M6 Mark 2 vs R7

nnowak wrote:

MAC wrote:

nnowak wrote:

MAC wrote:

nnowak wrote:

MAC wrote:

EDWARD ARTISTE wrote:

thunder storm wrote:

EDWARD ARTISTE wrote:

In my opinion, get the M50 mark ii. It has an upgraded eyeAF that is definitely better than the m62. Also the focus is just way more reliable. It's a really good small body to use and you get a flip out screen and evf. And it's cheaper.

I've been thinking about getting the M50II in stead of my M6II, but there's no minimum shutter speed, and less dynamic range. Less Megapixels isn't a huge problem for me, but less dynamic range is a downside.

You will not see a difference in dynamic range between these two cameras. Trust me I'm the ultimate pixel keeper that cares about the best image quality I can squeeze out of these sensors. There's no difference.

sorry,

there is a noticeable difference in dr

Less than a quarter of a stop difference at base ISO is not noticeable. Noticeable would be the almost two stop difference between the M6 II and the R5

I own 24 mpxl and 32.5 mpxl Canon technology

you don't

between the lower noise from the 32,5 mpxl and better dynamic range from the 32.5 mpxl, the better resolution from the 32,5 mpxl, the IQ is substantially better

I never want to go back to 24 mpxl

of course you settle for less

Fortunately, recognizing the meaningless 1/4 stop dynamic range difference in Bill's excellent chart that you linked to does not require any prerequisite camera ownership.

the combo of all three factors I mentioned adds up to be significant overall

Here's where it get's messy. Using the E-shutter on your M6 II reduces the dynamic range a bit. Depending on the situation, there is a good chance the M50 II is producing better dynamic range than the M6 II.

here is where people get confused and assume the way other cameras reduce bit depth in es so they can motor

I am not the one who is confused. Bit depth and dynamic range are not the same thing.

there is a correlation

Dynamic range is slightly reduced when using E-shutter due to how the sensor functions and is unrelated to 14 bit vs. 12 bit.

prove it

You could record 16 bit files and E-shutter would still show slightly reduced dynamic range.

prove it

is not true with the m6II that can't motor in es, so they didn't reduce bit depth of the files

I tested, and the file sizes are the essentially the same

RLight also looked into and found no difference in a prior thread

Just because you can't see a difference does not mean the difference does not exist.

ahh, you can't prove what you are saying

Your Canon 24MP sensor experience is only with Canon DSLRs. You have never experienced the 24MP sensor with the benefit of EF-M lenses. The T7i paired with the EF 35mm f/2.0 IS is not the same as the M50 II paired with the EF-M 32mm f/1.4

and the m 32 f1.4 paired with the m6II is not the same as the m32 f1.4 paired with the m50 II

https://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm#Canon%20EOS%20M50,Canon%20EOS%20M6%20Mark%20II

and with great lenses like the 32 f1.4 and 11-22, the IQ is better with the M6II

Over the last few weeks I've been taking the M50 for a spin for some landscape stuff. The files are pretty good. You know what files are better? The original M. I'm holding on to that one because the colors are just so much better. Unfortunately with the m62, you're not going to see a lot more detail either.

I'm just giving you raw information from what I've experienced in the last 2 years. I've been actively trying to replace the original m (that's how I got the m50, but then the m62 dropped in price) but it's been a headache mixed with lower image quality than expected and auto focus issues. I still wouldn't quite recommend using a M50 to shoot portraits, because the files have a kind of crunchy look to them... it is a fairly noisy sensor compared to the m62.

Regardless of which one you get, test it tested and tested to make sure it's working properly. I hope you don't have to go through what I went through.

Cheers and happy shooting.