After looking at the EOS M bodies I finally pulled the plug. Picked up a M6 with 15-45mm for $420 on Ebay.
I have a bunch of EF-s lenses that I'll adapt, so I'm set there. I just wanted a smaller body that I can use for video.
For a long time, I bought into what I read in the reviews. The review on this site says
The EOS M6's video is the standard, slightly soft, not very detailed 1080 footage that most Canon stills cameras shoot
But when I look at the actual comparisons, the M50, M5, and M6 look better than most of the other cameras at 1080p as far as details are concerned. So what am I missing? I used a D850 for comparison, but the 5D4 doesn't show much more detail either.

I'm not bashing the D850 and 5D4, I own a 5D4 with C Log and for me, its 1080p looks good for what I want to do.
From owning an 80D and 5D4, I know DPAF works great. Although I wanted an M50 for its slightly better speed, the m6's size was a plus for me and I don't care for EVF's, so M6 ticked the right boxes. I also considered an SL2, but at some point I'd like to pick up the 22mm to have a good quality pocketable setup. I would have gone for the M100 if it had a mic input and hotshoe.
Point of it all is, I see so many negative comments about these cameras from people who don't even use the cameras when the cameras themselves are fine. I know, I know, dynamic range and more dynamic range. But I literally have never seen real-world implications of this magic DR of other cameras. I don't take pictures of charts that need 6 stops of shadow pulls, so yeah, I think it'll be fine.