Is the Canon EOS M200 the best ratio of image quality to camera size?

I used to have a Sony NEX-6 which took great photos but I found myself not carrying it much because as small as it was it was still large enough to require needing a dedicated bag. I ended up giving it away to my mother.

Part of that is I'm a very occasional hobby photographer.

I'm planning some trips soon and thinking about getting another mirrorless and looking at the Canon EOS M200 it looks just about in terms of size and cost.

My question though is are the photos a large enough improvement over a good phone camera to justify it?

Second question: is there an alternative that is similar size that does much better in terms of photo quality?

mrozowjj said:

I'm planning some trips soon and thinking about getting another mirrorless and looking at the Canon EOS M200 it looks just about in terms of size and cost.

Click to expand...

Folks seem to like that camera, and Canon sells a lot of them. People are predicting the demise of the M system, but I’ve read that they make up 30% of Canon’s camera sales, and so the company says continued production is very likely.

mrozowjj said:

My question though is are the photos a large enough improvement over a good phone camera to justify it?

Click to expand...

If you get it with a zoom lens with a long enough range, then it can do things that most smartphones cannot, as most cannot zoom, and can only do image-quality harming crops.

Furthermore, with a suitably fast lens, it can take much better quality images in dim lighting. “Night mode”, found in some higher-end smartphones, takes multiple exposures and blends them together, narrowing the gap, but getting it right in one shot usually is better, especially if the camera or subject moves between shots. But some dedicated cameras have this feature as well.

What I do if I’m traveling lightly with my camera is to take two lenses: a lightweight zoom for daytime, and a fast prime for dim interiors and night. My big, heavy lenses are reserved for special occasions or locations that need them, but I don’t carry them around with me.

mrozowjj said:

Second question: is there an alternative that is similar size that does much better in terms of photo quality?

Click to expand...

Two common factors in technical image quality are signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) and the ability to resolve fine details crisply.

Larger sensors collect more total light at any given exposure, and so have a larger SNR, but there comes a point where more SNR doesn’t appreciably improve things unless you’re making huge prints. So in full sunlight, even small sensors can perform well enough. 1”-type or smaller sensors can be found in very compact cameras that perform very well in full sunlight.

Larger sensor cameras like the M200 perform better is in dim lighting.

Being able to resolve finer details requires more megapixels and a higher quality lens, but again this is subject to the law of diminishing returns, and will only be appreciated in large prints taken with good technique. Small sensor cameras tend to rely heavily on noise reduction, which harms resolution in dim lighting.

mrozowjj said:

I used to have a Sony NEX-6 which took great photos but I found myself not carrying it much because as small as it was it was still large enough to require needing a dedicated bag. I ended up giving it away to my mother.

Part of that is I'm a very occasional hobby photographer.

I'm planning some trips soon and thinking about getting another mirrorless and looking at the Canon EOS M200 it looks just about in terms of size and cost.

My question though is are the photos a large enough improvement over a good phone camera to justify it?

Second question: is there an alternative that is similar size that does much better in terms of photo quality?

Click to expand...

the title poses a little bit of a weird question, the sony a7c nikon z5 and canon rp are tiny cameras (relatively...), offer a ff sensor, and their image quality is superior to the m200 in a far greater ratio than that of their bigger size...

at that, the sony a7r iv nikon z7 ii and canon r5 are probably even better compared to their size....

but that's not what you meant to ask, is it? ;-)

as for you, i suggest you look into a fuji x100v, it's awesomely portable, and shoots far better pics than your phone or the nex 6 or the m200, that is if zoom isn't a must for you.

I guess I should have asked what is the smallest camera I can get that is a significant upgrade to a Google Pixel or Apple iPhone camera. For me I'm willing to trade almost all other features for compact size because I know my personality and I know I'll be far more likely to carry something smaller.

That Fuji X100v looks very promising. I was also looking at the Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX100 VII and Sony ZV-1

Or take the budget option- an X-M1 and the 27mm mk 1. This was my workhorse street, walkaround and travel camera for years and it never let me down. If you don't need a viewfinder, it's hard to beat.

mrozowjj said:

I guess I should have asked what is the smallest camera I can get that is a significant upgrade to a Google Pixel or Apple iPhone camera. For me I'm willing to trade almost all other features for compact size because I know my personality and I know I'll be far more likely to carry something smaller.

That Fuji X100v looks very promising. I was also looking at the Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX100 VII and Sony ZV-1

Click to expand...

i totally understand you, i own an r5, and as monstrous as that camera's abilities are, i still have my g7x iii sitting on the shelf incase something funny or interesting happens in the house... if i'll pull my monster r5 out every time i'll miss those moments (i use an old feature phone, ha ha!).

the rx100 is a 1 inch sensor camera, while being far more capable as an action shooter (af and burst speed) and boasting a serious zoom lens, i still think the fuji with it's apsc sensor (an excellent one at that) will be quite a bit differentiable from even the finest smartphone cameras, as as giving you as hardcore camera interface as you could possibly ask for (something smartphones, even the best of them, tend to lack altogether).

i don't see the sense in getting a zv 1, the rx100 does everything it does better than it, unless you're into videoing yourself, which, unless you're using the footage for something terribly important, a decent smartphone can suffice for.

yerach said:

mera, while being far more capable as an action shooter (af and burst speed) and boasting a serious zoom lens, i still think the fuji with it's apsc sensor (an excellent one at that) will be quite a bit differentiable from even the finest smartphone cameras, as as giving you as hardcore camera interface as you could possibly ask for (something smartphones, even the best of them, tend to lack altogether).

i don't see the sense in getting a zv 1, the rx100 does everything it does better than it, unless you're into videoing yourself, which, unless you're using the footage for something terribly important, a decent smartphone can suffice for.

Click to expand...

That's valid point about the zv-1. It was on the list because it was cheaper and small but the RX100 does seem to make more sense.

I see what you're saying about the Fuji being better in that regard but as nice as the larger sensor is the lack of adjustable focal length on the lens is kind of limiting. I guess I could just crop anything after the fact.

Though that does make me ask what is holding the M200 back from taking photos on the level of the Fuji if the sensor is the same size. Is the sensor not as good? If it's the lens can't I throw a better lens on it or is that kind of like polishing the wheels on a rust bucket?

mrozowjj said:

yerach said:

mera, while being far more capable as an action shooter (af and burst speed) and boasting a serious zoom lens, i still think the fuji with it's apsc sensor (an excellent one at that) will be quite a bit differentiable from even the finest smartphone cameras, as as giving you as hardcore camera interface as you could possibly ask for (something smartphones, even the best of them, tend to lack altogether).

i don't see the sense in getting a zv 1, the rx100 does everything it does better than it, unless you're into videoing yourself, which, unless you're using the footage for something terribly important, a decent smartphone can suffice for.

Click to expand...

That's valid point about the zv-1. It was on the list because it was cheaper and small but the RX100 does seem to make more sense.

I see what you're saying about the Fuji being better in that regard but as nice as the larger sensor is the lack of adjustable focal length on the lens is kind of limiting. I guess I could just crop anything after the fact.

Though that does make me ask what is holding the M200 back from taking photos on the level of the Fuji if the sensor is the same size. Is the sensor not as good? If it's the lens can't I throw a better lens on it or is that kind of like polishing the wheels on a rust bucket?

Click to expand...

yes, the fuji sensor is better, but that's no the main issue, the m200 is apart of a system bleeding to death, and if you'll pop on a lens to put it on par with the fuji's optical quality, you'll be getting a far larger package that's sort of out of balance.

if the zoom is a deal breaker for you... i don't know...

i know this is sort of a different option, but maybe do consider a canon rp with the rf 50 1.8, then you have the option to add a zoom when you want that, you'll get the best of both worlds in a package that can become quite portable when needed, just an idea...

yerach said:

yes, the fuji sensor is better, but that's no the main issue, the m200 is apart of a system bleeding to death, and if you'll pop on a lens to put it on par with the fuji's optical quality, you'll be getting a far larger package that's sort of out of balance.

if the zoom is a deal breaker for you... i don't know...

i know this is sort of a different option, but maybe do consider a canon rp with the rf 50 1.8, then you have the option to add a zoom when you want that, you'll get the best of both worlds in a package that can become quite portable when needed, just an idea...

Click to expand...

That canon RP is much larger than the Sony NEX-6 I never carrier because it was inconvenient so that's going to be a no go for me even if it is relatively small for the size.

I don't even need a massive amount of zoom just a bit. If there was a similar option the to X100v that lens with a bit of zoom I'd go for it.

I know I can edit after the fact and crop if needed but it's just much easier to do in the moment if it's an option. Maybe I'm doing it wrong though.

This is why ever few years I think about getting a camera I end up not; there are always frustrating compromises with little in my sweet spot.

mrozowjj said:

yerach said:

yes, the fuji sensor is better, but that's no the main issue, the m200 is apart of a system bleeding to death, and if you'll pop on a lens to put it on par with the fuji's optical quality, you'll be getting a far larger package that's sort of out of balance.

if the zoom is a deal breaker for you... i don't know...

i know this is sort of a different option, but maybe do consider a canon rp with the rf 50 1.8, then you have the option to add a zoom when you want that, you'll get the best of both worlds in a package that can become quite portable when needed, just an idea...

Click to expand...

That canon RP is much larger than the Sony NEX-6 I never carrier because it was inconvenient so that's going to be a no go for me even if it is relatively small for the size.

Click to expand...

true...

mrozowjj said:

I don't even need a massive amount of zoom just a bit. If there was a similar option the to X100v that lens with a bit of zoom I'd go for it.

Click to expand...

maybe canon g1x iii... although, then why not go for the m200?...

mrozowjj said:

I know I can edit after the fact and crop if needed but it's just much easier to do in the moment if it's an option. Maybe I'm doing it wrong though.

Click to expand...

you're perfectly right, cropping into 24mp isn't a disaster but it isn't a workflow either.

mrozowjj said:

This is why ever few years I think about getting a camera I end up not; there are always frustrating compromises with little in my sweet spot.

Click to expand...

have you peeked at your exifs to see what focal lengths you use most? if you haven't, you should, that way you'll know for sure if the fuji's prime is a dealbreaker (if you see that more than say 65% of your shots are shot at that 20-30mm range you'll be fine).

Ricoh GR III, equal or better picture quality compared to the Fuji X100V, smaller, cheaper and has IBIS. I don't write this to insinuate that the Fuji is overpriced - the Fuji has other attributes that justify the price. I couldn't decide between the two and own both.

When Zoom is wanted, the Fuji XE-4 is very similar to the X100V, cheaper and offers interchangeable lenses.

RX100 vii does it for me (though I don't do much low light shooting)

The RX100 vi would probably have done as well, since I don't do much video

mrozowjj said:

yerach said:

yes, the fuji sensor is better, but that's no the main issue, the m200 is apart of a system bleeding to death, and if you'll pop on a lens to put it on par with the fuji's optical quality, you'll be getting a far larger package that's sort of out of balance.

if the zoom is a deal breaker for you... i don't know...

i know this is sort of a different option, but maybe do consider a canon rp with the rf 50 1.8, then you have the option to add a zoom when you want that, you'll get the best of both worlds in a package that can become quite portable when needed, just an idea...

Click to expand...

That canon RP is much larger than the Sony NEX-6 I never carrier because it was inconvenient so that's going to be a no go for me even if it is relatively small for the size.

I don't even need a massive amount of zoom just a bit. If there was a similar option the to X100v that lens with a bit of zoom I'd go for it.

I know I can edit after the fact and crop if needed but it's just much easier to do in the moment if it's an option. Maybe I'm doing it wrong though.

This is why ever few years I think about getting a camera I end up not; there are always frustrating compromises with little in my sweet spot.

Click to expand...

by the sounds of it, i think you would be better of with a phone..i think camera advantages become to slim if you don't have at least APS-c and F2..if an RP and 50mm F1.8 is to big for you i would not bother

Camara phons have got pritty good and you can get RAW apps

davev8 said:

mrozowjj said:

yerach said:

yes, the fuji sensor is better, but that's no the main issue, the m200 is apart of a system bleeding to death, and if you'll pop on a lens to put it on par with the fuji's optical quality, you'll be getting a far larger package that's sort of out of balance.

if the zoom is a deal breaker for you... i don't know...

i know this is sort of a different option, but maybe do consider a canon rp with the rf 50 1.8, then you have the option to add a zoom when you want that, you'll get the best of both worlds in a package that can become quite portable when needed, just an idea...

Click to expand...

That canon RP is much larger than the Sony NEX-6 I never carrier because it was inconvenient so that's going to be a no go for me even if it is relatively small for the size.

I don't even need a massive amount of zoom just a bit. If there was a similar option the to X100v that lens with a bit of zoom I'd go for it.

I know I can edit after the fact and crop if needed but it's just much easier to do in the moment if it's an option. Maybe I'm doing it wrong though.

This is why ever few years I think about getting a camera I end up not; there are always frustrating compromises with little in my sweet spot.

Click to expand...

by the sounds of it, i think you would be better of with a phone..i think camera advantages become to slim if you don't have at least APS-c and F2..if an RP and 50mm F1.8 is to big for you i would not bother

Camara phons have got pritty good and you can get RAW apps

Click to expand...

camera phones are good (some of them...), but no match for even 1 inch sensor cameras (again some of them...), if someone is privileged enough to not mind carrying a camera around these days, he should see an advantage using it, even if it's not a massive pro camera...

DirkPeh said:

Ricoh GR III, equal or better picture quality compared to the Fuji X100V, smaller, cheaper and has IBIS. I don't write this to insinuate that the Fuji is overpriced - the Fuji has other attributes that justify the price. I couldn't decide between the two and own both.

Click to expand...

+1 that's also a good option!

but the fuji just feels like the real deal! i'd take it over the ricoh anyday.

DirkPeh said:

When Zoom is wanted, the Fuji XE-4 is very similar to the X100V, cheaper and offers interchangeable lenses.

Click to expand...

the xe-4 is slightly larger even before you couple it with the large lenses (the OP says the nex and the rp are too big for them...).

Sigma fp or Sigma fp L

https://camerasize.com/compact/#833,825,ha,f

Full frame 24 or 60 MB camera

Very compact with the native Sigma 45mm lens

I think many of the micro four thirds cameras will compete well with the M200 on image quality. However the best of them are not so small and also not cheap.

For many users the image quality of tiny cameras like the old Nikon 1 series or the Pentax Q is actually plenty good enough - easily beating android or I-phone yet the bodies are smaller still. The best ratio depends on how highly you regard camera size & what IQ you require for your purposes - if you only post on facebook you don't need a camera that produces perfect A2 prints

allineedislight said:

Sigma fp or Sigma fp L

https://camerasize.com/compact/#833,825,ha,f

Full frame 24 or 60 MB camera

Very compact with the native Sigma 45mm lens

Click to expand...

ouch!

i waited to see when someone would fall on this one!

yes, they are ff, but that's pretty much it....

yerach said:

davev8 said:

mrozowjj said:

yerach said:

yes, the fuji sensor is better, but that's no the main issue, the m200 is apart of a system bleeding to death, and if you'll pop on a lens to put it on par with the fuji's optical quality, you'll be getting a far larger package that's sort of out of balance.

if the zoom is a deal breaker for you... i don't know...

i know this is sort of a different option, but maybe do consider a canon rp with the rf 50 1.8, then you have the option to add a zoom when you want that, you'll get the best of both worlds in a package that can become quite portable when needed, just an idea...

Click to expand...

That canon RP is much larger than the Sony NEX-6 I never carrier because it was inconvenient so that's going to be a no go for me even if it is relatively small for the size.

I don't even need a massive amount of zoom just a bit. If there was a similar option the to X100v that lens with a bit of zoom I'd go for it.

I know I can edit after the fact and crop if needed but it's just much easier to do in the moment if it's an option. Maybe I'm doing it wrong though.

This is why ever few years I think about getting a camera I end up not; there are always frustrating compromises with little in my sweet spot.

Click to expand...

by the sounds of it, i think you would be better of with a phone..i think camera advantages become to slim if you don't have at least APS-c and F2..if an RP and 50mm F1.8 is to big for you i would not bother

Camara phons have got pritty good and you can get RAW apps

Click to expand...

camera phones are good (some of them...), but no match for even 1 inch sensor cameras (again some of them...), if someone is privileged enough to not mind carrying a camera around these days, he should see an advantage using it, even if it's not a massive pro camera...

Click to expand...

i disagree,,my phone can be better than my R6 in low light..i was shocked when i take a photograph of a serial number plate on the side of a gearbox that had broken at work ..it was in a very dark place and could just fit the phone in and the flash did not trigger. thinking the flash was off and expecting a black or very grainy photo i was surprised to see i perfectly exposed and sharp photo with very good detail ...noway my R6 could have done that ..apparently the phone is taking many photos before and after pressing the shutter and staking them together

mrozowjj said:

I used to have a Sony NEX-6 which took great photos but I found myself not carrying it much because as small as it was it was still large enough to require needing a dedicated bag. I ended up giving it away to my mother.

Part of that is I'm a very occasional hobby photographer.

I'm planning some trips soon and thinking about getting another mirrorless and looking at the Canon EOS M200 it looks just about in terms of size and cost.

My question though is are the photos a large enough improvement over a good phone camera to justify it?

Second question: is there an alternative that is similar size that does much better in terms of photo quality?

Click to expand...

certainly an improvement for shooting longer distances --- sports or birds (with telephoto lens)