What are the chances?

I've recently become aware of the excellent Canon EOS M6 Mark II in my search for a pocketable ILC. I waited to buy one thinking perhaps the R50 or R8 might be the R version of the M6II. Sadly, I seem to be mistaken.

With that said: In seeing how the M50, M5, M6, and M6 Mark II rolled out years ago, I'm curious about the following:

What are the chances that Canon plans to develop a future camera in the next couple years that combines the R50 and R8 into something similar to the M6 Mark II only in R mount? It seems like the RS lens they are "developing" are just "reworkings" of the M mount version...and seeing how they seem to push cameras out, is this a possible scenario? If so, when do you think it will happen…2 years from now, 3 years from now…next month?

Complete Tangent: I'm, personally, not too impressed by the R50 or R8. (I mean how many iterations of a similar body type can you produce...e.g. R5, R6, R6II, expected R5II, R7, R10, R50, R8...). I understand they come at different price points, but the Canon "hammer" is getting a little too ridiculous with so many bodies with only slight differences to spur the buyer into the next most expensive camera "up the ladder."

Despite what the vocal minority might say on enthusiast forums etc, the M6II was likely a low volume seller for canon, so I expect a replacement to take some time (more than a year if I had to guess).

Canon is likely to focus on their bread and butter (entry level and pro/prosumer market (IE R50/R10 vs R6/5/3/1(?)) )first. Selling a large volume of the cheaper bodies (and bundles) especially overseas, and targeting the cutting edge tech for the high end.

While certainly welcome, the M6II was a fairly niche buy all things considered. Nothing wrong with that, but low overall demand from the market, whose purchasing habits are absolutely not reflected on an enthusiast platform.

The next niche I expect canon to fill will be their vlogging model, and after that maybe, who knows, the M6II replacement.

I still love my M6II. I would certainly consider an R mount version of it, especially if some more of the excellent EF-M lenses get ported over to RF mount. I kind of agree with you about the R50, but definitely not the R8. Just because it has pretty much the same body as the RP, it doesn't follow that it's just a stale refresh. It's quite clearly the best full frame camera in its price range, by a long way. To get the same sensor and AF system, and e-shutter burst rate as the R6II for $1000 less is the complete opposite of crippling. To read some people on these forums, you'd think they expect Canon to give them everything from a more expensive camera, but for a lot less money. To lose only IBIS, a second card slot, a higher capacity battery, full mechanical shutter (which I have never used in over two years on my R and eight months on my R7), and the 12fps in EFCS for a saving of $1000, and plenty of weight and size too, is quite an amazing deal. I'm torn over whether I want to replace my R (eventually) with the R6II or the R8. My R7 is the first camera I've had with IBIS, and it is nice to have it. On the other hand, most of my lenses have IS, and the main one that doesn't (RF 50 F1.8) is used mostly for people shooting, where I need to keep the shutter speed up anyway. Of the differences between the R8 and the R6II, the lack of IBIS is the one that gives me most pause. But I've been very happily shooting my R for well over two years without IBIS. Probably by the time I come to a decision, there'll be yet another camera to throw in the mix.

Well, they introduced the R50 today, so there’s that.

Alastair Norcross wrote:

I still love my M6II.

Thanks for your insights and I agree with you on your points. Just one or two of those variables could have probably provided more interest for me (and I'm assuming others). For example: the inclusion of IBIS alone would have been fantastic.

A question for you: Having a bigger camera like the R7, do you find the M6II to be a good, small, portable compact ILC to pair with that camera?

I have an R5 and am looking for a small, compact ILC I can throw in my pocket, when I don't want to carry my bigger gear. I was hoping to stay within the same mount...but it doesn't look like that is going to happen.

Ember88 wrote:

Alastair Norcross wrote:

I still love my M6II.

Thanks for your insights and I agree with you on your points. Just one or two of those variables could have probably provided more interest for me (and I'm assuming others). For example: the inclusion of IBIS alone would have been fantastic.

A question for you: Having a bigger camera like the R7, do you find the M6II to be a good, small, portable compact ILC to pair with that camera?

I have an R5 and am looking for a small, compact ILC I can throw in my pocket, when I don't want to carry my bigger gear. I was hoping to stay within the same mount...but it doesn't look like that is going to happen.

Yes, I do find the M6II to be an ideal travel and carry-everywhere camera. For plane trips, I usually take the M6II with 22, 32, 56, 11-22, and 18-150, in a small bag, with a spare battery and the detachable EVF (which I only use with the 18-150). I also usually have it with me at work in an even smaller bag, with just the 22 and 56. I love the R7 for sports, wildlife, and lots of indoor events (I also use my R for some events). But with both the R7 and the R, I have to make a special effort to have the camera(s) with me, so only do that when I know I'll be photographing something, and then have the appropriate lenses. With the M6II, I often have it with me just on the off-chance that there will be something worth photographing. If it doesn't come out of the bag on any given day, it's not a big deal, because it adds so little weight or bulk.

Ember88 wrote:

... I have an R5 and am looking for a small, compact ILC I can throw in my pocket, when I don't want to carry my bigger gear. I was hoping to stay within the same mount...but it doesn't look like that is going to happen.

I also have an R5, and M6II is that secondary camera for me. I love it because it's pretty small and very capable, especially paired with the 32mm f/1.4

R50 ticks a few of the boxes to be able to replace it, but leaves several unticked. An important one is that there's no equivalent of the EF-M 32mm. RF 35 or 24mm f/1.8 come close, but not quite.

According to rumors the next camera from Canon may be the R5II, which I am also looking forward to. Will a new body smaller than R50 be in the following batch? Probably at least a year away.

Ember88 wrote:

What are the chances that Canon plans to develop a future camera in the next couple years that combines the R50 and R8 into something similar to the M6 Mark II only in R mount?

Not likely; Canon tried the M6 II in lieu of an M5 II and M6 II, and it didn't sell nearly as well as the M50 Mark II. Canon isn't one to repeat a mistake.

It seems like the RS lens they are "developing" are just "reworkings" of the M mount version...and seeing how they seem to push cameras out, is this a possible scenario? If so, when do you think it will happen…2 years from now, 3 years from now…next month?

Rumor has it a wide angle and 22 prime are coming natively to RF-S this year.

Complete Tangent: I'm, personally, not too impressed by the R50 or R8. (I mean how many iterations of a similar body type can you produce...e.g. R5, R6, R6II, expected R5II, R7, R10, R50, R8...). I understand they come at different price points, but the Canon "hammer" is getting a little too ridiculous with so many bodies with only slight differences to spur the buyer into the next most expensive camera "up the ladder."

You seem to be in contradiction here; you want yet another body, but are complaining about too many? I'll level with you and say like yourself, I'm disappointed this isn't an R60, instead, Canon gave us the better selling R50.

Now, all is hardly lost here. There is good reason the M50 II and kit lenses sold... Fun, cost effective and good image quality. With the kit lenses at that.

Images below are from Charleston, SC, except the Nutcracker obviously. Wonderful place to visit I should add

Also, the R paired with a small-lens is almost "just right", like DPR I found the RP to be a more desirable form factor, but, the RP a bit underwhelming. Hence I rocked the R for some time, with a RF 35. I did the 24-240 for a time but found it to be too unwieldy. Now Canon's fixed both by giving an RP form factor, with 6FPS, better AF, ADC sensor, full width 4k and then some... And, a compact kit lens (finally).

Now imagine, smaller. More powerful, and a zoom instead of a prime...

Make no mistake, FF has more "punch" but the R8 proves you need not have it big huge, expensive, to have punch. I always wished the M system had a little more oomph, like the R. Now the R system is smaller, and has more oomph. Just wish we had a more compact telephoto option. RF100-400 is not by any means small. I suppose that's what the R50 and RF 55-210 is for, but I think Canon can do better. They should revive the EF 70-300 DO, update it for 2nd gen DO (fixes gripes of poor contrast) and slap RF mount on it and slow the aperture a bit to reduce the width and bulk. Expensive, but I’d pay up. And it’d be full frame.

Alastair Norcross wrote:

I still love my M6II. I would certainly consider an R mount version of it, especially if some more of the excellent EF-M lenses get ported over to RF mount. I kind of agree with you about the R50, but definitely not the R8. Just because it has pretty much the same body as the RP, it doesn't follow that it's just a stale refresh. It's quite clearly the best full frame camera in its price range, by a long way. To get the same sensor and AF system, and e-shutter burst rate as the R6II for $1000 less is the complete opposite of crippling. To read some people on these forums, you'd think they expect Canon to give them everything from a more expensive camera, but for a lot less money. To lose only IBIS, a second card slot, a higher capacity battery, full mechanical shutter (which I have never used in over two years on my R and eight months on my R7), and the 12fps in EFCS for a saving of $1000, and plenty of weight and size too, is quite an amazing deal.

The viewfinder might has a lower resolution as well, but I agree with you the R8 is a great deal.

I'm torn over whether I want to replace my R (eventually) with the R6II or the R8. My R7 is the first camera I've had with IBIS, and it is nice to have it. On the other hand, most of my lenses have IS, and the main one that doesn't (RF 50 F1.8) is used mostly for people shooting, where I need to keep the shutter speed up anyway. Of the differences between the R8 and the R6II, the lack of IBIS is the one that gives me most pause.

The high ISO noise performance of the R8 is a pretty strong one, and you know how to do proper noise reduction in post as well, and those two factors combined might make IBIS less important.

But I've been very happily shooting my R for well over two years without IBIS. Probably by the time I come to a decision, there'll be yet another camera to throw in the mix.

Maybe it's time for a new Canon mount as well, or another sensor size, or both.