What are your plans about the M mount situation. Poll

Photato wrote:

Sittatunga wrote:

Photato wrote:

Assuming the discontinuation of the Canon M mount is imminent, what are your gear plans ?

I use EOS M mainly for its size and fun factor. There isn't a smaller decent camera than my M100 now that Panasonic have discontinued the GX880, and moving to micro four-thirds would be horrendously expensive given my preference for wideangle lenses. The OM Systems 9-18mm lens is 70g lighter than my 11-22mm, but effectively ⅔ of a stop slower and nearly double the price. The 7-14mm costs more than the 15-30mm RF lens for my EOS R and is effectively ⅔ to 1⅔ stops slower. Just replacing my EOS M lenses with their nearest equivalents in micro four-thirds would be the best part of the price of an EOS R6, so I shall just keep calm and carry on. I don't think Canon will be quite as keen on RF-S lenses as they were on EF-M, so it's the end of an era. It's not as if I wasn't warned eight years ago.

For a moment, I contemplated to sell all my M gear to move to RF-S assuming that Canon will eventually release the M equivalent lenses.

I didn't, because I was fairly sure that RF-S would be too big to be fun. I had a brief play with prerelease copies of the R7 and R10 in Wilkinson Cameras and found the R10 a lot less unattractive than the 90D but still too big to be attractive as a crop format companion. The R7 wasn't noticeably smaller than my original R, and while it's full of features I could learn to use, at 5x the new price I paid for my M100 it's just too expensive while I have a herd of functional EOS Ms.

So I decided to wait until late October hoping for a RF-S 11-22mm lens or the 22mm. But so far nothing, no Canon official roadmap nor even rumors.

I went so far as to take my calipers to my EF-M lenses and my EOS R. The rear element of the 11-22mm protrudes so far into the camera that I chickened out of seeing if it would clear the shutter of the EOS R. It's far too close for comfort.

The 22mm lens is definitely a possibility, as is the 28mm. The only direct port from EF-M to RF-S is the 18-150mm, so we can't say if the RF supplement is £60 or 13%. Optimistically assuming the former, that would put the RF-S 32mm f/1.4 (50mm f/2.3 equivalent) at £580 against the RF 50mm f/1.8 at £220.  £520 for the EF-M lens is a less difficult sell when the mounts are incompatible, but it's still expensive.

You’d think Canon would want to keep their M customers by encouraging them to migrate to RF, showing commitment by releasing at least 2 lenses but nada.

Apart from telephoto lenses, there are very few FF lenses that make sense on APS-C (RF 16mm, 50mm, possibly 35mm & 85mm, (possibly 15-30mm but that's getting a bit big and restricted in zoom range for a standard zoom) and no APS-C lenses that make any sense on FF apart from cropped video. If RF-S mount cameras are seen a a way for Canon to get APS-C users to buy FF lenses to tempt them into FF, then it seems counter productive for them to provide fast, interesting APS-C lenses.

How many years I’d have to wait to have a similar M lenses collection in the RF-S mount ?!

Forever.

WTH are they thinking ?

I don’t get it.

I hope they're going to throw the odd EOS M bone. I'd buy a 32Mpx EOS 100 II right now.

So for now, the best option for me is to keep using the M.
The only problem is whether or not to keep buying M gear knowing is a dead-end system, long term.

As Maynard Keynes said, in the long term we're all dead. Carpe diem.