OP
RLight
•
Senior Member
•
Posts: 4,414
Re: EOS KISS M2 (EOS M50 Mark II)
BirdShooter7 wrote:
RLight wrote:
thunder storm wrote:
RLight wrote:
thunder storm wrote:
RLight wrote:
R2D2 wrote:
Nnowak mentioned that he went this route also.
Could you tell me more about your experience with Tenso? (nnowak as well if you're listening).
Did you have any problems with changing the language, etc?
TIA,
R2
Um, I'm going to say if the rumor mill is correct, never mind. Buy a M6 Mark II, done.
Sounds logical to me....
The only thing I can figure is Canon is trying to simultaneously dupe some people into "upgrading" (at a profit).
*face palm*
Well, if the AF sensitivity went up from -2Ev to say -4Ev or even -5Ev (at f/2.0) just by improving software it might be worth it for some. When shooting with a speedlite it's the difference between having to mount the sigma 18-35mm f/1.8 or the ef-m 18-55mm.
I don't disagree. It was logical for Canon to do the software update as there's nothing wrong with the M50 in my book and having newer software is icing on the cake. But, wouldn't it have been more fair to have released that as a firmware update for the EOS M50 (mark I)?
This is pure greed, them releasing a same-hardware but different software, model and a misrepresentation of an "upgrade". Software costs (alot) of money to develop, it's not free, hardly, I'd know. Not disagreeing. But this is a disservice to those who have invested in the M platform, those who bought and made the M50 a best seller...
When dealing with the sheer volume of those that own the M50 though, it's not in Canon's financial interests to do that. That's alot of M50 owners to give a free pass, and hence why I think they did what they did here.
DPR (formal reviewers/paid contributors) is not going to be thrilled and will likely speak on the subject. They're not pro-Canon; Canon just gave them alot of ammunition to criticize them. I'm no rocket scientist but I can see this train coming down the tracks.
A free upgrade is associated with a malfunctioning product. And i think the M50 was good enough for it's price. For reducing the ecological footprint it would be better to update the firmware of existing bodies. But if Canon wants to charge customers a little for that upgrade it would be fine by me. But you and i know "the reviewers" would have another opinion about this. So if there's no good option, Canon picks the wrong option that suites them the best.
Hat off to this one. Think you nailed the monkey with the peanut as my late grandfather would say.
I think there’s value in the release date being more recent. Just based on my experience selling cameras back in the day, I would help lots of customers who didn’t have the time/desire to do a lot of research on what product to buy. I know a lot of the time when I’d show them an older model that was a really good deal because it had been around for a while the customer would be hesitant because it wasn’t the latest model and they didn’t want to buy something that would soon be obsolete. It didn’t seem to matter much when the actual was rather minimal, which looks like might be the case with the m50 mk2.
This is sadly true. Shiny (new) stuff and cute models sell things. Firmware news, doesn't.
This makes perfect (business) sense for Canon, it's just technically upside-down.