But if it would have only appealed to a tiny percentage of users, then it's still not really a "significant omission" from the line-up.
Upvote
0
Two more Canon EF-M lenses have been discontinued
- Thread starter Canon Rumors Guy
- Start date
This is the exact reason why I never had any (real) interest in the M-system. It was limited in size, it was limited in prize and therefore it was also limited in specs/features, ergonomics, focal length (and macro). This doesn't mean the system was bad in general. It was indeed an excellent (best) system if you wanted the smallest/lightest Dslm possible. But for others (me) this specialization was also the grestest downside. APS-C (and FF!) has more to offer than limitations!
Upvote
0
My interest was in something that could take much better photos than a cell phone, especially when I want to zoom in on a subject, which cell phones are awful for. The M50 has not disappointed me in that regard. Oddly I wasn't even looking at the size factor when I was trying to decide between it and other options (I considered the T7, T8i and SL3, plus Panasonic and a couple other brands). I was more interested in features for the cost and technology that was relatively modern (which is why I ruled out the T7 rather quickly). But now that I have it I appreciate what the compact size of everything does for me, and wouldn't want to give that up. I've got more into lenses than I thought I would by this point (about $500 beyond the 2-lens kit I started with), but I have likely finished most of my lens purchases until I get another camera, which would probably be 8-10 years down the road at the earliest.
Upvote
0
Maybe you are wondering why I like your comment (maybe not) ...
The funny thing is:
When APS-C is limited to cheap/light, shouldn't FF be limited to expensive/heavy?
If that would be the case neither the R7 nor the R8 would exist.
Both cameras are excellent (even most Canon haters would admit!) and very similiar (price point) while being very different (sensor) at the same time.
I have reasons why I prefer the R7, while you have yours why you prefer the R8.
I'm really glad both(!) cameras exist. And I'm even more glad both cameras share the same mount!
Upvote
0
Exactly. I usually think in terms of Small, Medium, Large.
And most people buy Medium.
Small = R50
Large = R3
But it's not clear whether Medium should be R6, R7, R8, or R10.
So we see the limitations of the SML theory !
Last edited:
Upvote
0
8-10 years is a long time. Until then Pentax will take the lead and Canon is finally ruined!
I don't know why so many M-users (at least in forums) seem to be in such a hurry!
It's not like the M-cameras/lenses are completly outdated. AF lacks a bit behind but in most use cases (for these cameras) it is still good enough to bridge the time till R has a sufficent lineup regarding small/light.
A (small) UW-lens propably will come next and (at least on the long run) there will also be a R100 (with detachable EVF).
If I'm wrong, feel free to hate me and go to Pentax!
Upvote
0
I can't see the limitations and i wouldn't call it SML-theory, rather spectrum-theory (because it is not ONLY about size, but also about quality)!Exactly. I usually think in terms of Small, Medium, Large.
And most people buy Medium.
Small = R50
Large = R3
But it's not clear whether Medium should be R6, R7, R8, or R10.
So we see the limitations of the SML theory !
LOWEND: R50 (small), R10 (small/medium), R7 (medium), R8 (medium), R6/R5 (medium/large), R3 (large) :HIGHEND
... wait for the R7.5 (will be APS-H) JUST KIDDING
... What was your point again?
Upvote
0
Agreed, but the R7 as a sports/wildlife camera is intended to be paired with FF telephoto glass, where the crop sensor advantage is reach rather than size.
For people who want a small 'premium' camera with small lenses and as many features as can be packed into its form factor, Canon just doesn't make that camera (they got close with the M6 II which I really enjoyed).
Last edited:
Upvote
0
You obviously just want to keep repeating the same point, so not sure why you bother quoting my comments. I will repeat my point: You criticize the new APS-C R system because it does not offer a complete system. No system offers a complete set of lenses when it it just getting started. So, while the M is complete enough now - it did not start out that way. If you don't think the R10 is a proper compact body, so be it, but my guess is that many if not most would disagree with you. It is very compact. Only 6mm wider, the same height as the M50 II, and only 42 grams heavier. A brand new buyer - as has been stated by others as well - will mostly buy the camera and one kit lens, maybe a 2nd kit lens.
And sorry, you are wrong. If you already have an M. you can buy any lens you want. There are, and will be, used lenses available for years to come. You seem to be hung up on the thought that people NEED to buy a complete compact comera SYSTEM now. My guess is that almost no one NEEDS to buy a complete compact camera system NOW. They either already have one, or they will buy a camera and maybe one or two lenses now and will be willing to wait for additional lenses because THERE IS NO HURRY. Those few who are in a hurry, will buy something other than a Canon. And why not? And why would you care? Are you someone who need a new compact system NOW???
Upvote
0
I thought the EF-M 18-150mm f/3.5-6.3 IS STM would have been a very popular lens for the market that EF-M is aimed for. My M5 is married to it.
Now to wait and see if all of the other EF-M lenses will be replaced with RF-S versions, then watch Canon slowly out-phase the EF-M versions.
EF-M is a great portable system and it's sad to see it being out-phased.
Now to wait and see if all of the other EF-M lenses will be replaced with RF-S versions, then watch Canon slowly out-phase the EF-M versions.
EF-M is a great portable system and it's sad to see it being out-phased.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
I think it's reasonable to complain that there's no current offering equivalent to the M6 II with EF-M 11-22.
My ideal camera is either:
* R100 with RF 16, or
* R8 with RF 24 prime in small form factor (like the RF 16 and RF 50).
I'm holding out for one of those (and also because my funds are low).
Upvote
0
What is wrong with sticking to the M6 II with EF-M 11-22? Are the body and lens really that outdated or why do you need an additional(!) equivalent offering RIGHT NOW?
This comment confuses me to the max!
You obviously want a specific combination of a body and lens.
1. No one knows exactly what an assumed(!) R100 would look like! How do you already know you really want one. I don't want to ruin your dreams, but I think an R100 and M6 II won't have much in common (except size and detachable EVF)! I guess(!) R100 will rather be low-end, while M6 II is/was rather high-end.
2. What would an R100 and an R8 have in common (except nearly equivalent focal length)?
If you want very small camera the R100 (probably!) would make sense. But the R8 with FF-lens (probably!) is much bigger, heavier and more expensive. What is your goal?
3. Wouldn't it make much more sense to look for a compact(?) all in one camera with big sensor and UW-lens (zoom). Personally, I am not interested in such cameras at all, but I know there is a market for such cameras ...
Maybe I missed some details, but why only Canon offerings and why only DSLM with attached lens?
Upvote
0
Longer lenses would have needed to be wider diameter so would not have been EF-M spec. There's only so long you can make a lens before it becomes too dark to be usable in a given diameter casing. This is the thing people forget with M, it's not about crop, it's about compact. Even on this thread people are talking about RF-S as though it's crop. So far the evidence suggests Canon aren't making crop lenses at all, just a compact range.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
Don't forget about form factor. The reason the M6ii was good was the lack of viewfinder hump, allowing a flip up screen to use for video where looking up is better than looking to the side to avoid creepy looking eyes. That's just one small example, but there is more to camera bodies than size, quality and features.
I quote you because you consistently misunderstood what I said. And still do.
I am very happy with my M6ii and 11-22. I'm also happy with my other EF-M lenses. To be clear I am happy to continue using them just as I do with my 450d and 90d SLR bodies and lenses. I am also in the lucky position that I could and would buy an R equivalent if it were available and intend to do so if and when they release one, as I'm sure many others will. I tried to buy another EF-M lens recently though and it was discontinued, which was disappointing since I can't get a new camera body with that form factor, nor can I get a compact 11-22 lens for any new body yet. Carrying two camera and lens systems rather defeats the purpose of compact systems. I'm not impatient, I just don't have any option right now, and the lens is very rare on the second hand market as I assume other users are also happy to continue using theirs. As I said, short sighted. All they are doing right now is frustrating loyal customers who are happy to buy old system or new system but can't do either.
Upvote
0
Ok, this makes sense. I wasn't aware that purchasing the EF-M 11-22 is already problematic.
I think Canon is aware of this situation and therefore I'm VERY confident that an RF-S UW-lens will come soon!
It baffles me that you own M6 II and(!) 90d! I really don't want to offend you. I'm just curious: Why both? When these cameras came out I was torn choosing one. I ended up deciding I neither want the one or the other and waited/hoped for an R7. I don't want to bragg being right (I was anything but sure being right!). But in the end I was lucky this decision turned out to be right for me.
Have you tried the R7? I think you would be surprised how small (compared to the 90d) it is. Of course, regarding size it can't keep up with the M6 II but it could (theoretically) substitute both cameras!
Upvote
0
That has been a kit lens in some places at some times, and for someone who knows up front that they want more reach than the 15-45mm affords, that would be a great lens to get in a kit. The problem is that a kit with that lens is going to cost significantly more than a kit with the 15-45mm, so to keep the bottom price of a kit down, they went with the 15-45mm. Canon must have then reasoned that a kit with two lenses where the long one provides even more reach than the 18-150 would be more appealing than a kit with a single lens that doesn't leave the system as compact as some people would like for walking around. (And if you bought the kit with only the 15-45mm, the cheaper 55-200mm is probably going to make more sense as an add-on than a more expensive lens that significantly overlaps the range of the lens you already have.)
Upvote
0
The 90d was for YouTube recording on a desk mount and permanently has a 10-22mm attached plus a field monitor below it. I bought it partly to replace my 450d which was old and not video capable but then never really took it anywhere due to the bulk. The m6ii I bought for a different YouTube project and for a sabbatical on my boat where I'd be photo and filming out and about so compact was the main criteria. That they have essentially identical menus and features was a bonus to me. The m6ii is a higher quality supplement to GoPro cameras for the outdoors stuff and fits the bill really well for throwing in a day bag to take walking around islands with a couple of lenses. If I took the 90d I'd have to choose between lenses and lunch/water on the long walks! Also, if I took the 90d I'd have to reset the studio when I got home, and that's a faff
The R7 has a flip out screen, so makes people look shifty eyed and creepy on video if they look at the screen. This is due to the viewfinder on top making flip up impossible. As such it's either a field monitor or bad video with that setup. I'm sure it's a fine camera, but it's not comparable.
The lens I tried to buy was the 18-150mm which has been unavailable here for a long time, so the announcement was pretty moot for me since I couldn't buy one new anyway and assumed they were gone. I did eventually fine one second hand in reasonable condition but it took a lot of searching and a fair amount of trust (I hate buying second hand lenses!)
Upvote
0
Similar threads
