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

[Eagle Eye]

An RF-mount APS-C would definitely compete better than an EF-M mount camera with the biggest market threats to Canon, right? Fuji, Nikon, Sony, right? Or wait, is the biggest market threat coming from cellphones, meaning the best way to compete is with an ultra-compact and inexpensive line with only a few lenses?

 

[reef58]

I agree with the consensus that these rumors sound like mere forum reverberations.

But to those who think Canon wouldn't kill the M line because it's a best-seller, I'd just say that Canon may find that it can make more net profit by forcing people in that market to buy a very small full frame R-line camera like the RP. People who buy the RP typically would have access to glass that gives Canon 100's of dollars of margin, versus 10's of dollars of margin. Their market research may (or may not) indicate that they could get a majority of current M buyers to buy into the RF system, creating bigger margins and also creating much better development and manufacturing efficiencies. They may surmise that having a system that sits between your phone and an RP is a bit of a nether world. I'm not saying any of these conditions are true. I don't know. But it is very possible.

They are not going to force me to buy anything. I have the m50 not only for the small camera size, but the small lens size. You can't get that with the RP. If they kill off the M series I will use the M50 until it dies and shop for a replacement that can also fit in the pocket of my cargo pants with a tiny zoom lens. I would be surprised if they kill it off. Last week the rumors were more high end M lens coming, so it appears we don't know yet.

 

[reef58]

I do wonder what percentage of EF-M users would even consider a full-frame camera. Let's say an M200 styled camera in RF mount would cost $550 with a lens. Is that enough of a difference for the person to not consider the RP at $1300 with a FF lens? Would people that have any interest in FF consider an APS-C starter when their kit lens and camera don't get them there? Sure they could buy this M200 with an RF 35mm f1.8, but that combo is getting close to the RP plus kit lens price. I can't see many beginners starting with a 35mm prime even though they might benefit from it. Back in the DSLR days, there was more of a reason to start in APS-C. Not until the Nikon D600 did FF really start to drop in price (I switched from Pentax to the D600 so I could try FF).

I could see Canon trying to follow Nikon for better or worse. I tried the Z50 and it is a decent camera, but it has a lot of drawbacks and will for a long time based on their lens roadmap. The current Z-mount FF lenses aren't amazing focal length combinations for a crop camera. It's totally possible Canon is willing to drop EF-M out of stubbornness.

What benefit is there to APS-C cameras in a FF mount? I guess maybe a sports focused camera if Canon had a fast and recent lower resolution APS-C sensor to source. Besides that, Canon already has RF pretty covered from $999 full-frame to high resolution with the R5. I wouldn't expect them to handle it any better than EF-S. I'm seeing 19 EF-S lenses on B&H right now with 4 of them have an aperture f/2.8 or faster.

Full-frame is a lot more accessible now than it was. I see the benefit of APS-C in the potential size of the lenses and to a lesser degree the size of the cameras (the RP is pretty small, so much so I prefer it with the grip extension). Okay, I guess people really want an 80D or 7D in RF, buy why? What would those as RF, updated to current tech, really get you over what current RF FF cameras that exist?

Fujifilm shows what dedicated APS-C can look like and it makes the most sense to me as the path of that sensor size, though maybe Fujifilm's APS-C will die out eventually... who knows. How much pricing room does Canon have in RF for APS-C? We'd probably see a bigger M200 styled camera. Maybe the sports camera if a sensor exists. What else? An M6 II with RF mount? The rest of it seems covered by current FF cameras. Right now the only recent APS-C sensor we know of is the 32mp one.

I think you will find a lot of full frame users have an M series camera as a walk around. It is a second camera. If I am going on a trip to take photos I will carry one or more of my full frame cameras. If I am going on a trip for work but may take a few photos and I am packing light the M50 comes. That is the beauty of it. It fits in my computer bag with lens on and you don't even know it is there. When I used an SL2 it also fit, but was way bigger and heavier.

 

[ashmadux]

First, no one is buying an M for 1600. That makes no sense at all.
Even 1k for an M would confuse the market unless its some new robust, metal body that would be that small/and or small and super rugged. It would be a 'mighty' M? confused: sorry, had to)

As a M user who is looking to pick up a m6mk2 right now, a new version with ibis and updated eye dpaf would be the holy grail of small camera shooting. The m62 was one of the very few M bodies that was well reviewed across the board aside from the m50.....easy to dismiss with nonsensical personal hate of a fine camera. (put a adapter on it ya crybabies).

I bet there's a fair portion of people still thinking mirrorless = tiny everything..that dream is over. But a small cheap RF cam...hey it can happen but really only if its a reworked RF. And the RF lenses are way too expensive for the market that the M serves.

 

[docsmith]

Canon will find a way to an option for photographers at lower price points. But, it would need to be lower cost lenses and lower cost bodies. It does make sense that those lower cost bodies/lenses can be a gateway to more expensive products. But, it is not that having two distinct lines is not without precedent. Just look at Fuji. The "X" line is APS-C while the "G" mount is a larger sensor. Yet, I know of at least a couple photographers that pack around X and G gear because they are "Fuji" users and that also plays into the files that come out of the camera, familiarity with the ergonomics and menu systems, etc.

 

[vangelismm]

Im afraid they won't be able to compete with Sony or Nikon in the high performance APS-C market
without a system with clear update path.

Stop this illusion of upgrade path.
Most of APS-C users never upgrade to full frame.
They buy rebel after rebel, xxD after xxD.

 

[slclick]

What I can't fathom is why the hate. It's a perfectly good system, and it being there doesn't break your bones or pick your pocket.

They do ditzier cameras by far than the M, yet they don't get nearly the hate.

And the logic behind the must have M>RF upgrade path? Please, a company cannot have distinct lines in a segment? Keep that stupidity out of the equation. M stands on it's own, does well and is a fine imaging product. Why on earth should the M glass be as expansive as EF or RF? Just to please some forumites in their Mom's basement? It's a nice little list of lenses. Try them.

 

[PureClassA]

Zero sense in dumping their best selling line.

If it can be effectively replaced with same/very similar cameras (size) but with a si gular mounting system across all Canon lines? Yes absolutely Canon would do this because it would save millions of otherwise duplicative development and manufacturing costs

 

[jam05]

Sounds like someone that is jealous of the M line's popularity and trolling incognito. Let's just start this rumour about Canon eliminating the M line, that way people won't buy it in fear of it going away.

 

[jam05]

What do you suppose the possibilities are of them discontinuing it in some markets where it hasn't done that well?
There aren't any.

 

[jam05]

If it can be effectively replaced with same/very similar cameras (size) but with a si gular mounting system across all Canon lines? Yes absolutely Canon would do this because it would save millions of otherwise duplicative development and manufacturing costs

BS. Name recognition is a selling point of the product. Marketing 101. This merely a trolling ploy to diminish the ever growing popularity of the M line by a person posing as having a legitimate positive interest.

 

[jam05]

Another ploy to tarnish the ever so popularity of the M line. Some just can't stand that hey, lot's of people prefer the M line over the other offerings. And it's popularity with content developers has crossed over to teleworkers and Zoom streamers. The M6mk II has become a hit with content developers that care very little about an EVF and often put asside it's EVF for a smoother looking package.

 

[Pete Roberts]

As an M user for the last 2 years (M50 then M6II) if Canon kills the M line I reckon most will go elsewhere, most likely Sony, maybe Fuji.

There are no good affordable Canon FF options at the moment for 4k video (the R crop is ridiculous and no DPAF in RP). Sure I could spend a lot more and get R6 but for me I like the small size and affordability, and oh yeah I like the NO OVERHEATING!

If this turns out to be true there will be a whole lot of pissed off M users that will want to give Canon a big ****** you and then give their $$$ to Sony, which maybe we M users should've done in the first place

 

[jam05]

Another ploy to tarnish the ever so popularity of the M line. Some just can't stand that hey, lot's of people prefer the M line over the other offerings. And it's popularity with content developers has crossed over to teleworkers and Zoom streamers. The M6mk II or M50 + Sigma 16mm f 1.4 is the combo to beat.

 

[jam05]

If they put a permanent EVF on the M7 it may not sell as well as the M6mkII. That is a huge selling point and appeal of the M6mk II. Those that care not for the EVF hump can merely leave it off for a slimmer curvy little Canon powerhouse camera.

 

[Whowe]

Yeah. Come back when it’s a Canon Press Release. Zero sense in maintaining the M line production when you can completely replace it with Uniform upgradeable glass on a singular mount system and transition over to the same end result

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

 

[PureClassA]

Another ploy to tarnish the ever so popularity of the M line. Some just can't stand that hey, lot's of people prefer the M line over the other offerings. And it's popularity with content developers has crossed over to teleworkers and Zoom streamers. The M6mk II has become a hit with content developers that care very little about an EVF and often put asside it's EVF for a smoother looking package.

Huh????? If Canon can make the SAME bodies right now in the M line but with RF mounts, they will. They can call it the RF-M instead of the EOS M. Whatever. It’s not about killing off the M line itself, its just about the MOUNT.
The purpose of the M line was for Canon to make great, compact, APS-C MILCs for the masses. Huge success.
But now we have the RF glass line, whose mount is similar to the M (albeit a tiny bit bigger but very close.). ApsC RF bodies are the next step for Canon. So what sense would it make for Canon to make two APSC MILC mount systems IF you can achieve the same thing on one??
Why would not want an M6 with an RF mount that can use small apsc rf glass and all the up to everything in RF if you wanted to? Canon is not making a huge line of M glass. They never have.

 

[Kit.]

Sounds like a Sony rumor.

 

[scyrene]

Don’t understand why Canon ever made the M cameras

Given how succesful they have been, that points to a lack of imagination on your part, rather than a misstep on Canon's

 

[unfocused]

Sounds like CR0 to me. Some random guy on the internet trolling CanonRumors Guy to get some attention.

Specs are mainly just guesses based on existing bodies.

$1699 price point is a little low for a 7DII replacement, but it would make sense if Canon wanted to price it aggressively. I've said it before: put out an M7, add a 15-85 walk around lens and a 150-500 or even 150-600 f6.3 that's a little better than the Sigma and Tamron and has a Canon label on it and most disgruntled 7D users will be happy.