The 'All Canon EF-M lenses' club

Photato wrote:

Right now, I'm sitting on the fence between staying with the M long term or moving on to the R APS-C R10, but not excited to further commit to Canon nor have a good impression about Fuji or Sony.

I've given consideration to the R10 and R7 recently and may even do a write up on the topic as platform conversions aren't something to be taken lightly.

.

Some thoughts regarding the R7 and R10...

.

For weight and size, the R7 (which you didn't ask) is more on par with the RP, which in turn isn't so portable after adding existing glass available at this time.

.

The R10 on the other hand when paired with say the RF-S 18-45 or RF-S 18-150, or, one of the non-L RF primes, ala RF 50 f/1.8, RF 35 f/1.8, RF 24 f/1.8, you're talking business. In fact, the RF 35mm in particular can give you 0.8x macro capabilities, with IS, on a crop. Where the R10 lacks is in a wide angle option, and, still isn't as compact/light as an M, and, lacks the ISO performance and resolution of the M6 II all at the same time... That hurts.

.

Canon is also holding themselves back by not using a stacked sensor. Although I agree with keeping things low-cost, and "kicking it out the door" so I may concur with the move to do another FSI in terms of a business decision, in terms of an enthusiast, I'm well aware that what holds me back on the M is autofocus and shutter shock ruining the number of keepers I take back home. I do get plenty, but compared to say my lowly R, or G5X II? Heh, no. The trouble is the R10 although has better autofocus processing, it still has a slower readout sensor which I've seen enough demos to tell you this side of even touching one, no. It may beat an M50/II, but in low light or demanding situations, I've read and suspect it'll struggle. Should Canon do an R20, with say the same M6 II sensor, we can talk. Also, the lack of crop RF glass, really does do it in. Going R10 although tempting, I know from experience it'd be going back to SL2 + EF-S footprint right now. When I came back to M, I tried the SL2, wonderful I might add, but the footprint difference between M and EF-S? The M is a joy to shoot due to the footprint. RF-S, because it exists in only two lenses right now, that's a real problem. Don't kid yourself.

https://bit.ly/3RKp8J8

The R10 may have access to that 100-400, which I suspect is awesome on a crop, but look at the footprint?

Also wide angle in particular becomes a problem...

https://bit.ly/3eh1172

I'll say there is very much a case to argue the RP, or it's successor with say an RF 15-30 (not-L) and it's non-L lenses, start to make RF-S look like a crop-reach only affair.

https://bit.ly/3fTkeMo

Imagine the RP mark II gets say the 30MP ADC capable R sensor, for a minute.

And let's look at "standard" zooms for a moment too

Will Canon ever do a "fast" RF-S zoom? Or do you have to adapt a legacy EF-S 17-55 f/2.8, which has older optical formula, USM motor? Ridiculous

I fear Canon will never do a RF-S f/2.8 zoom. If they were going to? They should've launched it out the gate with the R7, they didn't. But as a result, this is how insane reality is.

.

Oddly I think the M will stay in production ala M50 II, M200 and existing M glass for the short term, but the alternatives, Fuji and Sony have problems too. Sony has cancelled their enthusiast A6500/A6600 lineup, Fuji still can't get autofocus right after how many years and is still FF in size, price? Ugh.

Don't get me started with market conditions like chip shortages, etc.

But this is how you end up looking at the "old" M as being really friendly, despite Canon wishing they had never made it so as to sell more R. Ironically, the camera from yesterday (M's), is the funnest one. That shouldn't be and represents a failure IMO by Canon to not launch the RF-S platform correctly. Granted they're still growing it, but are they? Again look above and you can quickly see how the R7 is meant as a "birder" and the R10 is meant as the new Rebel, where folks only ever shoot the stock lens, and a telephoto. They've got both ala the RF-S 18-45 and RF 100-400... The R10/R7 may be "complete" in Canon's eyes. Go figure. Sadly if I was a product manager, I'd be nodding my head and suggesting marketing the R10 better to soccer moms, not making more RF-S glass...

My 2 cents, you've got the M with it's glass, the RP (or R, R6) and non RF-L glass, and the R10/7 with it's stock lens, and telephoto options. And then Fuji/Sony. Pick.