Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
There have been plenty of recent quotes from Canon firmly stating that there will be more RF bodies and lenses. Canon has explicitly stated that there will be a pro R coming as well as six RF lenses in the very near future. That is what "concrete evidence" looks like. Nothing you posted explicitly states more M gear is coming. Your quotes only indicate that more mirrorless cameras are coming. Last time I checked, the RF mount cameras are also mirrorless. Canon could release ten different RF mount cameras and zero M cameras and it would not run afoul of the quotes your posted.If I'm reading far too much into it, then you're not reading at all. According to your logic, because there's no explicit mention of EOSR bodies of lenses, let me guess - there's no evidence suggesting the future of EOSR either.No, I think the problem is you are reading far too much into what you posted. Absolutely no where in your quoted text is there any mention of EOS M bodies or EF-M lenses. Those are two things that one would expect to see in "concrete evidence".Don't know if your deduction/reading comprehension skills are that low or if you are being purposely argumentative because you have no better evidence yourself - what I've posted in the OP is concrete evidence straight from Canon regarding the future of EF-M.No, you did not. Show me specifically in your quotes where Canon said there will be more M bodies and lenses. Bonus points if you can show me a quote where Canon states that there will NOT be crop sensor RF mount bodies.Yes I did, read the OP again, it's straight from Canon. If that doesn't count as evidence, then I wonder what you call all the speculation and armchair analysis that have been posted over and over from people like you.Except, you did not post any evidence. Your infographic only represents the current lineup. Canon has provided nothing in the way of a roadmap or verbal commitment for anything beyond a few RF lenses and a high-end RF mount body.Also, if we're going to argue about the future of EF-M with actual naysayers in the future, feel free to use the evidence I've posted - non-official statements coming laypeople don't really hold weight.
Again, I have provided evidence from Canon that EF-M does indeed have a future.
I am not debating whether or not the M will continue. My contention in this thread has always been that your quotes prove nothing as the M system is not explicitly or implicitly mentioned.Again, if what I've posted doesn't count as solid evidence, then what is all the speculation posted here over the years? Still haven't answered that.
Okay, this proves that you're being purposely argumentative, and you've simply refused to ignore the facts to further your own argument. You are being pedantic and stubborn.There have been plenty of recent quotes from Canon firmly stating that there will be more RF bodies and lenses. Canon has explicitly stated that there will be a pro R coming as well as six RF lenses in the very near future. That is what "concrete evidence" looks like. Nothing you posted explicitly states more M gear is coming. Your quotes only indicate that more mirrorless cameras are coming. Last time I checked, the RF mount cameras are also mirrorless. Canon could release ten different RF mount cameras and zero M cameras and it would not run afoul of the quotes your posted.If I'm reading far too much into it, then you're not reading at all. According to your logic, because there's no explicit mention of EOSR bodies of lenses, let me guess - there's no evidence suggesting the future of EOSR either.No, I think the problem is you are reading far too much into what you posted. Absolutely no where in your quoted text is there any mention of EOS M bodies or EF-M lenses. Those are two things that one would expect to see in "concrete evidence".Don't know if your deduction/reading comprehension skills are that low or if you are being purposely argumentative because you have no better evidence yourself - what I've posted in the OP is concrete evidence straight from Canon regarding the future of EF-M.No, you did not. Show me specifically in your quotes where Canon said there will be more M bodies and lenses. Bonus points if you can show me a quote where Canon states that there will NOT be crop sensor RF mount bodies.Yes I did, read the OP again, it's straight from Canon. If that doesn't count as evidence, then I wonder what you call all the speculation and armchair analysis that have been posted over and over from people like you.Except, you did not post any evidence. Your infographic only represents the current lineup. Canon has provided nothing in the way of a roadmap or verbal commitment for anything beyond a few RF lenses and a high-end RF mount body.Also, if we're going to argue about the future of EF-M with actual naysayers in the future, feel free to use the evidence I've posted - non-official statements coming laypeople don't really hold weight.
Again, I have provided evidence from Canon that EF-M does indeed have a future.
Uh, actually, you've moved the goalposts (since we're being pedantic). You originally said, "Everyone is reacting this way because everything you posted has been posted numerous times before in several other threads.", which simply isn't true because nothing from Canon has been posted regarding the future of EF-M by anyone. Only speculation and analyses by armchair experts have been posted with no regard to any evidence from Canon whatsoever.I am not debating whether or not the M will continue. My contention in this thread has always been that your quotes prove nothing as the M system is not explicitly or implicitly mentioned.Again, if what I've posted doesn't count as solid evidence, then what is all the speculation posted here over the years? Still haven't answered that.
So again, you've indeed decided to be argumentative, stubborn, and pedantic on purpose.You keep throwing tacit attacks at me, but you have yet to point any specific text that actually mentions the future of the M system.
Name calling? Really?Okay, this proves that you're being purposely argumentative, and you've simply refused to ignore the facts to further your own argument. You are being pedantic and stubborn.There have been plenty of recent quotes from Canon firmly stating that there will be more RF bodies and lenses. Canon has explicitly stated that there will be a pro R coming as well as six RF lenses in the very near future. That is what "concrete evidence" looks like. Nothing you posted explicitly states more M gear is coming. Your quotes only indicate that more mirrorless cameras are coming. Last time I checked, the RF mount cameras are also mirrorless. Canon could release ten different RF mount cameras and zero M cameras and it would not run afoul of the quotes your posted.If I'm reading far too much into it, then you're not reading at all. According to your logic, because there's no explicit mention of EOSR bodies of lenses, let me guess - there's no evidence suggesting the future of EOSR either.No, I think the problem is you are reading far too much into what you posted. Absolutely no where in your quoted text is there any mention of EOS M bodies or EF-M lenses. Those are two things that one would expect to see in "concrete evidence".Don't know if your deduction/reading comprehension skills are that low or if you are being purposely argumentative because you have no better evidence yourself - what I've posted in the OP is concrete evidence straight from Canon regarding the future of EF-M.No, you did not. Show me specifically in your quotes where Canon said there will be more M bodies and lenses. Bonus points if you can show me a quote where Canon states that there will NOT be crop sensor RF mount bodies.Yes I did, read the OP again, it's straight from Canon. If that doesn't count as evidence, then I wonder what you call all the speculation and armchair analysis that have been posted over and over from people like you.Except, you did not post any evidence. Your infographic only represents the current lineup. Canon has provided nothing in the way of a roadmap or verbal commitment for anything beyond a few RF lenses and a high-end RF mount body.Also, if we're going to argue about the future of EF-M with actual naysayers in the future, feel free to use the evidence I've posted - non-official statements coming laypeople don't really hold weight.
Again, I have provided evidence from Canon that EF-M does indeed have a future.
And here is where your argument gets derailed. The red circle on the infographic represents current models and says nothing about future products. Canon has been using that pyramid for years. I could show you a version with no mirrorless camera.Go back to the first post, actually read what's been posted, and most importantly: use your skills of deduction and reading comprehension.
I'll give you a hint - it might have something to do with the giant red circle around the M50, and it might also have to do with something the phrase "strategic models".
Yes, it is true. Here is the exact same infographic posted a month ago in another one of these identical threadsUh, actually, you've moved the goalposts (since we're being pedantic). You originally said, "Everyone is reacting this way because everything you posted has been posted numerous times before in several other threads.", which simply isn't trueI am not debating whether or not the M will continue. My contention in this thread has always been that your quotes prove nothing as the M system is not explicitly or implicitly mentioned.Again, if what I've posted doesn't count as solid evidence, then what is all the speculation posted here over the years? Still haven't answered that.
Again with name calling.because nothing from Canon has been posted regarding the future of EF-M by anyone. Only speculation and analyses by armchair experts have been posted with no regard to any evidence from Canon whatsoever.
Clearly, you are wrong here, so you've moved the goalposts and continued to be argumentative to save face.
So again, you've indeed decided to be argumentative, stubborn, and pedantic on purpose.You keep throwing tacit attacks at me, but you have yet to point any specific text that actually mentions the future of the M system.
I was with you until this last paragraph. Your statements on the overall success of the M system are greatly exaggerated. In 2017, Canon sold more DSLRs than the entire history of the M system combined. In 2018, Canon launched the M50 and also steeply discounted the M5 and M6 for much of the year. Based on quarterly statements, Imaging division profit margins took a very steep decline in 2018. Yes, Canon makes a profit on the M system, but it is not some massively successful high volume sales success that props up the rest of the company as you seem to be implying.This is a legitimate topic of discussion, and is interesting in different ways to different people, distracting to some, even irritating to others. This is the nature of debate and disagreement and is not a bad thing.
M is a not a point product, it is a system, an entire product line. Product lines have many organizations behind them - design and development, supply chain , manufacturing and test, marketing, sales, and distribution. These functional organizations are probably comprised of people within their repsecitive departments in the imaging division that is responsible for many other product lines (DSLR, Mirrorless, compact). Currently the M people within the mirrorless division have to run the customer support for previous models, production of current models, and development of future models). Makes sense doesn’t it - past present future.
Past products are an easy discussion. They are discontinued because marketing and sales determine that the current product that replaced them obsoleted the discontinued models (keeping the older models sometimes makes sense if the pricing tiers can have enough separation to minimize confusion and overlap while maintaining profitability- no one wants to lose money keeping older models around). Look at Panasonic G80 vs G90 (they decided to keep G80 around)
Current products (M5, M50, M6...) that is more complicated because not only does the manufacturing cost, sales price and competition from other brands, and sales trends have to be considered, but also what future products are in the pipeline (Canon as well as other competitors) that the current products have to compete with for customers and profits. They have to stay competitive and compelling to stay in business.
In product development, time is always a resource you can’t afford to lose. So of course there is a future product lineup in development. Whether these will be brought to market is a sales and marketing decision that requires a crystal ball ( which none of us have, not even Canon or other manufacturers).
Keep in mind that product line decisions (past, present, future) are made at the board of directors level, and the CEO has to make his best plans and proposals and seek board approval. These decisions don’t happen quickly, large corporations don’t turn on a dime. That is usually a good thing.
But to answer the original question: Will EF-M survive? Yes because it is a currently successful product line and will continue on until conditions change to the point where it needs to be discontinued (for the above reasons). One can hope it is because a newer model has made it to market - in what form and features that would be is anyone’s guess. Even Canon who test different variations of a new model in development don’t know until they roll up all the feedback from field testers and they have to commit to the configuration for manufacturing and marketing ramp.
One thing to note: Canon probably doesnt have any particular aversity to supporting 4 lens mounts (EF, EF-S, EF-M and EF-R), logistically it is not difficult since manufacturing systems are so automated by computers, as long as it doesn’t cause customer angst from confusing product lines.
One other thing: the large sales volume of M is both tactical and strategic. It is tactical because it contributes a big part of revenue and profits which is a necessary thing when you are a publicly traded company. It is strategic because it gives them the advantage of scale; this translates into an operational and manufacturing cost advantage that affects their high other end higher profit margin products. So M contributes to the bottom line in a direct and indirect way. Whether it gets credit for the indirect impact to Canon’s bottom line is not known - that is an internal Canon business policy decision.
Canon doesnt break out profit/loss by camera line. I read something somewhere they may start doing it.I was with you until this last paragraph. Your statements on the overall success of the M system are greatly exaggerated. In 2017, Canon sold more DSLRs than the entire history of the M system combined. In 2018, Canon launched the M50 and also steeply discounted the M5 and M6 for much of the year. Based on quarterly statements, Imaging division profit margins took a very steep decline in 2018. Yes, Canon makes a profit on the M system, but it is not some massively successful high volume sales success that props up the rest of the company as you seem to be implying.This is a legitimate topic of discussion, and is interesting in different ways to different people, distracting to some, even irritating to others. This is the nature of debate and disagreement and is not a bad thing.
M is a not a point product, it is a system, an entire product line. Product lines have many organizations behind them - design and development, supply chain , manufacturing and test, marketing, sales, and distribution. These functional organizations are probably comprised of people within their repsecitive departments in the imaging division that is responsible for many other product lines (DSLR, Mirrorless, compact). Currently the M people within the mirrorless division have to run the customer support for previous models, production of current models, and development of future models). Makes sense doesn’t it - past present future.
Past products are an easy discussion. They are discontinued because marketing and sales determine that the current product that replaced them obsoleted the discontinued models (keeping the older models sometimes makes sense if the pricing tiers can have enough separation to minimize confusion and overlap while maintaining profitability- no one wants to lose money keeping older models around). Look at Panasonic G80 vs G90 (they decided to keep G80 around)
Current products (M5, M50, M6...) that is more complicated because not only does the manufacturing cost, sales price and competition from other brands, and sales trends have to be considered, but also what future products are in the pipeline (Canon as well as other competitors) that the current products have to compete with for customers and profits. They have to stay competitive and compelling to stay in business.
In product development, time is always a resource you can’t afford to lose. So of course there is a future product lineup in development. Whether these will be brought to market is a sales and marketing decision that requires a crystal ball ( which none of us have, not even Canon or other manufacturers).
Keep in mind that product line decisions (past, present, future) are made at the board of directors level, and the CEO has to make his best plans and proposals and seek board approval. These decisions don’t happen quickly, large corporations don’t turn on a dime. That is usually a good thing.
But to answer the original question: Will EF-M survive? Yes because it is a currently successful product line and will continue on until conditions change to the point where it needs to be discontinued (for the above reasons). One can hope it is because a newer model has made it to market - in what form and features that would be is anyone’s guess. Even Canon who test different variations of a new model in development don’t know until they roll up all the feedback from field testers and they have to commit to the configuration for manufacturing and marketing ramp.
One thing to note: Canon probably doesnt have any particular aversity to supporting 4 lens mounts (EF, EF-S, EF-M and EF-R), logistically it is not difficult since manufacturing systems are so automated by computers, as long as it doesn’t cause customer angst from confusing product lines.
One other thing: the large sales volume of M is both tactical and strategic. It is tactical because it contributes a big part of revenue and profits which is a necessary thing when you are a publicly traded company. It is strategic because it gives them the advantage of scale; this translates into an operational and manufacturing cost advantage that affects their high other end higher profit margin products. So M contributes to the bottom line in a direct and indirect way. Whether it gets credit for the indirect impact to Canon’s bottom line is not known - that is an internal Canon business policy decision.
I never implied that the infographic was a roadmap, not even close. Again, have you read the OP?!Name calling? Really?Okay, this proves that you're being purposely argumentative, and you've simply refused to ignore the facts to further your own argument. You are being pedantic and stubborn.There have been plenty of recent quotes from Canon firmly stating that there will be more RF bodies and lenses. Canon has explicitly stated that there will be a pro R coming as well as six RF lenses in the very near future. That is what "concrete evidence" looks like. Nothing you posted explicitly states more M gear is coming. Your quotes only indicate that more mirrorless cameras are coming. Last time I checked, the RF mount cameras are also mirrorless. Canon could release ten different RF mount cameras and zero M cameras and it would not run afoul of the quotes your posted.If I'm reading far too much into it, then you're not reading at all. According to your logic, because there's no explicit mention of EOSR bodies of lenses, let me guess - there's no evidence suggesting the future of EOSR either.No, I think the problem is you are reading far too much into what you posted. Absolutely no where in your quoted text is there any mention of EOS M bodies or EF-M lenses. Those are two things that one would expect to see in "concrete evidence".Don't know if your deduction/reading comprehension skills are that low or if you are being purposely argumentative because you have no better evidence yourself - what I've posted in the OP is concrete evidence straight from Canon regarding the future of EF-M.No, you did not. Show me specifically in your quotes where Canon said there will be more M bodies and lenses. Bonus points if you can show me a quote where Canon states that there will NOT be crop sensor RF mount bodies.Yes I did, read the OP again, it's straight from Canon. If that doesn't count as evidence, then I wonder what you call all the speculation and armchair analysis that have been posted over and over from people like you.Except, you did not post any evidence. Your infographic only represents the current lineup. Canon has provided nothing in the way of a roadmap or verbal commitment for anything beyond a few RF lenses and a high-end RF mount body.Also, if we're going to argue about the future of EF-M with actual naysayers in the future, feel free to use the evidence I've posted - non-official statements coming laypeople don't really hold weight.
Again, I have provided evidence from Canon that EF-M does indeed have a future.
And here is where your argument gets derailed. The red circle on the infographic represents current models and says nothing about future products. Canon has been using that pyramid for years. I could show you a version with no mirrorless camera.Go back to the first post, actually read what's been posted, and most importantly: use your skills of deduction and reading comprehension.
I'll give you a hint - it might have something to do with the giant red circle around the M50, and it might also have to do with something the phrase "strategic models".
Using your (lack of deduction and reading comprehension) logic, where does it say that it doesn't include the EF-M series? Where does it say it only includes the EOS-R series? Hmm?In relation to the quoted text, the circled "strategic" models are cameras that were launched in the past. Canon stated that there may be other strategic models coming and that the overall lineup will be expanding. You have assumed that this lineup expansion includes the M system, but nothing you posted supports that conclusion. However, there have been other very clear statements from Canon that the RF system will definitely be expanding.
Nope, they're just not "strategic models" to Canon.Since the M5, M6, and M100 were not included in the "strategic models" circle should we assume they will be discontinued?
So...just once? Not "numerous times before in several other threads" then?Yes, it is true. Here is the exact same infographic posted a month ago in another one of these identical threadsUh, actually, you've moved the goalposts (since we're being pedantic). You originally said, "Everyone is reacting this way because everything you posted has been posted numerous times before in several other threads.", which simply isn't trueI am not debating whether or not the M will continue. My contention in this thread has always been that your quotes prove nothing as the M system is not explicitly or implicitly mentioned.Again, if what I've posted doesn't count as solid evidence, then what is all the speculation posted here over the years? Still haven't answered that.
https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/62392645
It could be worse.Again with name calling.because nothing from Canon has been posted regarding the future of EF-M by anyone. Only speculation and analyses by armchair experts have been posted with no regard to any evidence from Canon whatsoever.
Clearly, you are wrong here, so you've moved the goalposts and continued to be argumentative to save face.
So again, you've indeed decided to be argumentative, stubborn, and pedantic on purpose.You keep throwing tacit attacks at me, but you have yet to point any specific text that actually mentions the future of the M system.
Finally, some solid and concrete evidence of your reading comprehension skills. Color me impressed.Enough with the insults. If you can't conduct yourself in a polite and adult manner, then maybe your should stop posting.
From these slim details, you have determined that this is "concrete evidence" in regards to a positive future for the M system. Using the phrase "concrete evidence" implies that the evidence is incredibly strong, demonstrative, and irrefutable. This is a massive leap when nowhere in the text does it state that there will be any future M products. Canon could cancel the entire M system today, and nothing in the Canon quotes would be untrue.
- You posted an infographic that listed the R, RP, and M50 as strategic launches (past tense).
- The M5, M6, and M100 were also on that same infographic, but they were not labeled as strategic models.
- In the quoted text, Canon will "strive to further enhance our lineup
going forward" and it was implied to refer to mirrorless products.- In the quoted text, Canon "will work to support our camera
business by focusing management resources on the growing
market segment of mirrorless cameras"
Why would I defend something I never said. You are quoting a post from a different memberFinally, some solid and concrete evidence of your reading comprehension skills. Color me impressed.Enough with the insults. If you can't conduct yourself in a polite and adult manner, then maybe your should stop posting.
From these slim details, you have determined that this is "concrete evidence" in regards to a positive future for the M system. Using the phrase "concrete evidence" implies that the evidence is incredibly strong, demonstrative, and irrefutable. This is a massive leap when nowhere in the text does it state that there will be any future M products. Canon could cancel the entire M system today, and nothing in the Canon quotes would be untrue.
- You posted an infographic that listed the R, RP, and M50 as strategic launches (past tense).
- The M5, M6, and M100 were also on that same infographic, but they were not labeled as strategic models.
- In the quoted text, Canon will "strive to further enhance our lineup
going forward" and it was implied to refer to mirrorless products.- In the quoted text, Canon "will work to support our camera
business by focusing management resources on the growing
market segment of mirrorless cameras"
You're completely glossing over (purposefully, if I may add) the fact that the argument YOU originally put forth is simply wrong. Not only have to failed to provide any evidence of the OP being posted "over and over and over and over" again, you've simply refused to respond when I have tried to bring up YOUR argument.
No, this is an utterly pointless thread.Let me repeat that this is a POSITIVE thread about the future of EF-M.
If you are incapable on having a discussion in a civilized manner, you are likely incapable of recognizing the the gaping holes in the chain of logic in your OP.Choose a side - are you arguing FOR or AGAINST the future of EF-M? Because it seems to me that you've chosen to argue about a completely different topic. In other words, you are pursuing a fruitless and unproductive goal.
You've chosen to cherry pick your arguments in an absolutely pathetic way, and at this point, unless you have any better evidence from Canon supporting the future of EF-M, or you have evidence that shows that EF-M has no future, you are wasting everyone's time.
You've lost your mind.Why would I defend something I never said. You are quoting a post from a different memberFinally, some solid and concrete evidence of your reading comprehension skills. Color me impressed.Enough with the insults. If you can't conduct yourself in a polite and adult manner, then maybe your should stop posting.
From these slim details, you have determined that this is "concrete evidence" in regards to a positive future for the M system. Using the phrase "concrete evidence" implies that the evidence is incredibly strong, demonstrative, and irrefutable. This is a massive leap when nowhere in the text does it state that there will be any future M products. Canon could cancel the entire M system today, and nothing in the Canon quotes would be untrue.
- You posted an infographic that listed the R, RP, and M50 as strategic launches (past tense).
- The M5, M6, and M100 were also on that same infographic, but they were not labeled as strategic models.
- In the quoted text, Canon will "strive to further enhance our lineup
going forward" and it was implied to refer to mirrorless products.- In the quoted text, Canon "will work to support our camera
business by focusing management resources on the growing
market segment of mirrorless cameras"
You're completely glossing over (purposefully, if I may add) the fact that the argument YOU originally put forth is simply wrong. Not only have to failed to provide any evidence of the OP being posted "over and over and over and over" again, you've simply refused to respond when I have tried to bring up YOUR argument.
https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/62534122
No, you being argumentative and pedantic is "utterly pointless".No, this is an utterly pointless thread.Let me repeat that this is a POSITIVE thread about the future of EF-M.
If you are incapable of remembering your own arguments, you are likely incapable of recognizing any of the gaping holes in in the chain of logic of ALL of your posts, because, well...you don't remember them.If you are incapable on having a discussion in a civilized manner, you are likely incapable of recognizing the the gaping holes in the chain of logic in your OP.Choose a side - are you arguing FOR or AGAINST the future of EF-M? Because it seems to me that you've chosen to argue about a completely different topic. In other words, you are pursuing a fruitless and unproductive goal.
You've chosen to cherry pick your arguments in an absolutely pathetic way, and at this point, unless you have any better evidence from Canon supporting the future of EF-M, or you have evidence that shows that EF-M has no future, you are wasting everyone's time.
Let me respond just to show how very very interesting this post is to me.You've lost your mind.Why would I defend something I never said. You are quoting a post from a different memberFinally, some solid and concrete evidence of your reading comprehension skills. Color me impressed.Enough with the insults. If you can't conduct yourself in a polite and adult manner, then maybe your should stop posting.
From these slim details, you have determined that this is "concrete evidence" in regards to a positive future for the M system. Using the phrase "concrete evidence" implies that the evidence is incredibly strong, demonstrative, and irrefutable. This is a massive leap when nowhere in the text does it state that there will be any future M products. Canon could cancel the entire M system today, and nothing in the Canon quotes would be untrue.
- You posted an infographic that listed the R, RP, and M50 as strategic launches (past tense).
- The M5, M6, and M100 were also on that same infographic, but they were not labeled as strategic models.
- In the quoted text, Canon will "strive to further enhance our lineup
going forward" and it was implied to refer to mirrorless products.- In the quoted text, Canon "will work to support our camera
business by focusing management resources on the growing
market segment of mirrorless cameras"
You're completely glossing over (purposefully, if I may add) the fact that the argument YOU originally put forth is simply wrong. Not only have to failed to provide any evidence of the OP being posted "over and over and over and over" again, you've simply refused to respond when I have tried to bring up YOUR argument.
https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/62534122
"Everyone is reacting this way because everything you posted has been posted numerous times before in several other threads."
"Next time, post something new."
No WONDER you have problems staying on topic - you can't even remember your own posts!
No, you being argumentative and pedantic is "utterly pointless".No, this is an utterly pointless thread.Let me repeat that this is a POSITIVE thread about the future of EF-M.
If you are incapable of remembering your own arguments, you are likely incapable of recognizing any of the gaping holes in in the chain of logic of ALL of your posts, because, well...you don't remember them.If you are incapable on having a discussion in a civilized manner, you are likely incapable of recognizing the the gaping holes in the chain of logic in your OP.Choose a side - are you arguing FOR or AGAINST the future of EF-M? Because it seems to me that you've chosen to argue about a completely different topic. In other words, you are pursuing a fruitless and unproductive goal.
You've chosen to cherry pick your arguments in an absolutely pathetic way, and at this point, unless you have any better evidence from Canon supporting the future of EF-M, or you have evidence that shows that EF-M has no future, you are wasting everyone's time.
Again, unless you have any better evidence from Canon supporting the future of EF-M, or you have evidence that shows that EF-M has no future, you are wasting everyone's time.
What's very, very, very, very interesting to me is how all of your posts in this thread have been utterly unproductive and pointless.Let me respond just to show how very very interesting this post is to me.You've lost your mind.Why would I defend something I never said. You are quoting a post from a different memberFinally, some solid and concrete evidence of your reading comprehension skills. Color me impressed.Enough with the insults. If you can't conduct yourself in a polite and adult manner, then maybe your should stop posting.
From these slim details, you have determined that this is "concrete evidence" in regards to a positive future for the M system. Using the phrase "concrete evidence" implies that the evidence is incredibly strong, demonstrative, and irrefutable. This is a massive leap when nowhere in the text does it state that there will be any future M products. Canon could cancel the entire M system today, and nothing in the Canon quotes would be untrue.
- You posted an infographic that listed the R, RP, and M50 as strategic launches (past tense).
- The M5, M6, and M100 were also on that same infographic, but they were not labeled as strategic models.
- In the quoted text, Canon will "strive to further enhance our lineup
going forward" and it was implied to refer to mirrorless products.- In the quoted text, Canon "will work to support our camera
business by focusing management resources on the growing
market segment of mirrorless cameras"
You're completely glossing over (purposefully, if I may add) the fact that the argument YOU originally put forth is simply wrong. Not only have to failed to provide any evidence of the OP being posted "over and over and over and over" again, you've simply refused to respond when I have tried to bring up YOUR argument.
https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/62534122
"Everyone is reacting this way because everything you posted has been posted numerous times before in several other threads."
"Next time, post something new."
No WONDER you have problems staying on topic - you can't even remember your own posts!
No, you being argumentative and pedantic is "utterly pointless".No, this is an utterly pointless thread.Let me repeat that this is a POSITIVE thread about the future of EF-M.
If you are incapable of remembering your own arguments, you are likely incapable of recognizing any of the gaping holes in in the chain of logic of ALL of your posts, because, well...you don't remember them.If you are incapable on having a discussion in a civilized manner, you are likely incapable of recognizing the the gaping holes in the chain of logic in your OP.Choose a side - are you arguing FOR or AGAINST the future of EF-M? Because it seems to me that you've chosen to argue about a completely different topic. In other words, you are pursuing a fruitless and unproductive goal.
You've chosen to cherry pick your arguments in an absolutely pathetic way, and at this point, unless you have any better evidence from Canon supporting the future of EF-M, or you have evidence that shows that EF-M has no future, you are wasting everyone's time.
Again, unless you have any better evidence from Canon supporting the future of EF-M, or you have evidence that shows that EF-M has no future, you are wasting everyone's time.
Olympus' camera-imaging division managed to lose money even during "the good times", which are gone forever. One of these years they may decide that they are tired of hanging on to a money losing division.if you think m's got problems...
