Rumored Canon EOS M7 camera specifications, and the end of the line for EOS M? [CR1]

[jolyonralph]

Seeing how Nikon have failed utterly with their APS-C offering on the Z mount, the Z50, I can't see Canon making the same mistake and ditching their highly profitable EF-M line for an untested RF APSC camera.

As for the complaints of the EF-M lens lineup not being good enough, how many APS-C lenses are there for RF? Don't count EF lenses - those work on EF-M too.

The noise and probably this rumour seem to be coming from a few noisy forum types who think Canon owes them a replacement for the 7D II and that only the RF mount can do because obviously RF is the best mount and they wouldn't want something that isn't the best.

Canon wouldn't be launching a high-end EF-M body now if they were going to be launching an R7 any time soon.

Face it guys, it's not going to happen. At least not for a while.

 

[Boblblawslawblg]

If they introduce a $1700 camera and then call the line dead, then they are dumber than I thought and I’ll move onto another system.

Give us damn near 2 Grand after taxes, and we will give you a product we aren’t supporting any more. Then they wonder why the pie is shrinking.

 

[PureClassA]

The M line isnt going to be retired until Canon has comparably small $500-$1000 RF ApSC bodies (same size types as the M) out with at least the same, few basic lenses the M has now. Then they can call it RF-M or whatever. You may still have an M line in name but the M mount is what I see getting phased out if they can make similar sized cameras with RF

 

[Bob Howland]

The M line isnt going to be retired until Canon has comparably small $500-$1000 RF ApSC bodies (same size types as the M) out with at least the same, few basic lenses the M has now. Then they can call it RF-M or whatever. You may still have an M line in name but the M mount is what I see getting phased out if they can make similar sized cameras with RF

Compare the sizes and weights of the RP and M5. The difference isn't all that great.

 

[Baron_Karza]

Compare the sizes and weights of the RP and M5. The difference isn't all that great.

Put a big fat lens on the RP and then see how physically HUGE it is compared to the M5 with a lens.

 

[PureClassA]

Ecept there is a large market for these smaller and inexpensive bodies. Just look at the sales of the M6ii and M50.

Absolutely. The M bodies are HUGELY successful! I own one! My point is not that Canon is going to terminate that TYPE/SIZE of the M. Simply that over time, it only makes total sense for Canon to unify mirrorless mounts under RF. If they can produce a crop sensor, RF Mounted MILC in the same size and body types as the M line currently.... not much sense in continuing the M long term. So, think of an M6 right now, but with the RF mount.

 

[blackcoffee17]

Seeing how Nikon have failed utterly with their APS-C offering on the Z mount, the Z50, I can't see Canon making the same mistake and ditching their highly profitable EF-M line for an untested RF APSC camera.

As for the complaints of the EF-M lens lineup not being good enough, how many APS-C lenses are there for RF? Don't count EF lenses - those work on EF-M too.

The noise and probably this rumour seem to be coming from a few noisy forum types who think Canon owes them a replacement for the 7D II and that only the RF mount can do because obviously RF is the best mount and they wouldn't want something that isn't the best.

Canon wouldn't be launching a high-end EF-M body now if they were going to be launching an R7 any time soon.

Face it guys, it's not going to happen. At least not for a while.

What's wrong with the Z50? It's a great camera. The lack of lenses is a different matter.

"how many APS-C lenses are there for RF"

Hm...none, because there is no RF APS-C camera yet. I'm sure there will be some once we have an APS-C camera.

But for a high-end APS-C camera you need high-end lenses, like the 70-200 F4, F2.8 or 100-500. Just like for 90D, 7D people use and used big whites or lenses like the 100-400. And no, don't want to adapt EF if i can rather buy RF lens (price aside now, we are talking long term).

 

[PureClassA]

Put a big fat lens one the RP and then see how physically HUGE it is compare to the M5 with a lens.

Yes precisely. But eventually in the next couple years, Canon is very likely going to huge slate of small, compact Non-L RF glass far more comparable to current M Lines

 

[Bob Howland]

Yes precisely. But eventually in the next couple years, Canon is very likely going to huge slate of small, compact Non-L RF glass far more comparable to current M Lines

Maybe! I'm sure that If Canon thinks they can profitably both sell an APS-C R body and continue the M system, that is exactly what they will do.

 

[Baron_Karza]

Yes precisely. But eventually in the next couple years, Canon is very likely going to huge slate of small, compact Non-L RF glass far more comparable to current M Lines

if Canon can keep the camera/lens system a small as the M line is now, I'd probably be ok if they killed it. But lens girth is what I am worried my be the issue.

I like the small factor for many reasons. More acceptable in venues where "Pro" cameras are not allowed. Easy to travel with.
....And it gets tiring when people are looking at you. I did a 360 degree pan around just before the lawn met the sand at a resort in Hawaii and I hear an annoyed woman say "Uh, What are you doing??" - I thought to myself "Please biAtcH, I wouldn't touch your saggy leather tanned skin with a 10 foot pole" This was with my already small M50, but with a mid sized lens (Sigma 18-35 1.8) and gorillapod on my shoulders for stability. If it were with just with the kit lens (sized) and no gorilla, I think she would've reacted the same as if I just had a cellphone (meaning no reaction). it's really weird how people react as if your camera is a machine gun, but like a released box of beautiful butterfly's when using a cell phone camera.

LOL!

 

[tbintb]

Isn't it a waste of space to use a large RF mount for an APS-C camera? The amazing thing about the M line were the small cameras that you can ALWAYS carry around in your pocket, but still have a somewhat large APS-C sensor.

The problem are locations were cameras are not appreciated, but they sometimes still allow small, not "serious" looking cameras. In that category the M line offered the best value.

You hit the nail on the head. I use my M6 where professional cameras aren’t allowed or when I need something on the go, that’s pocketable as well. Its more or less on the discreet side, and probably why it’s a great seller. It’s also a great travel companion. I love my R5, and would love to take it everywhere when everything reopens but there’s no way I could get away bringing it in to places that frown on photography.

 

[stevelee]

Why, oh why would they kill off their best selling camera line? You love to drive-by snipe at the M series but you've never given a rationale.

There seems to be an RF über alles mindset that seems to feel threatened as long as any other cameras and lenses continue to exist. There could be some commercial or rational arguments for One Lens Mount to Rule Them All, but I never seem to see them in the posts. It reminds me of the emotional tribalism of political posts.

Don't get me wrong. Apparently there are great RF lenses and some very nice R-series cameras. The R5 sounds amazing in spite of all the bad press. I am in no way casting aspersions on everybody who owns and likes those bodies and lenses, just the convert-or-die crusaders.

 

[KenLLL]

I highly doubt they'll kill off the M line-up. I've owned the m6 and now replaced it with the m6 mark ii. Love em both. Plus the M cameras are a top seller. The general population buying these cameras aren't working professionals. When i tell my coworkers i spent $1800 on my Eos R, they lose their minds. I'd rather not tell them i spent $3300 on my 5d4 that is currently collecting dust.
Long story short, i think it would be stupid for Canon to kill off the M line-up just because some snobby camera enthusiasts think they are worthless because of a weak lens lineup. For the general population, the lens lineup is more than satisfactory. 15-45 + 55-200 and they are set. Plus that 32mm is quite a gem. For someone who wants a better image, adapt adapt adapt! I've had zero issues throwing a big lens on the front. It's quite hilarious to me putting a Sigma 105mm f1.4 on my baby m6 ii. Okay, rant over. My opinion, the M cameras are here to stay.

 

[Baron_Karza]

I have a Canon M6 Mark II which has 1080P at 120FPS with no overheating... I'm very confused why it says it will overheat at 1080P 120FPS on the "rumored" M7. Does this mean that the M7 will have Dual-Pixel AF II during 120FPS or will it simply overheat with the lack of AF like M6 Mark II which does not overheat?

Because its a C0, I mean C1 rumor.

LOL!

 

[stevelee]

Smartphones compare fine at close quarters with compact cameras eg this photo I took with my iPhone SE View attachment 192516

Is that the current SE or the older, smaller model? I'm still using my iPhone 6S, but thinking about replacing it with the SE while I can. I don't want anything larger in my shirt pocket. I did the $29.95 battery replacement in my 6S a couple years ago, so it is still going strong. The SE would give me a few advantages, but also would mean I could continue using a phone of that size, the Lightning connector, and fingerprint recognition. (OK, I'm old and don't want to change too much.) The main thing I would lose is the headphone jack. With an Apple Card, Apple makes it way too easy to do the upgrade: $70 trade-in, 3% cash back, no interest, and so payments around $15/month. I came close the other night to an impulse purchase of a tricked-out iMac 5K until I thought of the hassle of dongles and such for my Firewire and pre-Thunderbolt 3 items.

Within its limitations, I find the camera on the 6S takes good pictures and serves its purpose as The Camera I Always Have With Me. I still was using G cameras for travel (back when I could travel) because I don't want to stay within those limitations. When upgrading from my G7X II, I considered the M50 very briefly, but decided to go with the G5X II for greater portability. I find the 24–120mm equivalent range almost perfect for travel photos, so I don't miss interchangeable lenses. If anything, I might want something wider for interiors and scenic vistas, so I occasionally take shots to be stitched later, and/or do panoramas on the iPhone. For later GPS location, I usually will take a quick shot on my phone rather than linking the camera to the phone.

 

[jvillain]

Great to see the EOS M will be killed off in favour of RF if this is true. They never really were comitted to it with the most pathetic lens line-up imaginable after nearly 8 years.

The down side is it will not give a lot of confidence in Canon killing off the EF-s and M lines both within a coup,e of years of each other. If you were an EF-S shooter and them moved to M because Canon said they were killing off EF-S and now they are killing off M, your moving to another company that won't make you rebuild from scratch every couple of years.

 

[mpb001]

I am a Canon FF DSLR user. I was a bit interested in the M system but hearing this news, I don’t know what sense it makes for Canon to introduce a new M body, especially with IBIS, if they are also planning of discontinuing the M series in 2021, which is right around the corner.

 

[Dragon]

Maybe this thread is Canon's research project . If so, they will likely keep the M line.

 

[Dragon]

As to the 18-45 non-L, why is that materially different from the EF 17-40 L. Just a little more range (which seems to be the norm for RF mound). It makes no sense for an APS-C lens to start at 18 and end at 45. If Canon were to make an APS-C R body, the lens of choice would be a 15-85 (arguably the most useful lens in the EF-s line).

 

[Chig]

Is that the current SE or the older, smaller model? I'm still using my iPhone 6S, but thinking about replacing it with the SE while I can. I don't want anything larger in my shirt pocket. I did the $29.95 battery replacement in my 6S a couple years ago, so it is still going strong. The SE would give me a few advantages, but also would mean I could continue using a phone of that size, the Lightning connector, and fingerprint recognition. (OK, I'm old and don't want to change too much.) The main thing I would lose is the headphone jack. With an Apple Card, Apple makes it way too easy to do the upgrade: $70 trade-in, 3% cash back, no interest, and so payments around $15/month. I came close the other night to an impulse purchase of a tricked-out iMac 5K until I thought of the hassle of dongles and such for my Firewire and pre-Thunderbolt 3 items.

Within its limitations, I find the camera on the 6S takes good pictures and serves its purpose as The Camera I Always Have With Me. I still was using G cameras for travel (back when I could travel) because I don't want to stay within those limitations. When upgrading from my G7X II, I considered the M50 very briefly, but decided to go with the G5X II for greater portability. I find the 24–120mm equivalent range almost perfect for travel photos, so I don't miss interchangeable lenses. If anything, I might want something wider for interiors and scenic vistas, so I occasionally take shots to be stitched later, and/or do panoramas on the iPhone. For later GPS location, I usually will take a quick shot on my phone rather than linking the camera to the phone.

That’s the older model SE , I currently use an iPhone 7 which suits me and I keep my 7D ii and a big telephoto in my car so it‘s always handy and if I want it I have my pancake 24mm f/2.8 lens in the Car too