How can we understand this statement from Canon regarding M?

koenkooi wrote:

MAC wrote:

pyla wrote:

The m-series of cameras has a lens mount that was optically designed for an aps-c sensor. The RF-S series has a lens mount that was optically designed for a full frame camera. I saw a review that compared the EOS R to the R7 using the 35 1.8. Although that is a sharp lens on the R, on the R7 the images were soft. When you compared that to the 32 1.4 (basically the same price lens) on the M6 II, the32 1.4 produces far superior images.

Bryan did the comparison of the RF 85 F1.2 lens with a lot of cameras

Canon RF 85mm F1.2 L USM Lens Image Quality (the-digital-picture.com)

what it shows is that the R had a stronger AA filter

R8/R6II are sharper than R with weaker AA filter

R7 holds its own

I'll likely get RF 35 F1.8 with my R8

but I'm keeping my m32 f1.4 on m6II and not getting RF 50 f1.8 for R8

I'm trying to decide if I need anything besides the RF16, RF50 (which I already have) and the RF24-50 kit lens. I mostly use the 22mm and 32mm lenses on my M6II, the 22mm mostly for its size.

The equivalent RF35 is a lot larger, so I'm tempted to use the RF16 and crop in post.

on what camera?

And I'll keep hoping for an M300 with USB-C charging, face tracking in AF-servo and non-cropped 4k

koenkooi wrote:

MAC wrote:

pyla wrote:

The m-series of cameras has a lens mount that was optically designed for an aps-c sensor. The RF-S series has a lens mount that was optically designed for a full frame camera. I saw a review that compared the EOS R to the R7 using the 35 1.8. Although that is a sharp lens on the R, on the R7 the images were soft. When you compared that to the 32 1.4 (basically the same price lens) on the M6 II, the32 1.4 produces far superior images.

Bryan did the comparison of the RF 85 F1.2 lens with a lot of cameras

Canon RF 85mm F1.2 L USM Lens Image Quality (the-digital-picture.com)

what it shows is that the R had a stronger AA filter

R8/R6II are sharper than R with weaker AA filter

R7 holds its own

I'll likely get RF 35 F1.8 with my R8

but I'm keeping my m32 f1.4 on m6II and not getting RF 50 f1.8 for R8

I'm trying to decide if I need anything besides the RF16, RF50 (which I already have) and the RF24-50 kit lens. I mostly use the 22mm and 32mm lenses on my M6II, the 22mm mostly for its size. The equivalent RF35 is a lot larger, so I'm tempted to use the RF16 and crop in post.

And I'll keep hoping for an M300 with USB-C charging, face tracking in AF-servo and non-cropped 4k

I would buy that M300 if it also had a fully articulating LCD screen as well.

MAC wrote:

koenkooi wrote:

MAC wrote:

pyla wrote:

The m-series of cameras has a lens mount that was optically designed for an aps-c sensor. The RF-S series has a lens mount that was optically designed for a full frame camera. I saw a review that compared the EOS R to the R7 using the 35 1.8. Although that is a sharp lens on the R, on the R7 the images were soft. When you compared that to the 32 1.4 (basically the same price lens) on the M6 II, the32 1.4 produces far superior images.

Bryan did the comparison of the RF 85 F1.2 lens with a lot of cameras

Canon RF 85mm F1.2 L USM Lens Image Quality (the-digital-picture.com)

what it shows is that the R had a stronger AA filter

R8/R6II are sharper than R with weaker AA filter

R7 holds its own

I'll likely get RF 35 F1.8 with my R8

but I'm keeping my m32 f1.4 on m6II and not getting RF 50 f1.8 for R8

I'm trying to decide if I need anything besides the RF16, RF50 (which I already have) and the RF24-50 kit lens. I mostly use the 22mm and 32mm lenses on my M6II, the 22mm mostly for its size.

The equivalent RF35 is a lot larger, so I'm tempted to use the RF16 and crop in post.

on what camera?

Oops, forget to mention ‘R8’

nnowak wrote:

koenkooi wrote:

MAC wrote:

pyla wrote:

The m-series of cameras has a lens mount that was optically designed for an aps-c sensor. The RF-S series has a lens mount that was optically designed for a full frame camera. I saw a review that compared the EOS R to the R7 using the 35 1.8. Although that is a sharp lens on the R, on the R7 the images were soft. When you compared that to the 32 1.4 (basically the same price lens) on the M6 II, the32 1.4 produces far superior images.

Bryan did the comparison of the RF 85 F1.2 lens with a lot of cameras

Canon RF 85mm F1.2 L USM Lens Image Quality (the-digital-picture.com)

what it shows is that the R had a stronger AA filter

R8/R6II are sharper than R with weaker AA filter

R7 holds its own

I'll likely get RF 35 F1.8 with my R8

but I'm keeping my m32 f1.4 on m6II and not getting RF 50 f1.8 for R8

I'm trying to decide if I need anything besides the RF16, RF50 (which I already have) and the RF24-50 kit lens. I mostly use the 22mm and 32mm lenses on my M6II, the 22mm mostly for its size. The equivalent RF35 is a lot larger, so I'm tempted to use the RF16 and crop in post.

Using a 16mm lens on the R8 and cropping it to match the 35mm field of view only leaves you with 5 megapixels on a sensor area smaller than m4/3. This crop puts your aperture equivalence at f/6.3. In other words, the 24-50mm f/4.5-6.3 will produce a far better image than cropping the 16mm.

That was my feeling as well, the 24-50 hits a sweet spot for when I want to bring a proper camera, but not lug around the R5.

The RF16 on the R5 did quite well last year on vacation, but I didn’t always bring it due to the bulk. But when I did bring it, the results were significantly better than my phone, even after cropping. That improves my motivation for this year

koenkooi wrote:

nnowak wrote:

koenkooi wrote:

MAC wrote:

pyla wrote:

The m-series of cameras has a lens mount that was optically designed for an aps-c sensor. The RF-S series has a lens mount that was optically designed for a full frame camera. I saw a review that compared the EOS R to the R7 using the 35 1.8. Although that is a sharp lens on the R, on the R7 the images were soft. When you compared that to the 32 1.4 (basically the same price lens) on the M6 II, the32 1.4 produces far superior images.

Bryan did the comparison of the RF 85 F1.2 lens with a lot of cameras

Canon RF 85mm F1.2 L USM Lens Image Quality (the-digital-picture.com)

what it shows is that the R had a stronger AA filter

R8/R6II are sharper than R with weaker AA filter

R7 holds its own

I'll likely get RF 35 F1.8 with my R8

but I'm keeping my m32 f1.4 on m6II and not getting RF 50 f1.8 for R8

I'm trying to decide if I need anything besides the RF16, RF50 (which I already have) and the RF24-50 kit lens. I mostly use the 22mm and 32mm lenses on my M6II, the 22mm mostly for its size. The equivalent RF35 is a lot larger, so I'm tempted to use the RF16 and crop in post.

Using a 16mm lens on the R8 and cropping it to match the 35mm field of view only leaves you with 5 megapixels on a sensor area smaller than m4/3. This crop puts your aperture equivalence at f/6.3. In other words, the 24-50mm f/4.5-6.3 will produce a far better image than cropping the 16mm.

That was my feeling as well, the 24-50 hits a sweet spot for when I want to bring a proper camera, but not lug around the R5.

The RF16 on the R5 did quite well last year on vacation, but I didn’t always bring it due to the bulk. But when I did bring it, the results were significantly better than my phone, even after cropping. That improves my motivation for this year

The RF 16mm was a very nice lens with only minor IQ limitations during my RP experiment. However, I prefer EF-M 11-22 mm.

koenkooi wrote:

MAC wrote:

koenkooi wrote:

MAC wrote:

pyla wrote:

The m-series of cameras has a lens mount that was optically designed for an aps-c sensor. The RF-S series has a lens mount that was optically designed for a full frame camera. I saw a review that compared the EOS R to the R7 using the 35 1.8. Although that is a sharp lens on the R, on the R7 the images were soft. When you compared that to the 32 1.4 (basically the same price lens) on the M6 II, the32 1.4 produces far superior images.

Bryan did the comparison of the RF 85 F1.2 lens with a lot of cameras

Canon RF 85mm F1.2 L USM Lens Image Quality (the-digital-picture.com)

what it shows is that the R had a stronger AA filter

R8/R6II are sharper than R with weaker AA filter

R7 holds its own

I'll likely get RF 35 F1.8 with my R8

but I'm keeping my m32 f1.4 on m6II and not getting RF 50 f1.8 for R8

I'm trying to decide if I need anything besides the RF16, RF50 (which I already have) and the RF24-50 kit lens. I mostly use the 22mm and 32mm lenses on my M6II, the 22mm mostly for its size.

The equivalent RF35 is a lot larger, so I'm tempted to use the RF16 and crop in post.

on what camera?

Oops, forget to mention ‘R8’

I look forward to getting my R8

The RF 16 looks like a lens I'll get to complement the Rf 24-105 F4L

the 11-22 and 32 on my M6II also give something special

I can easily take all of this in one of my medium sized bags

As "uninformed" consumer we are ready to stop buying what we need :
Find us another camera as small as and as capable as m6 mk2 (+22mm f2), we shall move to the new one.

If my camera is broken, I may wish a few more features and a few improvements for mk3 (if there is one).

Honestly there are enough lenses for my needs .

I do not collect lenses & gear, I collect views & memories. I guess there other uninformed ones like me. And Canon appreciates their existance.

justmeMN wrote:

nnowak wrote:

Along with the M6 II that was discontinued last summer, the M200 is now on the official Canon list of discontinued products

https://cweb.canon.jp/eos/lineup/old-products/

That's a shame. I thought it would be a nice replacement for the PowerShot G7X series, both being small cameras with no viewfinder hand no hot shoe.

The only thing replacing a G7 X is a G7 X with a higher number.

nnowak wrote:

Along with the M6 II that was discontinued last summer, the M200 is now on the official Canon list of discontinued products

https://cweb.canon.jp/eos/lineup/old-products/

The M50 II (Kiss M2) is currently the only M model that is not discontinued. For comparison, the SL3 (Kiss X10), T7 (Kiss X90), T8i (Kiss X10i) and 90D DSLRs which share much of their parts with the discontinued M models are all still available.

In broader numbers this is what is listed as current for each mount from Canon Japan:

• EF/EF-S DSLR - 7 models
• EF-M - 1 model
• RF - 10 models

You can read whatever you want into the statements from Canon executives, but the numbers above paint a very clear picture.

touche

it is moving faster than I thought

justmeMN wrote:

nnowak wrote:

The M50 II (Kiss M2) is currently the only M model that is not discontinued.

And the model name R50 makes it clear what will eventually happen to the M50.

But hey - unless Canon does an Apple - and forces some firmware update on our M series cameras without us knowing to limit them - they will all keep working just as nicely as before    That R50 has no place I can see in my bag...

nnowak wrote:

Along with the M6 II that was discontinued last summer, the M200 is now on the official Canon list of discontinued products

https://cweb.canon.jp/eos/lineup/old-products/

The M50 II (Kiss M2) is currently the only M model that is not discontinued. For comparison, the SL3 (Kiss X10), T7 (Kiss X90), T8i (Kiss X10i) and 90D DSLRs which share much of their parts with the discontinued M models are all still available.

In broader numbers this is what is listed as current for each mount from Canon Japan:

• EF/EF-S DSLR - 7 models
• EF-M - 1 model
• RF - 10 models

You can read whatever you want into the statements from Canon executives, but the numbers above paint a very clear picture.

Goodbye Canon, I won't buy into your R-system! 👎