The Demise of the EF-M and EOS M series?

[Tronhard]

Well, Canon rumors and some other websites are rife with suggestions that next year Canon will announce the discontinuation of the M series development and will sell off its remaining EF-M stock.  One final release may be the M7, a flagship 34MP body with DPAF, IBIS and a bunch of other features.  The suggestion is that this has been in development for some time and Canon will release it as it has gone too far to scrap.

As one who has an M and 2xM5's, plus almost all of the EF-M lenses, I view this possiblity with mixed feelings.  I agree that Canon needed to pare down on its range of lens mounts and with the limited number of EF-M lenses out there I can understand that this was the easiest one to dispense with.  Especially given the suggestions that Canon will be releasing other RF compatible bodies aimed at the lower end of the market.  What I have seen already is disappointment from vloggers and people who have wanted to travel light with small ILC bodies and lenses - into which category I belong.

The fact that the M7 is being released would suggest that this was a relatively recent move.  So, it will be interesting to see if 3rd party lens manufacturers have been aware of this for some time, in which case they may not have anything for the EF-M in the pipeline, or if this has come too later in their lens development cycle and they will continue to release some (hopefully) nice glass. 

At present I have no skin in the RF game, so I will ponder when things become clearer as to whether I shall get the last M7 or just move on to the R6, for example.

[Tronhard]

---

@Waddizzle wrote:

I think the rumors for 32MP M50 Mark II sound very interesting.  My only dislike with the M3 is the lack of an EVF.  I have the EVF adapter, but it is a serious drain on the battery, and it is little too easy to get dislodged from the body.  

---

I had the same issue with the PowerShot G3X - I found the attached EVF, clumsy, massively buky so I sold the unit and bought a Sony RX-10MkIV. Any camera that claims a FoV of 600mm needs an EVF IMHO.   If Canon had made a unit that was more like the G5X MkI or even MkII, I would have gone there, but they didn't.

There seems to be a movement to lose the EVF in favour of the LCD, likely pandering to the Cell Phone generation who have never had to put a camera to their eye, yet the physics of handling long telephoto still dictate that a 3rd point of contact, represented by the camera against one's face, is still necessary to avoid camera shake.   I think there needs to be a place for both the EVF and LCD. 

If the M7 comes out, especially with some more glass at the longer focal length, I might be interested..,

[ebiggs1]

"If the M7 comes out, especially with some more glass at the longer focal length, I might be interested..,"

Don't hold your breath!

[Tronhard]

---

@ebiggs1 wrote:

"If the M7 comes out, especially with some more glass at the longer focal length, I might be interested..,"

Don't hold your breath!

---

Not even for a minute, Ernie!!!

[ebiggs1]

Sometimes it is difficult to try and understand why Canon does some of the things they do. My belief is the M series was just a stop gap for mirrorless when Canon had none and the others did. It is basically a Powershot with interchangeable lenses.

Why they never come out with a 150-600mm (or simular FL super zoom) when they were so popular remains another mystery to me.  Of all the folks I know that shoot more than just an occasional snapshot have one version of the 150-600mm.

Another is why make these super slow zooms for the R series. If I had an inclination to buy an R camera that alone would be a deal breaker. Nada, never.

But what'da I know? 

[Tronhard]

---

@ebiggs1 wrote:

Sometimes it is difficult to try and understand why Canon does some of the things they do. My belief is the M series was just a stop gap for mirrorless when Canon had none and the others did. It is basically a Powershot with interchangeable lenses.

Why they never come out with a 150-600mm (or simular FL super zoom) when they were so popular remains another mystery to me.  Of all the folks I know that shoot more than just an occasional snapshot have one version of the 150-600mm.

Another is why make these super slow zooms for the R series. If I had an inclination to buy an R camera that alone would be a deal breaker. Nada, never.

But what'da I know? 

---

I think that the M-series suffered from a terrible numbering system - the models seemed to be assigned numbers randomly - I admit probably only frustrating people like me who were aware of the numbering system for the EOS series and were looking for some associated logic.   The target audiance seems to have been travellers, backpackers and social media v-loggers considering the majority of the designs emphasized compact size (at the expense of EV's generally), limited FL ranges, decent video specs.  The lack of long lenses made sense considering the majority of the models didn't have EV's.

For those of who want a small, compact photographer's camera with an EV built-in (as opposed to a clunky and expensive add-on) there was only the M-5 and M-50.  I consider the M-5 to be the photographer's camera in the range as it has the EV dial on the top and is not as well spec'd for video as the M-50. Admittedly the M-50 came out much later and it has been a massive hit with v-loggers for some time.   As many have commented, the range of lenses is neither huge, nor fast (generally), but for those outputting to social media or digital devices the quality is OK.  The 22mm, 33mm and 11-22 and 55-200 have got a lot of cudoes for their quality and value.  The rest do OK IMHO.  Again, to me, it's all about the output...

For myself, I got my M-5 units for when I travel or tramp but don't want either bulk or weight to burden me.  Like you, I would like to have seen something more at the long end - like the rumoured 100-300mm.   If they come out with an M-7 (is that the M version of the EOS 7DIII??) with the specs as rumoured, then I think it would be a useful body.  I have no use for the M-50II as, again, it seems to be targeted at videographers.

A super zoom like the 150-600 is going to be big, or involve a lot of compromises to fit comfortably on an M body, and personally I would prefer to have that attached to a DSLR for balance alone.   As to the two super tele lenses to which you refer: I am not likely to be in the market for them as I have a 150-600, plus a 100-400 with 1.4 tele and on a crop sensor body they take me close to an equivalent FoV of close to 1m and give me results I am happy with.   That's enough for me!

For me, the big question is whether I expand to the RF mount.  In a year or so, when the dust and prices have settled, I would consider an R6 with the RF24-105 f/4 and RF100-500.  Those two would get me all I am likely to need, especially considering I have this huge inventory of DSLR gear.

[Waddizzle]

Canon has left me scratching my head regarding the future of the M Series, too.  I thought they were jumping into the mirrorless market with gusto when they introduced the M Series.  But, the boides suffered from the cripple hammer.  I did not know tha tthe M3 was not capable of remote shooting until after I had bought it.

Canon then seemed to hold back on any lens development.  It took ook them too long to introduce a fast lens, either zoom or prime.  Meanwhile, the camera were popular for their size.  I didn't want a Powershot because they really seemed to disposable cameras.  If something happened to the lens assembly, then the camera body was done, even though the camera portion was still good.

https://shop.usa.canon.com/shop/en/catalog/eos-m50-webcam-starter-power-supply-kit 

Sales of the M Series have really taken off with the release of the Webcam Utility, which seemed perfectly timed for the need to work from home via video conferencing.  It has taken Sony and Nikon months to come up with something to compete with Canon's videoconferening software, and they're still playing catchup with the viceoconferencing camera kits.

If Canon plans to move full steam ahead with the M Series, I am all for it.  I think they bodies are MUCH better than the Sony Alpha 6000 series, which is where I thought Canon had positioned the M Series bodies.  All that the M Series bodies need is one that features a full featured, battery grip that makes it about the size of an EOS RP with its' "grip".