MAC
•
Forum Pro
•
Posts: 18,487
Re: Canon M50 mark II eye-AF better than M6 mark II?
thunder storm wrote:
MAC wrote:
thunder storm wrote:
MAC wrote:
thunder storm wrote:
MAC wrote:
so you’d get an m50 II over your M6II?
I like the dynamic range of the M6mkII..... At bright sunny days this helps. And I'm not sure if the tracking of the M50II would be as fast as the M6II, and I really like that tracking speed especially with the sigma f/1.8 zooms. I also like the flip up screen. I've updated the the chargers in my house and my car so I can charge two cameras at the same time with USB-C PD + some phones etc. The M6II has more dials and 32Mp. All in all I will stick with the M6II. I'm willing to give up something to get better eye AF, but not all, especially not the dynamic range and flip up screen.
that m6II sensor is nice
the shutter shock issues would be a concern
There aren't a lot of cases both electronic shutter and mechanical shutter can't be used. But it's annoying you have to think about setting the right shutter mode with slow shutter speeds using the 11-22mm. OTOH: full electronic shutter goes up to 1/16000th, which can be useful with fast glass, and the M50(either I or II) doesn't offer this.
With the 40mm Art I have to think about switching to full mechanical shutter when shooting faster than 1/1000th, as I'm shooting it wide open often. For slow shutter speeds EFCS is the best mode. I would love it if the camera would do this for me, but it doesn't.
besides the lame hot shoe evf implementation
your R sensor green issues would be a concern if put in RP 2
R5 is waaaaay better.
Though I’d like to have the 32, 11-22 and 56 in that order, I’m probably just going to stay with my great SOOC RP with EC control ring
Actually your Tamron 45mm is the perfect stop gap for not having the 32mm. And it's stabilized. You should just learn to love it. RF 50mm f/1.8 for landscapes, Tamron 45mm for portraits and stabilization. Mind you, the Tamron is way lighter than the 40mm Art. Not that bad.
all good points storm!
I’m torn with where to go
not sure where I’ll go from here
Don't go M. Just get that 14-35mm f/4.0 if you love wide angle. It's expensive, but it will crush the 11-22mm of course. Having 35mm&f/4.0 with fast AF adds flexibility too.
For the 70-200mm, get the f/2.8 version, not the f/4.0. If I was in your shoes, that's how I would spend the money. The f/2.8 isn't only giving shallower DOF, the character of the bokeh is beautiful. The f/2.8 is still not heavy at all.
Heck, I would even buy an M100 + 11-22mm over the RF 14-35mm f/4.0 to keep spare change to invest in that RF f/2.8 70-200. I know you're trying to tell yourself you want the f/4.0 because "you're to old for f/2.8 lenses", but we both know that's a lie, as your heart is at least 30 years younger, and the telescoping design of those new RF lenses will make your arms feeling 30 years younger too. You only live once, Mac.
I could probably save for R6 to go with my 70-200 f2.8 L and get IBIS - if I want bigger
but light and powerful are calling my name
the 32 is a lens I really want with a light m with eye focus. I’m thinking m50 II + 32 for about $1000 around Xmas - I can use my Odins also
-- hide signature --
I love 50mm (equivalence)