Having second thoughts (M6 II)

This is my second round with the M6 Mark II. Well third if you count the short stent I tried it with a poor copy of a 15-45, very short stent I might add. Having a bad lens combo can sour the punch.

.

Couple things to get out of the way.

.

Autofocus is substantially better on the M6 II than the M50 Mark II. The M50 Mark II may think it's got better AF since it's blue/green AF boxes track "better", but in terms of true hitrate? The M6 II walks all over the M50 Mark II. Just got done culling my first shots, they aren't even close. This solidifies in my brain the M6 II being "better", as it should be being the higher end model and more expensive, even though it isn't newer. The scan rate of the M6 II sensor is quite improved vs the 80D sensor. Software alone clearly can't bridge this advantage. Again, if the M6 II had the newest AF firmware, and, the faster sensor? Shame Canon won't pass it down.

.

You really don't know what you have till it's gone. The image quality of the M6 II vs say both my M50 Mark II, G1X III, and former G5X Mark II, are not close. The M6 II stands alone. Now what lens you use has a heavy influence. The 15-45 is an outlier where getting a bad copy can ruin the whole experience. In fact, as I've found, there are even bad copies of 22 pancakes. Didn't think that was possible, it is.

.

Although IQ is stronger on the M6 II between the higher resolution and better ISO handling, and Dynamic range to an extent, the AWB handling is lesser on the M6 Mark II vs the M50 Mark II. Again, this is where Canon passing down the firmware refinements the M50 II got with improved AF detection and AWB would be welcome. Nothing post can't fix, but really Canon should fork and port their code. Whatever, nothing new under the sun; Canon may do this, and sell it as a M6 Mark III that does YouTube streaming, horizontal video, improved AF and AWB and slap on the III.

.

The buffer capacity of the M6 II when using a fast UHS-II card and C-RAW is another huge difference vs the M50 Mark II. I just don't run out of buffer with normal shooting vs on the M50 II, I'd have to be conservative with rattling off bursts, even with C-RAW and a fast UHS-I card in the M50 Mark II.

.

Lastly the 1080P video of the M6 II is substantially cleaner than the M50 II 1080P. I'm still having some frame buffering of 4K video on my Roku lately so I've been sticking to 1080P/60. The new router helps, but, I think it's the Roku struggling which I've known for some time. I refuse to recode the content. I'll skin that cat eventually. If plugging in the old router as a wireless bridge via enet doesn't fix it, I don't want to buy a new TV for something silly... I also hate extra gizmos on the TV, I'll save that conversation for another time.

.

Obligatory first day shots. Not the best samples, but as they say, no pictures? Didn't happen...

C-RAW, post process swap to AWB-W, Fine Detail and ALO strong. The noise rendition is good for ISO2500. The older 80D sensor of the M50 II doesn't fair as well here. The M6 II sensor doesn't break a sweat.

With the LCD flipped forward; provides toddler entertainment too apparently.

AWB-W, ALO-weak, fine detail

AWB-W, Fine Detail, slight shadow lift and exposure lift.

I'm more impressed with the M6 II in this lifetime than the last. That's a good thing. What's amazing is it's almost what, 2 1/2 years old now?

Silver may take a bit to grow on me. Being different this round.