The M additions I’d like to see

I’ve been using an M6 Mark II since shortly after it was released and love it. With its 30MP sensor the results are excellent, particularly with the Canon 32mm/1.4 and Sigma 56mm/1.4 and its compactness is brilliant. Canon’s lack of commitment to the M series has made me look at other cameras for the future but none offers any compelling advantage over the M6 Mark II. In the overall combination of quality / frame rate / compactness / handling it’s still unsurpassed.

The one area where the M6 Mark II is particularly compromised is the lack of a built-in viewfinder and this surely put off some buyers. Yes, I have the add-on viewfinder which is fine but it would be better to have one built in. I compared the M6 Mark II to the Panasonic GX85 and was amazed to see how similar they are in size, except that the Panny has a built-in viewfinder. This could surely be added to the fictitious M6 Mark III by replacing the built-in flash.

See here and choose the views of the rear of the cameras.

https://camerasize.com/compare/#829,673

Increase the buffer size while they are updating it (22 shots is not enough when firing at 14 fps) and I would buy one.

On the lens side, release an M version of the R mount 16mm f2.8 pancake in the body of the M 22mm f2.

If Sony could only bring out more versions of their APS-C range like an improved A6600 - which has a similar form factor to the M6 and a built-in viewfinder - then maybe this would spur Canon into action. Compare the two in size here:

https://camerasize.com/compare/#829,831

Come on Canon, if the M series really isn't dead, give us an M6 Mark III with built-in viewfinder and bigger buffer, and a 16mm prime.

Wishful thinking, nothing will happen in this case.

cr3shooter wrote:

I’ve been using an M6 Mark II since shortly after it was released and love it. With its 30MP sensor the results are excellent, particularly with the Canon 32mm/1.4 and Sigma 56mm/1.4 and its compactness is brilliant. Canon’s lack of commitment to the M series has made me look at other cameras for the future but none offers any compelling advantage over the M6 Mark II. In the overall combination of quality / frame rate / compactness / handling it’s still unsurpassed.

The one area where the M6 Mark II is particularly compromised is the lack of a built-in viewfinder and this surely put off some buyers. Yes, I have the add-on viewfinder which is fine but it would be better to have one built in. I compared the M6 Mark II to the Panasonic GX85 and was amazed to see how similar they are in size, except that the Panny has a built-in viewfinder. This could surely be added to the fictitious M6 Mark III by replacing the built-in flash.

See here and choose the views of the rear of the cameras.

https://camerasize.com/compare/#829,673

Increase the buffer size while they are updating it (22 shots is not enough when firing at 14 fps) and I would buy one.

On the lens side, release an M version of the R mount 16mm f2.8 pancake in the body of the M 22mm f2.

If Sony could only bring out more versions of their APS-C range like an improved A6600 - which has a similar form factor to the M6 and a built-in viewfinder - then maybe this would spur Canon into action. Compare the two in size here:

https://camerasize.com/compare/#829,831

Come on Canon, if the M series really isn't dead, give us an M6 Mark III with built-in viewfinder and bigger buffer, and a 16mm prime.

if they were going to do a III, they would not have discontinued the II

I had to get over it

though I keep my m6II, my future investments are going toward an R8 - just what they intended would happen

Canon EOS M6 Mark II vs Canon EOS R8 Camera Size Comparison

MAC wrote:

cr3shooter wrote:

I’ve been using an M6 Mark II since shortly after it was released and love it. With its 30MP sensor the results are excellent, particularly with the Canon 32mm/1.4 and Sigma 56mm/1.4 and its compactness is brilliant. Canon’s lack of commitment to the M series has made me look at other cameras for the future but none offers any compelling advantage over the M6 Mark II. In the overall combination of quality / frame rate / compactness / handling it’s still unsurpassed.

The one area where the M6 Mark II is particularly compromised is the lack of a built-in viewfinder and this surely put off some buyers. Yes, I have the add-on viewfinder which is fine but it would be better to have one built in. I compared the M6 Mark II to the Panasonic GX85 and was amazed to see how similar they are in size, except that the Panny has a built-in viewfinder. This could surely be added to the fictitious M6 Mark III by replacing the built-in flash.

See here and choose the views of the rear of the cameras.

https://camerasize.com/compare/#829,673

Increase the buffer size while they are updating it (22 shots is not enough when firing at 14 fps) and I would buy one.

On the lens side, release an M version of the R mount 16mm f2.8 pancake in the body of the M 22mm f2.

If Sony could only bring out more versions of their APS-C range like an improved A6600 - which has a similar form factor to the M6 and a built-in viewfinder - then maybe this would spur Canon into action. Compare the two in size here:

https://camerasize.com/compare/#829,831

Come on Canon, if the M series really isn't dead, give us an M6 Mark III with built-in viewfinder and bigger buffer, and a 16mm prime.

if they were going to do a III, they would not have discontinued the II

I had to get over it

though I keep my m6II, my future investments are going toward an R8 - just what they intended would happen

Canon EOS M6 Mark II vs Canon EOS R8 Camera Size Comparison

Both of my M6II cameras are staying outside of my dry box.

Neither is a backup.

I bought a 5D for $69.  Works fine and has the mirror fix.

Put the 100L on it. Oh my !  Had no idea that combo worked so nice !

It is staying out of the dry box too.

I am afraid a R8 might live in my dry box like my RP did.

cr3shooter wrote:

I’ve been using an M6 Mark II since shortly after it was released and love it. With its 30MP sensor the results are excellent, particularly with the Canon 32mm/1.4 and Sigma 56mm/1.4 and its compactness is brilliant. Canon’s lack of commitment to the M series has made me look at other cameras for the future but none offers any compelling advantage over the M6 Mark II. In the overall combination of quality / frame rate / compactness / handling it’s still unsurpassed.

The one area where the M6 Mark II is particularly compromised is the lack of a built-in viewfinder and this surely put off some buyers. Yes, I have the add-on viewfinder which is fine but it would be better to have one built in. I compared the M6 Mark II to the Panasonic GX85 and was amazed to see how similar they are in size, except that the Panny has a built-in viewfinder. This could surely be added to the fictitious M6 Mark III by replacing the built-in flash.

See here and choose the views of the rear of the cameras.

https://camerasize.com/compare/#829,673

Increase the buffer size while they are updating it (22 shots is not enough when firing at 14 fps) and I would buy one.

On the lens side, release an M version of the R mount 16mm f2.8 pancake in the body of the M 22mm f2.

If Sony could only bring out more versions of their APS-C range like an improved A6600 - which has a similar form factor to the M6 and a built-in viewfinder - then maybe this would spur Canon into action. Compare the two in size here:

https://camerasize.com/compare/#829,831

Come on Canon, if the M series really isn't dead, give us an M6 Mark III with built-in viewfinder and bigger buffer, and a 16mm prime.

I would like to see an M3 Mark II. The M3's body size and weight was almost perfect.

m100 wrote:

MAC wrote:

cr3shooter wrote:

I’ve been using an M6 Mark II since shortly after it was released and love it. With its 30MP sensor the results are excellent, particularly with the Canon 32mm/1.4 and Sigma 56mm/1.4 and its compactness is brilliant. Canon’s lack of commitment to the M series has made me look at other cameras for the future but none offers any compelling advantage over the M6 Mark II. In the overall combination of quality / frame rate / compactness / handling it’s still unsurpassed.

The one area where the M6 Mark II is particularly compromised is the lack of a built-in viewfinder and this surely put off some buyers. Yes, I have the add-on viewfinder which is fine but it would be better to have one built in. I compared the M6 Mark II to the Panasonic GX85 and was amazed to see how similar they are in size, except that the Panny has a built-in viewfinder. This could surely be added to the fictitious M6 Mark III by replacing the built-in flash.

See here and choose the views of the rear of the cameras.

https://camerasize.com/compare/#829,673

Increase the buffer size while they are updating it (22 shots is not enough when firing at 14 fps) and I would buy one.

On the lens side, release an M version of the R mount 16mm f2.8 pancake in the body of the M 22mm f2.

If Sony could only bring out more versions of their APS-C range like an improved A6600 - which has a similar form factor to the M6 and a built-in viewfinder - then maybe this would spur Canon into action. Compare the two in size here:

https://camerasize.com/compare/#829,831

Come on Canon, if the M series really isn't dead, give us an M6 Mark III with built-in viewfinder and bigger buffer, and a 16mm prime.

if they were going to do a III, they would not have discontinued the II

I had to get over it

though I keep my m6II, my future investments are going toward an R8 - just what they intended would happen

Canon EOS M6 Mark II vs Canon EOS R8 Camera Size Comparison

Both of my M6II cameras are staying outside of my dry box.

Neither is a backup.

I bought a 5D for $69. Works fine and has the mirror fix.

Put the 100L on it. Oh my ! Had no idea that combo worked so nice !

It is staying out of the dry box too.

I am afraid a R8 might live in my dry box like my RP did.

$69 a great price with the mirror box fix. I loved mine in its time even with its shortcomings and weight.

R8 really requires more RF L glass imo if you go there someday - eg, RF 24-105 F4L, RF 70-200 F4L, then for birding add Rf 100-400 + Rf 1.4 ext

-- hide signature --

Dr. says listen to this every morning.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bEeaS6fuUoA

nnowak wrote:

MyM6II wrote:

I would like to see an M3 Mark II.

Isn't that what the M6 was?

The M6 is a very good camera, but has not got the newest technology. And no, the M6 was not M3 Mark II.

The M3's body size and weight was almost perfect.

M6 is the same dimensions, same shape, and only 24g heavier. The only real external differences are an extra dial and some of the buttons swapped locations.

The M6 is great too. But it has a few physical drawbacks IMO.

1. I don't like the "ears" where you attach the strap.

2. The top of the camera is not flat because of the exposure compensation wheel.

3. As you said it is heavier. Not much. But every iteration has been slightly heavier and I liked the weight of the M3 better. I would like a new camera to go back to that weight (or even lighter).

Point 1 and 2 makes the camera "feel" a bit larger and more uncomfortable.

Not deal killers, but if I could choose, I would choose the M3 body.

M6 mark II fixes point 1 and 2, but not point 3. And it is also bigger than the M6.

MAC wrote:

m100 wrote:

MAC wrote:

cr3shooter wrote:

I’ve been using an M6 Mark II since shortly after it was released and love it. With its 30MP sensor the results are excellent, particularly with the Canon 32mm/1.4 and Sigma 56mm/1.4 and its compactness is brilliant. Canon’s lack of commitment to the M series has made me look at other cameras for the future but none offers any compelling advantage over the M6 Mark II. In the overall combination of quality / frame rate / compactness / handling it’s still unsurpassed.

The one area where the M6 Mark II is particularly compromised is the lack of a built-in viewfinder and this surely put off some buyers. Yes, I have the add-on viewfinder which is fine but it would be better to have one built in. I compared the M6 Mark II to the Panasonic GX85 and was amazed to see how similar they are in size, except that the Panny has a built-in viewfinder. This could surely be added to the fictitious M6 Mark III by replacing the built-in flash.

See here and choose the views of the rear of the cameras.

https://camerasize.com/compare/#829,673

Increase the buffer size while they are updating it (22 shots is not enough when firing at 14 fps) and I would buy one.

On the lens side, release an M version of the R mount 16mm f2.8 pancake in the body of the M 22mm f2.

If Sony could only bring out more versions of their APS-C range like an improved A6600 - which has a similar form factor to the M6 and a built-in viewfinder - then maybe this would spur Canon into action. Compare the two in size here:

https://camerasize.com/compare/#829,831

Come on Canon, if the M series really isn't dead, give us an M6 Mark III with built-in viewfinder and bigger buffer, and a 16mm prime.

if they were going to do a III, they would not have discontinued the II

I had to get over it

though I keep my m6II, my future investments are going toward an R8 - just what they intended would happen

Canon EOS M6 Mark II vs Canon EOS R8 Camera Size Comparison

Both of my M6II cameras are staying outside of my dry box.

Neither is a backup.

I bought a 5D for $69. Works fine and has the mirror fix.

Put the 100L on it. Oh my ! Had no idea that combo worked so nice !

It is staying out of the dry box too.

I am afraid a R8 might live in my dry box like my RP did.

$69 a great price with the mirror box fix. I loved mine in its time even with its shortcomings and weight.

R8 really requires more RF L glass imo if you go there someday - eg, RF 24-105 F4L, RF 70-200 F4L, then for birding add Rf 100-400 + Rf 1.4 ext

I still have a Nikon 50mm f/1.4 from 1967 I sometimes use for focus stacking. On a 5D at f/1.4 too.

Still have a 1D III that really does have a good mirror box.

I know how to rebuild the battery packs.

You know what I step out with though ?

To upgrade my stepppin out camera it would need to be something lighter and more powerful than a M6II with a 32mm lens for less than $1000 ?

And I sure do not know what setup that would be.

I do not find myself having a problem getting eyes in focus or tracking cars or bikes.

Rarely go out at night anymore.

cr3shooter wrote:

Come on Canon, if the M series really isn't dead, give us an M6 Mark III with built-in viewfinder and bigger buffer, and a 16mm prime.

It's the "M5 Mk2" that we've all been dreaming about but sadly I cannot see it coming!

AbuMahendra wrote:

The M6II is technically superior and more capable than the M5. But I prefer the ergonomics and shooting experience of the latter.

Could share the specifics in more detail?

I am curious because I skipped M5... 🤔

Maxmolly7 wrote:

AbuMahendra wrote:

The M6II is technically superior and more capable than the M5. But I prefer the ergonomics and shooting experience of the latter.

Could share the specifics in more detail?

I am curious because I skipped M5... 🤔

You didn't miss much.  The M5's AF pales in comparison to the M6ii's.

R2

R2D2 wrote:

Maxmolly7 wrote:

AbuMahendra wrote:

The M6II is technically superior and more capable than the M5. But I prefer the ergonomics and shooting experience of the latter.

Could share the specifics in more detail?

I am curious because I skipped M5... 🤔

You didn't miss much. The M5's AF pales in comparison to the M6ii's.

R2

I skipped the m, until the m6II - and I love the M6II ergonomics.

and I say this, after having 15 Canon bodies in 20+ years

AbuMahendra wrote:

Maxmolly7 wrote:

AbuMahendra wrote:

The M6II is technically superior and more capable than the M5. But I prefer the ergonomics and shooting experience of the latter.

Could share the specifics in more detail?

I am curious because I skipped M5... 🤔

It's quite simple. The M5 has an EVF which I use 99.9% of the time so the shooting experience is rather like a DSLR, which I prefer.

Thanx for coming back on this! All clear now.

AbuMahendra wrote:

The M6II is technically superior and more capable than the M5. But I prefer the ergonomics and shooting experience of the latter.

What I meant by "M5 Mk2" is basically a "marriage" of the internals of the M6ii with the body of M50 Mk2 (built-in EVF, fully-articulated touchscreen) with a couple of extra dials as in the M5. This to me would be the ultimate "M"