Does Canon have to explain where they want the M to go or not go?

With all the conversation on this forum about the future or lack thereof of the M system, will Canon try to explain to us where they are taking the M system? Personally, actions speak louder than words and I suspect we won't hear much from Canon about the direction they will take with the M system. Their actions of new M cameras and lenses or lack thereof will speak for them.

What do you think?

ByronP said:

ByronP wrote: Their actions of new M cameras and lenses or lack thereof will speak for them.

Click to expand...

I don't think the typical M100/M50 owner is the target market for a new $480 lens. That leads me to believe that there will be some kind of "M 5 Mark II" update sometime in the future.

ByronP said:

With all the conversation on this forum about the future or lack thereof of the M system, will Canon try to explain to us where they are taking the M system? Personally, actions speak louder than words and I suspect we won't hear much from Canon about the direction they will take with the M system. Their actions of new M cameras and lenses or lack thereof will speak for them.

Click to expand...

Funny you mention that. There is a multi-page PDF floating around (if this link doesn't work paste it into a fresh browser window, Canon's site seems to block referral links) from Canon about why they made the RF mount with a bunch of technical data and whatever. I saw zero mention of EF-M.

ByronP said:

What do you think?

Click to expand...

If Canon will say whether it continues to develop for EF-M long term? I'd guess they won't. It will depend on sales of what they do have planned and end up releasing. The same will be said for EF, and to a more extreme degree EF-S. Maybe Canon feels that their large market share means they can have breaks in compatibility while still getting volume in each format.

The EF-M system seems like it was used to develop necessary technologies that bridge the gap between DSLR live-view >> MILC, while still making some cash on that stuff in the consumer space. It was also targeted toward the small compact market given the original EOS-M had no viewfinder and a lot of consecutive cameras don't. I think their target of small compact bodies is the biggest chance EF-M has to stay around.

I see EOS R as their professional line of camera given the big document trying to tell pros what's going to happen and why they did it. EOS R will envelop Canon's cinema line and whatever other high-end types of ILC they offer.

What am I hoping for with EF-M?

That EF-M sticks around and ends up having a solid range of camera bodies and lenses. Some advanced models and some small compact models. I'm hoping this line of camera excels at price vs. performance ratio. I think overall there are some great deals in the system right now. I'd be glad with higher spec bodies similar to what Canon offered on their traditional DSLRs. Though, I don't expect anything past "semi-pro" and "enthusiast" levels of performance. Even that stuff is up in the air right now considering EOS R could fill it.

A potential issue years down the road is whether Canon cuts off development and production of EF glass, which in turn would cut off supply of unique options for EF-M. (at least from a new equipment perspective... there will always be solid used gear around). I don't expect them to make mirrorless versions of EF/EF-S cameras, though that might be good stopgap measure for them.

Right now I have some full-frame DSLR gear on consignment. Considering getting more into EF-M, or using those future funds on a full-frame mirrorless. Still on the fence, but I'm seeing benefits to my workflow if I did go EF-M and that could happen right now (or at least once that 32mm lens is officially out). I mean, I like full-frame and want FF mirrorless, but I expect all of it to be pretty pricey for quite a while until it moves down toward more general consumers (if it does...). I'd like a M100 to go along with the M50 bodies I have (better on my gimbal, even easier to carry around as a second camera), plus something ranged (55-200) and that soon to be released 32mm. A plus here would be if Canon did release some more substantial EF-M bodies from a grip size and ergonomic standpoint. The M50 grip is decent, but a bit small. Kind of like how Panasonic does with their GH5. I know I'll eventually want something more substantial for some situations.

Canon doesn't have to say anything, but it may frustrate people in the long term.

People want to know what the roadmap for EF-M is, we now know it is not going to be FF ever.

Is the M5 the highest model in the line, will there be bigger model for people that want better ergo. Will it ever get the features the RF has. Control ring lenses? ND filter adapters?

I know most people say buy what you need now not the future. But people have a habit of wanting to be in the system that succeeds and continues on.

Manufacture don't admit defeat....they just quietly wither way.

AFAIK...Samsung don't make a press-release announcement of its NX cancellation. Samsung merely withdraw from the marketplace quietly as much as possible.

People had been speculating the death of Nikon CX for 5~6 years, Nikon never admit to CX cancellation either until the imminent release of Nikon Z6/Z7 mirrorless.

The same Quiet Deaths awaits for entire Canon EOS-M.

The "ACTION" that will speak louder than words is the APS-C (R) camera that will surely come in 2019. When an cheaper APS-C (R) is release, than there is no point of making EOS-M anymore. I suspect there is NO EOS-M5/M6 mark II, but an APS-C (R) substitutes.

It is in Canon's best interest to Build Up its R - Lens lineup as quickly as possible. That is where the money is, and where the consolidation is as well.

I"m more curious about the Canon 90D DSLR. It is not confirm yet but everyone seem to expect at least ONE more APS-C enthusiast DSLR before death. I for one, suspect 90D = "might" be the 1st APS-C (R) mirrorless. Do you think Canon might push 90D as a mirrorless?

ByronP said:

With all the conversation on this forum about the future or lack thereof of the M system, will Canon try to explain to us where they are taking the M system? Personally, actions speak louder than words and I suspect we won't hear much from Canon about the direction they will take with the M system. Their actions of new M cameras and lenses or lack thereof will speak for them.

What do you think?

Click to expand...

I think the only thing that can provide any answers is the passing of time. Canon will not tell use if they are planning the phase out of the M system. I wouldn't blindly believe then if they said it wasn't being phased out. It will likely take another 2-3 years to know the truth as to path Canon is taking. IMO, a big indicator is if an ASP-C R camera shows up. If it does then it probably means the M system will be phased out.

According to Thom Hogan, Canon M is #2 in worldwide mirrorless market share. It is also the best selling mirrorless camera in Japan. Why would Canon want to kill a system that is selling well? Why would Canon release a new $480 lens for a system that they plan to kill? The M-FUD doesn't make any sense to me.

justmeMN said:

According to Thom Hogan, Canon M is #2 in worldwide mirrorless market share. It is also the best selling mirrorless camera in Japan. Why would Canon want to kill a system that is selling well? Why would Canon release a new $480 lens for a system that they plan to kill? The M-FUD doesn't make any sense to me.

Click to expand...

They won't kill it they will migrate it to the R system. They will make APS-C R cameras more attractive than EOS M cameras. It really isn't a hard exercise to complete. Starve the M system and feed the R system. They have been starving the M system by means of not developing a robust lens catalog. I believe the M system was their R&D playground that generated cash for MILC camera development. It would be a really brilliant move by Canon to do this. I keep saying there is a reason Canon refused to develop a deep bench of EF-M lenses. Any company that was serious about growing an ILC based camera system would do this. They would have to. Canon did not and they aren't novices at developing camera systems. Look at how they have done it in the past and with the R system. Why have they not done this with the M system?

ByronP said:

With all the conversation on this forum about the future or lack thereof of the M system, will Canon try to explain to us where they are taking the M system? Personally, actions speak louder than words and I suspect we won't hear much from Canon about the direction they will take with the M system. Their actions of new M cameras and lenses or lack thereof will speak for them.

What do you think?

Click to expand...

No they don't and they won't. EOS M is a tiny system and it doesn't have that many users. And on top of that, their users are mainly casual users because that's what the system has been outfitted as. In contrast, compare EOS M to the FD system which was much larger and had a bigger pool of users (including serious pro users).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canon_FD_lens_mount

"Over the 21-plus years of production, Canon introduced 134 different FD lenses ranging from 7.5mm through 1,200mm in seventeen different fixed focal lengths and nineteen different zoom ranges, one of the most, if not the most, extensive manual focus lens lines ever produced.

The Canon FD system enjoyed huge popularity in the 1970s and 1980s, when it established and grew a market share with professional photographers as well as having equipped over a million consumer users. Indeed, sales of the Canon AE-1 camera alone exceeded one million."

This is the FD system that Canon eventually abandoned in favor of a larger 54mm lens mount (EF):



And this is the EF-M system that Canon will eventually abandon in favor of a larger 54mm lens mount (RF):



Canon isn't losing any sleep over EOS M or its users. In the grand scheme of things, EOS M is just a small blip on the radar, a footnote in Canon history. It is literally a tiny 8-lens system that hasn't been around very long. Is anyone going to miss it or remember it years from now? Does anyone remember Canon rangefinders?

https://www.cameraquest.com/canonp.htm





EOS M is kind of like that. Or it's like the FD system. Take your pick. Regardless, I think it will just be yet another bygone Canon system that had a small loyal following, but ultimately got left to history.

justmeMN said:

According to Thom Hogan, Canon M is #2 in worldwide mirrorless market share. It is also the best selling mirrorless camera in Japan. Why would Canon want to kill a system that is selling well? Why would Canon release a new $480 lens for a system that they plan to kill? The M-FUD doesn't make any sense to me.

Click to expand...

Tell that to Canon FD users. They already went through this. FD was a popular line of cameras and lenses:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canon_FD_lens_mount

"Over the 21-plus years of production, Canon introduced 134 different FD lenses ranging from 7.5mm through 1,200mm in seventeen different fixed focal lengths and nineteen different zoom ranges, one of the most, if not the most, extensive manual focus lens lines ever produced.

The Canon FD system enjoyed huge popularity in the 1970s and 1980s, when it established and grew a market share with professional photographers as well as having equipped over a million consumer users. Indeed, sales of the Canon AE-1 camera alone exceeded one million."

Canon could have used the FD mount for their AF system. People have argued that Canon's FD mount was far too small to be used for AF, but that's not true. Nikon F has a throat diameter of 44mm and it seems to be perfectly fine with AF. Canon FD had a 48mm throat diameter. Larger than Nikon F! Nevertheless, Canon decided to not use FD anyways because they thought that the larger EF mount was better. Likewise, I see that eventually happening with EF-M; they'll kill off the smaller lens mount in favor of the bigger one-- regardless of what their users think or how they feel or how "well" it is selling.

The parallels between FD and EF-M are quite striking. Both used smaller lens mounts-- almost identical throat diameters (48mm for FD, 47mm for EF-M). In both cases, their respective users touted the smaller size of the bodies and lenses as something they liked. In both cases, Canon could have used these same mounts (FD for autofocus, EF-M for full frame). But they decided against it. In both cases, Canon introduced a new larger mount (54mm for EF, 54mm for RF). And in both cases, Canon went with a greater flange distance and larger throat diameter that made the previous mount incompatible! And in both cases, their previous users get left behind.

If Canon can kill off the popular FD system in favor of a new lens mount that Canon thinks is better, they sure as heck can do the same with the much smaller EOS M system!

I bet that if Canon introduced a compact Rebel R mirrorless body with a couple APS-C RF lenses (RF-S lenses), it would easily sell as well as any EOS M body. They won't care that they are abandoning their EOS M users. Just ask FD users.

I find it staggering that people so misunderstood Canon, the market, and the M and R systems.

Yes, Canon did abandon FD, but it left a deep scar on the corporate psyche. It's unlikely they would repeat that, despite the enormous commercial success the move brought. Also, remember that they did continue to sell FD bodies for some time, and even introduced a new one (the T60) after the launch of EOS. It was ultimately sales that killed off FD, as the EOS system became wildly popular.

All camera choices are a compromise. It's long been clear that the M compromise is respectable quality in a very small package. It's equally clear that the R compromise is rather bigger cameras for rather better quality. The design of the mount means that cameras cannot be as small as M ones in two dimensions. They will be bigger. Maybe not massively so, but bigger. It's possible that there might be an APS-C R model, but to introduce incompatibility into the R range with dedicated APS-C R lenses seems utterly illogical and un-Canon like. Even if they did, these lenses would still be larger than EF-M equivalents.

The M series is actually selling in large numbers. There is no current overlap with R, nor is that at all likely in reality.

Canon have never been very clear about a roadmap for M but then they have long been secretive about new cameras and in all honesty, I doubt if they will introduce a vast range of M lenses - maybe there will be an f2 prime tele at some point, and possibly a wider prime than 22mm, but the reality is that the current lens range covers off most bases for a really compact system. In all honesty, I don't think outside these somewhat febrile forums many M users will be remotely concerned about it - there's often a very odd way of thinking around here that comes up with very unusual answers to simple questions like 2 plus 2. It's as though all the photographic conspiracy theorists in the world operate solely on DPR.

ByronP said:

With all the conversation on this forum about the future or lack thereof of the M system, will Canon try to explain to us where they are taking the M system? Personally, actions speak louder than words and I suspect we won't hear much from Canon about the direction they will take with the M system. Their actions of new M cameras and lenses or lack thereof will speak for them.

What do you think?

Click to expand...

i dont recall Canon ever doing a road map

my prediction is the M is not going to be killed off ...we all know someday all ILC will be MILC and the R is not no way going to replace the lower end rebels that will be the M ....also many want the tiniest system possible and that's not the R the R will replace the 1D and 5D the 7D and probably the xxD cameras ...there may be some overlap in the APS-c ..the M will not get L glass just like EF-s never did...we will get more M glass just before low end APS-c DSLRs start losing sales rapidly

--
Attention Dislexsic i mean dyslexic person... This post will have many although spell checked, spelling and grammatical errs ..its The best its going get so no need to tell me its bad i know it is .....................................................................................................
My 5D IS a MK1 classic
..........................................................................................................
There is no argument for FF vs APS-c (or m43) with shallow DOF..as it's a law of physics and a very subjective personal thing if you want to make use of the shallow DOF only FF can offer
...........................................................................................................
Political correctness....somebody being offended on someone else's behalf....who that someone doesn't give a damn in the first place ....David Appleton
..................................................................................................
quoting irrefutable facts may get you branded a racist ..even if no race is involved .......David Appleton
.....................................................................................................
The word ‘racism’ is like ketchup. It can be put on practically anything — and demanding evidence makes you a ‘racist.’”........Thomas Sowell

007peter said:

Manufacture don't admit defeat....they just quietly wither way.

AFAIK...Samsung don't make a press-release announcement of its NX cancellation. Samsung merely withdraw from the marketplace quietly as much as possible.

People had been speculating the death of Nikon CX for 5~6 years, Nikon never admit to CX cancellation either until the imminent release of Nikon Z6/Z7 mirrorless.

The same Quiet Deaths awaits for entire Canon EOS-M.

Click to expand...

do you really think the R will replace low end rebels ???...do you think canon will nock the M on the head when its the 2ed (i think its 1st is in japan and asia ) best selling MILC in the world ???????? i think not

007peter said:

The "ACTION" that will speak louder than words is the APS-C (R) camera that will surely come in 2019. When an cheaper APS-C (R) is release, than there is no point of making EOS-M anymore. I suspect there is NO EOS-M5/M6 mark II, but an APS-C (R) substitutes.

It is in Canon's best interest to Build Up its R - Lens lineup as quickly as possible. That is where the money is, and where the consolidation is as well.

I"m more curious about the Canon 90D DSLR. It is not confirm yet but everyone seem to expect at least ONE more APS-C enthusiast DSLR before death. I for one, suspect 90D = "might" be the 1st APS-C (R) mirrorless. Do you think Canon might push 90D as a mirrorless?

Click to expand...

T3 said:

justmeMN said:

According to Thom Hogan, Canon M is #2 in worldwide mirrorless market share. It is also the best selling mirrorless camera in Japan. Why would Canon want to kill a system that is selling well? Why would Canon release a new $480 lens for a system that they plan to kill? The M-FUD doesn't make any sense to me.

Click to expand...

Tell that to Canon FD users. They already went through this. FD was a popular line of cameras and lenses:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canon_FD_lens_mount

"Over the 21-plus years of production, Canon introduced 134 different FD lenses ranging from 7.5mm through 1,200mm in seventeen different fixed focal lengths and nineteen different zoom ranges, one of the most, if not the most, extensive manual focus lens lines ever produced.

The Canon FD system enjoyed huge popularity in the 1970s and 1980s, when it established and grew a market share with professional photographers as well as having equipped over a million consumer users. Indeed, sales of the Canon AE-1 camera alone exceeded one million."

Canon could have used the FD mount for their AF system. People have argued that Canon's FD mount was far too small to be used for AF, but that's not true. Nikon F has a throat diameter of 44mm and it seems to be perfectly fine with AF. Canon FD had a 48mm throat diameter. Larger than Nikon F! Nevertheless, Canon decided to not use FD anyways because they thought that the larger EF mount was better.

Click to expand...

yes it was better to dump FD..look at the mess the F mount became with lenses not compatible AF wise with newer compact bodies and older body not compatible with with the new E lenses ...with canon the new R mount is compatible with every EF lens ever made still today with no crovates at the time nikon was bigger than canon ...not now ....i think canon was 3ed

T3 said:

Likewise, I see that eventually happening with EF-M; they'll kill off the smaller lens mount in favor of the bigger one-- regardless of what their users think or how they feel or how "well" it is selling.

The parallels between FD and EF-M are quite striking. Both used smaller lens mounts-- almost identical throat diameters (48mm for FD, 47mm for EF-M). In both cases, their respective users touted the smaller size of the bodies and lenses as something they liked. In both cases, Canon could have used these same mounts (FD for autofocus, EF-M for full frame). But they decided against it. In both cases, Canon introduced a new larger mount (54mm for EF, 54mm for RF). And in both cases, Canon went with a greater flange distance and larger throat diameter that made the previous mount incompatible! And in both cases, their previous users get left behind.

If Canon can kill off the popular FD system in favor of a new lens mount that Canon thinks is better, they sure as heck can do the same with the much smaller EOS M system!

I bet that if Canon introduced a compact Rebel R mirrorless body with a couple APS-C RF lenses (RF-S lenses), it would easily sell as well as any EOS M body. They won't care that they are abandoning their EOS M users. Just ask FD users.

Click to expand...

Rock and Rollei said:

It's possible that there might be an APS-C R model, but to introduce incompatibility into the R range with dedicated APS-C R lenses seems utterly illogical and un-Canon like.

Click to expand...

If they introduce APS-C R model they also have to introduce RF-S lenses (walkaround and wideangle) or they will not sale them well. Those lenses would not be incompatible with FF like EF-S were with EF. I do not see that 7d3 mirrorless version could come out as M because it is incompatible with RF and that would bother most of users.

janez said:

Rock and Rollei said:

It's possible that there might be an APS-C R model, but to introduce incompatibility into the R range with dedicated APS-C R lenses seems utterly illogical and un-Canon like.

Click to expand...

If they introduce APS-C R model they also have to introduce RF-S lenses (walkaround and wideangle) or they will not sale them well. Those lenses would not be incompatible with FF like EF-S were with EF. I do not see that 7d3 mirrorless version could come out as M because it is incompatible with RF and that would bother most of users.

Click to expand...

They might mount, but they won't cover. That's a compatability issue.

Rock and Rollei said:

janez said:

Rock and Rollei said:

It's possible that there might be an APS-C R model, but to introduce incompatibility into the R range with dedicated APS-C R lenses seems utterly illogical and un-Canon like.

Click to expand...

If they introduce APS-C R model they also have to introduce RF-S lenses (walkaround and wideangle) or they will not sale them well. Those lenses would not be incompatible with FF like EF-S were with EF. I do not see that 7d3 mirrorless version could come out as M because it is incompatible with RF and that would bother most of users.

Click to expand...

They might mount, but they won't cover. That's a compatability issue.

Click to expand...

Why? FF camera would just switch to crop mode and user would not note anything. Just like if user switches camera to lower resolution that is not incompatibility.

janez said:

Rock and Rollei said:

janez said:

Rock and Rollei said:

It's possible that there might be an APS-C R model, but to introduce incompatibility into the R range with dedicated APS-C R lenses seems utterly illogical and un-Canon like.

Click to expand...

If they introduce APS-C R model they also have to introduce RF-S lenses (walkaround and wideangle) or they will not sale them well. Those lenses would not be incompatible with FF like EF-S were with EF. I do not see that 7d3 mirrorless version could come out as M because it is incompatible with RF and that would bother most of users.

Click to expand...

They might mount, but they won't cover. That's a compatability issue.

Click to expand...

Why? FF camera would just switch to crop mode and user would not note anything. Just like if user switches camera to lower resolution that is not incompatibility.

Click to expand...

What crop mode? I don't see any mention of a crop mode for APS-C anywhere.

janez said:

Rock and Rollei said:

janez said:

Rock and Rollei said:

It's possible that there might be an APS-C R model, but to introduce incompatibility into the R range with dedicated APS-C R lenses seems utterly illogical and un-Canon like.

Click to expand...

If they introduce APS-C R model they also have to introduce RF-S lenses (walkaround and wideangle) or they will not sale them well. Those lenses would not be incompatible with FF like EF-S were with EF. I do not see that 7d3 mirrorless version could come out as M because it is incompatible with RF and that would bother most of users.

Click to expand...

They might mount, but they won't cover. That's a compatability issue.

Click to expand...

Why? FF camera would just switch to crop mode and user would not note anything. Just like if user switches camera to lower resolution that is not incompatibility.

Click to expand...

Yes but that's pointless. That's not an upgrade path any more than EF-S was an upgrade path, that's using an RF-S lens on a more expensive body and not using half the sensor, and an RF-S lens would always be a little bigger and a little heavier and a little costlier than the EF-M optical equivalent. EF-M is designed to be the best solution for mirrorless crop sensors, RF is designed to be the best solution for mirrorless FF sensors.

This is different from the first crop sensors in DSLRs, the bodies had to be a certain size to fit in the mirror and the prism so the EF mount size made sense, and the FF sensors were way more expensive than the crop ones, EF-S lenses followed because EF lenses with their FF coverage were too expensive for the cheaper crop bodies. Canon doesn't have to make that engineering choice again, it has a mount ideal for each.

Rock and Rollei said:

janez said:

Rock and Rollei said:

janez said:

Rock and Rollei said:

It's possible that there might be an APS-C R model, but to introduce incompatibility into the R range with dedicated APS-C R lenses seems utterly illogical and un-Canon like.

Click to expand...

If they introduce APS-C R model they also have to introduce RF-S lenses (walkaround and wideangle) or they will not sale them well. Those lenses would not be incompatible with FF like EF-S were with EF. I do not see that 7d3 mirrorless version could come out as M because it is incompatible with RF and that would bother most of users.

Click to expand...

They might mount, but they won't cover. That's a compatability issue.

Click to expand...

Why? FF camera would just switch to crop mode and user would not note anything. Just like if user switches camera to lower resolution that is not incompatibility.

Click to expand...

What crop mode? I don't see any mention of a crop mode for APS-C anywhere.

Click to expand...

Canon claims (according to dpr) that new adapters are compatible with all EF and EF-S lenses. I can not imagine that they don't have (or will not have) crop mode for viewfinder if they introduce EF-R lenses.