UPDATE: EOS M2 Not Coming to North America

[Don Haines]

The M, a timid release of a half hearted product... Canon could easily make something that would blow our minds and set the camera world on fire, they chose not to. Instead they let Ricoh, Fuji and Sony have some moments of glory. Their fear of harming Rebel sales allows these other brands some sort of safety net. For now I guess.

If canon were smart, they'd make the Rebel line mirrorless. Test the waters by putting it into an already established and popular line. First off, the rebel is already small. Provide adapters for lenses. Bam. Of course this won't happen, but I think eventually Canon will have to answer Sony. Sony won't stop. They are onto something with the A7. The next version of the A7 will be even better. Pretty soon Canon will have a lot of catching up to do if they take their time. True, Sony has its own work to do to get more native lenses for their new system...but with adapters, photographers can use lenses from Canon, Nikon, Leica, voitlander etc...so they actually have more lenses than the big two available.

It also makes sense for Canon to move to mirrorless. Less moving parts. Cheaper faster production.

Make the Rebels mirrorless and keep the existing flange distances so you don't need an adaptor to use the existing lenses......

 

[AvTvM]

Make the Rebels mirrorless and keep the existing flange distances so you don't need an adaptor to use the existing lenses......

no no no. Make em small and thin. And include the adapter with every camera body at no separate charge.
That way, we can have it both:

• small size with native lenses, for when we want to "go small" and
• "regular size" with "regular lenses" when small size is not needed

 

[vscd]

- small size with native lenses, for when we want to "go small" and
-"regular size" with "regular lenses" when small size is not needed

And then you have a small, unusable, brick with a long lense on it. Feels like a Rebel with 400L 2.8... what do you all want with a small and light camera? Of course I understand that size matters on daily street photography, but I *dont want* to have anything smaller than a 5D while working with serious aims. A Cam is a tool, not a toy or gimmick.

I even don't like an EVF, no just because of the flatten 2D Image, but for the lack of shoots with one Akku. Maybe Canon will invent a hybrid solution (electronic informations on demand inside an optical VF), then I'm back on the horse. But please go away with those touchscreens or liveview-shooters.

The mirrorless is a hype, which everyone seems to push at the moment. Just stop a second and make up your *own* thoughts. There never went any mirror broken, the shutter is the mechanical part which dies and all those new cameras still have it. The mirrors are getting more quiet than ever and a real AF-Array is *AGES* better than the lousy onchip-resolutions. Using the sensor all the time will make the chip getting warmer and more prone to noise.

 

[LDS]

So your saying Canon is dumb? For being number 1 and best selling camera brand on earth. So you are smarter than their engineering and marketing departments.

Truth is that big, successful companies make big mistakes too. Look at Microsoft with Windows Vista and 8. Or with its Surface 1.0 tablets. Users told them they were bad products even before they were released, Microsoft didn't accept critics, delivered products that didn't sell and had to return on its steps and correct mistakes that were clearly visible to everybody, but to those in charge of the products. And there are many examples from many other companies.
The fact that Canon will not sell the M2 in Western markets shows it understood it's the wrong product for such markets - and some humble user can spot them and find better ideas. But it looks that someone at Canon is unwillingly to say "I was wrong - we need a different kind of product". Don't believe Canon engineering and marketing is populated by superhumans who never make mistakes. And I prefer a company that learns from mistakes, that one that stubbornly denies them.

 

[vscd]

At the moment there seems to be no big market for mirrorless cams like in asia. Don't forget you're all some kind of interested people, which read news or are envolved in the materia. Normal people go into the shop and buy what they know... or what they think it's ok. Nikon or Canon. And you can't get anything more valueable than a Nikon D3100 for example. For this price no mirrorless can even try to beat the small DSLR.

I suggest to read the Interview with the Olympus Product Strategy Manager:

http://www.dpreview.com/articles/3168945932/cp-2014-olympus-interview-our-reason-to-exist-is-to-push-the-envelope

I spoke to Fujifilm recently, and I was told by a senior marketing executive that if Canon and Nikon made serious mirrorless cameras, this would help the format to gain traction. Do you agree?

Well that’s his view! We’ll keep on communicating the benefits of mirrorless but Canon and Nikon dominate the interchangeable lens camera market and if they did come out with serious, reliable mirrorless cameras, I agree that yes - it might stimulate the market and boost sales of our cameras. Maybe it’s intentional that they haven’t launched enthusiast-focused mirrorless cameras, because they’re dominant. They’ve been maturing their systems for years. Maybe it’s strategic that they’re staying away.

The only plus for mirrorless cams is the size, but with the existing Nikon- or Canonbayonett the advantage is gone. And new systems? Why? But I agree, if the ships turns and the mirrorless systems are getting better and better, the big two could fall down very deep.

 

[traveller]

The only plus for mirrorless cams is the size, but with the existing Nikon- or Canonbayonett the advantage is gone. And new systems? Why? But I agree, if the ships turns and the mirrorless systems are getting better and better, the big two could fall down very deep.

Not necessarily, once you've dumped the mirror, there's a lot of room inside a legacy mount body where you could put lens elements. I suspect that this is what Canon and Nikon are thinking; why throw away your biggest advantage over your competitors by changing your lens mount? Sony has nothing to lose, the Alpha mount was a distant third place also-ran.

 

[vscd]

Not necessarily, once you've dumped the mirror, there's a lot of room inside a legacy mount body where you could put lens elements. I suspect that this is what Canon and Nikon are thinking; why throw away your biggest advantage over your competitors by changing your lens mount? Sony has nothing to lose, the Alpha mount was a distant third place also-ran.

This already exists, it's called EF-S, and the cameras are as big as a fullframe 6D f.e..

 

[Sanaraken]

So your saying Canon is dumb? For being number 1 and best selling camera brand on earth. So you are smarter than their engineering and marketing departments.

Truth is that big, successful companies make big mistakes too. Look at Microsoft with Windows Vista and 8. Or with its Surface 1.0 tablets. Users told them they were bad products even before they were released, Microsoft didn't accept critics, delivered products that didn't sell and had to return on its steps and correct mistakes that were clearly visible to everybody, but to those in charge of the products. And there are many examples from many other companies.
The fact that Canon will not sell the M2 in Western markets shows it understood it's the wrong product for such markets - and some humble user can spot them and find better ideas. But it looks that someone at Canon is unwillingly to say "I was wrong - we need a different kind of product". Don't believe Canon engineering and marketing is populated by superhumans who never make mistakes. And I prefer a company that learns from mistakes, that one that stubbornly denies them.

Yes Canon is very sucessfull and know what they are doing. Thats why they dominate. Why would they come out with a really good mirrorless and I know they have the technology already. It will canabilize their sales on the DSLR market specially the Rebels.

 

[traveller]

Not necessarily, once you've dumped the mirror, there's a lot of room inside a legacy mount body where you could put lens elements. I suspect that this is what Canon and Nikon are thinking; why throw away your biggest advantage over your competitors by changing your lens mount? Sony has nothing to lose, the Alpha mount was a distant third place also-ran.

This already exists, it's called EF-S, and the cameras are as big as a fullframe 6D f.e..

Probably because the difference is about 4mm, versus 26mm between EF and EF-M (measured slightly differently -i.e. flange back), and last time I looked the 100D was substantailly smaller than the 6D

 

[AvTvM]

Yes Canon is very sucessfull and know what they are doing. Thats why they dominate. Why would they come out with a really good mirrorless and I know they have the technology already. It will canabilize their sales on the DSLR market specially the Rebels.

Why? Because otherwise Sony, Fujifilm, Panasonic, Olympus and all others will cannibalize their Rebels and all of their other DSLRs with the possible exception of action-oiented models (1D-X)? ;D

 

[traveller]

Yes Canon is very sucessfull and know what they are doing. Thats why they dominate. Why would they come out with a really good mirrorless and I know they have the technology already. It will canabilize their sales on the DSLR market specially the Rebels.

Why? Because otherwise Sony, Fujifilm, Panasonic, Olympus and all others will cannibalize their Rebels and all of their other DSLRs with the possible exception of action-oiented models (1D-X)? ;D

They haven't so far and growth in mirrorless in at least two major markets has reversed.

That's not to say that there's no future for mirrorless, nor that mirrorless isn't the future, just that it doesn't seem to be the present. Why would Canon and Nikon risk undermining their supremacy by bringing out 'pro' mirrorless cameras? Isn't that effectively endorsing their competitors' efforts? If Canon and Nikon dump their legacy mounts, what competitive advantage do they have over the likes of Sony or Fujifilm?

I think that's the crux of Canon's current dilemma. They didn't want to rock the boat by developing mirrorless, but evidently elements in their hierarchy felt the need to enter what was a growing market (hence EOS-M and Nikon 1). Now that the growth has died, so has Canon and Nikon's enthusiasm for their mirrorless systems.

Who knows how this will end up, maybe EOS-M will develop into a fully fledged system (especially if there is room for a full frame sensor in the specification), or the EF mount may start to evolve towards going mirrorless. I suspect that this isn't fully decided at Canon and will depend on what happens in the market this year.

 

[moreorless]

Yes Canon is very sucessfull and know what they are doing. Thats why they dominate. Why would they come out with a really good mirrorless and I know they have the technology already. It will canabilize their sales on the DSLR market specially the Rebels.

Why? Because otherwise Sony, Fujifilm, Panasonic, Olympus and all others will cannibalize their Rebels and all of their other DSLRs with the possible exception of action-oiented models (1D-X)? ;D

They haven't so far and growth in mirrorless in at least two major markets has reversed.

That's not to say that there's no future for mirrorless, nor that mirrorless isn't the future, just that it doesn't seem to be the present. Why would Canon and Nikon risk undermining their supremacy by bringing out 'pro' mirrorless cameras? Isn't that effectively endorsing their competitors' efforts? If Canon and Nikon dump their legacy mounts, what competitive advantage do they have over the likes of Sony or Fujifilm?

I think that's the crux of Canon's current dilemma. They didn't want to rock the boat by developing mirrorless, but evidently elements in their hierarchy felt the need to enter what was a growing market (hence EOS-M and Nikon 1). Now that the growth has died, so has Canon and Nikon's enthusiasm for their mirrorless systems.

Who knows how this will end up, maybe EOS-M will develop into a fully fledged system (especially if there is room for a full frame sensor in the specification), or the EF mount may start to evolve towards going mirrorless. I suspect that this isn't fully decided at Canon and will depend on what happens in the market this year.

Personally my feeling is that reduced flange distance on FF is simply much less of an advantage than on ASPC since your having to deal both with larger lenses for a larger image circle and long lenses to avoid more extreme light angles.

I think its notable that both Canon and Nikon have put most of their focus on FF devolpment over the last couple of years, more levels of body on offer and a lot of new lenses on offer whilst EF-S/DX lenses have been limted mostly to kit updates.

To me it looks like theres a real divide in the mirrorless market between east and west, in the former ultra small view finderless bodies make up most of the sales, in the latter theres a much smaller market focused on higher end bodies with viewfinders. My guess is if Canon come up with a higher end ASPC body then it will be released in the west.