Canon DSLR Rumors

IBIS is likely coming to the EOS M lineup [CR2]

I have been having some conversations with a source about the EOS M lineup and its future. Canon is apparently behind the system for the long haul by everything the source has been told.

I asked specifically if IBIS is something we’ll see in future EOS M cameras. The source has told me that Canon will likely be bringing IBIS to a camera or two in the EOS M lineup.

I was not told which upcoming EOS M camera would be getting IBIS, but I think the EOS M50 Mark II would be a good place to start. There’s also a chance that IBIS will be held for the rumored flagship EOS M camera body.

More to come…

Konachu

Canon EOS R
Jan 9, 2020
6
31
I feel like Canon will push APS-C Mirrorless using the EOS M system. A flagship camera and some nice lenses will serve the system well.
My guess is this is a better way for Canon, rather than putting out crop lenses on the RF mount.
Just my guess though.
 

goldenhusky

EOS RP
Dec 2, 2016
328
121
I thought lens based stabilization was superior always and there was no value add with the IBIS what changed now? ;)
On Oct 1 2018
With an in-body IS system you are creating something that needs to work over lots of different types of lenses and different lens groups, so you don’t get a dedicated system for that particular lens.
All lenses move in different ways, and you get different types of shake depending on what kind of lens you’re using, so dedicating the IS system to the particular lens is, for us, the optimum way of doing it – but that’s not to say that we aren’t looking at in-body IS.
– David Parry, Product Intelligence Consultant, Canon UK
 

herein2020

Run | Gun Shooter
Mar 13, 2020
267
364
I thought lens based stabilization was superior always and there was no value add with the IBIS what changed now? ;)

That was the old guard, I think Canon leadership retired and the new leadership says put in whatever competes with Sony. I think it is also possible Canon just didn't have the computing power to run IS and DPAF and had to buy time to improve their HW.
 

Chaitanya

EOS R
Jun 27, 2013
1,284
392
34
Pune
Since Laowa released native 65mm 2x Ultra Macro for EF-M Mount this new camera can make a good macro camera to carry around. I just hope Canon uses LP-E6 FF batteries instead of smaller batteries.
 
Last edited:

nchoh

EOS RP
Apr 3, 2018
235
145
Calgary
I thought lens based stabilization was superior always and there was no value add with the IBIS what changed now? ;)
In general lens based stabilization is superior. However, it cannot correct for roll (is that the correct term?). Yes, competition has forced Canon's hand. Besides, with IBIS, Canon will now have a market for unstabilized lenses, which means more sales. Maturity of the M system perhaps?
 
  • Like
Reactions: stevelee

SteB1

EOS M50
Feb 22, 2019
34
45
I'm baffled as to why Canon is continuing with the M mount system given it's incompatibility with the RF mount. As there are only a few lenses for it no one can be heavily invested in the system. It made sense when M cameras could be adapted to all other lenses in the Canon system, but no sense now. In a few years time when far more Canon users have RF mount lenses, why would they be interested in a system totally incompatible with many of their lenses? Whereas if Canon started creating RF mount APS-C cameras they'd retain full compatibility across the whole system. Surely this would be the best point in time to kill off the M range?
 

miketcool

EOS 90D
Jun 29, 2017
134
229
I thought lens based stabilization was superior always and there was no value add with the IBIS what changed now? ;)
That was true at a time where you had computational limits. Now that the camera can use full time tracking, the image quality is vastly improved with IBIS. Early versions mostly induced unacceptable levels of warping. The examples on Canon’s iteration looks really good.


I'm baffled as to why Canon is continuing with the M mount system given it's incompatibility with the RF mount.
Canon camera’s current cash cow is the EOS-M. Killing it off would be disastrous. There will be plenty of consumer need for a sub professional lineup of camera.
 

fox40phil

EOS 90D
Apr 12, 2013
152
69
Germany
www.phileas-schoenberg.de
Just let M die ;p!

not one nice lens... and three different mounts at the same time is garbage... look at Sony and Nikon! They should go the way like before with EF(S).

Canons M line has/had a heavy slow development... no IBIS until now, slow lenses etc.
Want to see a m6II with dual card, nice weather sealing in a aps-c pro body WITH evf in body!
 

blackcoffee17

EOS RP
Sep 17, 2014
395
430
They just need to add a few lenses, especially higher quality zooms. Basically all the zooms they have are dark, fully plastic and just ok optically, with the 11-22 being the only exception.
And the M6 should have had a corner EVF.
 

LSXPhotog

EOS RP
Apr 2, 2015
425
317
www.diossiphotography.com
I am basically obsessed with the M-series cameras. I would love to see a serious M5 Mark II hit the market along with a fixed aperture zoom that still covers the 24mm equivalent...may be a chance to add weather sealing on a lens/body combo and bring out a sealed adapter? For the love of GOD, give us a better buffer on the M6 Mark II if it can be optimized in firmware...but make it a priority on the M5 Mark II.
 

ReflexVE

EOS M50
May 5, 2020
55
64
Renton, WA
I'm baffled as to why Canon is continuing with the M mount system given it's incompatibility with the RF mount. As there are only a few lenses for it no one can be heavily invested in the system. It made sense when M cameras could be adapted to all other lenses in the Canon system, but no sense now. In a few years time when far more Canon users have RF mount lenses, why would they be interested in a system totally incompatible with many of their lenses? Whereas if Canon started creating RF mount APS-C cameras they'd retain full compatibility across the whole system. Surely this would be the best point in time to kill off the M range?
As I understand it the only issue with RF compat is that you couldn't do a straight through adapter, you'd need a converter of some sort (like a speedbooster). If true then this limitation wouldn't mean much.

That said, the price of RF glass makes it a silly investment for a M mount camera at this point. By the time it matters my guess is there will be a solution. In the meantime, the number of M mount lenses is rapidly increasing and EF is easy to adapt/mount.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dswtan and stevelee

mb66energy

EOS R
Dec 18, 2011
1,402
279
Germany
www.MichaelBockhorst.de
I thought lens based stabilization was superior always and there was no value add with the IBIS what changed now? ;)
They have read my posts at canonrumors that I want to reuse FD lenses and that I will be grateful for some image stabilization.

I think the true reason might be some development of a very good IBIS which might roll and shift the sensor not only by some gyro but also by pattern recognition during sensor readout. I do not know if other companies or Canon do that but I think this is much more precise than reading gyro / accel sensors - my experience with medium priced sensors is that they are good if you can average but if you need an exact readout of current values at higher rates they aren't that good.

And maybe there is some magic with RF lenses, Ibis and the additional RF specific contacts ?!
 

ReflexVE

EOS M50
May 5, 2020
55
64
Renton, WA
Just let M die ;p!

not one nice lens... and three different mounts at the same time is garbage... look at Sony and Nikon! They should go the way like before with EF(S).

Canons M line has/had a heavy slow development... no IBIS until now, slow lenses etc.
Want to see a m6II with dual card, nice weather sealing in a aps-c pro body WITH evf in body!
1) EF-M 32mm
2) EF-M 22mm
3) Sigma 16mm
4) Sigma 56mm

And EF itself is dead, no new lenses in a couple years, so Canon is really only doing two systems right now.