Disappointed with the fate of the EOS M line

Sittatunga wrote:

nnowak wrote:

I don't think Fuji's market share has changed dramatically in the last few years. Any M users moving to Fuji are mostly coming from that small middle group I mentioned above. RF users will just add RF-S.

The R7 has a very attractive specification, but it's not significantly smaller that the R, so it's more a replacement for the 7D or 90D than for EOS M. There's little point as I own an FF RF mount camera for me to buy an APS-Ccamera that's a similar size to it except as a teleconverter. I might be tempted by its self-levelling IBIS if i were feeling flush, but my existing lenses would suffice for it. I would see little point in buying RF-S lenses for it as I was never tempted by the EF-M 18-150mm; I want tiny APS-C lenses because that's the whole point of APS-C for me. I know that a lot of people on the EOS R forum like the R7 and R10, but they're too big, and the R50 lacks the cleaning vibrator. No point in going to the size and expense of Fuji either, so EF-M is probably the end of the APS-C lens road for me.

... If the manufacturers knew where mirrorless technology would end up, and how inexpensive full frame sensor would become, many (most?) would have made different design choices for their new mounts.

And if there hadn't been such vocal lobbies for consistent lens mounts and against adapters, both EF-M and EF mounts would be in much better condition today.

Mirrorless killed EF.  There is no way around that fact.  There is no point in building new EF lenses if no one is buying new EF DSLRs.  Anyone still wanting to adapt EF glass in the future will have a plethora to choose from on the used market for decades to come.

Consistent mounts just make sense.  The ONLY reason for separate mounts is to potentially make cameras and lenses slightly smaller.  Even with the larger mount, the R50 and existing RF-S lenses are within single digit percentages of the size and weight of the M50 and comparable EF-M lenses.  Within reason, the diameter of the mount is not the primary factor in determining camera and lens size.  Fuji's mount is actually smaller than EF-M, yet people in this forum constantly complain that Fuji gear is too big

If Canon had made the EF-M mount just 2mm bigger, they could have followed the same path as Sony, and the RF mount never would have been needed.