Disappointed with the fate of the EOS M line

R2D2 wrote:

Sittatunga wrote:

R2D2 wrote:

Canon's #1 operating principle has always been to protect their higher end sales. Period. It's never been a question of ability, it's always been about will.

I've always had difficulty believing that bit of folklore.

I can't believe you don't see this at work, you've been around long enough! Like I said, Canon does nothing that might endanger their higher end sales. Every move they make takes this into account, even the timing of releases.

Most of what we see happens in the brain and is subject to all sorts of confirmatory biasses. It's folklore that "Canon does nothing that might endanger their higher end sales" and folklore often had a kernel of truth. But that's a very vague statement and I still don't think that Canon would injure their overall profitability to boost certain unspecified lines. Please give some examples of this behaviour that have no other explanation. What's the relevance of the timing of releases remark?

If Canon can make money out of fast APS-C lenses they will. Those lenses aren't so much about stealing sales from their high end as stealing sales from their competitors and making their competitors look unattractive.

But those high end APS-C lenses are also up against Canon's low end FF models so, while the £490 EF-M 32mm f/1.4 makes the £700 XF 33mm f/1.4 look too big, too heavy and too expensive, the RF 50mm f/1.8 is smaller, lighter and less than half the price of its EF-M equivalent. Canon can sell the EF-M lens because it's excellent and won't fit RF mount or DSLRs, but an RF mount version is a harder sell. From an engineering point of view, top end APS-C is just too expensive for its results compared with low end FF.

I think it's general consensus that Canon needs to fill out their "crop compatible" lens lineup further if they want to make crop a comprehensive system, able to stand alone.

I'm always wary of opinions put forward as general consensus. Like you, I don't think Canon want to make crop a comprehensive system. Unlike you, I think it's because Canon couldn't sell enough of it.

I'll be surprised if we see this happen though. Their entire lean has been toward full frame. Even the existing (RF) lenses that are useful on crop are FF lenses (16, 24, 35, 50, 85, and the zooms). Heck, the two RF-S lenses they've given us so far are EF-M hand-me-downs!

One of them is very similar. The other is a complete redesign. And an awful lot of people on this forum are pleading for EF-M hand-me-downs.

And I think with the coming introduction of an entry-level FF the emphasis will stay on FF. We'd all love Canon to surprise us though with a dozen magnificent crop-specific (or at least crop-oriented) lenses, but what do you think the chances are?

Not all of us. I'd be happy with an EF-M 62mm f/2 and ecstatic with a wider EF-M zoom than the 11-22mm, but I think the people insistent on a common mount for FF and APS-C have done me out of those.

What are the chances that Canon will release a fast and bright RF-S 18-50 f/2.8 zoom? Zippo. Because in reality the results would compete directly with one of their own systems costing many times more than that.

Not really. That Sigma 18-50 f/2.8 zoom is almost small enough for the EF-M template and priced very keenly, but I still wouldn't buy one if it were available. I don't use my existing 18-55mm enough to justify replacing it. And I still think Canon are more worried about their APS-C stuff competing with Sony and Nikon while still making money than about it taking sales from their FF stuff.

It's for the same reason that Canon never gave EF-M one of these lenses. Canon has to protect their money-making upper end systems. Otherwise it would be fiscal suicide.

Not if the high end APS-C stuff made big money. In that case Canon would put a lot more effort into it. You think high end APS-C would inhibit low end FF sales. I think low end FF (and legacy EF for that matter) would compete too keenly with high end APS-C to make it viable.

Personally I'd LOVE to eat crow if our Leopard (Canon) changes its spots. I'll be first in line to buy! Starting with an M6ii form-factor R body with a TILTING LCD! Bring it on!

I take a lot of pictures in portrait format. A lot of people even make videos in portrait format. A Pentax style two-way tilting would do me, but I can't see how you could flip it for selfies or vlogging. So I would still take my R's fully articulated screen over my M100's tilting screen (and either over the one for my RX100).