M5: why 15-45 instead of 18-55 as kit?

Ben Herrmann wrote:

I'm an avid EOS M system user also (m, M2, M3, M100, M50). But it has become a well known issue that the Canon EOS EF-M 15-45 F3.5-6.3 IS STM lens has massive issues with copy to copy variations (mostly decentering issues). I know, I had to go through 4 of them before I settled on 2 that were halfway decent. After sending in my 4th one to Canon repair, I talked with one of the customer service reps there. The person that I spoke with told me that in the case of the EF-M 15-45, it was the most sent in lens they've seen. They typically don't try to repair them because just about all of them have decentering issues. Instead, they replace them with a new one because it's not cost effective for them to try and repair.

This Fuji EX 15-45 F3.5-5.6 IS PZ is superior optically, I can tell you that and that 22.5 MM wide end equivalent really makes a difference (even over the now standardized 24 MM equivalents that you see from other brands). Now keep in mind, I'm not slamming the EOS M system at all as I find those cameras fun to shoot with. If you've been keeping up with the various Canon patents, they have a half dozen different patents in the system for 15-45 lens improvements, so I can only hope they finally release a replacement for that lens. I will say that I do love the compact form factor of the Canon EF-M 15-45.

Developments in 2018, especially the release of the Sony a7-3 has changed many old plans. These has literally made 3 companies change course in a dime. With the M dead-end to go to the R, I very much doubt if Canon will release a fast 15-45. It could still be in the books thoughh as that is a sought after FL. And Canon is also very good at designing and making those lens and will still make a profit, if only to prolong the M line.

With Canon admitting the shrinking of the camera market on all fronts, I don't foresee them working to make the M expand to really serious/enthusiast market. It could go the way of the Nikon 1, a niche MILC, although, being aps-c, instead of the insulting 1" sensor Nikon used, it will have a longer life. My take is that Canon will slowly drop the dslr line, from bottom to top, and let the M exist as an independent system. Yes, you can still use the EF/EF-s lenses with an adapter but I doubt if the R lenses will be backward portable though I see no reason why not.

I very much doubt if Canon is in the mood to make an aps-c R series. It would divide them too much with too many lines to maintain. As the market shrinks, their best bet is still to keep the M, even if a different system that will not lead to the R.

But the more pressing problem for Canon is how to catch up in technology for even R to make good at the 35FF line. They need to match or to get very near the A7-3 in performance if they hope to justify charging U$2,400, or even U$2,000. Otherwise, they will be relegated to the U$1,000-1,400 range. They can't even compete well with the U$900 XT-30 or the a6400 in the aps-c line.

My take is, Canon will try to keep the loyal in with a low cost body (but hit them with the lenses and accessories to compensate). That's what they are doing now with the M and it seems the RP will be doing the same with the 35FF MILC. I will not even deal with how they can respond to build the 1DX-3 or future 5Ds or their MILC version, which I think they will do. At this stage of development, Canon just wants to lessen the bleeding.  And that means low cost cameras, and making theh current loyalists happy as best as they can.