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

BirdShooter7 wrote:

How is RF-s even necessary at all? The reason for EF-s was the mirror. That is gone so if there is a lens with reduced image circle the chip in the lens can simply indicate that to the camera to force crop mode when the lens is mounted on a FF camera. I really don’t see any benefit from all these different lens mounts other than to get customers to buy more stuff

Though that would technically work, it might defeat one of the main purposes of an RF-s system: cost. IMO, the main advantages the EF-s and M systems have over the EF and R systems are portability and cost (there are those that don't care about the previous two and appreciate it for the crop factor (like wildlife and sports photographers) but that's not the majority). Using a full frame body that would have enough megapixels to accommodate a 1.6x crop would probably hit the cost factor hard and possibly the portability factor too.

Whether or not Canon should turn M into the R system is a tough one. I've once polled some Canon users and many of them don't see a need to merge the two. One big issue is that M users would probably get upset over their system being abandoned for a similar one. The other issue is that it would cost Canon to start a new system (though it may offer returns if enough users buy into it). There is also the possibility that switching APS-C mirrorless from the smaller M mount to a larger RF-s mount could lead to a slight increase in cost and size/weight due to the larger mount and the longer flange distance though I'm not sure if these would be significant or not.