The first EOS-M on market is always suitable for my purposes.

Regards Bernhard
https://deramateurphotograph.de/

When it comes to a cheap portable camera, aesthetics matter more to me. I like the white color. A rose gold though would be great.

To evaluate Canon M200 sensibly one should know all its available features. Then with $550 in mind as its price, see what features can one get with other brands of similarly priced cameras. Comparing M200 to a mobile phone is not comparing apples with apples. What features can one get with a $550 priced mobile phone.? Is image quality the same? I compared a Tz110 photo with my Samsung photo in my 27' 4k monitor and the result is a mismatch in favour of my TZ110.

These days if I want a selfie 4K videocam, its already in my pocket, with GPS, 4G and all the social Apps I want to publish to.

Good luck to camera makers if they think cutting out an EVF for a «selfie screen» is the path to survival, let alone success . So doomed.

Does it have DPAF in 4K (like the M6II) or does it loose DPAF when you shoot 4K (like the M50)?????

No point in complaining about video features. Let the money do the talking. My smartphone with a gimbal can do better video than any other M hand held.

Reading through the comments, not only here but on the M6ii and 90D as well, you have to wonder if anyone shoots still images anymore.
It is all about the video features.
For me personally the video features are the last thing that I look at as I hardly ever use them and when I do its only for uploading to social media so all I am looking for is ease of use and decent quality.
Does anyone who is considering a camera in this range, regardless of brand really want to use it for video productions or even care about the video specs?
Not every camera needs high end video capabilities.
If you are that interested in video buy a higher end camera with all the bells and whistles or better yet a video camera designed for that purpose and if it is really a deal breaker for you buy another brand, any brand and quit whinging about a $600 entry level camera thats obviously is not designed with you in mind.

Dear lord. Someone is making the case for a Sony A9 or A7r4 over an M62 in the comments. It's like having a Sony camera gives you a hard-on for nonsensical comparisons.

This camera is an M50 in a smaller body.

If you need 4k and dpaf spend more money. If you need 24p because you're a filmmaker, pick up an Arri camera and roll away.

I tried the M100 with kit lens. I liked the camera but not the lens, which was decentered and quite soft along one side during a range of FL. From reading, it seems this lens has quite a range of hit/miss quality. I understand the desire to keep the kit lens compact with a short zoom range and slow, but at least, build the lens to a consistent level of quality. Of course, this isn't my first experience with decentered lenses, which unfortunately, seems to be a common zoom lens problem even with fixed lens cameras. Time for a better kit lens from Canon, and it doesn't have to be f2.8 and 24-120mm.

One of the most useful and popular feature in camera phones is the digital zoom (aka Live Crop) for Stills and Video.

Why is this $550 camera which is supposed to be "fun", "portable" and for casual shooting lacks this?!

No wonder why people are not buying dedicated cameras like these anymore.
Crippled to the BOOORING end !

for my main cam is Sony no question. But I still have lots of Canon lenses and I like to play with astro, Canon without doubt has done fine with astro (my 7Dmk2 is good for this) although I'm not so excited with the Canon Ra as I'm not foolish enough to pay silly hikes for a filter change after a few removed screws. Unless we are talking peltier coolers etc which won't happen. I'm going to keep my foot in the Canon door with either the M6mk2 or this M200 and it's looking M6mk2 so far just need to wait for the grey market prices to stabilize for the UK. Probably in a month or two. M200 is no diff to M100 for what I would use it for. Keep at it Canon I hate the Sony Monopoly but sorry they rule and you Canon foolishly cripple. You got to get past Nikon first they are still ahead.

When a camera company releases a camera without giving a prototype to reviewers they are saying this camera is not for you. The camera is too low end for camera people...our target market is for someone who has never used a camera before.

Colour options, pink, yellow, red etc? Time to boycott these boring products.

Can we forego the DPReview TV review on this one? In a nutshell, Jordan will praise the (near) 24p and then spend the rest of the review whining about the crop and lack of mic and headphone jacks for bloggers...

The M100 has always looked like a ‘handbag’ camera; but get over the fact you don’t have a PSAM dial and what you do have is a cracking camera with great IQ, fantastic screen and a low cost, pin sharp lens range ... even the option to add EF-S lenses!

In the UK you can pick up a new M100 for sub £300 ... and when you take a moment to investigate this camera, you realise it’s a bit of a hidden gem! (You can then upgrade to the M5/M6 and carry over the glass).

Are video clips still limited to 29 minutes?

Canon are going to have a better lens lne up for this camera.

This upgrade is about as inspiring as the upgrade from the 20D to the 30D. The Fuji X-A7 makes a far better case for smartphone users wanting to upgrade to an entry level camera with video. The 4K video crop on the M200 was inevitable, given the size of the camera, and it doesn't bother me. However, it will make the YouTube talking heads happy - those egocentric folks who believe that their dull talking head content must be in 4K with "cinematic" 24p frame rate.

If the X-A7 isn't affordable, and you can live without most of the new features it comes with, then a refurbished M100 certainly is affordable. In Canada, at the time of this post, Best Buy sells refurbished M100s for $390 CDN or about $293 US - and you might grab a used one for even less.

what f6.3?? how lazy is Canon? that is a total joke. Lose!

Are the people here stuupid or something?
Comparing this to Fuji XA7, which costs $700 when the Canon costs $150 less. $700 is not entry level, that's midrange. This Canon is entry level.

$150 is a lot of difference in the entry level segment. That's half a month worth of salary for some people in Asia.

“and we've reached out to Canon to confirm.” ..... I think the word you are struggling to find is “asked”.

As many of us who have used the likes of the EOS M10, followed by the EOS M100, we can attest to the "fun factor" involved. In addition to superb APS-C IQ levels, whenever I reach for my M100, it becomes such a breeze to use. And when holding this camera, it almost defies logic that Canon managed to put an APS-C sized sensor in that tiny (pocketable) body. There are a multitude of options available in the menu structure even though it has a minimalist exterior body design.

I don't know if I'd want to "upgrade" to this model over the M100, but it will still sell quite well (IMO, that is). And as usual - as if right on que - the self proclaimed naysayers (doesn't matter what brand of camera it is) - will knock this model for this or that reason. But that's life I suppose.
As an M user, I can see this camera continuing to sell just fine, perhaps not to folks with the current M100, but more so for new users. All of the brands do these incremental upgrades.

Better autofocus is nice, but USB charging is great: that is a nice upgrade for a travelcam.

Why is it that every comment section, under every post of a camera, is dominated by spec talk? “Camera x isn’t as good as camera y,” or “it doesn’t have 4K af face and retinal detection so it must be trash!”

Got damn! Most of you don’t even own the product you’re championing nor intend to buy the product you’re downgrading. You all remind me middle school children. /rant

I'm surprised no one is complaining about the lack of a grip.

Was hoping this would get the 32Mp sensor - it`d have really made its mark in the budget ILC market, they didn`t even update the 24Mp one to a decent DR spec or better high ISOs (neither of which are up to the 6yr old Nikon D7200 even) .. missed opportunity IMO , much like making a M6 Mk2 instead of a M5 Mk2 .. Shame . at least it`ll make for cheap blowout M100s

The margins are at the lower end camera's, consumer market, not at the high end. I'm happy that Canon knows that, so it stays a healthy company! Best camera brand to be a pro with. Just sayin!
And yes, this camera looks fun! Maybe they could make a 15 45 mark ii, I hear stories that that lens could be a lot better.

i know folk will complain that this is not much of an update ...but for the market its intended for its plenty fine

I really like the Canon M100. What a great design it is. Canon might not have the best specs but this camera has incredible usability due to its small size, ergonomics and image quality. I wish Nikon had something similar as I prefer Nikon lenses and colours.

is there dpaf in 4k? I’m guessing not, then why is it not mentioned?

Hey DPR,

Please do a head-to-head with Fuji X-A7. Thanks in advance.

Price is good.

So this entry M200 can do 24p, but the M6II cannot???