We've now been told by a couple of people that an EOS R camera is currently being tested with an APS-C image sensor. One of the sources told us that they don't know if it will become a consumer product, but that there is some internal discussion about what to do with the EOS M line of cameras and lenses.
I don't think anyone would be surprised to hear that EOS M may indeed be on the chopping block in the coming years as the EOS R system matures, and we expect it to mature quite quickly.
We believe there will always be a market for APS-C ILC cameras and it it would make a lot of sense for Canon's mirrorless system(s) to be using a single lens mount.
I imagine size would be reduced if such a product is coming. It's just about the RF mount.
What exactly does that mean? By definition, that would be an EF-R camera. It would just be an extremely small one with an APS-C sensor. Look at the comparative sizes of the EF-R, M5 and SL2 bodies. The EF-R body could have been much smaller and, judging from the Fuji bodies, there is no reason why there couldn't be a much larger EF-M body.
I am sure future sales will determine which stays and what goes, and M seems to be selling just fine (based on Japan numbers). I can see it staying as a niche camera system, larger/better than the Gx series, but not as good as the RF.
An APS-C R, to me, this would have to be all about frame rate/throughput, and reach. This is a sports/wildlife camera.
I really hope it has a new sensor.
I was wondering about this because the M isn't as direct of a path to move to a R.
A cheap R would give them that path going forward with the R.
I don't know what gives you the idea that there was much forethought. The first thing about bring out a new camera line is the mount. The M mount allows for very small and therefore light lenses. The M lens lineup shows that they were committed to that small and light design language. For example, the EF-S has a 55-250mm lens, but that changed to 55-200mm to fit the size dimension design requirements for the M. Also, notice that the EF-M 32 1.4 is out, but not the EF-S equivalent. Looking at the lens line up and how some lenses appear in the M first rather than the S says something about Canon's view of the M.
I doubt that the M will go away as long as it is a popular enough camera line. It is not surprising that they would re-look at their complete strategy (across EF, EF-S, EF-M and EF-R) now that the R mount is out. But I doubt the talks are specific about how to ditch the M. However, if Canon were to be able to build a R APS-C subsystem that is, say, less than 10% heavier and larger than the M, then it might be reasonable for Canon to ditch the M line.
In my view, there is more than a bit of 'anti-M' bias here on CanonRumors (one of my favorite websites)...at times I even think I see this bias from people who post A LOT here.
Canon's executives and technical people will always have some internal discussion about what to do with the M line...I hope they continue to have those discussions for a long time.
They could be having discussions on how to get 'better' (as in more high-performance) sensors inside of an M.
I own a 5D Mk III and two Canon APS-C DSLRs...as well as Canon-branded wide-angle zooms, 2.0 and 2.8 and 4.0 primes...and telephoto zooms.
There is a place for a large body that two large hands can nicely hold...with a heavy telephoto lens attached...and an ultra-modern focusing system that enables birding etc...with a modern sensor inside...a sensor that also excels in low-light situations.
There is also a place for a large body that has a sensor with zillions of pixels inside...for situations where a tripod is often critical (landscapes and architecture/real estate).
And then there are also places for the M format, which, for the money, in every way except for sensor performance, when combined with the EF-M lenses...supplies a superior experience for those who want to acquire high-quality images...sometimes WHILE DOING OTHER THINGS (can you say family vacations and pictures around the house?)!
And what some people overlook is how (relatively) inexpensive the M5 and M6 are, when kitted with the 18-150mm lens (compared to the gold standard of the OM-D E-M1 Mark II/Olympus 12-100mm lens duo).
A quick search reveals a difference that approaches 2K USD!?
I envision a long lifetime for the M format, and for the EF-M lenses, all of which have the same diameter.
And yes, with an inexpensive adapter, all of the lenses purchased for the EF and EF-S formats work perfectly on every M I've used.
With sensor development, the M will continue to be the smallest and in some ways the BEST APS-C-sized sensor camera on the market.
1) APS-C partially solves Canon's woeful readout issue. You could offer a 7D3 in R mount that actually had almost 10fps using current technology. That would somewhat stifle the complaints of action/wildlife shooters like me, provided the sensor IQ had made the progress warranted in a 4 year period.
2) The M mount issue: Canon has never before shied away from an opportunity to segment a market. That you might have APS-C R mount bodies makes perfect sense. I'd much rather shoot an R mount body because I'm not concerned about size. Others love the M form factor, which is fine too. They will just understand they're not on an upgrade path, and 99 percent of them will be fine with that.
No way is Canon going to bail out of a large and lucrative market. So they said that they were looking at the M..... that does not mean getting rid of it, it may well mean they are planning to expand it.....
The M50 is selling extremely well in Japan for example. There is surely a market for compact, lightweight, discrete responsive mirrorless cameras--hence the M line. Which by the way just had the 32mm F/1.4 lens released.
Full frame DSLRs have existed for years and no one suggested that there was no future for APS-C crop bodies because of their existence. To me the M series represents one possible future path for the APS-C line, as opposed to the APS-C DSLRs. That seems logical to me.
Not everyone can afford, or has need of a full-frame mirrorless or DSLR. Different market segments, budgets and needs.