Opinion: EOS-M transition that never was

[Canon Rumors Guy]

This was originally part of the article on the EOS-M discontinued, but then it grew to the point it made sense to unpack it into its own article. You can read about the EOS-M being quietly discontinued here. Be warned, there is not a lot said in this article that is pro-Canon, but I’ll do

See full article...

 

[DrMathochist]

The COVID-19 pandemic that really halted everything happened in early 2019.

I'm sorry, I couldn't quite hear what you said; I had something crazy in my ear.

 

[Richard CR]

I'm sorry, I couldn't quite hear what you said; I had something crazy in my ear.

hah! thanks for highlighting that, corrected the timeline.

 

[mxwphoto]

I rocked the original M, 10-22, and 18-55 as my casual travel kit for way longer than it's intended use cycle. Magic Lantern breathed new life into it, but alas after a good 8 years it was time to retire it after I bought my R6 (to replace my 5D II, and yes, much bigger tham M). Sadly M lenses cannot be adapted onto R mount.

I would like to see Canon come out with a spiritual successor like a R9 or R11 with the M6 body size as I do miss the compact sub 70mm high form factor. Also toss in a RF-S pancake lens or a 22mm 1.4 please.

 

[Richard CR]

I rocked the original M, 10-22, and 18-55 as my casual travel kit for way longer than it's intended use cycle. Magic Lantern breathed new life into it, but alas after a good 8 years it was time to retire it after I bought my R6 (to replace my 5D II, and yes, much bigger tham M). Sadly M lenses cannot be adapted onto R mount.

I would like to see Canon come out with a spiritual successor like a R9 or R11 with the M6 body size as I do miss the compact sub 70mm high form factor. Also toss in a RF-S pancake lens or a 22mm 1.4 please.

I'd love to see a small camera body like the M200 too. The R100 isn't it.

 

[blackcoffee17]

I might still buy a used M6 Mark II with a couple of cheap M lenses and use it as a travel camera for years. The RF(s) system has nothing that comes close in
size and portability or even lenses. The second option would be Fuji but they discontinued the X-E4 and the rest of their cameras are big.

I think Canon could have kept the M system going by simply reusing all the R APS-C camera internals, except the mount. R cameras can never be as small because of the much bigger mount.

 

[blackcoffee17]

I'd love to see a small camera body like the M200 too. The R100 isn't it.

The R100 could have been designed that way but they went with the bulky grip + EVF route. Even tho the RF mount is much bigger, the cameras could be almost as small as the M ones, only a couple mm taller (in the M100 the mount still have some space around it).

 

[Richard CR]

I might still buy a used M6 Mark II with a couple of cheap M lenses and use it as a travel camera for years. The RF(s) system has nothing that comes close in
size and portability or even lenses. The second option would be Fuji but they discontinued the X-E4 and the rest of their cameras are big.

I think Canon could have kept the M system going by simply reusing all the R APS-C camera internals, except the mount. R cameras can never be as small because of the much bigger mount.

outside of a less robust AF than, an, say R7.. it's great little camera. I may start watching fleabay some more now.

 

[DhlcadR6]

EF-M always and will be recorded in history books as Canon's Open Beta testing project. It was something they bring out to counter m43&Sony. They designed it with Rebels in their mind. Resulting it has repeat similar mistakes as T series FD-mount cameras.

I dunno why Canon is slow on converting EF-M lenses....They actually spent effort to bring newly designed RF-S10-18 is surprising. When re-make the mount of 11-22 will do.

 

[koenkooi]

My favourite combo is still the original M + 22mm. The M6II + 32mm a close second.

 

[Del Paso]

Some of you will hate me, but I was never really interested in the M system .
First, they had no EVF or OVF. I just can't use the LCD in bright sun. When the M 5 came, I got mildly interested , but there were simply not enough interesting lenses for it, and the system had stopped growing. Could be that I had expected a Fuji APS/C equivalent from Canon.
Maybe I was wrong, but I have no regrets. There are, in my opinion, some good alternatives (not from Sony!).

 

[Blorp]

Biggest issue with switching to RF-S is there is no camera in the size of the M6 II. I don't want to go to Sony either...

 

[EOS 4 Life]

I'd love to see a small camera body like the M200 too. The R100 isn't it.

It clearly was not supposed to be.
It was more a 100D or T100 than M100.

 

[EOS 4 Life]

This was originally part of the article on the EOS-M discontinued, but then it grew to the point it made sense to unpack it into its own article. You can read about the EOS-M being quietly discontinued here. Be warned, there is not a lot said in this article that is pro-Canon, but I’ll do

See full article...

I also hope Canon makes something similar to the M6 II.

 

[vjlex]

I don't really get (nor was I even really aware of) the hate for the M3. It was my first mirrorless body. It was a trooper. I loved it. I never had a problem with the Powershot firmware (I simultaneously owned both EOS and ELPH/IXY cameras for many years prior to the M3). I currently have the M50, and admittedly, I don't love it. It's not nearly as pocketable as the M3, and just doesn't see nearly as much use from me.

The EF-M22 f/2 is still one of my all-time favorite lens to this day, and for now, the only reason I haven't yet chucked the M50.

I wish Canon had planned a better transition and that M lenses could have been adapted to R. Regardless, the M-series will be missed.

 

[vjlex]

I'd love to see a small camera body like the M200 too. The R100 isn't it.

I just happened to see the R100 up close and handled it for the first time today. You're right- the R100 most definitely isn't it.

 

[Gino_FOTO]

EF-M 22mm f/2 and 32mm f/1.4, best of its kind, small performers with true character.

 

[Richard CR]

I don't really get (nor was I even really aware of) the hate for the M3. It was my first mirrorless body. It was a trooper. I loved it. I never had a problem with the Powershot firmware (I simultaneously owned both EOS and ELPH/IXY cameras for many years prior to the M3).

there was so many things wrong with the M3 if you came from the M or M2. The AF was as bad even though Canon said it was going to be better. The sensor was okay. it was the sensor gen before DPAF, and used phased detection rows that could show up. The AEB took 1-2 second in between photos meaning no matter your AF, it took 3+ seconds, the sensor was completely unable to be IR converted (which for me was a $1000 mistake), the UI experience was very clunky coming from the M / M2. There were shutter timer features missing. There were color cast issues in the corners with fast lenses. Coming from the M or M2 it felt like Canon got out the cripple hammer, dialed it up to 11 and beat the damned thing to death.

We were all waiting for it, it wasn't released in the USA (obviously the one time you can state Canon USA was smart), so we all had to order it via Japan, we had online tutorials rolling on dpreview on how to navigate third party shippers to ship to USA / Canada / etc.

and that's what I can remember off the top of my head something like 10 years after the fact.
Canon could have corrected most of that via firmware but instead they did the M6 and M5 cameras that fixed all those problems and delivered a far superior camera(s)

 

[john1970]

I never purchased an EOS-M system. I did try out one camera in a store at one time, but was not too impressed. As others have already mentioned, once the RF system was announced the days of the EOS-M system were limited.

 

[Pierre Lagarde]

I'd love to see a small camera body like the M200 too. The R100 isn't it.

I know some here want to ignore it, but that simply can't be because physics are what they are : you can't put an RF mount in a camera with that form factor while being that small. The only way to have a camera that small (on a volume basis) would be to make it more square and thin and I really wonder about what would be the handling of such a camera .

Apart from that, RF seems to be the only logical future of Canon's cameras.
Anyway, for me it's clear now : after EOS M, there won't be any APS-C "small" camera I would buy and small APS-C system I would invest in. And even not that small in fact...
Think : EOS R8 is smaller and lighter than EOS R7 and if I was to choose between those two cameras I certainly wouldn't even bother about R7 !

Also : I wonder why you used past tense (i.e. "The EF-M 32mm was ...", "Mine was certainly the EOS-M M6 Mark II..."). I hope yours are still working great ! Unless you sold them of course, so they are probably working great for someone else ...