RF-S Lenses - What We Know and What is Rumored

musicmaster wrote:

KEG wrote:

A lot of reviewers are on a mission to discredit EF-M into non-existence to force people like you to eventully break down and buy Fuji/Sony.

Canon discredited EF-M themselves.

Slow zooms, the "Prosumer" body M5 was never updated and always the seemingly red-headed stepchild with a few firmware quirks that were never fixed.

I have a M5, M100, 15-45, 22, 11-22 and 55-200 sitting right behind me.

It takes fine photos for the limitations of the lenses and sensor, but at this point, the only benefit of the system is the size and dirt cheap pricing.

The R10 is what the M5 MKII should have been, although it is using the same old 24MP sensor from 6 years ago that frankly, pales in comparison in low light performance and dynamic range to the 32MP much less the 26MP Fuji's.

RF-S would be so much more appealing if the Sigma 18-50 2.8 and Tokina 11-18 2.8 were on it. Small, light weight (in comparison), but high quality.

Replies in order. As a dpreview and photographic novice, I'm guessing that learning photography with the EF-M system is totally fine as long as I understand that any money spent on those lenses isn't portable if I eventually move into a new system (even Canon). I can live with that, but it does mean I'm highly unlikely to spend over $1,000 on lenses for our years together.

MusicMaster, following up on your thoughts, have you considered the Canon M6 Mark 2? Very affordable, critically praised, updated 32mp sensor, and a good migration option for your existing EF-M lenses.

You're correct that Canon end-of-lifed the EF-M system and appear to have implicitly pushed their FF RF lenses to fill the ginormous lens gaps for their new APS-C cameras, but it's your money. As for me, the M6 mk2 ($700-800 used) and its cost, its weight, and lens costs and weights are very attractive. I'm strongly considering it, but need to actually handle it to see if my giant hands have issues with the ergonomics: