What fills the gap?

The latest APSC "R Body" rumor is just a rumor. Plus it just says that Canon is "thinking about it". Which in Canon-speak means 3-5 years out.

But the Nokishita Camera memo from a couple weeks ago that identified the upcoming products (will try to find the link) specifically mentioned that the next R body will very likely use the current 6D II 26mp sensor (or one derived from it ala what they did with the 5d4 -> R)

So that fills the gap from the upper end a little.

On the lower end... maybe a M5 II that uses DIGIC 8 "plus" and removes the M50's 4K video restrictions.

Seriously though, stop dreaming. Nothing major is right around the corner. You know it.

nnowak wrote:

The EOS M system ranges covers bodies from about $800 on down. Compared to current Canon DSLRs, this would be the T7i/800D on down. The EOS R currently sits at $2300 and I would assume will include more advanced and more expensive bodies in the future. The DSLR equivalents would be the 6d II, 5D IV and 1DX II. This leaves the lucrative market between $1000 and $2000 completely unrepresented. The current Canon DSLRs in this market are the 77D/9000D. 80D, and 7D II. Some key crops lenses for these users would be a 15-80mm f4 and a 15-50 f2.8 (approximately), but full frame glass like the 70-200mm f2.8 or 100-400mm f4-5.6 are also important. What will Canon's mirrorless answer be for the $1000 to $2000 market?

I see three potential routes Canon could take:

1. Seroulsy amp up the M system with much higher level bodies and dramatically expand the lens lineup with more advanced options. The needed lenses would break the 61mm limit on lens diameter and some of the bodies would need to get much bigger. Weather sealing would need to be added to some bodies and lenses and a weather sealed EF adapter would be needed too.

Canon has had six years to "amp up" the M system.  I don't see them doing it now.  Especially with a whole new R system coming out that is completely incompatible with the EF-M mount.

2. Build crop sensor bodies and lenses in RF mount. Full frame RF lenses could cover some focal lengths, but a few crop zooms covering 16-200mm equivalent would be absolutely necessary.

IMO, it is a lock that APS-C will come to the R system.  The overriding reason is that Canon needs to be able to sell RF mount lenses to APS-C camera owners.  Imagine how much revenue it would have lost had it decided to make the DSLR APS-C mount completely incompatible with the EF mount.  Secondarily, Canon needs the path for all APS-C users to seamlessly move to FF R cameras.  Since the M system can't do this, IMO, it spells its eventual replacement by APS-C with the RF mount.

3. Ignore this segment of the market. Canon could sell cheaper full frame R cameras in this price range, but features such as AF, burst rate, buffer, and physical controls would likely be well below the level expected by 80D and 7D II users.

Canon can't afford to ignore this segment because its competitors are not/will not do the same.  The gap they ignore will turn into a cancer that eats up the high and low end segments from the middle..

This is not a debate about the health of the M system. It is only a question of what you think Canon will do to fill the current gap in their lineup. If you think there is another possible scenario, please suggest it below.

Canon really messed up with their distinction between M and R mounts. But since they already did, I'd say the only sensible way to deal with it is to keep M for APS-C and R for FF.

While dividing the market so sharply between APS-C and FF is not very sensible (people may want to combine both within the same system, like with EF/EF-S), at least customers can decide in advance where they want to go.

If they make APS-C R bodies and APS-C R lenses, that would mean one of 3 things:

a) Have M and APS-C R directly competing with each other, possibly duplicating APS-C lenses in both mounts, which just makes no sense;

b) Relegate M to clearly low-end status, i.e. lack of really good lenses (those would be only for R, either APS-C or FF). That would put off everyone who is looking for something more up-scale but doesn't want to go FF;

c) Just kill off M eventually. In the current marketspace, even Canon might not survive that. (Nikon could 'afford' to kill off the 1 series because there was never that much faith in that series in the first place. But M is seriously competitive.)

Of course keeping the lines so separate is a turn-off for people who wish to combine APS-C and FF bodies for whatever reason (more reach, lighter/cheaper body with the same lenses etc.) but Canon has made their bed.

samfan wrote:

c) Just kill off M eventually. In the current marketspace, even Canon might not survive that. (Nikon could 'afford' to kill off the 1 series because there was never that much faith in that series in the first place. But M is seriously competitive.)

Is it really competitive?   For 2017, Sony was in 1st place with more than twice as many cameras sold.  The m4/3 mount is in 2nd place with about 50% more units sold.

Here is another data point... Canon sold more DSLRS in 2017 than the entire history of the M system combined.

nnowak wrote:

Is it really competitive? For 2017, Sony was in 1st place with more than twice as many cameras sold. The m4/3 mount is in 2nd place with about 50% more units sold.

Here is another data point... Canon sold more DSLRS in 2017 than the entire history of the M system combined.

As far as I know, Canon is #1 in APS-C MILC but I'm not gonna argue this point because I'm lazy to look up the numbers. However, even if it's the case that M isn't doing well, what makes you think APS-C R would fare better?

As for DSLRs, those are Canon's bread and butter, that's nothing new. They'll need to be replaced by MILC eventually.

samfan wrote:

Of course keeping the lines so separate is a turn-off for people who wish to combine APS-C and FF bodies for whatever reason (more reach, lighter/cheaper body with the same lenses etc.) but Canon has made their bed.

This is  would be a major problem for Canon.  These people can choose to move to another brand to have full mount compatibility between FF and APS-C sensors.

samfan wrote:

nnowak wrote:

Is it really competitive? For 2017, Sony was in 1st place with more than twice as many cameras sold. The m4/3 mount is in 2nd place with about 50% more units sold.

Here is another data point... Canon sold more DSLRS in 2017 than the entire history of the M system combined.

As far as I know, Canon is #1 in APS-C MILC

Only in Japan.  Global rankings look different.

but I'm not gonna argue this point because I'm lazy to look up the numbers. However, even if it's the case that M isn't doing well, what makes you think APS-C R would fare better?

APS-C R may not fare better, but your prior post suggested that EF-M was too popular for Canon to neglect.

As for DSLRs, those are Canon's bread and butter, that's nothing new. They'll need to be replaced by MILC eventually.

-- hide signature --

Don't quote whole posts - your keyboard has the Delete key!

The entry price on the M5 was closer to $1000 according to the review of it here. There is some room for lower and higher priced models within the APS-C EF-M system depending on what Canon can manage from a technical standpoint and what they want to do with EF-M moving forward.

I think we will find out soon enough where EF-M will go based on the M5 mark II.

* If it's essentially a M50 with more buttons and firmware unlocked features like DPAF in cropped 4K (maybe they would stick a bigger heatsink in the M5II to make it work or maybe the M50 is technically capable but software limited). I'd expect EF-M to move even more toward entry level.

* If it's at attempt at feature parity with the new Fujifilm X-T3, then I'd say there is an open future for EF-M. Canon might see this line of camera as direct competition to people interested in Fujifilm X and micro 4/3rds mount cameras. The goal there being as small as possible while not sacrificing much in regard to performance and image quality. The release of the 32mm f1.4 lens is a good sign here. Given the release of the EOS R, I'd be really surprised if the M5 Mark II comes out soon with advanced market leading features because even though they are different sensor sizes and mounts it could make the EOS R look bad. Maybe in April or May 2019 they won't care much about the EOS R. I'm kinda thinking the EOS R is a stopgap type of release, and won't even be produced in huge numbers, basically because the sensor side of the equation needs more time. FF Canon mirrorless won't get true legs until a sensor made specifically for mirrorless is released.

The biggest problem for Canon right now appears to be full sensor read-out speeds with their current sensors that all existed on DSLRs before mirrorless (even a cropped 4k in the M50 has a ton of rolling shutter). This isn't just related to video, but also things like silent photo mode and I imagine the EVF. If they don't have a new sensor ready for the M5 mark II we probably won't see much innovation or high level features in the line even if Canon has full intention to continue with EF-M.

nnowak wrote:

The EOS M system ranges covers bodies from about $800 on down. Compared to current Canon DSLRs, this would be the T7i/800D on down. The EOS R currently sits at $2300 and I would assume will include more advanced and more expensive bodies in the future. The DSLR equivalents would be the 6d II, 5D IV and 1DX II. This leaves the lucrative market between $1000 and $2000 completely unrepresented. The current Canon DSLRs in this market are the 77D/9000D. 80D, and 7D II. Some key crops lenses for these users would be a 15-80mm f4 and a 15-50 f2.8 (approximately), but full frame glass like the 70-200mm f2.8 or 100-400mm f4-5.6 are also important. What will Canon's mirrorless answer be for the $1000 to $2000 market?

I see three potential routes Canon could take:

1. Seroulsy amp up the M system with much higher level bodies and dramatically expand the lens lineup with more advanced options. The needed lenses would break the 61mm limit on lens diameter and some of the bodies would need to get much bigger. Weather sealing would need to be added to some bodies and lenses and a weather sealed EF adapter would be needed too.

2. Build crop sensor bodies and lenses in RF mount. Full frame RF lenses could cover some focal lengths, but a few crop zooms covering 16-200mm equivalent would be absolutely necessary.

3. Ignore this segment of the market. Canon could sell cheaper full frame R cameras in this price range, but features such as AF, burst rate, buffer, and physical controls would likely be well below the level expected by 80D and 7D II users.

This is not a debate about the health of the M system. It is only a question of what you think Canon will do to fill the current gap in their lineup. If you think there is another possible scenario, please suggest it below.

I won't speculate what Canon will do. But I'd like to have mirrorless FF with 40-50mp, 10fps in servo, great tracking, weather sealing etc. I would ditch my 5d3 and 7d2 for that. M-system is fine when I need smaller, lighter and cheaper system. I don't need anything between that "gap".

thunder storm wrote:

The gap is no gap. There are the 77D, 80D, and 7DmkII. And in the next future we will see updated versions with the EF-s mount. I think in this price range the majority of customers are o.k. with dslr's .

I agree that we will likely see another round of DSLRs in this segment, but it will likely only be one more round.  Based on Nokishita rumors, it looks like the 7D III is coming soon.  That puts the 7D series on a 4-5 year life cycle.  A 7D IV DSLR in 2025 does not seem very likely.  The 77D and 80D iterate a bit faster, so there may be a second round of those cameras.  Canon will probably still be producing DSLRs in 2025, but the product line will have contracted quite a bit.

If they want mirrorless they buy a M50 and be perfectly happy with that, or a future M model with both the strengths of the M5 and M50.

Telling a 7D user to be happy with the M50/M5 is like telling them to be happy with the SL2

MyM3 wrote:

thunder storm wrote:

The gap is no gap. There are the 77D, 80D, and 7DmkII. And in the next future we will see updated versions with the EF-s mount. I think in this price range the majority of customers are o.k. with dslr's . If they want mirrorless they buy a M50 and be perfectly happy with that, or a future M model with both the strengths of the M5 and M50.

I agree with this (for the most).

And the poll misses a lot of possibilities and/or an option for "other".

If you believe I missed a significant alternative possibility, I specifically asked that you "suggest it below"

People who disagree with the "gap" and people who see other possibilities can not vote in this poll. So it is skewed or "manipulated" and constructed to go in the favor of OP's opinion.

If you truly believe that my poll is so tragically flawed or "manipulated", please feel free to start your own.

Other options could be:

- Continue with the biggest cameras as DSRL's

Likely, but only for one or two more iterations.

- Make a mirrorless 7D with EF mount.

Unlikely as it confuses the already messy M vs. RF vs. EF lineup.

- Make a mirrorless 7D with RF mount, but no RFs lenses. (Can still use RF, EF and EFs lenses)

Possibly

- Make new M cameras with a movable sensor, so they can use a thin RF to EF-M adapter. (Moving the sensor a little bit forward when the adapter is connected.)

Not even physically possible.  Look at the image below.

Standard EF-M camera mount

The depth from .1 to .2 is 4.5mm  The depth from .2 to .3 is 5mm.  The image sensor is much larger than what you can see in this image and can not be simply pushed through the current rectangular opening.  Most of the current rectangular shroud would need to be removed which would negatively impact internal reflections.  Even if the shroud was removed, you can not advance beyond the ring labeled .1.  You also can not eliminate parts of the ring.

You have much less than 9.5mm available for moving the sensor forward.  The thinnest available EF extension tube with electrical contacts is 10mm.  That is for a tube with EF mounts on both ends and the electrical contacts are all perfectly aligned and straight through.  Creating a tube with different mounts and contacts that are not aligned would be incredibly difficult in only 10mm.  Even if you could create a 10mm thick adapter, you would need to advance the sensor forward by 8mm.  That is not physically possible without ripping out all of the internal shrouds in the camera.  Also, advancing the sensor by 8mm while still maintaining perfect alignment requires a very robust mechanism.

Is all of this theoretically possible?  Barely.  Will it ever show up in a compact and lightweight $500 camera?  Never.  The amount of engineering required is astronomical compared to the potential sales advantage.  Especially when the amount of engineering required to build an RF mount M50 is no greater than an EF-M mount M50.

thunder storm wrote:

nnowak wrote:

thunder storm wrote:

The gap is no gap. There are the 77D, 80D, and 7DmkII. And in the next future we will see updated versions with the EF-s mount. I think in this price range the majority of customers are o.k. with dslr's .

I agree that we will likely see another round of DSLRs in this segment, but it will likely only be one more round. Based on Nokishita rumors, it looks like the 7D III is coming soon. That puts the 7D series on a 4-5 year life cycle. A 7D IV DSLR in 2025 does not seem very likely. The 77D and 80D iterate a bit faster, so there may be a second round of those cameras. Canon will probably still be producing DSLRs in 2025, but the product line will have contracted quite a bit.

Canon will upgrade dslrs as long as Canon thinks it sells.

I think in this price range the majority of customers are o.k. with dslr's .If they want mirrorless they buy a M50 and be perfectly happy with that, or a future M model with both the strengths of the M5 and M50.

Telling a 7D user to be happy with the M50/M5 is like telling them to be happy with the SL2

A 7D user is not interested in mirrorless anyway.

Maybe not now, but they will be soon.

It is all about immediacy and handling. The extra size is needed for the handling. The extra weight of the body is peanuts for lens+body-combinations.

None of those are exclusive to DSLRs

An OVF will always be the best for some uses, no matter how good EVFs will get. It can also be made possible to have an external evf mounted on a dslr for those who want the benefits of both.

Mirrorless cameras are already starting to surpass DSLRs in many performance metrics.  In 5 more years when the 7D III is due for a refresh, DSLRs will be so far behind the technology curve that they will only be suitable for budget consumers.

thunder storm wrote:

nnowak wrote:

thunder storm wrote:

The gap is no gap. There are the 77D, 80D, and 7DmkII. And in the next future we will see updated versions with the EF-s mount. I think in this price range the majority of customers are o.k. with dslr's .

I agree that we will likely see another round of DSLRs in this segment, but it will likely only be one more round. Based on Nokishita rumors, it looks like the 7D III is coming soon. That puts the 7D series on a 4-5 year life cycle. A 7D IV DSLR in 2025 does not seem very likely. The 77D and 80D iterate a bit faster, so there may be a second round of those cameras. Canon will probably still be producing DSLRs in 2025, but the product line will have contracted quite a bit.

Canon will upgrade dslrs as long as Canon thinks it sells.

I think in this price range the majority of customers are o.k. with dslr's .If they want mirrorless they buy a M50 and be perfectly happy with that, or a future M model with both the strengths of the M5 and M50.

Telling a 7D user to be happy with the M50/M5 is like telling them to be happy with the SL2

A 7D user is not interested in mirrorless anyway. It is all about immediacy and handling. The extra size is needed for the handling. The extra weight of the body is peanuts for lens+body-combinations. An OVF will always be the best for some uses, no matter how good EVFs will get. It can also be made possible to have an external evf mounted on a dslr for those who want the benefits of both.

I'm also 7d user and I'd love to switch my 7d2 for capable mirrorless "all in one" body. No need for mfa would also  be great...

MyM3 wrote:

nnowak wrote:

MyM3 wrote:

thunder storm wrote:

The gap is no gap. There are the 77D, 80D, and 7DmkII. And in the next future we will see updated versions with the EF-s mount. I think in this price range the majority of customers are o.k. with dslr's . If they want mirrorless they buy a M50 and be perfectly happy with that, or a future M model with both the strengths of the M5 and M50.

I agree with this (for the most).

And the poll misses a lot of possibilities and/or an option for "other".

If you believe I missed a significant alternative possibility, I specifically asked that you "suggest it below"

And I did. But there is no way to vote for those alternatives. Not even a "other" option. Or are you going to include peoples suggestions in a new poll?

People who disagree with the "gap" and people who see other possibilities can not vote in this poll. So it is skewed or "manipulated" and constructed to go in the favor of OP's opinion.

If you truly believe that my poll is so tragically flawed or "manipulated", please feel free to start your own.

Why would I ? I don't think there is a gap.

That is not what you have been arguing in all of your comments.  You are suggesting that Canon will create an M system camera with a movable sensor to accommodate 7D users who want to utilize full frame RF glass.

Other options could be:

- Continue with the biggest cameras as DSRL's

Likely, but only for one or two more iterations.

As long as they sell and make money for Canon.

Which will only be for one or two more iterations.  Mirrorless cameras have already eclipsed DSLRs in many performance metrics and there is no way for DSLRs to keep up.  In 5 years, DSLRs will only be suitable for low end uses.

- Make a mirrorless 7D with EF mount.

Unlikely as it confuses the already messy M vs. RF vs. EF lineup.

Not more than some other alternatives.

- Make a mirrorless 7D with RF mount, but no RFs lenses. (Can still use RF, EF and EFs lenses)

Possibly

Yes.

- Make new M cameras with a movable sensor, so they can use a thin RF to EF-M adapter. (Moving the sensor a little bit forward when the adapter is connected.)

Not even physically possible. Look at the image below.

Yes. It is. But I just mentioned it as a possible option for your poll.

Standard EF-M camera mount

The depth from .1 to .2 is 4.5mm The depth from .2 to .3 is 5mm. The image sensor is much larger than what you can see in this image and can not be simply pushed through the current rectangular opening. Most of the current rectangular shroud would need to be removed which would negatively impact internal reflections. Even if the shroud was removed, you can not advance beyond the ring labeled .1. You also can not eliminate parts of the ring.

You have much less than 9.5mm available for moving the sensor forward. The thinnest available EF extension tube with electrical contacts is 10mm. That is for a tube with EF mounts on both ends and the electrical contacts are all perfectly aligned and straight through. Creating a tube with different mounts and contacts that are not aligned would be incredibly difficult in only 10mm. Even if you could create a 10mm thick adapter, you would need to advance the sensor forward by 8mm. That is not physically possible without ripping out all of the internal shrouds in the camera. Also, advancing the sensor by 8mm while still maintaining perfect alignment requires a very robust mechanism.

Is all of this theoretically possible? Barely. Will it ever show up in a compact and lightweight $500 camera? Never. The amount of engineering required is astronomical compared to the potential sales advantage. Especially when the amount of engineering required to build an RF mount M50 is no greater than an EF-M mount M50.

Are you a camera engineer?

I personally converted two different Metabones SpeedBoosters to EF-M mount with full electrical communication.  I have disassembled and modified EF-M lenses.  I have disassembled and repaired several digital cameras.  I am also a mechanical engineer.

The adapter can be thinner than 10mm.

No, it can't.  Even 10mm would be very challenging.  If you have seen the inside of existing adapters and lenses you would understand why.

But I think I would leave the construction and cost calculations to Canon's engineers and employees. I know they can do it if they want.

How do you know?  Have you spoken directly with Canon engineers