Canon M50 Mark II - an underrated camera?

Dave Seeley wrote:

RLight wrote:

...I'm going to say, look, person to person, if you want to try Fuji, do. If it makes you happy, you should do it. Also, Fujis biggest downfalls is cost and size, in that order. If both of those are agreeable to you, it's arguably the biggest competitor to the M system, and it has a faster standard zoom, IBIS, and decent colors. I never could get over the handling and cost. I haven't had a chance to play with the new S10 though in all fairness. It may have "cured" my former complaint. But, when you compare size and costs, you could've gone R, or Z in many cases, for the same "costs".

Serious though, if you're not happy with your M50, you're not happy. Why though? I can tell you why I wasn't, and I am happy, with FF output and a RF 28-70 f/2L if I may be blunt. But I don't carry it everywhere, that's where my PowerShot comes in. I'm overkill by most folks standards, but it's my fun-hobby. Most folks gripes with the M system are lack of fast zoom, and lack of a true M5 sucessor. This represents the sort of folks that should, in my opinion, consider an R with f/4 lens (or maybe faster, you might enjoy it, but it's not cheap, small), or Fuji with f/2.8 lens, in that order of consideration.

BTW, several folks on this forum, have an R. Just saying.

I've never seriously considered jumping from the Canon ship. For me, learning curve is the huge issue. Muscle memory. All other differences seem minor by comparison. I'm sure other systems are also equally as good (over time), but they tend to leapfrog each other incrementally, but those leaps seem inconsequential. I'm not a guy who revels in seeing how other companies approach doing things differently.

I was one of the folks who wanted the M5ii, and would have purchased it, had Canon produced it w the same specs as the M6ii... If canon had put the M6ii sensor into the M50ii w similar video capability, I'd have purchased one, even losing the control dials I love on the M5. My M5 system was my travel system, or for friends and family events, while my primary pro system was 5Dsr based and lived mostly in the studio. I've LOVED the touch and drag autofocus since the original M, and really wanted it on my pro system all along, so was a ripe prospect for R series. Several months after M6ii, I got tired of waiting for the M5ii, AND the high megapixel R camera that was rumored.... and picked up a B&H deal on the R w kit lens, and a manfrotto camera bag that fit under an airplane seat. That bag made the R system as portable for me as the M5 had been, and I was very (pleasantly) surprised how enjoyable the R was to shoot. As a result, the R became my M5ii. My M system gathered dust. That said, I am only now selling my M system, because I love it for the miniaturization and build quality. It's truly lovely. I hate to lose it, but I just don't have the desire to shoot it any more. Big hands.

I constantly recommend M to those on a budget, so long as low-light shooting isn't a high priority.

I mention the Fuji for prospects in particular. I've done enough camera-chasing to know sometimes it is better to get it out of your system, but, as someone who's done it, I'll say I ended up with an R, like yourself.

The reality is the M will never match the IQ of an R, except for the 32mm itself married to a M6 II, but otherwise, nope. But, the R will never match the price or portability (when you account for the whole system, ie lenses) of the M, either. But like yourself, the R's size and weight savings with say a more modest lens, be it non-L ala 35mm f/1.8 or 24-105 f/4-7.1, or even the 24-105 f/4L lens, it's a notable savings (in bulk) vs it's DSLR counterparts, enough to make it palatable and fill the slot the M did.

The M is still the Goldilocks system and I recommend it like yourself to others. But the R does step in where the M leaves off if you need more.