15-45mm + 55-200m Or 18-150mm for m50 mark ii

yonatan5522 wrote:

Hi, I have 2 options:

1. 15-45mm + 55-200m

2. 18-150mm

I want to photograph landscapes, people, cars, and planes.

what should I get?
or maybe should I buy a different camera (250D/850D)

15-45mm + 55-200m no doubt ! (for your use cases)

15-45mm is much better in the 15-18mm range and 55-200 is much better in the 150-200mm range.

Seriously; 15mm is important for landscapes. And 200mm is important for planes.

The 18-150 is also a very good lens, but is a bit large and heavy (IMO) for a walkaround lens and it starts a bit narrow. The 15-45 is very small and light and very good stopped down a little. They both have copy variations, so check the lens when you receive it.

EF-M 15-45 @ 15mm

EF-M 15-45 @ 15mm

EF-M 15-45 @ 45mm

The 55-200mm is a very good lens. It slightly beats the larger EFs 55-250 STM in image quality. It is obviously missing the 200-250 range, but is much more compact and much lighter and does not need an adapter.

EF-M 55-200mm @200mm (Cropped a little )

There is a good review of the 55-200mm by Dustin Abbott here. He also compares it to the Efs 55-250 STM.

Here is what he says about the pros for each lens when he compares them:

EF-M 55-200mm STM

• Significant size advantage
• Construction and handling are superior
• Better overall image quality
• Better balance on EOS M/M2/M3
• Greater portability (retains the compact nature of the mirrorless system)

EF-S 55-250 STM

• Price advantage (if you own the EF adapter)
• Longer focal range
• About 1/3rd stop aperture advantage at all focal lengths
• Can be used on EF-S mount cameras as well.
• Better minimum focus distance and maximum magnification