Canon M50 Mark II - an underrated camera?

Namouze wrote:

KEG wrote:

Namouze wrote:

I am surprised not to find any review of the Canon EOS M50 Mark II camera anywhere (neither on dpreview nor on youtube)...

I am a dad of two kids and I realized after having rent a Sony A7III that face detection and eye AF were not just gimmicks but super useful features to take portraits of kids running around at full speed.

I rented a Fujifilm X-T3 that I didn't like much, and a Canon EOS R6 that I liked very much but I am still reluctant to spend 2500 dollars for mainly travel and family pictures (and some landscape photography from time to time).

I own an Olympus OMD EM10 Mk II which takes very pictures but struggles with continuous AF tracking of my 2,5 year old son. I also own a Canon M100 with a 22mm lens that is very convenient to carry everywhere, and I realized that I liked the pictures coming this tiny APS-C camera.

I made my wish list for a camera: state of the art AF with very good tracking and eye AF for portraits of my kids, compact (I found the Canon R6 a bit bulky compared to the sony A7), decent 1080p 24fps video (no need for 4K). No need for high speed fps.

So I decided to rent the Canon Eos M50 Mark II (I don't like the Sony A6XX range finder body style) and I really liked the autofocus capabilities (at least single shot drive), the compact body, responsive touchscreen, image quality (with lossless compressed raw).

Now this camera is difficult to purchase as it seems sold out in a lot of places, but can somebody explain me why nobody talks about this little gem? I understand that some people were expecting more from the Mark II with more pixels, 4K etc, but for somebody focused on still photography, it looks like a perfect carry everywhere camera.

I'd like to have other people opinion on this camera!

Cheers

For most part it is because M50 does it almost all.

This is true, but the autofocus seem greatly improved with continuous tracking, and eye AF similar to the EOS R6 (without the 20 fps). This improvement by itself puts it in another ballpark I'd say.

If the AF is on a level with the M6II, I agree that it's a big step forward over the M50. The M6II AF is leaps and bounds better than the M6, which I also have. From what I've read of the M50 AF, it's basically on a level with the M6, maybe a touch better. If you want good tracking and eye AF, the difference is definitely worth it. Given the popularity of the M50, I imagine the M50II will also sell very well, once it's widely available.