32 F1.4 on M6II compared with RF 50 F1.8 on R

I love shooting primes on my M6II, especially the 22 F2, 32 F1.4, and Sigma 56 F1.4. When I got a refurbished R for a great price, I also bought the closest RF equivalents to those 3 lenses, the 35 F1.8 IS, 50 F1.8 STM, and 85 F2 IS. I posted a comparison of the EF-M 22 and 56 with the RF 35 and 85 last week: https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/64718104

My RF 50 F1.8 was backordered with Adorama, but I saw it in stock on Amazon, with free overnight shipping, so I ordered it and cancelled my Adorama order. So I've just done the same comparison of the M6II with 32 F1.4 with R with RF 50 F1.8. This is the only RF lens that I have that is actually smaller, lighter, and cheaper than the EF-M equivalent. The 32 F1.4 is $479, 281gm, and 60mm long. The RF 50 F1.8 is $199, 160gm, and 41mm long. Here's how the two lenses look on their respective cameras from above:

The R combo here is not much bigger and heavier than the M combo (and the 50 mounted on an RP would be even smaller). In equivalence terms, the RF 50 on an R is roughly equivalent to an EF-M 31 F1.2, so it gives a very similar FOV, and has just slightly more subject separation at maximum aperture. I took similar shots with the two lenses (not identical, because I'm only interested in a rough idea of how the combinations compare). I shot the 32 at F1.4, F2, and F2.8. I shot the 50 at F1.8, F2, and F2.8. I'll only post the wide open comparisons here (32 at F1.4, 50 at F1.8). If anyone wants to see the other shots, I'll be happy to post them too. I used the same processing parameters for each lens, and turned on profile corrections. Lightroom doesn't yet have the lens profile for the RF 50, so I used the profile for the EF 50 F1.8STM. First, the corners:

M6II with 32 at F1.4

R with 50 at F1.8

Now the center:

M6II with 32 at F1.4

R with 50 at F1.8

The R combo gives just slightly more subject separation, as expected, but it's barely noticeable. Both combos are pretty sharp. If you only shoot at 50mm FF equivalent, neither combo has a big advantage over the other. The R is slightly more comfortable in the hand, or at least in my hand (I have big hands). The M is slightly smaller and lighter (but not much). I expected that the 32 would have obviously better IQ, but so far I'm not really seeing that, unless I view at 100%, when I do see better sharpness in the corner and center. But for normal viewing sizes, it's not going to show up. And stopping the 50 down to F2 or F2.2 improves things a bit. For the money, the RF 50 is surprisingly good. The EF-M 32 is still an outstanding lens. Of course, most of us shoot with a variety of lenses, and that's where the M system really shines (depending on which lenses you like to use). The size and weight advantage of the M system show up a lot more with the 22 and 56, compared with the 35 and 85 on the R. For a traveling kit (when that happens again), I'll be sticking with my M6II and primes (and a couple of zooms thrown into the small bag for good measure).