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

KEG wrote:

Scott Stoness wrote:

I'll try to quantify for you what "quite a bit better" means to me.

The casual photographer who doesn't crop much, uses jpg instead of RAW, doesn't use processing software like dxo photolab, uses mostly kit lenses, will likely not see much of a difference. The feature set and the IQ of the M50II might serve their needs.

Whereas I look for the combination of small IQ advantages, that when considered in total, make a difference to me. Here is a list of small advantages to consider:

1) The cropping power of the 32.5 MPXL sensor over the 24 MPXL sensor gives close to a 20% cropping advantage -- that is an IQ advantage to me that is important because I do a lot of artistic cropping of my images.

2) The RP is known to have about a 1 stop noise advantage at high iso over the m6II. You can study the links above. The M6II has about 1/2 stop advantage over the M50/M50II.

3) The M6II has a dynamic range advantage over the M50/M50II

4) With the M6II and f1.4 lenses @ f1.4 in direct sunlight, you can use the m6II's e-shutter and get ss of 1/16,000. Whereas, you'd have to use ss 1/4000 and use ND filters with M50 that would potentially degrade your IQ -- as well as being a pain to mess with.

5) Kit lenses will not show as much benefit because they will not fully resolve on the higher mpxl sensor -- whereas great lenses like the 32 f1.4 and 56 f1.4 more fully resolve on the higher mpxl sensor and show blazing sharpness. At high iso when you are dealing with noise -- you want blazing sharpness and you do not want to sharpen images because sharpening exasperates noise. So the combination of blazing sharp lenses without sharpening with post processing, use of dxo Photolab for class leading Noise Reduction that can give you 1 -2 stop advantage over other software, and the 1/2 stop advantage over the M50/M50II, this all adds up to a significant advantage to me.

YMMV, but for me, my m6II approaches my RP's FF IQ when I combine all of the above.

Happy shooting!

For me the M50, M5 vs M6v2 are:

same weight - but M62 has no viewfinder, so M5/M50 are better.

M62 is smaller because it has no viewfinder. So M62 is better.

M62 has 16% more ability to crop or print. So M62 is better.

M62 and M5 have C1,C2. M50 does not. This really matters to me because I use AEB a lot and it resets to AEB off with auto off. C1, C2 are worth a lot to me. So M62 and M5 are even but M50 is lessor.

I have the M5. I have debated trading up to M62 for the mpx. 16% difference is barely noticeable. But the C1,C2 are really useful. The size difference is notable but small. I keep stalling at the fact that most lens will not resolve the difference of 16%. The 11-22 and the fast primes will likely cause a difference. Unfortunately the only lens I would buy that is light and would cause a difference is the Laowa 9/2.8 for a walk about uwa. But at f8, for landscape, they are very close. I mostly want the M (5vs6ii) for small and light while hiking.

M6ii also has 14 fps and lightning fast focus system

.... and focus stacking.