It’s GONE!!! No more refurbished M6ii!!!

Larry Rexley wrote:

nnowak wrote:

Larry Rexley wrote:

Carl LaFong wrote:

Most likely most of them were bought up by people on this forum, who egged each other on

But if history is any guide, there will be more … sometime.

Sure, some of them were, but this time it feels different. This was a fire sale - 'dumping' of stock unlike anything we've seen before from Canon, and the end of the line for a lens mount, which hasn't happened for decades.

No, not at all. The massive "fire sale" was only on refurbished gear, and only on the Canon USA website. New M gear is just getting typical holiday discounts of $100 to $150. For example, the M6 II + 15-45mm + EVF kit is currently in stock at B&H and discounted only $100 to $999. Yes, Canon is phasing out the EF-M mount and yes, the M6 II is discontinued. However, M50 II and M200 options are still readily available, and none of the EF-M lenses have been discontinued.

Glad I snagged a refurb myself, netting three M6ii bodies over 2 years at a total price only a few hundred bucks higher than a single R7 body with nearly the same sensor and IQ.

There is a lot more to a camera than just the image sensor. The R7 can do things that are not possible with any number of M6 II bodies.

My point isn't about comparing which is better --- but about value for money. The M6ii is already an exceptionally capable camera, and I don't feel the need to move to a higher price point pair of bodies, not to mention the really sizable investment that would be required in lenses to replace my current set of native EF-M lenses. Not sure why you felt you had to comment on that.

You specifically chose the R7 for comparison based on the image sensor "with nearly the same sensor and IQ". I am not saying one is better than the other. I am saying the actual cameras are on completely different levels and any price comparison is nonsense. You might as well be comparing the M50 II to the R6 II since they are both 24mp cameras.

Canon may not want cheap M options around, making people question why entry-level and APS-C R cameras are priced so high...

Why does this conspiracy theory continue to fester?

Conspiracy theory? Where did you get that from?

You, and others, keep making these claims that the M system was too good and Canon needed to kill it to protect their RF mount profits. That is a conspiracy theory.  Canon did not suddenly wake up one morning, look at a sales chart, panic, and then decide to kill off the M system.  The reality is Canon is trying to streamline their lineup and production capacity in a market that is now much smaller. It was clear Canon was winding down the M system all of the way back in 2019 when they chose not to update the more popular M5.

This is basic sales and marketing 101. Canon has already proven this point by discontinuing the M6 Mark ii just before the R7 release so they wouldn't be offering customers a choice between a cheaper 32 MP camera that might undercut R7 sales. I've worked at many big companies, this is how things are done. Selling off old stock of M bodies seems like a pretty sure sign that new R bodies will be released, and signs are that they are likely to be at higher price points.

That logic just does not fit with reality. First off, if Canon was worried about protecting R7 profits, they would have halted M6 II production much earlier and cleared out all stocks before the R7 was released. In the USA, at least, all M6 II options were available for multiple months after the release of the R7. The M6 II and R7 serve completely different markets and are not even remotely competing with one another any more than the M6 II was competing with the 90D that also shares the same sensor. There is a very large contingent of DSLR owners that have been waiting for a camera like the R7 who have zero interest in a camera like the M6 II. Again, the two cameras serve completely different markets. The timing of events looks far more like Canon stopped production of the M6 II to free up manufacturing capacity for the R7. In the USA, Canon no longer sells any M kits with the 18-150mm lens, which also suggest that production capacity was shifted to the nearly identical RF version. Since you have worked in "many big companies", you should know that all companies have finite resources and cannot produce every product imaginable indefinitely.

So far, there are only two RF-S lenses and they are the same price as the comparable EF-M versions. The R7 is on a level far beyond anything ever produced for the M system. Comparing the R7 to the M6 II solely on the fact they both contain 32mp sensors is just nonsense. The R10 is using a newer sensor and is far above the M50 II in capabilities. The R10 is more like a hypothetical M5 II, yet it is priced lower than the original M5. All of the rumors point to even lower priced crop R bodies and more RF-S lenses coming early next year.

Canon is not forcing people into purchasing more expensive gear.

True enough. Consumers have the choice to jump to other brands, and from reading posts on dpreview this is the route many are apparently taking.

You can go to any forum on DPReview and you will find people jumping to other brands. Most people in this forum seem to be hoarding M bodies.

Camera sales are now a fraction of what they were and Canon is trying to cut costs by consolidating the entire camera lineup under a single mount. It is simply about survival.

Time will tell. If Canon comes out with an M50ii replacement at an M50 price point, plus a more extensive, M-like series of lenses for RF-S bodies at M-like pricing within the next year or two, your point will be proven.

It won't take that long.

For everyone's sake, I hope you are correct. Recent trends with Canon pricing, and locking out third party lenses from the R mount for 'survival' of the company don't give me the warm fuzzies, however.

What "recent trends with Canon pricing"? Canon's pricing is no different than it ever was and is in line with the competition. While the quality may not be the highest level, Canon has more full frame RF glass under $500 than either Nikon or Sony.

I do agree with you third party lens issue. That one is utter stupidity.