Disappointed with the fate of the EOS M line

Such a compact system with compact lenses - Now being replaced by bulkier RF cameras and bigger RF-S lenses.

I own the R5 and many bigger EF/RF lenses, but my M6 II has always been a joy to carry out for casual photography and videography.

I hope Canon could could produce something as compact and capable as the M system in their RF APS-C lineup, but I'm doubtful due to the physical limitations of the mount size.

Yeah.  Wishful thinking I know, but I keep hoping for a last ditch M7 to go out with a bang.  Not much bigger than the M6II with a built in EVF, IBIS, and Digic X with all the AF goodness that comes with.  Throw in an EF-M 100-300 f/5.6-8 and M users would gobble that stuff up for a spell. Dead mount or not.

But that’s not to be I guess.

Yeah. Wishful thinking too but I still hope that Sigma can make the 18-50mm F2.8 in EF-M mount.

sgangker wrote:

Yeah. Wishful thinking too but I still hope that Sigma can make the 18-50mm F2.8 in EF-M mount.

After much debating where to go from my deceased Sigma EX 12-24 (full frame) I opted for the Sigma 8-16 mm (APS-C) - not ideal, but at least I consider the "fate" of my EOS M line to be, that it may outlast the RF mount, considering the rate at which Canon is changing mounts recently.

In a way I am grateful to Canon, that there is no luring or essential upgrades to my EOS M and M5. That M5-mkII with the digicX processor might have been hard to resist, but now I can spend my money on something else.

At this point, I still have my M10 which is my main carry around camera, and my M200. These will be my main cameras for a long time (with the T5 of course). I don't really want another big camera and I have tiny hands, the M10 even with my biggest lens is still better than my T5 and the same lens for me.

In 10 years down the road ill upgrade, but who knows what companies will even be around in 2033?

aeronium wrote:

Such a compact system with compact lenses -

Now being replaced by bulkier RF cameras and bigger RF-S lenses.

I own the R5 and many bigger EF/RF lenses, but my M6 II has always been a joy to carry out for casual photography and videography.

I hope Canon could could produce something as compact and capable as the M system in their RF APS-C lineup,

but I'm doubtful due to the physical limitations of the mount size.

Nope,,,,, the R10 to all intent and perpus is the same size and weight as the M5..infact the M5 is a little taller  so the mount has no bearing on the body size and the RF 18-150 is the same size  as the M 18-150..the eye peace sticks out a little more on the R10 which is a good thing as my nose was always pressed against the LCD and the grip is bigger but when a lens is fitterd it makes no difrence to space needed in the bag

Kjeld Olesen wrote:

sgangker wrote:

Yeah. Wishful thinking too but I still hope that Sigma can make the 18-50mm F2.8 in EF-M mount.

After much debating where to go from my deceased Sigma EX 12-24 (full frame) I opted for the Sigma 8-16 mm (APS-C) - not ideal, but at least I consider the "fate" of my EOS M line to be, that it may outlast the RF mount, considering the rate at which Canon is changing mounts recently.

In a way I am grateful to Canon, that there is no luring or essential upgrades to my EOS M and M5.

That M5-mkII with the digicX processor might have been hard to resist, but now I can spend my money on something else.

so true ... nice going Canon, you didn't get my money

I was disappointed when R mount came out. How could Canon be so shortsighted in using a mount that could not fit a FF sensor.

davev8 wrote:

aeronium wrote:

Such a compact system with compact lenses -

Now being replaced by bulkier RF cameras and bigger RF-S lenses.

I own the R5 and many bigger EF/RF lenses, but my M6 II has always been a joy to carry out for casual photography and videography.

I hope Canon could could produce something as compact and capable as the M system in their RF APS-C lineup,

but I'm doubtful due to the physical limitations of the mount size.

Nope,,,,, the R10 to all intent and perpus is the same size and weight as the M5..infact the M5 is a little taller so the mount has no bearing on the body size and the RF 18-150 is the same size as the M 18-150..the eye peace sticks out a little more on the R10 which is a good thing as my nose was always pressed against the LCD and the grip is bigger but when a lens is fitterd it makes no difrence to space needed in the bag

Actually the R10 is much THICKER than the M5, M50, or M6ii.  And with its MUCH more substantial grip, the R10 also FEELS so much bigger.  It’s entirely at home with lenses both large and small IME.  So there’s definitely room for even more compact bodies below the R10, and that’s what I suspect they’re going to be releasing later this year.

R2

aeronium wrote:

Such a compact system with compact lenses - Now being replaced by bulkier RF cameras and bigger RF-S lenses.

I own the R5 and many bigger EF/RF lenses, but my M6 II has always been a joy to carry out for casual photography and videography.

I hope Canon could could produce something as compact and capable as the M system in their RF APS-C lineup, but I'm doubtful due to the physical limitations of the mount size.

Exactly my thoughts, thanks for sharing!

Hope never dies, but historically Canon has always treated their non-FF systems rather mediocre. My prediction is that they will port some of the M-Lenses to the RF-S mount, then they will also leave it in a mediocre state, and then they will continue with some new (incompatible) cropped mount / system.

My guess is that this market is too niche for Canon, because it is otherwise a pretty fine, and solid system.

JustUs7 wrote:

Yeah. Wishful thinking I know, but I keep hoping for a last ditch M7 to go out with a bang. Not much bigger than the M6II with a built in EVF, IBIS, and Digic X with all the AF goodness that comes with. Throw in an EF-M 100-300 f/5.6-8 and M users would gobble that stuff up for a spell. Dead mount or not.

But that’s not to be I guess.

Right now I don’t even want them to go out with a bang, still selling some M-mount compatible body in case mine would die (in a couple of years?) would be enough for me.

But even if this won’t happen. I will enjoy my M-mount system until the body dies, and nobody will service it anymore for a rational amount of money.

My M bodies made me enjoy taking pictures in a way that I haven't appreciated before. I don't want a viewfinder, my eyesight is bad and they are usually too small for me to see if what I'm doing is in focus. The flippy screen of my M10 works wonderfully, combine that with the size too, its a match made in heaven for me

I will gladly pay to get my camera fixed before I consider getting a new one.

Canon explicitly announces that it will not update SLR again.

However, it was not explicitly announced that eosm would stop updating.

I didn't take it as a solemn promise.

But I have one expectation, which is:

Rfs if the lens other than efm is updated

Maybe efm can get the same version.;-)

Yaixi wrote:

Canon explicitly announces that it will not update SLR again.

However, it was not explicitly announced that eosm would stop updating.

I didn't take it as a solemn promise.

But I have one expectation, which is:

Rfs if the lens other than efm is updated

Maybe efm can get the same version.;-)

It would be an absolutely no-brainer and cost nearly no development to produce the R7 and R10 in versions with EF-M mount ...

Throw in an improved alternative to the 55-200 and all is fine

Kjeld Olesen wrote:

It would be an absolutely no-brainer and cost nearly no development to produce the R7 and R10 in versions with EF-M mount ...

Throw in an improved alternative to the 55-200 and all is fine

But there is a marketing and opportunity cost.

Every M is one less R sold. Sometimes it's better not to put more money into a sinking ship and put money into building a new one. The M replacements will come in R.