I Am Sensing A Lot Of Anger Over Canon's New Mirrorless

nnowak said:

MyM3 said:

nnowak said:

Sibir Lupus said:

T3 said:

Kodak, Nokia, Blackberry were all tops in their respective markets too.

Let's also not forget that Canon killed off their FD system when they introduced the EF system. They even released new FD bodies after the EF system was released. But the system still eventually went away. More recently, look at Nikon killing off their Nikon 1 system. It just goes to show that companies will make any changes that they feel are necessary. EOS M won't be immune to that.

Click to expand...

EF was designed to replace FD which was pretty much a given. And for the Nikon 1 system, it was a flop overall. The EOS M was the highest selling mirrorless system in the second quarter of 2018 in Japan. And that's primarily due to entry level models like the M100 and M50. Canon would be insane to kill off this kind of success seeing as the EOS R system won't be "entry level" for quite a while. And even then, what would a $600 crop sensor EOS R even look like or be able to offer with so many cut corners to reduce price?

Click to expand...

It would look and perform the same as the M50, except the mount diameter would be slightly larger.

Click to expand...

I am not sure that they will make cheap Aps-c R cameras. They want to sell expensive FF cameras.

Click to expand...

How does a $600 crop body reduce sales of a $2000 full frame body?

Click to expand...

Some people might buy the cheap body to use with the "great new" lenses instead of the FF body. Of course Canon want them to buy the expensive FF body. They will continue with that as long as possible.

nnowak said:

If anything, having a crop body that takes the same lenses and the full frame body is a bid advantage. The overall size and weight differences between EF-M and RF would be completely negligible. Your entire kit probably wouldn't even gain 100 grams.

Click to expand...

Probably? Guessing here ? Ok my guess at least 500 grams/kit gain.

nnowak said:

nnowak said:

But if they do, it will be heavier and at least 7mm higher and 2mm deeper. And heavier and bigger lenses (in diameter).

Click to expand...

The lenses only need to be bigger at the mount. The rest of the lens could still be 61mm, or even smaller.

Click to expand...

That will look silly. And it's the diameter on the widest part that is important here. And did Canon ever make such lenses for EF-s? Even if they was supposed to be smaller.

nnowak said:

nnowak said:

nnowak said:

nnowak said:

And lets not forget that the EOS R doesn't really have any affordable lenses right now to even go with an more entry level type model.

Click to expand...

The new RF 35mm f1.8 STM IS Macro is $20 more expensive than the new EF-M 32mm f1.4 STM. Size and weight are also very close. One lens is a bit brighter, but the other has IS and macro capabilities.

Click to expand...

Too heavy and too wide. And many want f1.4 instead of IS.

Click to expand...

Only 70 grams heavier, 13mm wider, and 10mm longer. Compared to the 35mm f2 IS USM plus adapter that many use with the M system, this new RF lens is 155 grams lighter, 4mm skinnier, and 26mm shorter. Plus, it is 1/3 of a stop faster with better IS. I am sure there are many Rebel shooters right now that would love to have access to this new lens.

Click to expand...

Add some lenses and the gain is LARGE.

nnowak said:

nnowak said:

nnowak said:

nnowak said:

I'm not saying the EOS M system is immune to being ended at any point. All I'm saying is that the future is uncertain right now and that no one should be planning the EOS M's funeral anytime soon.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Brian Slater said:

Kharan said:

EOS M will be slowly abandoned, because Canon never rush, and also because they have heaps of unsold M gear :-|

And the users who are inventing twisted narratives, to justify what essentially was a big 'FU' to the EOS M userbase, are simply making Canon's job easier.

EF-M mount has now an expiration date, whether in two or five years remains to be seen, but it'll die, all alone and sad in a corner.

Click to expand...

Your scenario is certainly possible, but I think you are wrong, and there are no twisted narratives needed. "As Canon continues to expand the company’s EF-M lineup, it is very important that users are provided the tools they desire for a variety of shooting situations,” said Kazuto Ogawa, president and chief operating officer, Canon U.S.A., Inc." (From press release for new 32 f1.4 this week).

Click to expand...

A regional COO outside Japan won't know the long term engineering projects. He is likely only fully aware of what is coming in the next 12-18 months.

Brian Slater said:

And another thing. Canon has another incentive to keep the EOS M system alive: Nikon abandoned the Nikon 1 system, and Canon made better choices in designing a more useful and popular system.

Click to expand...

nnowak said:

MyM3 said:

My point stands. If you put a the same EVF on top of both a RF mount and a EF-M mount, the M-camera can always be made 7mm lower and 2mm less deep. And the most important is that the lenses will be BIGGER in diameter and heavier.

Click to expand...

No, it can't. Look at the back of the M50. The EVF and LCD are already touching.

Click to expand...

The LCD frame can be made smaller (lower), even without reducing the screen.

nnowak said:

You can't make the M50 shorter without compromising ergonomics. Now, look at the front of the M50. The gap between the EVF hump and the mount is big enough to absorb the RF mount.

Click to expand...

Again. The M can always be 7mm lower.

nnowak said:

Regardless, the sizes and weights you are quibbling over are inconsequential.

Click to expand...

No it's not. Everything counts and adds up in the bag, rucksack, etc. That's why so many love the M cameras. As small and light as possible with very good iQ.

nnowak said:

MyM3 said:

nnowak said:

Sibir Lupus said:

T3 said:

Kodak, Nokia, Blackberry were all tops in their respective markets too.

Let's also not forget that Canon killed off their FD system when they introduced the EF system. They even released new FD bodies after the EF system was released. But the system still eventually went away. More recently, look at Nikon killing off their Nikon 1 system. It just goes to show that companies will make any changes that they feel are necessary. EOS M won't be immune to that.

Click to expand...

EF was designed to replace FD which was pretty much a given. And for the Nikon 1 system, it was a flop overall. The EOS M was the highest selling mirrorless system in the second quarter of 2018 in Japan. And that's primarily due to entry level models like the M100 and M50. Canon would be insane to kill off this kind of success seeing as the EOS R system won't be "entry level" for quite a while. And even then, what would a $600 crop sensor EOS R even look like or be able to offer with so many cut corners to reduce price?

Click to expand...

It would look and perform the same as the M50, except the mount diameter would be slightly larger.

Click to expand...

I think you will need something larger than M50:



Not much grip! (He,he. )

Click to expand...

Shift the mount and EVF 10mm to the left. Done. Problem solved.

Click to expand...

Is that even is possible? One release button there, and maybe other components. If so, then it can also be done on the M50 (and move the grip the same amount). Hey, even smaller!

MyM3 said:

nnowak said:

MyM3 said:

nnowak said:

Sibir Lupus said:

T3 said:

Kodak, Nokia, Blackberry were all tops in their respective markets too.

Let's also not forget that Canon killed off their FD system when they introduced the EF system. They even released new FD bodies after the EF system was released. But the system still eventually went away. More recently, look at Nikon killing off their Nikon 1 system. It just goes to show that companies will make any changes that they feel are necessary. EOS M won't be immune to that.

Click to expand...

EF was designed to replace FD which was pretty much a given. And for the Nikon 1 system, it was a flop overall. The EOS M was the highest selling mirrorless system in the second quarter of 2018 in Japan. And that's primarily due to entry level models like the M100 and M50. Canon would be insane to kill off this kind of success seeing as the EOS R system won't be "entry level" for quite a while. And even then, what would a $600 crop sensor EOS R even look like or be able to offer with so many cut corners to reduce price?

Click to expand...

It would look and perform the same as the M50, except the mount diameter would be slightly larger.

Click to expand...

I am not sure that they will make cheap Aps-c R cameras. They want to sell expensive FF cameras.

Click to expand...

How does a $600 crop body reduce sales of a $2000 full frame body?

Click to expand...

Some people might buy the cheap body to use with the "great new" lenses instead of the FF body. Of course Canon want them to buy the expensive FF body. They will continue with that as long as possible.

Click to expand...

Your theory runs counter to the decades of Rebel sales.

M4Mobility said:

M4Mobility said:

If anything, having a crop body that takes the same lenses and the full frame body is a bid advantage. The overall size and weight differences between EF-M and RF would be completely negligible. Your entire kit probably wouldn't even gain 100 grams.

Click to expand...

Probably. Guessing here ? Ok my guess at least 500 grams/kit gain.

Click to expand...

Have your ever weighed a lens mount? I have. Canon can build an entire lens that only weighs 130g.

M4Mobility said:

M4Mobility said:

M4Mobility said:

But if they do, it will be heavier and at least 7mm higher and 2mm deeper. And heavier and bigger lenses (in diameter).

Click to expand...

The lenses only need to be bigger at the mount. The rest of the lens could still be 61mm, or even smaller.

Click to expand...

That will look silly. And it's the diameter on the widest part that is important here. And did Canon ever make such lenses for EF-s? Even if they was supposed to be smaller.

Click to expand...

Plenty of manufacturers build lenses in this manner and they have no trouble selling them.

M4Mobility said:

M4Mobility said:

M4Mobility said:

M4Mobility said:

M4Mobility said:

And lets not forget that the EOS R doesn't really have any affordable lenses right now to even go with an more entry level type model.

Click to expand...

The new RF 35mm f1.8 STM IS Macro is $20 more expensive than the new EF-M 32mm f1.4 STM. Size and weight are also very close. One lens is a bit brighter, but the other has IS and macro capabilities.

Click to expand...

Too heavy and too wide. And many want f1.4 instead of IS.

Click to expand...

Only 70 grams heavier, 13mm wider, and 10mm longer. Compared to the 35mm f2 IS USM plus adapter that many use with the M system, this new RF lens is 155 grams lighter, 4mm skinnier, and 26mm shorter. Plus, it is 1/3 of a stop faster with better IS. I am sure there are many Rebel shooters right now that would love to have access to this new lens.

Click to expand...

Add some lenses and the gain is LARGE.

Click to expand...

Add what lenses to what? Plenty of M users put an adapter and 35mm f2 IS USM on their cameras. The new RF 35mm is much smaller and lighter.

M4Mobility said:

M4Mobility said:

M4Mobility said:

M4Mobility said:

M4Mobility said:

I'm not saying the EOS M system is immune to being ended at any point. All I'm saying is that the future is uncertain right now and that no one should be planning the EOS M's funeral anytime soon.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

nnowak said:

Brian Slater said:

Kharan said:

EOS M will be slowly abandoned, because Canon never rush, and also because they have heaps of unsold M gear :-|

And the users who are inventing twisted narratives, to justify what essentially was a big 'FU' to the EOS M userbase, are simply making Canon's job easier.

EF-M mount has now an expiration date, whether in two or five years remains to be seen, but it'll die, all alone and sad in a corner.

Click to expand...

Your scenario is certainly possible, but I think you are wrong, and there are no twisted narratives needed. "As Canon continues to expand the company’s EF-M lineup, it is very important that users are provided the tools they desire for a variety of shooting situations,” said Kazuto Ogawa, president and chief operating officer, Canon U.S.A., Inc." (From press release for new 32 f1.4 this week).

Click to expand...

A regional COO outside Japan won't know the long term engineering projects. He is likely only fully aware of what is coming in the next 12-18 months.

Click to expand...

Ridiculous. He is a senior Canon executive with a long history (he was previously VP of Canon in China) and heads Canon’s largest market. You can be sure he knows all about Canon’s long term engineering goals and has a significant role in driving them. Canon is a global company.

nnowak said:

nnowak said:

And another thing. Canon has another incentive to keep the EOS M system alive: Nikon abandoned the Nikon 1 system, and Canon made better choices in designing a more useful and popular system.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

nnowak said:

MyM3 said:

nnowak said:

MyM3 said:

nnowak said:

Sibir Lupus said:

T3 said:

Kodak, Nokia, Blackberry were all tops in their respective markets too.

Let's also not forget that Canon killed off their FD system when they introduced the EF system. They even released new FD bodies after the EF system was released. But the system still eventually went away. More recently, look at Nikon killing off their Nikon 1 system. It just goes to show that companies will make any changes that they feel are necessary. EOS M won't be immune to that.

Click to expand...

EF was designed to replace FD which was pretty much a given. And for the Nikon 1 system, it was a flop overall. The EOS M was the highest selling mirrorless system in the second quarter of 2018 in Japan. And that's primarily due to entry level models like the M100 and M50. Canon would be insane to kill off this kind of success seeing as the EOS R system won't be "entry level" for quite a while. And even then, what would a $600 crop sensor EOS R even look like or be able to offer with so many cut corners to reduce price?

Click to expand...

It would look and perform the same as the M50, except the mount diameter would be slightly larger.

Click to expand...

I am not sure that they will make cheap Aps-c R cameras. They want to sell expensive FF cameras.

Click to expand...

How does a $600 crop body reduce sales of a $2000 full frame body?

Click to expand...

Some people might buy the cheap body to use with the "great new" lenses instead of the FF body. Of course Canon want them to buy the expensive FF body. They will continue with that as long as possible.

Click to expand...

Your theory runs counter to the decades of Rebel sales.

Click to expand...

?? They still sell Rebels. An now plenty of M's. No need to stop producing M's. And they will milk the FF R sales as much as possible.

nnowak said:

nnowak said:

nnowak said:

If anything, having a crop body that takes the same lenses and the full frame body is a bid advantage. The overall size and weight differences between EF-M and RF would be completely negligible. Your entire kit probably wouldn't even gain 100 grams.

Click to expand...

Probably. Guessing here ? Ok my guess at least 500 grams/kit gain.

Click to expand...

Have your ever weighed a lens mount? I have. Canon can build an entire lens that only weighs 130g.

Click to expand...

They need more materials than just the mount. I was not sure if I should buy the 18-150 because of weight (300 grams). I found it's absolutely the limit for me (for comfort) for a daily walkabout/hiking lens. So I have set the absolute limit to 300 grams for primes and normal zooms (and shorter superzooms). (exception is a longer telezoom for special occasions). A R lens has to be heavier, no doubt. And the largest dimeter will be too big.

nnowak said:

nnowak said:

nnowak said:

nnowak said:

But if they do, it will be heavier and at least 7mm higher and 2mm deeper. And heavier and bigger lenses (in diameter).

Click to expand...

The lenses only need to be bigger at the mount. The rest of the lens could still be 61mm, or even smaller.

Click to expand...

That will look silly. And it's the diameter on the widest part that is important here. And did Canon ever make such lenses for EF-s? Even if they was supposed to be smaller.

Click to expand...

Plenty of manufacturers build lenses in this manner and they have no trouble selling them.

Click to expand...

That is a different discussion. The diameter will not be smaller. And it adds up in the bag / rucksack or whatever.

nnowak said:

nnowak said:

nnowak said:

nnowak said:

nnowak said:

nnowak said:

And lets not forget that the EOS R doesn't really have any affordable lenses right now to even go with an more entry level type model.

Click to expand...

The new RF 35mm f1.8 STM IS Macro is $20 more expensive than the new EF-M 32mm f1.4 STM. Size and weight are also very close. One lens is a bit brighter, but the other has IS and macro capabilities.

Click to expand...

Too heavy and too wide. And many want f1.4 instead of IS.

Click to expand...

Only 70 grams heavier, 13mm wider, and 10mm longer. Compared to the 35mm f2 IS USM plus adapter that many use with the M system, this new RF lens is 155 grams lighter, 4mm skinnier, and 26mm shorter. Plus, it is 1/3 of a stop faster with better IS. I am sure there are many Rebel shooters right now that would love to have access to this new lens.

Click to expand...

Add some lenses and the gain is LARGE.

Click to expand...

Add what lenses to what? Plenty of M users put an adapter and 35mm f2 IS USM on their cameras. The new RF 35mm is much smaller and lighter.

Click to expand...

Add 3 or 4 lenses in a rucksack when hiking, and you will know. Every mm and gram will count. The EF-M 32mm F1.4 will be even smaller and lighter and have F1.4 .

nnowak said:

nnowak said:

nnowak said:

nnowak said:

nnowak said:

nnowak said:

I'm not saying the EOS M system is immune to being ended at any point. All I'm saying is that the future is uncertain right now and that no one should be planning the EOS M's funeral anytime soon.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

nnowak said:

How are two incompatible mounts a benefit for the current M system owners? Keeping a system alive is little benefit if it never grows and advances. There are only so many lenses that can fit into a 61mm diameter.

Personally, I am not upset as I have far less invested in the M system than I did a couple years ago. I can clearly understand why many others would be upset.

Click to expand...

You have "far less invested" now? :-D Come on, it's a small system of relatively cheap lenses and bodies - what did you do, liquidate one or two units from your lens "portfolio" to free up hundreds dollars for other "investments"?

Why any M owner would be upset by the R is beyond me - different mounts, but similar underlying technologies means that any future M bodies are likely to benefit from developments made in the R system.

In the meantime, my "portfolio" of M gear still works exactly the same, and will in time have the 32mm f/1.4 added to it.

MyM3 said:

nnowak said:

MyM3 said:

nnowak said:

Sibir Lupus said:

T3 said:

Kodak, Nokia, Blackberry were all tops in their respective markets too.

Let's also not forget that Canon killed off their FD system when they introduced the EF system. They even released new FD bodies after the EF system was released. But the system still eventually went away. More recently, look at Nikon killing off their Nikon 1 system. It just goes to show that companies will make any changes that they feel are necessary. EOS M won't be immune to that.

Click to expand...

EF was designed to replace FD which was pretty much a given. And for the Nikon 1 system, it was a flop overall. The EOS M was the highest selling mirrorless system in the second quarter of 2018 in Japan. And that's primarily due to entry level models like the M100 and M50. Canon would be insane to kill off this kind of success seeing as the EOS R system won't be "entry level" for quite a while. And even then, what would a $600 crop sensor EOS R even look like or be able to offer with so many cut corners to reduce price?

Click to expand...

It would look and perform the same as the M50, except the mount diameter would be slightly larger.

Click to expand...

I think you will need something larger than M50:



Not much grip! (He,he. )

Click to expand...

Shift the mount and EVF 10mm to the left. Done. Problem solved.

Click to expand...

Is that even is possible?

Click to expand...

Yes

M4Mobility said:

One release button there, and maybe other components. If so, then it can also be done on the M50 (and move the grip the same amount). Hey, even smaller!

Click to expand...

Go look at the back of an M50. You can't move the handgrip by 10mm unless you eliminate most of the buttons on the back. You can only shrink a camera so much before you completely compromise the handling.

nnowak said:

nnowak said:

And lets not forget that the EOS R doesn't really have any affordable lenses right now to even go with an more entry level type model.

Click to expand...

The new RF 35mm f1.8 STM IS Macro is $20 more expensive than the new EF-M 32mm f1.4 STM. Size and weight are also very close. One lens is a bit brighter, but the other has IS and macro capabilities.

Click to expand...

True, but it's a niche lens. But I'm referring to a lower priced kit, primes, and telephoto lenses.

byDMP said:

nnowak said:

How are two incompatible mounts a benefit for the current M system owners? Keeping a system alive is little benefit if it never grows and advances. There are only so many lenses that can fit into a 61mm diameter.

Personally, I am not upset as I have far less invested in the M system than I did a couple years ago. I can clearly understand why many others would be upset.

Click to expand...

You have "far less invested" now? :-D Come on, it's a small system of relatively cheap lenses and bodies - what did you do, liquidate one or two units from your lens "portfolio" to free up hundreds dollars for other "investments"?

Click to expand...

M, M2, M3, 22mm, 11-22mm, 18-55mm, 55-200mm, several EF adapters, and two Metabones Speedboosters that I converted to EF-M mount. I also sold a few EF/EF-S lenses and a flash that I was only using with the M system. It was much more than "hundreds".

Member said:

Why any M owner would be upset by the R is beyond me - different mounts, but similar underlying technologies means that any future M bodies are likely to benefit from developments made in the R system.

Click to expand...

They won't benefit from any of the new lenses built for the R system.

Member said:

In the meantime, my "portfolio" of M gear still works exactly the same, and will in time have the 32mm f/1.4 added to it.

Click to expand...

Sibir Lupus said:

nnowak said:

Sibir Lupus said:

And lets not forget that the EOS R doesn't really have any affordable lenses right now to even go with an more entry level type model.

Click to expand...

The new RF 35mm f1.8 STM IS Macro is $20 more expensive than the new EF-M 32mm f1.4 STM. Size and weight are also very close. One lens is a bit brighter, but the other has IS and macro capabilities.

Click to expand...

True, but it's a niche lens. But I'm referring to a lower priced kit, primes, and telephoto lenses.

Click to expand...

How is the RF 35mm a "niche" lens. The EF 35mm f2 IS USM is frequently adapted the M cameras as well as Rebels for a 50mm equivalent lens. The new RF lens is smaller, lighter, cheaper, brighter, has better IS and focuses closer than the USM alternative.

nnowak said:

MyM3 said:

nnowak said:

MyM3 said:

nnowak said:

Sibir Lupus said:

T3 said:

Kodak, Nokia, Blackberry were all tops in their respective markets too.

Let's also not forget that Canon killed off their FD system when they introduced the EF system. They even released new FD bodies after the EF system was released. But the system still eventually went away. More recently, look at Nikon killing off their Nikon 1 system. It just goes to show that companies will make any changes that they feel are necessary. EOS M won't be immune to that.

Click to expand...

EF was designed to replace FD which was pretty much a given. And for the Nikon 1 system, it was a flop overall. The EOS M was the highest selling mirrorless system in the second quarter of 2018 in Japan. And that's primarily due to entry level models like the M100 and M50. Canon would be insane to kill off this kind of success seeing as the EOS R system won't be "entry level" for quite a while. And even then, what would a $600 crop sensor EOS R even look like or be able to offer with so many cut corners to reduce price?

Click to expand...

It would look and perform the same as the M50, except the mount diameter would be slightly larger.

Click to expand...

I think you will need something larger than M50:



Not much grip! (He,he. )

Click to expand...

Shift the mount and EVF 10mm to the left. Done. Problem solved.

Click to expand...

Is that even is possible?

Click to expand...

Yes

nnowak said:

One release button there, and maybe other components. If so, then it can also be done on the M50 (and move the grip the same amount). Hey, even smaller!

Click to expand...

Go look at the back of an M50. You can't move the handgrip by 10mm unless you eliminate most of the buttons on the back. You can only shrink a camera so much before you completely compromise the handling.

Click to expand...

Of course you can. There is a lot of black frames around the screen that can be eliminated.

But now I am tired of all this guessing and assumptions. So you can continue with your guesses and hopes for an R APS-C alone.

I think it is possible they will make one later some time, but not likely. At least not a cheap camera. And it will not be as small as M. But I don't really care. I just know that it is not for me. Me and many many others like the M cameras as they are, because of size and weight (and price). And you know what. My M camera(s) works today too! That should not be possible, should it.?
Now I have to go out and use my M, while it still works.

byDMP said:

nnowak said:

How are two incompatible mounts a benefit for the current M system owners? Keeping a system alive is little benefit if it never grows and advances. There are only so many lenses that can fit into a 61mm diameter.

Personally, I am not upset as I have far less invested in the M system than I did a couple years ago. I can clearly understand why many others would be upset.

Click to expand...

You have "far less invested" now? :-D Come on, it's a small system of relatively cheap lenses and bodies - what did you do, liquidate one or two units from your lens "portfolio" to free up hundreds dollars for other "investments"?

Why any M owner would be upset by the R is beyond me - different mounts, but similar underlying technologies means that any future M bodies are likely to benefit from developments made in the R system.

In the meantime, my "portfolio" of M gear still works exactly the same, and will in time have the 32mm f/1.4 added to it.

Click to expand...

+1

The high-end R system is a good thing for future M bodies.

Some people will always find something to complain about: bad weather, fat butter, wet water...;-)

T3 said:

High end compacts aren't part of a system...

Click to expand...

Yes they are - the system extends beyond the camera and lens. You're forgetting flashes and filters and batteries and controls and menus and software.

T3 said:

...

Yes, the M line sells well, but how well will it continue to sell now that Canon offers a totally different, incompatible mirrorless system that uses a totally different mount? As more and more EOS R bodies and lenses are introduced, I think more and more EOS M users are going to feel left out in the cold. I also think that most of the R&D resources are going to be poured into EOS R, not EOS M.

Click to expand...

For at least the next few years they'll continue at completely different price points - for many buyers that will be the main differentiator. And while the mounts are different, the underlying technology is now more similar between M & R bodies than it is between M & DSLRs - many R&D advancements could be shared between the two lines.

T3 said:

You have to also keep in mind that consumers are aspirational. They may never move up to FF, but many like the idea of being able to do so. EOS M doesn't offer their users that opportunity.

Click to expand...

Many consumers buy a camera because they're going on holiday, or having a baby, or cause an ILC looks cool, and don't give a moment's thought it being the entry point to an upgrade path. And for your "aspirationals", while the M doesn't offer FF, the R does, and stepping up from an M50 or M5 to an R is going to seem like a natural progression now given the similarities in design, handling etc.

T3 said:

And unlike the APS-C Fuji X system, EOS M is not well supported with a full, serious system of bodies and lenses covering everything from entry-level to pro-level offerings.

Click to expand...

The M series isn't trying to be everything from entry-level to pro - that's already covered by EF-S, EF and now R systems.

Brian Slater said:

Kharan said:

EOS M will be slowly abandoned, because Canon never rush, and also because they have heaps of unsold M gear :-|

And the users who are inventing twisted narratives, to justify what essentially was a big 'FU' to the EOS M userbase, are simply making Canon's job easier.

EF-M mount has now an expiration date, whether in two or five years remains to be seen, but it'll die, all alone and sad in a corner.

Click to expand...

Your scenario is certainly possible, but I think you are wrong, and there are no twisted narratives needed.

Click to expand...

But quite a few posters are pushing them, you included. There's absolutely no upside to EF-M being an orphan mount. None. It didn't have to be this way - at all.

Brian Slater said:

"As Canon continues to expand the company’s EF-M lineup, it is very important that users are provided the tools they desire for a variety of shooting situations,” said Kazuto Ogawa, president and chief operating officer, Canon U.S.A., Inc." (From press release for new 32 f1.4 this week).

Click to expand...

So, if you're into believing the statements of corporate bigwigs, I guess you also believe that Sony A-mount is alive and kicking, Samsung will keep on producing NX cameras, Nikon remains committed to their 1 system, and Canon sensors are the best in the market right now :-D

Brian Slater said:

And another thing. Canon has another incentive to keep the EOS M system alive: Nikon abandoned the Nikon 1 system, and Canon made better choices in designing a more useful and popular system.

Click to expand...

How in blazes is that an incentive?

Canon have every incentive to transition to RF, not to keep developing EF-M. RF will prove much more popular in NA and Europe, which are substantially larger markets than Japan, and thus will be the more sustainable mount in the short and long run. Japan will adapt to RF too, eventually.

fstopx2 said:

Is it because of incompatibility between EOS M and EOS R?

Click to expand...

It seems pretty clear that RF is the one unifying mount from Canon that can do everything for them. It will take EF lenses, EF-S lenses (a first for Canon FF digital cameras), RF lenses, FF sensors, APS-C sensors (eventually), and it will even take FD lenses in all their FF glory (another first for Canon FF digital cameras because previous EOS bodies have had a flange distance that was too large for FD). Canon are also including an in-camera 1.6x crop mode in the EOS R. So clearly, Canon has designed the RF mount bodies to be able to handle everything that Canon offers or has offered: EF lenses, EF-S lenses, RF lenses, and even FD lenses. But the only lens system that is being left out is EF-M. I think that tells you a little about how Canon feels about EF-M. I wouldn't go so far as to call it an outcast system, but it kind of feels that way since it's the only one essentially being excluded from use with Canon's latest mount.

I do think that RF is the mount that Canon is banking on to take them into the next few decades.

And for anyone who says that Canon will never push aside EF-M because the system is selling so well, keep in mind that the FD system was doing very well too. The FD-mount Canon AE-1 was the best selling manual focus camera in the world. The FD lens system was very large. The FD system had pro usership and big L telephotos. And yet, they still killed it off.



So if you think that Canon won't kill off a system as sparse as EOS M because it's too popular and the system is too big, and they've invested too much into EOS M:



...then think again.

The good news is that I think EOS M has several more years of life. It'll take a little while for Canon to introduce APS-C EOS R bodies and lenses. But I don't think EOS M will last as long as the FD system did (1971-1992: 21 years). The EOS M system is 6 years old. It'll probably go another 6 years. By then, Canon will have certainly released APS-C EOS R bodies and lenses.

Brian Slater said:

Kharan said:

EOS M will be slowly abandoned, because Canon never rush, and also because they have heaps of unsold M gear :-|

And the users who are inventing twisted narratives, to justify what essentially was a big 'FU' to the EOS M userbase, are simply making Canon's job easier.

EF-M mount has now an expiration date, whether in two or five years remains to be seen, but it'll die, all alone and sad in a corner.

Click to expand...

Your scenario is certainly possible, but I think you are wrong, and there are no twisted narratives needed. "As Canon continues to expand the company’s EF-M lineup, it is very important that users are provided the tools they desire for a variety of shooting situations,” said Kazuto Ogawa, president and chief operating officer, Canon U.S.A., Inc." (From press release for new 32 f1.4 this week).

Click to expand...

That just sounds like corporate speak. "As Canon continues to expand" could simply be a reference to the new 35mm EF-M. As for providing "the tools they desire", that could just as easily mean APS-C EOS R. Besides, Canon has never been a company that goes by user desire. Canon does what it wants, and the users just go along for the ride.

Brian Slater said:

And another thing. Canon has another incentive to keep the EOS M system alive: Nikon abandoned the Nikon 1 system, and Canon made better choices in designing a more useful and popular system.

Click to expand...

Well, Nikon 1 also shows the danger of concentrating on a system that narrowly caters to people who just want a really compact camera system, and doesn't have a native upgrade path to larger sensor formats.

At first I was concerned that EOS M system, that I have invested heavily in over the past year, had become an orphan because of incompatibility with EOS R. But after comparing the weights (and sizes) of what my choices for camera systems would be today I am still glad that I chose EOS M (see attached chart that I created). It is still compatible with all my EF and EF-S lenses so I am covered for fast primes on the rare occasions that I use them, my new M lenses, although slow, are sharp as a tack, and none of the other systems come close in terms of compactness and weight which is very important to me as a walk-around photographer. The new EOS R kit system is actually heavier than my previous APS-C DSLR system and not much less than a comparable Canon full frame system. The Nikon Z system is a bit lighter with its less ambitious lens speeds and might be a better choice for those looking for a full frame compact system but for me as an enthusiast the EOS M system is perfect. The only other competitor for compactness and lens quality is the Fuijifilm X system but I still love Canon colour, user friendliness, and glass.


Camera System Comparison by Weight

Bob GR Morgan said:

At first I was concerned that EOS M system, that I have invested heavily in over the past year, had become an orphan because of incompatibility with EOS R. But after comparing the weights (and sizes) of what my choices for camera systems would be today I am still glad that I chose EOS M (see attached chart that I created). It is still compatible with all my EF and EF-S lenses so I am covered for fast primes on the rare occasions that I use them, my new M lenses, although slow, are sharp as a tack, and none of the other systems come close in terms of compactness and weight which is very important to me as a walk-around photographer. The new EOS R kit system is actually heavier than my previous APS-C DSLR system and not much less than a comparable Canon full frame system. The Nikon Z system is a bit lighter with its less ambitious lens speeds and might be a better choice for those looking for a full frame compact system but for me as an enthusiast the EOS M system is perfect. The only other competitor for compactness and lens quality is the Fuijifilm X system but I still love Canon colour, user friendliness, and glass.


Camera System Comparison by Weight

Click to expand...

Your charts are nice, but they are a static snapshot of what is currently available. There is no technical roadblock preventing Canon from recreating all of the EF-M lenses and M cameras with the RF mount and a crop sensor. Sizes, weights, and prices would remain nearly identical.

Take a look at the new RF 35mm f1.8 IS STM Macro vs the new EF-M 32mm f1.4 STM. Sizes and weights are not very far apart and prices are basically the same. That RF lens would make a great "normal" lens on a crop sensor RF mount camera. It is also smaller, lighter, and cheaper than the EF 35mm f2 IS USM that many have been using as a "normal" lens.