deepbluejh wrote:
Impossible, huh? That' is an awfully strong word.
I think you are underestimating both the flexibility of the RF mount and the intelligence of the engineers that work at Canon.
Regardless, splitting up the mirrorless line into two overlapping lens and camera systems is in nobody's best interest. Not consumers' and not Canon's. Canon knows this and they've likely put the M system on life support for an EOL in the not-so-distant future.
Meanwhile, be on the lookout for some of those small RF bodies that you claim are impossible.
I am definitely not a camera or lens design expert so I could be totally wrong. I am just going by the observation that the outer diameter of the mount on RF camera seems to be about 69-70mm (based on comparing against the inner diameter). The total height of M200 is 67mm including the buttons, hence my conclusion that an M200 class body would not be possible (unless they go the Sony route of mount sticking above the body height as in A5100 type bodies)
Nevertneless, my main point is that I think the primary target of Canon APS-C mirrorless would be smaller bodies + lenses like they have with EOS-M system. If they can make that happen with RF mount then that's all good.
curious80 wrote:
I know I am in a minority here, but personally I don't see Canon abandoning EOS-M mount in favor of APS-C RF bodies. RF mount diameter is large enough that it will make it impossible to create small bodies like M200. .
deepbluejh wrote:
Impossible, huh? That' is an awfully strong word.
I think you are underestimating both the flexibility of the RF mount and the intelligence of the engineers that work at Canon.
Regardless, splitting up the mirrorless line into two overlapping lens and camera systems is in nobody's best interest. Not consumers' and not Canon's. Canon knows this and they've likely put the M system on life support for an EOL in the not-so-distant future.
Meanwhile, be on the lookout for some of those small RF bodies that you claim are impossible.
curious80 wrote:
I am definitely not a camera or lens design expert so I could be totally wrong. I am just going by the observation that the outer diameter of the mount on RF camera seems to be about 69-70mm (based on comparing against the inner diameter). The total height of M200 is 67mm including the buttons, hence my conclusion that an M200 class body would not be possible (unless they go the Sony route of mount sticking above the body height as in A5100 type bodies)
Nevertneless, my main point is that I think the primary target of Canon APS-C mirrorless would be smaller bodies + lenses like they have with EOS-M system. If they can make that happen with RF mount then that's all good....Show more →
...perhaps Canon will build a 'ruggedized' APS-C setup for RF, while keeping the Rebel / EF-S-grade APS-C bodies and lenses on EF-M?
You'd figure that your typical 7D II / D500 customer would want essentially R5 / R6 ergonomics and ruggedness, so all Canon would really have to do is put a super-high-speed APS-C sensor in the R5 body, for example, and be done. Existing EF-S lenses add flexibility (adapter availability at the moment notwithstanding), and if there are any serious gaps like say the need for an updated 1x-5x/2.8 IS to take the place of the aging EF-S 17-55 IS USM, perhaps as an L lens this time, Canon could produce those for RF.
And maybe after they do all that, if that's the direction they're going, they'll develop an RF to EF-M capability.
I agree I don't see Canon abandoning the M series they are aimed at completely different markets, M series is a step up from most compact cameras giving DSLR type qualities but not enough for amateurs so I do see some low end cameras in the R range such as APS-C format cameras that will offer amateurs the path to full frame. APS-C is useful in larger format cameras especially for shooting wildlife as it gives the little extra with focal length. I do have an M series camera along with the R and 5D and a couple of older cameras the M series is a great camera to take on holiday when the wife doesn't want all the kit being lugged around and it still gives me the ability to add a zoom lens when I need it and because it has EF-EF-M it's a great spare camera to tuck in the corner of a kit bag incase a disaster should happen. Canon have always differentiated between Pro/Amateurs and general hobbyists with their ranges the M-series fitting in nicely with the top end proshots.
I would definitely like a cheaper second R series as my older EF series slowly get put in the box of old cameras. I still have most of my old cameras but only a couple of EF-S lenses (Kit lenses) the only big EF-S was the 18 - 200 as it was then good buy for Holidays and to replace the 18 - 135 kit lens which broke when I dropped it.
I would expect that Canon will sustain and evolve the M system as long as people are buying these lenses and cameras. Looking at the compactness of the RP, it is hard to see how a crop sensor R system camera with the same large mount diameter could be smaller.
Having said this, just from the marketing point of view one could imagine a crop sensor camera as a low-cost entry into the R system. Such a model would increase the market for the R system while maintaining a clear distance to the current FF cameras and avoiding price pressure on them.
You've nailed the catch-22 that Canon is caught in right here:
rmhh wrote:
I would expect that Canon will sustain and evolve the M system as long as people are buying these lenses and cameras. Looking at the compactness of the RP, it is hard to see how a crop sensor R system camera with the same large mount diameter could be smaller.
Having said this, just from the marketing point of view one could imagine a crop sensor camera as a low-cost entry into the R system. Such a model would increase the market for the R system while maintaining a clear distance to the current FF cameras and avoiding price pressure on them. ...Show more →
It's very hard to argue for the continued existence of the EOS M if there will be an APS-C EOS R, and there remains no means of adapting said hypothetical APS-C RF (RF-M? RF-S?) lenses to the EOS M.
And I love my EOS M5; a successor packed with EOS R5 / R6 tech would be an instabuy for me. Even more so if an RF to EF-M adapter became available!
reggraham wrote:
I agree I don't see Canon abandoning the M series they are aimed at completely different markets, M series is a step up from most compact cameras giving DSLR type qualities but not enough for amateurs so I do see some low end cameras in the R range such as APS-C format cameras that will offer amateurs the path to full frame.
APS-C is useful in larger format cameras especially for shooting wildlife as it gives the little extra with focal length. I do have an M series camera along with the R and 5D and a couple of older cameras the M series is a great camera to take on holiday when the wife doesn't want all the kit being lugged around and it still gives me the ability to add a zoom lens when I need it and because it has EF-EF-M it's a great spare camera to tuck in the corner of a kit bag incase a disaster should happen.
Canon have always differentiated between Pro/Amateurs and general hobbyists with their ranges the M-series fitting in nicely with the top end proshots.
I would definitely like a cheaper second R series as my older EF series slowly get put in the box of old cameras. I still have most of my old cameras but only a couple of EF-S lenses (Kit lenses) the only big EF-S was the 18 - 200 as it was then good buy for Holidays and to replace the 18 - 135 kit lens which broke when I dropped it. ...Show more →
Just how different of a market do you think the Canon separates the EOS M and a potential APS-C RF system? I get that they're different, but just how different? Enough for them to run two product lines? Not talking dreams here. Literally, how much different?
And the M series is... "not enough for amateurs"? How does that even compute?
And APS-C doesn't 'give focal length'. It is a cropped sensor, and cropping the image projected by a lens designed for a larger sensor is the effect of using an APS-C camera with larger format lenses. Focal length doesn't change.
Now I'll agree that the EOS M system is great for holidays, especially those where photography isn't a primary 'focus'. I've done this many times, and have come to further appreciate the size of the system.
But I don't know what difference others are expected to perceive between 'amateurs' and 'general hobbyists'. Or 'Pros', even. The use of broad, overlapping terms makes the application of a narrow 'Pro' definition untenable. We cannot know the meaning.
Last, the EF-S 18-200 is a terrible lens by every modern definition. It's ancient, and being an entry-level ~11x zoom it is inferior to every other lens in its class that Canon released at the time, all of which have also long been surpassed since. The only times it would be considered to be a 'good' lens are if it were free or if it were the only lens on hand that could get the shot.
And listing it as a 'good buy' really undermines every other attempted point
Well, Canon actually stated they weren't abandoning the M series like a year or two ago. So perhaps that has changed, perhaps not. In any case, the M series has a wide range of lenses available to it, in fact the M series has more lenses available for use than any of the other models Canon makes.
I don't need dedicated M series, the EF adapter and EF speedboosters aren't that large, so I don't mind using them. I just get the smaller EF lenses if I have a hole in my M lineup, but I have a few M and 3rd party M lenses that do the job.
The M series will stay around for as long as Canon wants to offer a very travel friendly system, and the M series is very popular in other countries other than the US for the portability they offer.
I have shot sports, weddings, and costal scenery with my M50, and with the lenses I have (12 f2, 50 1.2, etc), the images are every bit as good as anything from my FF in most cases. It probably helps that I also use a speedbooster for portraiture, etc too. I had the 7D2 and actually sold it after using the M50 for a month or so. It does quite a bit of the 7D2 for what I shoot, and actually with f11 AF (2x or 1.4x on slow lenses), it sometimes works better, and it has a decent eye AF system too, and 10fps.
TeamSpeed wrote:
Well, Canon actually stated they weren't abandoning the M series like a year or two ago. So perhaps that has changed, perhaps not. In any case, the M series has a wide range of lenses available to it, in fact the M series has more lenses available for use than any of the other models Canon makes.
I don't need dedicated M series, the EF adapter and EF speedboosters aren't that large, so I don't mind using them. I just get the smaller EF lenses if I have a hole in my M lineup, but I have a few M and 3rd party M lenses that do the job.
The M series will stay around for as long as Canon wants to offer a very travel friendly system, and the M series is very popular in other countries other than the US for the portability they offer.
I have shot sports, weddings, and costal scenery with my M50, and with the lenses I have (12 f2, 50 1.2, etc), the images are every bit as good as anything from my FF in most cases. It probably helps that I also use a speedbooster for portraiture, etc too. I had the 7D2 and actually sold it after using the M50 for a month or so. It does quite a bit of the 7D2 for what I shoot, and actually with f11 AF (2x or 1.4x on slow lenses), it sometimes works better, and it has a decent eye AF system too, and 10fps.
mg]...Show more →
the Canon M6ii, M50, is definitely small and light and travel friendly
I'm using the M5 but I can see upgrading to an R5 or R6 (or R7) at some point in the future
I had the 7D2 and actually sold it after using the M50 for a month or so. It does quite a bit of the 7D2 for what I shoot, and actually with f11 AF (2x or 1.4x on slow lenses), it sometimes works better, and it has a decent eye AF system too, and 10fps.
