Disappointed with Canon

Starting out, let me say that I love my M system stuff. I've got 2 M50's and an M100 and most of the M series lenses. I can produce some nice photos with that lot. But, as I think we all know, it's basically a dead end now.

So, I've been watching the R series coming out - and the R7/10 look OK, but nothing too special apart from the IBIS in the R7. I like the APS-C format (I have a 6D if I want full frame).

So lenses. Canon have produced the 18-45 (same as the M18-55 but with less distance) and the 18-150 (Same as). Now I hear they will produce the 11-22 next year. Also 'same as'.

When I started with the M, I had had the 20D, 30D, 40D and 70D - all gave me a little more. I went with the M (first was the M3) because of the size advantage and I haven't regretted it. But why should I change again? It's basically giving me much the same as I already have.

I was hoping for some extras in the R-APS-C range. Maybe a 15-80 lens. Maybe better dynamic range without too much messing around. So far (apart from IBIS), I haven't seen anything to make me go 'wow'. (And I'm not over impressed with the video specs - although I don;t do video seriously, so maybe that's what I am missing).

So, just my thoughts on a late Monday night. Comments invited.

Alan Sh wrote:

Starting out, let me say that I love my M system stuff. I've got 2 M50's and an M100 and most of the M series lenses. I can produce some nice photos with that lot. But, as I think we all know, it's basically a dead end now.

So, I've been watching the R series coming out - and the R7/10 look OK, but nothing too special apart from the IBIS in the R7. I like the APS-C format (I have a 6D if I want full frame).

So lenses. Canon have produced the 18-45 (same as the M18-55 but with less distance) and the 18-150 (Same as). Now I hear they will produce the 11-22 next year. Also 'same as'.

When I started with the M, I had had the 20D, 30D, 40D and 70D - all gave me a little more. I went with the M (first was the M3) because of the size advantage and I haven't regretted it. But why should I change again? It's basically giving me much the same as I already have.

I was hoping for some extras in the R-APS-C range. Maybe a 15-80 lens. Maybe better dynamic range without too much messing around. So far (apart from IBIS), I haven't seen anything to make me go 'wow'. (And I'm not over impressed with the video specs - although I don;t do video seriously, so maybe that's what I am missing).

So, just my thoughts on a late Monday night. Comments invited.

my advice, if you love what you got, don't worry about dead ends

the R7/R10 is about speed and R3 like autofocus - but RF-s lenses are not there yet

as far as lenses, what I consider the most fun lenses ever, the m32 f1.4 and the 100L

maybe refocus on getting those two lenses, which are pivotal for me to staying with Canon

Alan Sh wrote:

Starting out, let me say that I love my M system stuff. I've got 2 M50's and an M100 and most of the M series lenses. I can produce some nice photos with that lot. But, as I think we all know, it's basically a dead end now.

So, I've been watching the R series coming out - and the R7/10 look OK, but nothing too special apart from the IBIS in the R7. I like the APS-C format (I have a 6D if I want full frame).

So lenses. Canon have produced the 18-45 (same as the M18-55 but with less distance) and the 18-150 (Same as). Now I hear they will produce the 11-22 next year. Also 'same as'.

When I started with the M, I had had the 20D, 30D, 40D and 70D - all gave me a little more. I went with the M (first was the M3) because of the size advantage and I haven't regretted it. But why should I change again? It's basically giving me much the same as I already have.

I was hoping for some extras in the R-APS-C range. Maybe a 15-80 lens. Maybe better dynamic range without too much messing around. So far (apart from IBIS), I haven't seen anything to make me go 'wow'. (And I'm not over impressed with the video specs - although I don;t do video seriously, so maybe that's what I am missing).

So, just my thoughts on a late Monday night. Comments invited.

Also agree.

I have learned after 5 years of using my M6 (which is my first Canon camera), that Canon invites you with interesting products but they never give you all that you want.

But: Dead end? Disappointed? No. I can get fantastic results with my M6 and its lenses, especially with my favorites: 11-22, 16, 32, 56mm and sometimes 55-200mm.

There are larger systems with probably slightly better results, but they will never offer such a great compromise of portability, handling, IQ, affordability and fun. Because of the small size I can take my system almost wherever I want.

It was a mistake by Canon having introduced such a great small system

Sittatunga wrote:

The 32mm f/1.4 (50mm f/2.3 FF equivalent) is twice the price of the RF 50mm f/1.8 and only offers a huge advantage over the fastest two stops of its range.

About the only reason to stop down the EF-M 32mm is to get greater DOF ?

Sittatunga wrote:

m100 wrote:

Sittatunga wrote:

The 32mm f/1.4 (50mm f/2.3 FF equivalent) is twice the price of the RF 50mm f/1.8 and only offers a huge advantage over the fastest two stops of its range.

About the only reason to stop down the EF-M 32mm is to get greater DOF ?

I did find some low cost ND filters that work fine for slower shutter speeds.

Have to use an adapter though.

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1089487-REG/vu_filters_vsnd155_55mm_sion_1_stop_nd.html

In my case I find a 22mm (35mm FFE) more natural as a standard lens than 32mm (50mm FFE), and I use 100mm on the R for portraits, so restricted depth of field at 32/50mm field of view isn't that important to me. I already have an EF 50mm for my EOS R, and I've not thought it worthwhile to upgrade it to the RF mount model so I'm even more reluctant to spend twice as much as that RF lens on a 32mm for APS-C.

I am thinking the RF 50mm f/1.8 is kinda like the EF 50mm f/1.8 ?

Came back from a car show after using my EF 50mm f/1.8 STM on the 6D and after looking at the photos threw my EF 50mm hard on a concrete floor.

It bounced like a ball and landed in the corner of the room and I swore I would never use that lens again.

Later I found it and tried it. Still worked. Great lens.

Never once felt like throwing my EF-M 32mm at the floor though.

With all that glass in it the 32mm would bust all to pieces ?

Sittatunga wrote:

m100 wrote:

Sittatunga wrote:

m100 wrote:

Sittatunga wrote:

The 32mm f/1.4 (50mm f/2.3 FF equivalent) is twice the price of the RF 50mm f/1.8 and only offers a huge advantage over the fastest two stops of its range.

About the only reason to stop down the EF-M 32mm is to get greater DOF ?

I did find some low cost ND filters that work fine for slower shutter speeds.

Have to use an adapter though.

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1089487-REG/vu_filters_vsnd155_55mm_sion_1_stop_nd.html

In my case I find a 22mm (35mm FFE) more natural as a standard lens than 32mm (50mm FFE), and I use 100mm on the R for portraits, so restricted depth of field at 32/50mm field of view isn't that important to me. I already have an EF 50mm for my EOS R, and I've not thought it worthwhile to upgrade it to the RF mount model so I'm even more reluctant to spend twice as much as that RF lens on a 32mm for APS-C.

I am thinking the RF 50mm f/1.8 is kinda like the EF 50mm f/1.8 ?

Came back from a car show after using my EF 50mm f/1.8 STM on the 6D and after looking at the photos threw my EF 50mm hard on a concrete floor.

It bounced like a ball and landed in the corner of the room and I swore I would never use that lens again.

Later I found it and tried it. Still worked. Great lens.

Never once felt like throwing my EF-M 32mm at the floor though.

With all that glass in it the 32mm would bust all to pieces ?

The RF lens is supposed to have better edges than the EF lenses and be pretty good stopped down beyond f/2.8 (f/1.7 APS-C equivalent). Generally speaking I'd want to stop down a bit more for cars, and would definitely pack an ultrawide.

The RF f/1.8 lens should bounce about as well as the EF STM lens and a lot better than the mkii (not that I'm tempted to try). I'd be more worried about denting the thin metal skin of the 32mm if it has one like that of the 22mm. At least the RF-S lenses are all plastic.

i am thinking the plastic recipe Canon uses for lenses is first class ! 

Canon screwed up their transition to mirrorless by aborting their plans with the M mount.
Back in the early days it was assumed, just like Sony did, Canon's next logical step was to release FF sensors for this mount along with the better lenses, many people, myself included kept waiting on. Unfortunately as we now know it did not play that way.
In hindsight it becomes obvious that after the M mount was released Canon decided to redesign their mirrorless mount with more electrical pins, a wider throat and by changing the flange distance 2mm, they made it harder for 3rd party share lens designs among mounts. This would place them potentially, a step above the Sony mount.
So, resistance is futile, you can consider the R10 or R7 as the easiest upgrade path for current M series owners if you desire the new features and access to their newer RF lenses.

It sucks not doubt, because your M lenses are no compatible, but that is life, deal with it.
I made the transition to the R mount because my M6ii clock battery stop working and wanted some of the features the R10 has, specially higher quality video among several other things and half of my lenses were EF, EF-S.

I also figured it was better to sell my M gear sooner than later when they will depreciate more.
It really sucks that I ended up rewarding Canon after all this, but I had not easier option.
Currently, the major issue is the lack of native RF-S lenses and the blockade Canon has on third party manufacturers, so the wonderful Sigma f/1.4 trio won't be available among others. I miss the 11-22 and the 22 pancake the most. The 32mm would have been really nice to have too.
For someone who is happy with their M series bodies and the available lenses there is not a compelling reason to migrate now. Many bargains await if you resist the temptation to go R.

Photato wrote:

It sucks not doubt, because your M lenses are no compatible, but that is life, deal with it.

Whenever I start to get bummed I go to the R forum and read and my R camera desires seem to go away.

For real, not kidding.

Sittatunga wrote:

m100 wrote:

Sittatunga wrote:

m100 wrote:

Sittatunga wrote:

The 32mm f/1.4 (50mm f/2.3 FF equivalent) is twice the price of the RF 50mm f/1.8 and only offers a huge advantage over the fastest two stops of its range.

About the only reason to stop down the EF-M 32mm is to get greater DOF ?

I did find some low cost ND filters that work fine for slower shutter speeds.

Have to use an adapter though.

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1089487-REG/vu_filters_vsnd155_55mm_sion_1_stop_nd.html

In my case I find a 22mm (35mm FFE) more natural as a standard lens than 32mm (50mm FFE), and I use 100mm on the R for portraits, so restricted depth of field at 32/50mm field of view isn't that important to me. I already have an EF 50mm for my EOS R, and I've not thought it worthwhile to upgrade it to the RF mount model so I'm even more reluctant to spend twice as much as that RF lens on a 32mm for APS-C.

I am thinking the RF 50mm f/1.8 is kinda like the EF 50mm f/1.8 ?

Came back from a car show after using my EF 50mm f/1.8 STM on the 6D and after looking at the photos threw my EF 50mm hard on a concrete floor.

It bounced like a ball and landed in the corner of the room and I swore I would never use that lens again.

Later I found it and tried it. Still worked. Great lens.

Never once felt like throwing my EF-M 32mm at the floor though.

With all that glass in it the 32mm would bust all to pieces ?

The RF lens is supposed to have better edges than the EF lenses and be pretty good stopped down beyond f/2.8 (f/1.7 APS-C equivalent). At that point i suspect my EOS R 30Mpx sensor will start to give more pleasing results with my 30 year old lens than my 24Mpx M100 sensor would with the 32mm and i don't really want to spend nearly £500 to find out for sure. Generally speaking I'd want to stop down a bit more than f/1.7 APSC (f/2.8 FF) for cars, and would definitely pack an ultrawide.

The RF f/1.8 lens should bounce about as well as the EF STM lens and a lot better than the mkii (not that I'm tempted to try). I'd be more worried about denting the thin metal skin of the 32mm if it has one like that of the 22mm. At least the RF-S lenses are all plastic.

I've owned five 50's

I concluded that f4.5 - f8 was where I noticed the sharpness wow - but why bother, use a zoom instead

with my m32 f1.4, I see a sharpness wow at f1.4

no brainer for me at $399

Photato wrote:

It really sucks that I ended up rewarding Canon after all this, but I had not easier option.

Currently, the major issue is the lack of native RF-S lenses and the blockade Canon has on third party manufacturers, so the wonderful Sigma f/1.4 trio won't be available among others. I miss the 11-22 and the 22 pancake the most. The 32mm would have been really nice to have too.
For someone who is happy with their M series bodies and the available lenses there is not a compelling reason to migrate now. Many bargains await if you resist the temptation to go R.

^ yes, this sucks

Sittatunga wrote:

I think people hoping for an advanced, capable and fast third series of Canon APS-C lenses are misguided. Fuji have already shown Canon how big that market really is.

they'll be hoping a long time

I think it is also small and value proposition sigmas, the trio and 18-50, that is showing the market the potential

OK, I've been shooting just a ton with mirrorless (both EOS M and R) as it's evolved over the years, and I truly love both systems!  One thing that's become patently clear to me is that each camera (and line) has its particular strengths, and having one doesn't automatically obsolete the other!

For those here who are disappointed with the M System I have a little hard-earned advice:

Maximize the capabilities of your current kit with what's already available to you, Before you go jumping ship and spending more money.

IMHO that starts with shooting RAW and upgrading your noise reduction to DxO Photolab if you already haven't.  You'll easily gain 2 stops from this move alone.

Move up to the most capable M body in the system.  The M6ii can give you even higher ISO abilities, better IQ, better autofocus, and more capability.

Get the lenses that will maximize your keeper rates and IQ.  Lots of examples have been posted here over the years.  EF-M is strong here, especially if you shoot primes.

These steps will truly increase the longevity of the M System, and I expect to continue to shoot mine for years to come, even though I also have the R System.

Happy shooting!

R2

R2D2 wrote:

OK, I've been shooting just a ton with mirrorless (both EOS M and R) as it's evolved over the years, and I truly love both systems! One thing that's become patently clear to me is that each camera (and line) has its particular strengths, and having one doesn't automatically obsolete the other!

^this - one system doesn't meet all needs

For those here who are disappointed with the M System I have a little hard-earned advice:

Maximize the capabilities of your current kit with what's already available to you, Before you go jumping ship and spending more money.

^this - those complaining, haven't maximized

IMHO that starts with shooting RAW and upgrading your noise reduction to DxO Photolab if you already haven't. You'll easily gain 2 stops from this move alone.

^exactamundo -- maximize!

Move up to the most capable M body in the system. The M6ii can give you even higher ISO abilities, better IQ, better autofocus, and more capability.

^exactamundo - the body of choice!

Get the lenses that will maximize your keeper rates and IQ. Lots of examples have been posted here over the years. EF-M is strong here, especially if you shoot primes.

32 f1.4 for sure

56 and 16 will also maximize

These steps will truly increase the longevity of the M System, and I expect to continue to shoot mine for years to come, even though I also have the R System.

Chris at DP Review gives it the number 1 camera for buying used!

Happy shooting!

R2