Not that it matters these days as you can't find a Powershot G5X Mark II due to supply chain issues, but I thought I'd chime in on an age old battle: Large Sensor PowerShots vs Canon's EOS M's, which are a form of PowerShot-like in "fun" and size, and price for that matter these days compared to the R.
Skip down to TL;DR as I can get windy if needed.
.
The obvious: The M can swap a lens, the G cannot. Lets get that out of the way.
But, what if the lens you want, is in the "normal" range IE 24-70? What if you never leave your stock lens, say your EF-M 15-45 or 18-55? It's a really silly number of ILC photographers that meet this criteria, like 70% I heard. And, of that 30%, it's something silly like another 20% of that, swap for a bundled telephoto option, think the 18-55 and 55-250 Canon likes to bundle with Rebels, and the M50s for that matter, which are wildly popular, meaning only 10-15% of folks venture outside of a bundled lens of some sort...
Anyhow, I digress...
After swapping back and forth a couple times, I can say the following: One is not "better" than other. But let me say that again another way, the PowerShot G5X II and G1X Mark III are not better than a EOS M50/M6 II setup... Nor is the EOS M50 / M6 II setup better than the PowerShot G5X II / G1X III. Folks like to argue both ways, it's just not true.
Some ways the two diverge, I risk repeating the obvious, but it's worth repeating...
The G5X II pockets, the M's, don't. The G1X III doesn't pocket, but it slings and stows easily, the M's, don't. The G1X III is weather proof, has a sharper lens and smaller form factor than a M + 15-45. Interestingly, the hit rate of the G5X II, for stills, beats an M. We've had discussions over shutter shock around here impacting results of the M6 II. This is an important point here, the G5X II can't track nearly as well as a phase-detect enabled M6 II, which is the king of crops, but, the G5X II in "Auto" mode where it can do a single shot AI-Servo, or, multi-shot no tracking, is just bang on almost every time, whereas the M6 II, no offense, can flounder and you should shoot 14FPS to get best results and cull your shots. Both are true, you can hit moving things better on a M6 II, and still things better on a G5X II. I should add, the M's have access to the 22 pancake, 32/1.4, the G's don't. Ditto for other EF-M glass, think 11-22, 55-200.
In practical use, I have found having access to 24-120 is useful, as is having access to decent macro on the G5X II. On the flip side, I've found the image quality advantage crop has, is missed at times. These are two sides to the coin here folks, Canon themselves had a wonderful presentation regarding their RF lens regarding "operational specs" like, 24-120 f/1.8-2.8 for example, and the macro capabilities, vs optical quality, or sharpness, colors, bokeh quality, etc. Imatests show this; the G5X II doesn't break 2700 lines per inch, the M's on the other hand go up to 3500 lines depending upon glass / sensor combination, or I should say I estimate they do as I haven't seen an Imatest of the 32/M6 II, but it should. Lets be blunt, crop is crop, 1" is 1". But 24-120 f/1.8-2.8 is that, Canon don't make a equivalent lens for the M.
.
TL;DR: If you need to pocket, and use the normal range, yes, I might say the G5X II is the more proper option. If you need more than 24-120 and are okay with not pocketing, M is.
.
I've personally found that Canon is lacking on the M setup a few things:
Weather sealing
Pop-up EVF
"Fast" Normal zoom
Better hit rate in AF / fix the shutter shock
.
Whether Canon does another M, or does an RF-S offering, I'm hoping they can check some of these boxes. And, for folks like myself that fit in both the G and M camp in terms of need/want, I can say there is choice. It really comes down to basic things like cost and form factor desired. Some of the more intricate things like shutter shock, image quality, are trading blows between platforms cancelling each other in my book. It's not like one clearly wins in terms of effective results; think quantity achieved outweighs quality or vice versa. I get more shots from my G5X II than the M6 II for example, but, the M6 II gets better shots. But it's not like there is a clear winner, the two do cancel each other and both are acceptable options. I have found you need to shoot RAW though and post process with a third party IE Lightroom, post processor on the G5X II to get acceptable results in my book though. It'd be nice if Canon fixed that btw, their JPEG sharpening and noise reduction. It really is a, damper for the G5X II. That's something software can fix. It impacts the M6 II too, but is less noticeable, but again, you can get best results by shooting RAW and processing yourself as always.
.
It'd be nice to see Canon do R7, M5 II / M7 with say a faster normal zoom. We've been saying this for years, but it's true having access to a faster equivalence on the G5X II. Likewise, access to DPAF on the G5X II is missed for tracking opportunities, but less than you'd think in the 24-120 range though. And it does matter in both regards (fast zoom, tracking AF). Likewise, it'd be nice they either do an offering with weather sealing, or, a pop-up EVF. Imagine a M6 II with a pop-up EVF? A 22 pancake can be nearly pocketable, with an EVF! Lastly, that hit rate and jpeg engine, Canon can do better. Having access to lack of shutter shock, and post processing via Lightroom has made me think yeah, Canon needs to address both. For a while I thought otherwise. As I get older I continue to get more picky...
.
I should caveat my rant; both the M6 II and G5X II, are excellent offerings for someone just dropping into this rant and are overkill for most people. In fact, based off how things are going, I know all the talk is R7 this and R7 that. The R7 itself, may not ever happen. The G5X III may never happen. The M7/M5 II may never happen. I recommend both the G5X II and M6 II, don't hear what I'm not saying. But over time I'm finding there are pros and cons to each, and Canon has some growth opportunities. Sadly market economics mean Canon has to produce something they can sell and make a profit in, and that market is shrinking. Thankfully we have the G5X II and M6 II. We're very fortunate to have both.
