Would you want an APS-C camera with an RF mount?

rrc1967 wrote:

fstopx2 wrote:

quiquae wrote:

Dave Seeley wrote:

No.... that'd be silly.... why take the crop and speed hit of aps-c, when you can shoot an R or RP, and only slightly larger than the m5. Now I'd LOVE an M camera that is FF.

Why? For the same reason people chose to buy 7D mark II over 5D mark III or 1D X, of course. 1.6x reach, pixel density benefits over cropping from full frame, and cost. On mirrorless, you can also add battery life to the list (smaller sensors need less power).

I confidently predict, without a shred of material evidence, that an RF high end APS-C body (say “RF-S”) is coming in a year or two. Probably not any less than that, because Canon is clearly too busy to be working on an RF-S kit lens right now.

What about EF-M, you say? Even if the next EOS M is so beastly awesome that it makes a Nikon D500 look like a Fisher-Price toy, it won’t cut it as a 7D mark II replacement because future big whites are going to be RF lenses, and EF-M is never going to be compatible with them. Ergo, a beastly awesome EOS M is never gonna happen.

There is a rumor that the M5 successor will move upmarket, which means a solid mid-range, 80D-ish camera; that’s plausible, and I’d be in line for one, but that is as high-end as the line is ever going to go.

I have a bunch of EOS M and EFS cameras and lenses which I am selling. Why? Because its a dead end.

I have the EOS-M and I don't care really if they come out with something new. I don't see why that makes a difference to how you use a camera right now.

As of right now, it's small and compact and fits in comfortable under the 7kg total carry on weight restriction that is now being imposed around the world, and God knows what I'll do in that regard when an EOS-RF comes out that I want to get.

Quite. The M system is great for its size, and its size is great for travel. I certainly wouldn't want APS-C R for that, it just wouldn't work. Dead end? Not the way I look at it. Incredibly useful.