How substantial is the image quality difference between M50 and M6 markii?

MAC wrote:

m100 wrote:

thunder storm wrote:

m100 wrote:

MAC wrote:

yikes, cut off bokeh with your f1.2/f1.4 lenses on A7IV?

yikes is right ! I did not know this.

Doing a bit more research MAC found for me the A7IV does come with full mechanical shutter, so no filters required.

Don't worry, I will find other downsides of the A7IV.

They put some Sony cameras on display at the local Best Buy but they are locked up in a display cabinet. The Canons are out in the open to play with.

I should ask for them to take a Sony out for me to try.

They are locked up at Best Buy. That is the only downside I can think of.

Storm owned the m50 and sold it. He owned the m6II and is selling it.

One kid has the M100, the other one has the M200. I'm also familiar with the 22mm f/2.0.

So he brings a tremendous number of experiences to the m forum to share his experiences and answer questions. I appreciate this and hope he visits from time to time to share his experiences.

Storm originally taught me about mirrorless and risk of cut off bokeh. I'm glad I could help him with cut off bokeh on his new camera by finding information he was needing. He'll be fine in FF, he doesn't mind the weight and costs, and the IQ and value is better in the 3rd party glass FF where he is going.

for me, my m32 f1.4 is my sharp wide open 50 fov f2.2 equivalent. I'll not get an RF 50 f1.8. I've had five nifty fifties over the past 20 years and I had to stop them down to f2.8 to be as sharp as my m32 f1.4 is at f1.4.

The 32mm has a nice character as well for such a small lens.

I use my 32 f1.4 for shallow dof and smooth bokeh.

32 F1.4 @ f1.4 on my m6II is the FF equivalent of 50 fov F2.2 on FF.

I don't really want F1.2 on FF which is so thin dof that one could more often miss getting both eyes in focus.

I'm upgrading from my 50mm f/1.4 Art. The character is so so, and I want more AF speed. To get stunning sharpness you'll have to be at f/2.0 or f/1.8.

for example, at 6 feet and f1.4, I have about 6 inches of dof

At that distance you generally shouldn't be at f/1.2 with that G-master. Note: you can shoot subjects at larger distances as well.

to get both eyes in focus with my spot focus technique on the eyes which is very accurate. And I get two extra stops of light with dxo PL6.

whereas, at f1.2, Storm would be relying on the continuous eye autofocus, to get both eyes in focus with only 3 inches of dof -- yikes,

I have some experience with stopping down. On my R5 AV-mode the starting point of the aperture value is f/2.0.  Personally I like to shoot a larger aperture lens stopped down a bit for rounder bokeh, so it's not always about the max aperture.

and add action to that, and not using dxo, that is the cut off light capability by not using the latest software technology also.

Not yet. The compressed RAW files are waiting for the noise reduction technology of 2050.   All I can do now is to get the best starting point as good as it gets now.

not to mention the $3K price differential

the bokeh of my 32 f1.4 is smooth and creamy enough for me to be the 50 fov for me

It's Canons best "50 mm", and I'm sick of that brand for not continuing aps-c in a sensible way.

But customers never learn. They will happily get the R10, think about lenses later on, locking themselves up in the third never complete Canon aps-c platform.  And pros don't care. They will shoot their L USM zooms with their top op the line full frame body.  And I love that 32mm for showing what could have been possible, but - for me - it's time to say goodbye now.