Planning for obsolescence

Kwick1

Leading Member
Messages
916
Reaction score
445
Location
Jomtien, TH
Let’s assume for a second that the rumors of the M line coming to an end are true. How are you planning for the end?

Buying a spare body? Lenses? Switching now? Not worrying about it?
 
I am not worrying about it. I have all the lenses. My M6II is 2 years old and in pristine condition. I am assuming that there will be some people who will move to the R system and start selling their M cameras. There will be plenty of the M series cameras available on the used market when or if I need to replace my camera.

Hal
 
Let’s assume for a second that the rumors of the M line coming to an end are true. How are you planning for the end?

Buying a spare body? Lenses? Switching now? Not worrying about it?
I would keep my M stuff until it dies, but, as it's my only system, I find myself really wishing it had a fast standard zoom that I could keep on it most of the time, and IBIS would be nice too especially if that lens wasn't stabilized. Since it's clear to me that neither of those features is coming, I'm thinking of selling it while used prices are still pretty high. I haven't decided what I would replace it with, though. All the other options are bigger, which I guess I'll have to be okay with. The price for those features, even in APS-C, is into full frame territory, so now I'm trying to decide if it's time to make that jump.

Anyway, there was a similar thread recently. For most people, the answer depended on whether they use their M as the main system or as a backup to something else. The latter group was more likely to say they plan to stick with it or even buy extra bodies.
 
Last edited:
The demise of M has been a constant theme since I bought into the system 2.5 years ago.

My initial response was to keep on using my EF-S lenses (10-18 IS STM, 18-135 IS STM, 55-250 IS STM, EF ii 50 f1.8) in case I wanted to migrate to R at some point.

Slowly, with the help of this forum, I began to try the native EF-M lenses. Finding them superior in nearly every way to the EF-S generation of lenses, especially the fast primes, and seeing just how good the M6 Mark ii is, the M system won me over and I went all in, replacing most of the EF-S glass with the better, smaller, lighter EF-M offerings.

The only EF-S glass I still use is the 55-250 IS STM -- and that one only for the extra reach and that I can use teleconverters on it. I actually now prefer the EF-M 55-200 IS STM if I don't need the extra reach -- it is optically slightly superior to the EF-S 55-250 IS STM, and much smaller and lighter.

A major factor for my decision to stay with M was starting to use DxO Photolab with its deep prime de-noise. In one fell swoop it solved the APSC high-ISO noise issue, giving me clean results past ISO 6400, essentially giving the M system what had been up to that time 'full-frame' noise performance.

This year with the deals on refurbs I bulked up on the bodies so that I'd have plenty of backup. I'm up to 2 M6ii's and 2 M200s (one converted to full-spectrum for infrared).

The R7 looks like a great camera, but it doesn't offer much for me over the already excellent M6ii --- and it also has significant disadvantages for me... I prefer the M6ii's tilting screen and smaller size, and really like the removable EVF and the 'tilting' EVF-DC1 that I have for tripod and astro work.

Throughout Canon's history, more 'modular' usually meant 'more pro-level'... thinking back to the original Canon F-1 with the removable finder. I find it interesting that so many users have a negative reaction to the removable EVF, I don't think Canon realized the current generation of its users would not see the removable EVF as an advantage --- especially for a system geared to be as small and light as possible.

At nearly double the price, plus the far more expensive R lenses, It would cost a small fortune for me to upgrade to 2 R7 bodies and native R lenses --- to the tune of at least $6,000 more. The M system remains by far the best value for me and I expect to keep me happy for years. I still haven't tried out all the features the M6ii offers.
 
Last edited:
  1. I have EOS R and 3 RF so I am kind of in migration but it is also pretty stalled at the moment
  2. I have old M3 and M6 and new M6 mk II which all use the same batteries and chargers as RP and R10 so I am good for several years at least on getting new cameras
  3. Next step is probably Sony if I have to leave Canon but I have complete faith in Canon giving us a new and tiny camera, it is just matter of which mount that camera will have
 
The demise of M has been a constant theme since I bought into the system 2.5 years ago.

My initial response was to keep on using my EF-S lenses (10-18 IS STM, 18-135 IS STM, 55-250 IS STM, EF ii 50 f1.8) in case I wanted to migrate to R at some point.

Slowly, with the help of this forum, I began to try the native EF-M lenses. Finding them superior in nearly every way to the EF-S generation of lenses, especially the fast primes, and seeing just how good the M6 Mark ii is, the M system won me over and I went all in, replacing most of the EF-S glass with the better, smaller, lighter EF-M offerings.

The only EF-S glass I still use is the 55-250 IS STM -- and that one only for the extra reach and that I can use teleconverters on it. I actually now prefer the EF-M 55-200 IS STM if I don't need the extra reach -- it is optically slightly superior to the EF-S 55-250 IS STM, and much smaller and lighter.

A major factor for my decision to stay with M was starting to use DxO Photolab with its deep prime de-noise. In one fell swoop it solved the APSC high-ISO noise issue, giving me clean results past ISO 6400, essentially giving the M system what had been up to that time 'full-frame' noise performance.

This year with the deals on refurbs I bulked up on the bodies so that I'd have plenty of backup. I'm up to 2 M6ii's and 2 M200s (one converted to full-spectrum for infrared).

The R7 looks like a great camera, but it doesn't offer much for me over the already excellent M6ii --- and it also has significant disadvantages for me... I prefer the M6ii's tilting screen and smaller size, and really like the removable EVF and the 'tilting' EVF-DC1 that I have for tripod and astro work.

Throughout Canon's history, more 'modular' usually meant 'more pro-level'... thinking back to the original Canon F-1 with the removable finder. I find it interesting that so many users have a negative reaction to the removable EVF, I don't think Canon realized the current generation of its users would not see the removable EVF as an advantage --- especially for a system geared to be as small and light as possible.
the removable EVF is bir of a hassle, it just improves the usabiity of the camera and longer lenses
At nearly double the price, plus the far more expensive R lenses, It would cost a small fortune for me to upgrade to 2 R7 bodies and native R lenses --- to the tune of at least $6,000 more. The M system remains by far the best value for me and I expect to keep me happy for years. I still haven't tried out all the features the M6ii offers.
 
I’m not going to worry about it. I probably will pick another body and maybe a lens or two if I see a good deal. In particular I wouldn’t mind trying out the 32mm f/1.4 considering how much praise it gets.
 
The demise of M has been a constant theme since I bought into the system 2.5 years ago.
It goes back a lot further than that, to the initial sales failure of the original M - many were predicting a very short life for the system. At least this time, Canon have stated categorically that the system isn't dead, but that said, not sure we'll see another model like the M6 II. Which is a huge shame, but for my uses, not actually critical - an M300 or M50 III would do fine if my M6 II packs up.
 
After testing RP and 24-240mm, I have given up on FF.

After the last 2 trips, I am actually very fond of a 1 camera 1 lens solution for travel. Sony RX10IV that is. In combination with Topaz tools it is good enough for my usage.

I still have EOS M system around M6ii for more creative photography and will take it along on trip #3 this fall to see which way I will be going in the future.

Right now simplifying seems the right thing for me, YMMV...

--
May THE LIGHT be with you!
 
Last edited:
After testing RP and 24-240mm, I have given up on FF.
Can you share your experience? That looks like an interesting combo for travel?

(And that lens could be used on a R7.)
Yes, on paper the technical details sound like a good travel set up, starting with 24mm wide angle which seems to be my standard wide setting and offering more than the typical 200mm standard tele setting.

The truth (fo me) is, that the combo is on the larger and on the heavy side plus more expensive than any similar setup in EOS M. I am not a professional, so I do not realistically need the gain in IQ provided by a FF system.
Down side with any M is you need two zooms to cover a similar range (11-22 & 18-150mm). M is much smaller and better to handle in my hands than the "fat" RF lenses.
For any of my M setps I need rather small bags to pack even all of my M zooms/lenses.

So right now I am torn between M-system and Sony RX10IV (eqv. 24-600mm in 1 lens!) for travel. The latter will remain with me for air travel, so much is certain.
This fall I will be using the MLC vs. the bridge for sighteeing and hiking in Spain to determine the path forward.
 
Let’s assume for a second that the rumors of the M line coming to an end are true. How are you planning for the end?

Buying a spare body?
Not
Not
Switching now?
with my M6II + 32 + 11-22 + DXO PL5 there is nothing comparable to switch to
Not worrying about it?
"worry" isn't a good thing to be doing

"be smart about the possibility" is something to think about

I don't see the appealing RF-s glass with the R10 and soon to follow R100

if one considers IQ - my RP + RF 24 -105 F4 L does great versus buying all those RF consumer lenses that need stopped down

buying an R7 with expensive long L glass to get IQ benefit over FF is an expensive proposition and not something I'll likely do

think about IQ and glass and body combos versus buying every bag of primes that come out, eg, my $899 RF 24-105 F4 L is a great all arounder with great IQ and saved on many other potential wasted purchases
 
Let’s assume for a second that the rumors of the M line coming to an end are true. How are you planning for the end?

Buying a spare body? Lenses? Switching now? Not worrying about it?
I'm not going to worry about it. I'm just going to use and enjoy my M50 for as long as it is working - and hopefully that is a long, long time! When it finally stops working, I'll worry about a replacement then.

Cheers!

Rick
 
After testing RP and 24-240mm, I have given up on FF.
Can you share your experience? That looks like an interesting combo for travel?

(And that lens could be used on a R7.)
Yes, on paper the technical details sound like a good travel set up, starting with 24mm wide angle which seems to be my standard wide setting and offering more than the typical 200mm standard tele setting.

The truth (fo me) is, that the combo is on the larger and on the heavy side plus more expensive than any similar setup in EOS M. I am not a professional, so I do not realistically need the gain in IQ provided by a FF system.
Down side with any M is you need two zooms to cover a similar range (11-22 & 18-150mm). M is much smaller and better to handle in my hands than the "fat" RF lenses.
For any of my M setps I need rather small bags to pack even all of my M zooms/lenses.

So right now I am torn between M-system and Sony RX10IV (eqv. 24-600mm in 1 lens!) for travel. The latter will remain with me for air travel, so much is certain.
This fall I will be using the MLC vs. the bridge for sighteeing and hiking in Spain to determine the path forward.
When we travel I have 2 bodies with me. A new M50ii with the 11-22 covering the wide angles, and the Sigma 30 and the adapted EF-s24 in the bag. Perhaps I will add the Sigma 56 soon, still hesitating but I probably will try it. Waiting for Black Friday and Santa Claus. The primes are often for people shots. The M50 bag is not heavy. And the big lens is the RP with the adapted Tamron 35-150 F/2.8-4 in another bag. So I have aps-c and FF and can make combinations. With 2 bodies, I don't have to change lenses. In september we go to middle Spain I will try these combinations. In the near future I will stay with these camera's. An M6ii is tempting, of course, and an R6 too, and an R7 too, ... but I don't want to buy too much. It's time to use my gear!
 
Let’s assume for a second that the rumors of the M line coming to an end are true. How are you planning for the end?

Buying a spare body?
Not
Not
Switching now?
with my M6II + 32 + 11-22 + DXO PL5 there is nothing comparable to switch to
Not worrying about it?
"worry" isn't a good thing to be doing

"be smart about the possibility" is something to think about

I don't see the appealing RF-s glass with the R10 and soon to follow R100

if one considers IQ - my RP + RF 24 -105 F4 L does great versus buying all those RF consumer lenses that need stopped down
owned RP and 24-105 stm, sold in favor of just owning R which coincidently I have found in real life usage to be smalle because I don't need to use a extension grip for it.

Planning on getting RF 24-105L and probably 24/1.8.
buying an R7 with expensive long L glass to get IQ benefit over FF is an expensive proposition and not something I'll likely do

think about IQ and glass and body combos versus buying every bag of primes that come out, eg, my $899 RF 24-105 F4 L is a great all arounder with great IQ and saved on many other potential wasted purchases
 
Buying an extra body was the route for me. Helping future proof what I like and want as well as not changing lenses as often is a bonus. . I will probably acquire a few additional lenses as more people abandon ship and sell out. I have no intention of shoveling cash onto the "R" train when I have exactly what I need but I appreciate Canon trying to steer me into something I don't want for my own good. So that's my answer.
 
Let’s assume for a second that the rumors of the M line coming to an end are true. How are you planning for the end?

Buying a spare body?
Not
Not
Switching now?
with my M6II + 32 + 11-22 + DXO PL5 there is nothing comparable to switch to
Not worrying about it?
"worry" isn't a good thing to be doing

"be smart about the possibility" is something to think about

I don't see the appealing RF-s glass with the R10 and soon to follow R100

if one considers IQ - my RP + RF 24 -105 F4 L does great versus buying all those RF consumer lenses that need stopped down
owned RP and 24-105 stm, sold in favor of just owning R which coincidently I have found in real life usage to be smalle because I don't need to use a extension grip for it.

Planning on getting RF 24-105L
it will combine well with your 70-300 L

L matters
and probably 24/1.8.
buying an R7 with expensive long L glass to get IQ benefit over FF is an expensive proposition and not something I'll likely do

think about IQ and glass and body combos versus buying every bag of primes that come out, eg, my $899 RF 24-105 F4 L is a great all arounder with great IQ and saved on many other potential wasted purchases
 
Buy a new system when you can't pass by what you're missing, but keep your M gear around.

There are a few things that the M system is close enough to the best that obsolescence is far away.

For me, one such zone is short macro.

Another is "give your camera to a kid and see what comes back". I use the 11-22 for this purpose, set close to 11.

I doubt I'll ever buy a full frame fisheye lens. Or an R to M39 adapter. Oddball stuff works well on an M, and seldom works better anywhere else.
 
The demise of M has been a constant theme since I bought into the system 2.5 years ago.
It goes back a lot further than that, to the initial sales failure of the original M - many were predicting a very short life for the system. At least this time, Canon have stated categorically that the system isn't dead,
Unless there is some new unposted interview, No, Canon has not "stated categorically that the system isn't dead".

Multiple interviews have been posted recently, and in every one Canon makes the same longevity claims about the M system as they do about their DSLR systems. Basically, Canon will continue selling M gear and DSLRs for the near future, but there have been zero promises of any future development.

Canon, or any other manufacturer, is not going to announce a definitive date when a product line will be dead and discontinued. They will just gradually wind down development and production while selling off remaining inventory. If a formal announcement is ever made, it will come after all inventory has been cleared out. Making any announcement earlier just makes it far more difficult to clear out remaining inventory.

Nikon DSLRs, Canon DSLRs and the M system are all following the same pattern set by Sony A mount DSLRs, Four Thirds DSLRs, Nikon 1, Samsung NX, and countless other product lines before them.
 
The demise of M has been a constant theme since I bought into the system 2.5 years ago.
It goes back a lot further than that, to the initial sales failure of the original M - many were predicting a very short life for the system. At least this time, Canon have stated categorically that the system isn't dead,
Unless there is some new unposted interview, No, Canon has not "stated categorically that the system isn't dead".
As you're one of the people who have insisted for more than a few years that the system was already dead, you'll perhaps forgive me if I trust my interpretation more than yours. ;)

Multiple interviews have been posted recently, and in every one Canon makes the same longevity claims about the M system as they do about their DSLR systems. Basically, Canon will continue selling M gear and DSLRs for the near future, but there have been zero promises of any future development
Canon, or any other manufacturer, is not going to announce a definitive date when a product line will be dead and discontinued. They will just gradually wind down development and production while selling off remaining inventory. If a formal announcement is ever made, it will come after all inventory has been cleared out. Making any announcement earlier just makes it far more difficult to clear out remaining inventory.

Nikon DSLRs, Canon DSLRs and the M system are all following the same pattern set by Sony A mount DSLRs, Four Thirds DSLRs, Nikon 1, Samsung NX, and countless other product lines before them.
I don't actually massively disagree with anything you say, and I'm not saying Canon have broadcast a shining future for EF-M, but the reality is that as long as it continues to sell, they'll continue to sell it. The M200 and M50 II don't really compete with either any actual product in the R range, nor really with much production capacity, and they continue to be pretty good earners.
 

Keyboard shortcuts

Back
Top