What are your plans about the M mount situation. Poll

Photato wrote:

istscott wrote:

brent1395 wrote:

tvcat wrote:

I don't understand why people so scare of camera mount discontinued.

Film camera was discontinued since very long time ago and it still take great photo.

EOS M mount has more lens than you ever need.

As far as native glass goes, there's some holes in the EF-M lineup.

For me, the reasons I'm upset about EF-M dying-- I also use my cameras for video. Video specs on cameras are still advancing pretty quickly. If I want some of the video features that are pretty much standard now, such as IBIS, real (non-sub-sampled) 4k, and unlimited recording times, I need to start over from scratch and switch to a different mount, which means re-buying everything and spending a bunch of money.

Even from a photography perspective, things are advancing, and these bodies we have now won't last forever. It's going to be a slow, painful death.

Same here, a mix of video and photo. It is frustrating because EF-M hits a pretty solid sweet spot of cost, size, and function. The advancements that Canon has would be great in EF-M. Now we will likely be artificially limited even though the tech/firmware is already available in various RF cameras.

To get around the 30 minute per video clip limiter I use an Atomos Ninja V (with the paid add-on h.265 hevc encoder to have manageably sized files). It works nicely with the M6ii, though recent Atomos firmware have been causing HDMI audio passthrough noise/consecutive blip sounds. I use a powered mic attached to the Ninja V directly usually so not a huge issue for me with that extra audio track besides a little bit of audio sync offset.

Personally, I think I'd want whichever new sensor has a faster read-out from the R10 or R7. A body design like the M6ii, but with a true photo/video setting split. Add in IBIS, no record limit, h.265 encoding and a few other things but it's totally a pipe dream at this point, lol.

You are describing the R7, it has all that except that the sensor readout is still relatively slow in the higher quality mode. Not as small as the M6ii but smaller than FF.
The biggest issue IMO is the lens situation, but if you think of it as a Canon EF camera ignoring the RF lenses then it becomes more aceptable. This is what I’m thinking if I would buy the R7, use it with the newer EF lenses which supposedly play better with the R mount than the older ones, but don’t quote me on this.

Yeah, the R7 does look pretty appealing. I like that it can record video to both SD cards at the same time (apparently). Though if I could get the R7 right now, I'd probably go with the Sony FX30 instead. Maybe once both cameras are commonly available on the used market for a solid discount I'll actually do the switch, haha. Picked up a second M6ii refurb. It's fine enough.

Maybe in years RF will cover most of what EF-M is, but I can't say I like the way they design their cheaper RF glass and there are no 3rd party alternatives. (Similar focusing barely/motors as the 22mm f/2 and 32mm f/2 which I was never too fond of for video). Canon should at least officially let Sigma and Tamron release lenses for RF. If they don't then RF is likely a no go for me.

I lost trust in the Canon brand, it has become a love hate relationship. So I’m not rushing excited to their system once more after the M debacle.

Oops, made a typo, I meant inner focus barrel and motors. The 22mm and 32mm work fine for video, but not ideal. I'm assuming the same for RF glass with a similar focusing system. My favorite is the 11-22mm for video. I want a lot more of however that is designed. The Sigma 16mm as well but it's a little quirky at the widest apertures in video mode on the M6ii (thinking it would be better on Sony).