Moving from Canon M system

MAC said:

thunder storm said:

MAC said:

Alastair Norcross said:

navinadvani said:

Fjzk said:

MAC said:

The Sigma 16 is also a fantastic lens, but maybe more for special occasions. It is larger and heavier than the other EF-M lenses. But it is a great lens especially for parties, family gatherings and environmental portraits. You have to decide for yourself if you need it.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

If I replace the EF-S 55-250 with an EF-M 55-250 and replace the EF 50/1.4 with the Sigma 56/1.4 then add a Canon 32/1.4, I'd end up with a kit that weighs about the same.

Canon M50 is 390 gms
Canon EF-M 11-22mm f/4-5.6 IS STM 220 gms
Canon EF-M 55-200mm f/4.5-6.3 IS STM 260 gms
Canon EF-M 22mm f/2.0 105 gms
Canon EF-M 15-45mm f/3.5-6.3 IS STM 130 gms
Canon EF-M 32mm f/1.4 STM 235 gms
Sigma 56mm f/1.4 DC DN 280gms

If I add a Sigma 16/1.4, I'd have to choose between carrying it or the 56 1/4 + 22/2.

MAC said:

MAC said:

But then comes the size and weight. The EF-M is so small and light and needs no adapter. Tough decision.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

I think the EF-M might be worth it if I am discarding the adapter altogether.

MAC said:

MAC said:

You are asking difficult questions.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

That's why we have experts like you.

MAC said:

MAC said:

I own the Sigma 16, the Canon 32 and the Sigma 56.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

This might be the best combination.

MAC said:

MAC said:

If you are not using the long end very much, I would replace the EF-S 55-250 with the EF-M 55-200 (or EF-M 18-150mm?).

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

I could replace the EF-M 15-45 and the EF-S 55-250 with the EF-M 18-150. I think 150mm might give me all the reach I need.

How does the 18-150 compare with the EF-M 15-45, EF-M 55-200 and EF-S 55-250?

MAC said:

MAC said:

And if you also replace the 50mm with the Sigma 56, you don't need to carry the adapter. Sorry, but I can't take the decisions for you.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

The idea is to avoid the adapter altogether.

MAC said:

For travel (with the M50) I would keep the 11-22, 22 and add the 18-150 and 56 1.4. Keep the 15-45 as backup (no significant resale value and very useful as ultra light standard zoom) and get rid of the rest.

Click to expand...

I am thinking: 11-22 + 22/2 + 32/1.4 + 56/1.4 + 18-150/f 3.5-6.3

Click to expand...

That’s the kit I take with my M6II when traveling.

Click to expand...

and it is a great travel kit if the body doesn't break and they don't discontinue m!

Click to expand...

Oh common, you will find a body on the used market, don't worry.

Click to expand...

maybe for some folks that is the case

I've always bought new

Click to expand...

MAC said:

I would only buy m6II

M6II is gone

when mine dies, I'm likely done with m

Click to expand...

thunder storm said:

MAC said:

thunder storm said:

MAC said:

Alastair Norcross said:

navinadvani said:

Fjzk said:

thunder storm said:

The Sigma 16 is also a fantastic lens, but maybe more for special occasions. It is larger and heavier than the other EF-M lenses. But it is a great lens especially for parties, family gatherings and environmental portraits. You have to decide for yourself if you need it.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

If I replace the EF-S 55-250 with an EF-M 55-250 and replace the EF 50/1.4 with the Sigma 56/1.4 then add a Canon 32/1.4, I'd end up with a kit that weighs about the same.

Canon M50 is 390 gms
Canon EF-M 11-22mm f/4-5.6 IS STM 220 gms
Canon EF-M 55-200mm f/4.5-6.3 IS STM 260 gms
Canon EF-M 22mm f/2.0 105 gms
Canon EF-M 15-45mm f/3.5-6.3 IS STM 130 gms
Canon EF-M 32mm f/1.4 STM 235 gms
Sigma 56mm f/1.4 DC DN 280gms

If I add a Sigma 16/1.4, I'd have to choose between carrying it or the 56 1/4 + 22/2.

thunder storm said:

thunder storm said:

But then comes the size and weight. The EF-M is so small and light and needs no adapter. Tough decision.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

I think the EF-M might be worth it if I am discarding the adapter altogether.

thunder storm said:

thunder storm said:

You are asking difficult questions.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

That's why we have experts like you.

thunder storm said:

thunder storm said:

I own the Sigma 16, the Canon 32 and the Sigma 56.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

This might be the best combination.

thunder storm said:

thunder storm said:

If you are not using the long end very much, I would replace the EF-S 55-250 with the EF-M 55-200 (or EF-M 18-150mm?).

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

I could replace the EF-M 15-45 and the EF-S 55-250 with the EF-M 18-150. I think 150mm might give me all the reach I need.

How does the 18-150 compare with the EF-M 15-45, EF-M 55-200 and EF-S 55-250?

thunder storm said:

thunder storm said:

And if you also replace the 50mm with the Sigma 56, you don't need to carry the adapter. Sorry, but I can't take the decisions for you.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

The idea is to avoid the adapter altogether.

thunder storm said:

For travel (with the M50) I would keep the 11-22, 22 and add the 18-150 and 56 1.4. Keep the 15-45 as backup (no significant resale value and very useful as ultra light standard zoom) and get rid of the rest.

Click to expand...

I am thinking: 11-22 + 22/2 + 32/1.4 + 56/1.4 + 18-150/f 3.5-6.3

Click to expand...

That’s the kit I take with my M6II when traveling.

Click to expand...

and it is a great travel kit if the body doesn't break and they don't discontinue m!

Click to expand...

Oh common, you will find a body on the used market, don't worry.

Click to expand...

maybe for some folks that is the case

I've always bought new

Click to expand...

Why?

Click to expand...

thunder storm said:

thunder storm said:

I would only buy m6II

M6II is gone

when mine dies, I'm likely done with m

Click to expand...

RF 15-30mm f/4.5-6.3 IS stm? Does that float your boat?

Click to expand...

thunder storm said:

RF 50mm f/1.8 stm?

Click to expand...

thunder storm said:

Or rather an FE 50mm f/1.4 GM? ;-)

Click to expand...

Llop said:

Llop said:

Agreed. I just came back from a hike carrying: Canon M50, Canon EF-M 11-22mm f/4-5.6 IS STM, Canon EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 ISII STM, Canon EF-M 22mm f/2.0, Canon EF-M 15-45mm f/3.5-6.3 IS STM, Canon EF 50mm F1.4 + Canon EF-EFM adapter.

The total weight of this kit was 1.6kg and it was just about comfortable.

Click to expand...

Honest question, do you really need to carry for a hike 5 different lenses? If I were in that situation I would probably spend more time thinking on what lens to use and keep swapping them instead of enjoying the scenery and capturing photos with whichever focal lens I had on the camera. Sometimes simplicity is better.

Click to expand...

MAC said:

Alastair Norcross said:

navinadvani said:

Fjzk said:

MAC said:

The Sigma 16 is also a fantastic lens, but maybe more for special occasions. It is larger and heavier than the other EF-M lenses. But it is a great lens especially for parties, family gatherings and environmental portraits. You have to decide for yourself if you need it.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

If I replace the EF-S 55-250 with an EF-M 55-250 and replace the EF 50/1.4 with the Sigma 56/1.4 then add a Canon 32/1.4, I'd end up with a kit that weighs about the same.

Canon M50 is 390 gms
Canon EF-M 11-22mm f/4-5.6 IS STM 220 gms
Canon EF-M 55-200mm f/4.5-6.3 IS STM 260 gms
Canon EF-M 22mm f/2.0 105 gms
Canon EF-M 15-45mm f/3.5-6.3 IS STM 130 gms
Canon EF-M 32mm f/1.4 STM 235 gms
Sigma 56mm f/1.4 DC DN 280gms

If I add a Sigma 16/1.4, I'd have to choose between carrying it or the 56 1/4 + 22/2.

MAC said:

MAC said:

But then comes the size and weight. The EF-M is so small and light and needs no adapter. Tough decision.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

I think the EF-M might be worth it if I am discarding the adapter altogether.

MAC said:

MAC said:

You are asking difficult questions.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

That's why we have experts like you.

MAC said:

MAC said:

I own the Sigma 16, the Canon 32 and the Sigma 56.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

This might be the best combination.

MAC said:

MAC said:

If you are not using the long end very much, I would replace the EF-S 55-250 with the EF-M 55-200 (or EF-M 18-150mm?).

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

I could replace the EF-M 15-45 and the EF-S 55-250 with the EF-M 18-150. I think 150mm might give me all the reach I need.

How does the 18-150 compare with the EF-M 15-45, EF-M 55-200 and EF-S 55-250?

MAC said:

MAC said:

And if you also replace the 50mm with the Sigma 56, you don't need to carry the adapter. Sorry, but I can't take the decisions for you.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

The idea is to avoid the adapter altogether.

MAC said:

For travel (with the M50) I would keep the 11-22, 22 and add the 18-150 and 56 1.4. Keep the 15-45 as backup (no significant resale value and very useful as ultra light standard zoom) and get rid of the rest.

Click to expand...

I am thinking: 11-22 + 22/2 + 32/1.4 + 56/1.4 + 18-150/f 3.5-6.3

Click to expand...

That’s the kit I take with my M6II when traveling.

Click to expand...

and it is a great travel kit if the body doesn't break and they don't discontinue m!

Click to expand...

MAC said:

but you also should provide full disclosure with your RF FF stuff for other non travel applications

Click to expand...

MAC said:

for me, the FF R8 will enter back into both travel and other applications

Click to expand...

thunder storm said:

MAC said:

thunder storm said:

MAC said:

Alastair Norcross said:

navinadvani said:

Fjzk said:

thunder storm said:

The Sigma 16 is also a fantastic lens, but maybe more for special occasions. It is larger and heavier than the other EF-M lenses. But it is a great lens especially for parties, family gatherings and environmental portraits. You have to decide for yourself if you need it.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

If I replace the EF-S 55-250 with an EF-M 55-250 and replace the EF 50/1.4 with the Sigma 56/1.4 then add a Canon 32/1.4, I'd end up with a kit that weighs about the same.

Canon M50 is 390 gms
Canon EF-M 11-22mm f/4-5.6 IS STM 220 gms
Canon EF-M 55-200mm f/4.5-6.3 IS STM 260 gms
Canon EF-M 22mm f/2.0 105 gms
Canon EF-M 15-45mm f/3.5-6.3 IS STM 130 gms
Canon EF-M 32mm f/1.4 STM 235 gms
Sigma 56mm f/1.4 DC DN 280gms

If I add a Sigma 16/1.4, I'd have to choose between carrying it or the 56 1/4 + 22/2.

thunder storm said:

thunder storm said:

But then comes the size and weight. The EF-M is so small and light and needs no adapter. Tough decision.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

I think the EF-M might be worth it if I am discarding the adapter altogether.

thunder storm said:

thunder storm said:

You are asking difficult questions.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

That's why we have experts like you.

thunder storm said:

thunder storm said:

I own the Sigma 16, the Canon 32 and the Sigma 56.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

This might be the best combination.

thunder storm said:

thunder storm said:

If you are not using the long end very much, I would replace the EF-S 55-250 with the EF-M 55-200 (or EF-M 18-150mm?).

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

I could replace the EF-M 15-45 and the EF-S 55-250 with the EF-M 18-150. I think 150mm might give me all the reach I need.

How does the 18-150 compare with the EF-M 15-45, EF-M 55-200 and EF-S 55-250?

thunder storm said:

thunder storm said:

And if you also replace the 50mm with the Sigma 56, you don't need to carry the adapter. Sorry, but I can't take the decisions for you.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

The idea is to avoid the adapter altogether.

thunder storm said:

For travel (with the M50) I would keep the 11-22, 22 and add the 18-150 and 56 1.4. Keep the 15-45 as backup (no significant resale value and very useful as ultra light standard zoom) and get rid of the rest.

Click to expand...

I am thinking: 11-22 + 22/2 + 32/1.4 + 56/1.4 + 18-150/f 3.5-6.3

Click to expand...

That’s the kit I take with my M6II when traveling.

Click to expand...

and it is a great travel kit if the body doesn't break and they don't discontinue m!

Click to expand...

Oh common, you will find a body on the used market, don't worry.

Click to expand...

maybe for some folks that is the case

I've always bought new

Click to expand...

Why?

thunder storm said:

I would only buy m6II

M6II is gone

when mine dies, I'm likely done with m

Click to expand...

RF 15-30mm f/4.5-6.3 IS stm? Does that float your boat?

RF 50mm f/1.8 stm? Or rather an FE 50mm f/1.4 GM? ;-)

Click to expand...

JRET said:

navinadvani said:

JRET said:

JRET said:

Add the 32/1.4, 56/1.4, and 18-150 to your travel kit along with the 11-22, 22/2. If your 55-250 still fits, carry it also - it will be especially helpful when you want that extra 100mm on the long end. side note: if your 55-250 is a good copy, keep it and don't worry about the EF-M 55-200. This kit of 3 primes & 3 zooms is quite good and should serve you quite well for a number of years.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Is there any particular need to have 2 lenses covering 55-150?

3 primes (22/2, 32/1.4 and 56/1.4) + 2 zooms (11-22 and 18-150) should cover 99% of my need.

Click to expand...

Not really. The main reason to keep the 55-250 is for the additional reach. For travel the 18-150 is perfect, at least for me. My 18-150 is better than the 15-45 & 55-200 (both sold)

3 primes & 2 zooms will serve you well - great kit.

Click to expand...

MAC said:

navinadvani said:

MAC said:

if it were me, I wouldn't invest in m without a second body, like a m6II

if it were me, I'd migrate toward a new travel kit: M50, 11-22, 32, R8 + Rf 24-105 (non L)

My travel kit will be M6II, 11-22, 32, R8 + RF 24-105 F4L

Click to expand...

Why have 2 systems?

I was thinking of the M50 + 11-22 + 22/2 + 32/1.4 + 56/1.4 + 18-150 (all EFM). Total weight 1.53 kgs.

I'd get the 400gm 16/1.4 for the wide end if I had the weight to spare.

Click to expand...

you then have all that glass invested in one body - think about what happens if you lose that body

Click to expand...

MAC said:

and your m50 can't do this

Stunning AF demo of the R8 by the Fro: Canon EOS R Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review (dpreview.com)

Click to expand...

navinadvani said:

JRET said:

navinadvani said:

JRET said:

navinadvani said:

Add the 32/1.4, 56/1.4, and 18-150 to your travel kit along with the 11-22, 22/2. If your 55-250 still fits, carry it also - it will be especially helpful when you want that extra 100mm on the long end. side note: if your 55-250 is a good copy, keep it and don't worry about the EF-M 55-200. This kit of 3 primes & 3 zooms is quite good and should serve you quite well for a number of years.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Is there any particular need to have 2 lenses covering 55-150?

3 primes (22/2, 32/1.4 and 56/1.4) + 2 zooms (11-22 and 18-150) should cover 99% of my need.

Click to expand...

Not really. The main reason to keep the 55-250 is for the additional reach. For travel the 18-150 is perfect, at least for me. My 18-150 is better than the 15-45 & 55-200 (both sold)

3 primes & 2 zooms will serve you well - great kit.

Click to expand...

Thanks. I am quite surprised that a 18-150 can outperform a 55-200.

Click to expand...

Fjzk on VERO™

Nature and Travel Photography #snap_community_member

vero.co

navinadvani said:

MAC said:

navinadvani said:

MAC said:

if it were me, I wouldn't invest in m without a second body, like a m6II

if it were me, I'd migrate toward a new travel kit: M50, 11-22, 32, R8 + Rf 24-105 (non L)

My travel kit will be M6II, 11-22, 32, R8 + RF 24-105 F4L

Click to expand...

Why have 2 systems?

I was thinking of the M50 + 11-22 + 22/2 + 32/1.4 + 56/1.4 + 18-150 (all EFM). Total weight 1.53 kgs.

I'd get the 400gm 16/1.4 for the wide end if I had the weight to spare.

Click to expand...

you then have all that glass invested in one body - think about what happens if you lose that body

Click to expand...

I buy another body or get a spare now, while they are still available.

navinadvani said:

and your m50 can't do this

Stunning AF demo of the R8 by the Fro: Canon EOS R Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review (dpreview.com)

Click to expand...

Which lenses is he using here?

Of course, you cannot compare a FF equipped with fast, expensive, heavy glass with a much poorer APSC camera. The question is do I need this level of performance?

Besides if I move to the RF system, I'd have to either shell out for expensive RF glass or adapt old and heavy EF glass. RF-S is unlikely to get too much attention from Canon.

I don't shoot sports. I rarely shoot in very low light. Most of my shooting is done on holidays visiting museums, hiking, indoor dinner parties, etc. For this use, a few fast primes (24/2, 50/2, and 80/1.4 in FF equivalent) and light zooms (16-35/4.5, 28-80/4.5, and 70-300/5.6 in FF equivalent) are adequate.

Click to expand...

Fjzk said:

navinadvani said:

JRET said:

navinadvani said:

JRET said:

Fjzk said:

Add the 32/1.4, 56/1.4, and 18-150 to your travel kit along with the 11-22, 22/2. If your 55-250 still fits, carry it also - it will be especially helpful when you want that extra 100mm on the long end. side note: if your 55-250 is a good copy, keep it and don't worry about the EF-M 55-200. This kit of 3 primes & 3 zooms is quite good and should serve you quite well for a number of years.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Is there any particular need to have 2 lenses covering 55-150?

3 primes (22/2, 32/1.4 and 56/1.4) + 2 zooms (11-22 and 18-150) should cover 99% of my need.

Click to expand...

Not really. The main reason to keep the 55-250 is for the additional reach. For travel the 18-150 is perfect, at least for me. My 18-150 is better than the 15-45 & 55-200 (both sold)

3 primes & 2 zooms will serve you well - great kit.

Click to expand...

Thanks. I am quite surprised that a 18-150 can outperform a 55-200.

Click to expand...

I also highly recommend the 18-150…never felt the need to buy the 55-200 as 240mm (ff equiv) can handle most of my landscape and travel photography needs. In my own case the jump from 150 to 200 does not justify carrying another lens. What I did was to buy the 70-300 USM II (excellent lens) which I use on both the M and the R cameras with adapters.
I think the reason why Canon launched a 55-210 in the RF-S mount, instead of a 55-250, was to protect sales of the 100-400 to the crop crowd who needs more reach. So they want hobbyists on a budget to have a kit like R10 plus 11-22 (fingers crossed), 18-150 and 100-400…or, for more entry level and lightweight, R10/R50 plus 18-45 and 55-210.

https://vero.co/fjzk

Click to expand...

1. I have the 15-45, which has no resale value.

MAC said:

navinadvani said:

MAC said:

navinadvani said:

MAC said:

if it were me, I wouldn't invest in m without a second body, like a m6II

if it were me, I'd migrate toward a new travel kit: M50, 11-22, 32, R8 + Rf 24-105 (non L)

My travel kit will be M6II, 11-22, 32, R8 + RF 24-105 F4L

Click to expand...

Why have 2 systems?

I was thinking of the M50 + 11-22 + 22/2 + 32/1.4 + 56/1.4 + 18-150 (all EFM). Total weight 1.53 kgs.

I'd get the 400gm 16/1.4 for the wide end if I had the weight to spare.

Click to expand...

you then have all that glass invested in one body - think about what happens if you lose that body

Click to expand...

I buy another body or get a spare now, while they are still available.

MAC said:

and your m50 can't do this

Stunning AF demo of the R8 by the Fro: Canon EOS R Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review (dpreview.com)

Click to expand...

Which lenses is he using here?

Of course, you cannot compare a FF equipped with fast, expensive, heavy glass with a much poorer APSC camera. The question is do I need this level of performance?

Besides if I move to the RF system, I'd have to either shell out for expensive RF glass or adapt old and heavy EF glass. RF-S is unlikely to get too much attention from Canon.

I don't shoot sports. I rarely shoot in very low light. Most of my shooting is done on holidays visiting museums, hiking, indoor dinner parties, etc. For this use, a few fast primes (24/2, 50/2, and 80/1.4 in FF equivalent) and light zooms (16-35/4.5, 28-80/4.5, and 70-300/5.6 in FF equivalent) are adequate.

Click to expand...

then yeah, go with your m plan and at some point get a second m body to keep you sustained for the next decade

that said, watch that video again, it doesn't just apply to action, it changes the way folks will shoot stills too - notice the tap, tap, tap on his screen changes from eye to eye

if this is not for you, and the R8 + RF 35 f1.8 IS and the RF 85 F2 IS is light and not for you, then stay put, you are meeting your needs.

But for me, whether action or stills, I'll be taking the paradigm leap and shooting in continuous AF subject tracking with the R8 most of the time, whether it be stills, or action

The biggest thing that bugs me about m is no bright zooms

Click to expand...

navinadvani said:

MAC said:

navinadvani said:

MAC said:

navinadvani said:

MAC said:

if it were me, I wouldn't invest in m without a second body, like a m6II

if it were me, I'd migrate toward a new travel kit: M50, 11-22, 32, R8 + Rf 24-105 (non L)

My travel kit will be M6II, 11-22, 32, R8 + RF 24-105 F4L

Click to expand...

Why have 2 systems?

I was thinking of the M50 + 11-22 + 22/2 + 32/1.4 + 56/1.4 + 18-150 (all EFM). Total weight 1.53 kgs.

I'd get the 400gm 16/1.4 for the wide end if I had the weight to spare.

Click to expand...

you then have all that glass invested in one body - think about what happens if you lose that body

Click to expand...

I buy another body or get a spare now, while they are still available.

navinadvani said:

and your m50 can't do this

Stunning AF demo of the R8 by the Fro: Canon EOS R Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review (dpreview.com)

Click to expand...

Which lenses is he using here?

Of course, you cannot compare a FF equipped with fast, expensive, heavy glass with a much poorer APSC camera. The question is do I need this level of performance?

Besides if I move to the RF system, I'd have to either shell out for expensive RF glass or adapt old and heavy EF glass. RF-S is unlikely to get too much attention from Canon.

I don't shoot sports. I rarely shoot in very low light. Most of my shooting is done on holidays visiting museums, hiking, indoor dinner parties, etc. For this use, a few fast primes (24/2, 50/2, and 80/1.4 in FF equivalent) and light zooms (16-35/4.5, 28-80/4.5, and 70-300/5.6 in FF equivalent) are adequate.

Click to expand...

then yeah, go with your m plan and at some point get a second m body to keep you sustained for the next decade

that said, watch that video again, it doesn't just apply to action, it changes the way folks will shoot stills too - notice the tap, tap, tap on his screen changes from eye to eye

if this is not for you, and the R8 + RF 35 f1.8 IS and the RF 85 F2 IS is light and not for you, then stay put, you are meeting your needs.

But for me, whether action or stills, I'll be taking the paradigm leap and shooting in continuous AF subject tracking with the R8 most of the time, whether it be stills, or action

The biggest thing that bugs me about m is no bright zooms

Click to expand...

There aren't any bright zooms for RF-S either. The bright RF (FF) lenses would be heavy by design.

Click to expand...

navinadvani said:

The best camera is one that makes itself conducive to carrying. If you have to think about carrying a camera, there might be occasions when you won't.

Click to expand...

MAC said:

and we'll have to see what is available when my m6II breaks - never say never on a A7CII + 50 f1.4 gm if canon doesn't get it's act together

Click to expand...

thunder storm said:

MAC said:

and we'll have to see what is available when my m6II breaks - never say never on a A7CII + 50 f1.4 gm if canon doesn't get it's act together

Click to expand...

Most likely a huge step up in price. Most likely a huge step up in IQ as well.

Click to expand...

thunder storm said:

And most likely a step down in terms of value for money imo.

Click to expand...

navinadvani said:

MAC said:

navinadvani said:

MAC said:

navinadvani said:

MAC said:

if it were me, I wouldn't invest in m without a second body, like a m6II

if it were me, I'd migrate toward a new travel kit: M50, 11-22, 32, R8 + Rf 24-105 (non L)

My travel kit will be M6II, 11-22, 32, R8 + RF 24-105 F4L

Click to expand...

Why have 2 systems?

I was thinking of the M50 + 11-22 + 22/2 + 32/1.4 + 56/1.4 + 18-150 (all EFM). Total weight 1.53 kgs.

I'd get the 400gm 16/1.4 for the wide end if I had the weight to spare.

Click to expand...

you then have all that glass invested in one body - think about what happens if you lose that body

Click to expand...

I buy another body or get a spare now, while they are still available.

navinadvani said:

and your m50 can't do this

Stunning AF demo of the R8 by the Fro: Canon EOS R Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review (dpreview.com)

Click to expand...

Which lenses is he using here?

Of course, you cannot compare a FF equipped with fast, expensive, heavy glass with a much poorer APSC camera. The question is do I need this level of performance?

Besides if I move to the RF system, I'd have to either shell out for expensive RF glass or adapt old and heavy EF glass. RF-S is unlikely to get too much attention from Canon.

I don't shoot sports. I rarely shoot in very low light. Most of my shooting is done on holidays visiting museums, hiking, indoor dinner parties, etc. For this use, a few fast primes (24/2, 50/2, and 80/1.4 in FF equivalent) and light zooms (16-35/4.5, 28-80/4.5, and 70-300/5.6 in FF equivalent) are adequate.

Click to expand...

then yeah, go with your m plan and at some point get a second m body to keep you sustained for the next decade

that said, watch that video again, it doesn't just apply to action, it changes the way folks will shoot stills too - notice the tap, tap, tap on his screen changes from eye to eye

if this is not for you, and the R8 + RF 35 f1.8 IS and the RF 85 F2 IS is light and not for you, then stay put, you are meeting your needs.

But for me, whether action or stills, I'll be taking the paradigm leap and shooting in continuous AF subject tracking with the R8 most of the time, whether it be stills, or action

The biggest thing that bugs me about m is no bright zooms

Click to expand...

There aren't any bright zooms for RF-S either. The bright RF (FF) lenses would be heavy by design. The best camera is one that makes itself conducive to carrying. If you have to think about carrying a camera, there might be occasions when you won't.

Click to expand...

MAC said:

navinadvani said:

MAC said:

navinadvani said:

MAC said:

navinadvani said:

MAC said:

if it were me, I wouldn't invest in m without a second body, like a m6II

if it were me, I'd migrate toward a new travel kit: M50, 11-22, 32, R8 + Rf 24-105 (non L)

My travel kit will be M6II, 11-22, 32, R8 + RF 24-105 F4L

Click to expand...

Why have 2 systems?

I was thinking of the M50 + 11-22 + 22/2 + 32/1.4 + 56/1.4 + 18-150 (all EFM). Total weight 1.53 kgs.

I'd get the 400gm 16/1.4 for the wide end if I had the weight to spare.

Click to expand...

you then have all that glass invested in one body - think about what happens if you lose that body

Click to expand...

I buy another body or get a spare now, while they are still available.

MAC said:

and your m50 can't do this

Stunning AF demo of the R8 by the Fro: Canon EOS R Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review (dpreview.com)

Click to expand...

Which lenses is he using here?

Of course, you cannot compare a FF equipped with fast, expensive, heavy glass with a much poorer APSC camera. The question is do I need this level of performance?

Besides if I move to the RF system, I'd have to either shell out for expensive RF glass or adapt old and heavy EF glass. RF-S is unlikely to get too much attention from Canon.

I don't shoot sports. I rarely shoot in very low light. Most of my shooting is done on holidays visiting museums, hiking, indoor dinner parties, etc. For this use, a few fast primes (24/2, 50/2, and 80/1.4 in FF equivalent) and light zooms (16-35/4.5, 28-80/4.5, and 70-300/5.6 in FF equivalent) are adequate.

Click to expand...

then yeah, go with your m plan and at some point get a second m body to keep you sustained for the next decade

that said, watch that video again, it doesn't just apply to action, it changes the way folks will shoot stills too - notice the tap, tap, tap on his screen changes from eye to eye

if this is not for you, and the R8 + RF 35 f1.8 IS and the RF 85 F2 IS is light and not for you, then stay put, you are meeting your needs.

But for me, whether action or stills, I'll be taking the paradigm leap and shooting in continuous AF subject tracking with the R8 most of the time, whether it be stills, or action

The biggest thing that bugs me about m is no bright zooms

Click to expand...

There aren't any bright zooms for RF-S either. The bright RF (FF) lenses would be heavy by design. The best camera is one that makes itself conducive to carrying. If you have to think about carrying a camera, there might be occasions when you won't.

Click to expand...

this portrait setup has world class AF, has IS, has shallower dof control, and is less weight than your 1.4 Kg

R8 = 461 g

RF 35 f1.8 IS– 300 g

RF 85 F2 IS = 497 g

Total 1258 g

the RF 24-105 stm is just 391 g - your at 1.6 kg out the door

Click to expand...

navinadvani said:

Now that Canon has decided not to support the M system, I am considering moving from it.

The options are to move to Canon's R system or another company (Fuji / Sony).

The overall weight of the system is an essential consideration. My current M system (total weight of <1.4kg) includes the following:

Canon M50 (24MP) - 390 gms
Canon EF-M 22mm f/2.0 - 105gm
Canon EF-M 11-22mm f/4-5.6 IS STM - 220gms (my primary lens)
Canon EF-M 32mm f/1.4 STM - 235gms
Canon EF-M 15-45mm f/3.5-6.3 IS STM - 130gms
Canon EF-M 55-200mm f/4.5-6.3 IS STM - 260gms

I want the new system not to exceed 1.5kg (with 3 zoom lenses and 2 primes) and hopefully weigh less than my current system. Additionally, I prefer a body with an EVF (which almost eliminates the Sony ZVE10). Fuji does not have a lightweight lens like the Canon EF-M 11-22mm f/4-5.6 IS STM, Canon EF-S 10-18mm f/4.5-5.6 IS STM or even the Sony E 10-20mm F4 PZ G.

I also use a 50/1.4, which works as a portrait lens, but I don't carry this everywhere as it is very bulky and heavy with the EF to EFM adapter. I'd have to add a Fujifilm XF 50mm F2 R WR or a Sony FE 55mm F1.8 ZA to compensate for this lens.

Option 1: 1.5 kg

Canon EOS R50 - 375 gms
Canon RF 16mm F2.8 STM - 165 gms
Canon EF-S 10-18mm f/4.5-5.6 IS STM - 240 gms
Canon RF 35mm F1.8 IS STM Macro - 305 gms
Canon RF-S 18-45mm F4.5-6.3 IS STM - 130 gms
Canon RF-S 55-210mm F5.0-7.1 IS STM - 270 gms

Option 2: 1.4 kg but no EVF

Sony ZV-E10 - 343 gms
Sony E 15mm F1.4 G - 219 gms
Sony E 10-18mm F4 OSS - 225 gms
Sony E 35mm F1.8 OSS - 155 gms
Sony E 16-50mm F3.5-5.6 PZ OSS - 116 gms
Sony E 55-210mm F4.5-6.3 OSS - 345 gms

I could save 140 gms by replacing the 15/1.4 with the Sony E 16mm F2.8 Pancake (78 gms).

Option 3: 1.6kg, so over my 1.5kg threshold

Fujifilm X-T200 - 370 gms
Fujifilm XF 18mm F2 R - 116 gms
Fujifilm XF 10-24mm F4 R OIS - 385 gms
Fujifilm XF 35mm F1.4 R - 187 gms
Fujifilm XC 15-45mm F3.5-5.6 OIS PZ - 136 gms
Fujifilm XC 50-230mm F4.5-6.7 OIS - 375 gms

I could save about 100 gms by replacing the 35/1.4 with the XF 27mm f/2.8 Pancake.

Should I stick with Canon? If so, should I get the R50 or the R10 (which is a little bigger/heavier)? Or should I continue with my M system till it dies?

If I shift, I'd have the following (in addition to my above system) to offer as a trade-in. These items have not been used since 2019 but have been serviced by Canon annually (every May).

Canon 77D body

Canon EF 28mm f/1.8
Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS
Canon EF 24-105mm f/4 IS
Canon EF 100mm f/2
Canon EF-S 60mm f/2.8 Macro
Canon EF-S 18-55 4-5.6 IS STM
Canon EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5
Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS

If you think I should continue with the M system, what should I trade in the above 77D-based system for?

Thanks.

Click to expand...

navinadvani said:

JRET said:

navinadvani said:

JRET said:

navinadvani said:

Add the 32/1.4, 56/1.4, and 18-150 to your travel kit along with the 11-22, 22/2. If your 55-250 still fits, carry it also - it will be especially helpful when you want that extra 100mm on the long end. side note: if your 55-250 is a good copy, keep it and don't worry about the EF-M 55-200. This kit of 3 primes & 3 zooms is quite good and should serve you quite well for a number of years.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Is there any particular need to have 2 lenses covering 55-150?

3 primes (22/2, 32/1.4 and 56/1.4) + 2 zooms (11-22 and 18-150) should cover 99% of my need.

Click to expand...

Not really. The main reason to keep the 55-250 is for the additional reach. For travel the 18-150 is perfect, at least for me. My 18-150 is better than the 15-45 & 55-200 (both sold)

3 primes & 2 zooms will serve you well - great kit.

Click to expand...

Thanks. I am quite surprised that a 18-150 can outperform a 55-200.

Click to expand...