Reading mode: Light Dark

M6ii in 2025?

Go to last post
It's a helluva camera.

but when MPB UK has it in stock, its probably around 600 pounds.

that kit lens is worth around 40, and the EVF? maybe 120?

my M6 II goes on every vacation

paired with the EF-M 32 or EF-M 22 lens its small and light and portable

the EF-m 55-200 or 18-150 give u very small and very good telephoto capability

https://flickr.com/photos/186162491@N07/albums/72177720306430498/
 
I love mine, and have had great success in my travels with it. I still run comparisons against other cameras out here in the forum comparison tools and find it holds up very well. Of course good lenses help a lot, and a variety is very useful also. The only down side is weight/size as compared to carrying something like my Pana FZ-1000. Trip to Greece this year, and Japan last year took the M6ii and lenses. Love the pancake for use in travels on a bus, quick and clear.
 
Canon R50 is not the same size class as the M6II and the R50V is inferior in a lot of ways.
 
nurf said:
Canon R50 is not the same size class as the M6II and the R50V is inferior in a lot of ways.
Click to expand...
For me, the M6ii and R50 (and Z50ii and A6700) are the same size category. Neither fits comfortably in any of my pockets (not even a jacket pocket when using a pancake prime), but both are easily carried in my favorite small camera bag that I use for travel.

The M200 is in a different size category because it is pocketable, but the M6ii is a "small bag" camera for me and at that point I have much better options within APS-C and even full-frame depending on which lenses I plan to use on a trip.
 
I have mine and love it, Canon still doesn't have a photography-focused flat top-style camera for RF mount, and the larger RF mount gives their compact cameras a larger profile anyway, so there will never be something quite as small as the M6 II.
 
OhdranSuzuki said:
Skux said:
I have mine and love it, Canon still doesn't have a photography-focused flat top-style camera for RF mount, and the larger RF mount gives their compact cameras a larger profile anyway, so there will never be something quite as small as the M6 II.
Click to expand...
Its too bad they ditched the line. I feel they never gave it a real chance
Click to expand...
It launched in 2012 and production ended in 2023. An 11 year run is not a real chance? There was even a time when the M50 was Canon's best selling camera. It had nothing to do with giving the system a chance and everything to do with Canon simplifying their lineup around one single mount for everything. If you want to blame anything, blame Canon for not making the EF-M mount just a couple millimeters larger so that it would have worked for full frame. Then the RF mount would have never been needed.
 
nnowak said:
OhdranSuzuki said:
Skux said:
I have mine and love it, Canon still doesn't have a photography-focused flat top-style camera for RF mount, and the larger RF mount gives their compact cameras a larger profile anyway, so there will never be something quite as small as the M6 II.
Click to expand...
Its too bad they ditched the line. I feel they never gave it a real chance
Click to expand...
It launched in 2012 and production ended in 2023. An 11 year run is not a real chance? There was even a time when the M50 was Canon's best selling camera. It had nothing to do with giving the system a chance and everything to do with Canon simplifying their lineup around one single mount for everything. If you want to blame anything, blame Canon for not making the EF-M mount just a couple millimeters larger so that it would have worked for full frame. Then the RF mount would have never been needed.
Click to expand...
A "real chance" would have existed, if Canon had offered the M5 ii and two or three bright zooms.

On the other hand, I really don't understand the problem with the "couple millimeters". This point must have been clear to the engineers from the beginning of the M.
Sony is able to use the same mount for FF and APS-C with a diameter of 46,1 mm, the M-mount has 47 mm.
 
Last edited:
rz64 said:
nnowak said:
OhdranSuzuki said:
Skux said:
I have mine and love it, Canon still doesn't have a photography-focused flat top-style camera for RF mount, and the larger RF mount gives their compact cameras a larger profile anyway, so there will never be something quite as small as the M6 II.
Click to expand...
Its too bad they ditched the line. I feel they never gave it a real chance
Click to expand...
It launched in 2012 and production ended in 2023. An 11 year run is not a real chance? There was even a time when the M50 was Canon's best selling camera. It had nothing to do with giving the system a chance and everything to do with Canon simplifying their lineup around one single mount for everything. If you want to blame anything, blame Canon for not making the EF-M mount just a couple millimeters larger so that it would have worked for full frame. Then the RF mount would have never been needed.
Click to expand...
A "real chance" would have existed, if Canon had offered the M5 ii and two or three bright zooms.

On the other hand, I really don't understand the problem with the "couple millimeters". This point must have been clear to the engineers from the beginning of the M.
Sony is able to use the same mount for FF and APS-C with a diameter of 46,1 mm, the M-mount has 47 mm.
Click to expand...
The positions of the electrical contacts are different; Sony's leave room for a 36×24mm sensor, Canon's do not.

The initial publicity for EOS M emphasised that it was seen as a supplementary small system to professional 36×24mm cameras, and the initial publicity for EOS R emphasized that the mount was optimised for FF sensors and that EF, EF-S EF-M and RF were parallel strands of a common system linked by perfect compatibility with EF lenses. Had Canon remembered the collapse of the FD lens market when they introduced the EF mount thirty years earlier they should have known better. Another thing they failed to take into account was the poor reputation that the Sony E mount had given to AF adapters and the thing they couldn't take into account was that Nikon's mount adapter didn't have the ability to connect to the AF mechanism of their first four generations of AF lenses, some of which were still available new at the time.

I was never interested in the M5 (too big and too expensive) and I don't think the combined sales of the M5 and M6 were that impressive so I can see why the Mark II of one of them was ditched.

Canon's only f/2.8 APS-C zoom was introduced in 2006, the year after the original 5D, so they obviously thought there would be a demand for the type of APS-C lens that people are still asking for. It wasn't discontinued until 2023, so it must have sold steadily enough to keep producing it, but not enough to inspire Canon to make any other fast APS-C zooms in EF-S, EF-M or RF-S mounts or to produce a Mark II version. The other reason for not producing fast EF-M zooms is that every Canon EF-M lens is 61mm diameter and the front elements would be too big for that.
 
rz64 said:
nnowak said:
OhdranSuzuki said:
Skux said:
I have mine and love it, Canon still doesn't have a photography-focused flat top-style camera for RF mount, and the larger RF mount gives their compact cameras a larger profile anyway, so there will never be something quite as small as the M6 II.
Click to expand...
Its too bad they ditched the line. I feel they never gave it a real chance
Click to expand...
It launched in 2012 and production ended in 2023. An 11 year run is not a real chance? There was even a time when the M50 was Canon's best selling camera. It had nothing to do with giving the system a chance and everything to do with Canon simplifying their lineup around one single mount for everything. If you want to blame anything, blame Canon for not making the EF-M mount just a couple millimeters larger so that it would have worked for full frame. Then the RF mount would have never been needed.
Click to expand...
A "real chance" would have existed, if Canon had offered the M5 ii and two or three bright zooms.
Click to expand...
Look at all of the other cameras available in the early days of mirrorless. With a few exceptions, smallest possible size was the overarching design goal. General performance on all of these mirrorless cameras was utter crap relative to even the cheapest DSLR, but they were selling based on "tiny". Canon came later to the mirrorless game and their answer to the miniscule Sony and m4/3 options was the M system. Bright zooms would have run counter to those initial smallest possible size design goals. This is especially true with Canon artificially restricting all EF-M lenses to a 61mm diameter.

Originally, Canon only saw mirrorless as a tiny camera niche. It wasn't until the success of Sony's full frame A7 series, and the resulting loss of market share, that it became clear that mirrorless could legitimately be used professionally. With the move to higher performance mirrorless cameras, Canon could have extended the capabilities of the M system with brighter lenses and a higher performance body, but it still would have only been a temporary solution as the EF-M mount is too small for full frame use. Canon instead focused their engineering efforts on rolling out the new R system.
rz64 said:
On the other hand, I really don't understand the problem with the "couple millimeters". This point must have been clear to the engineers from the beginning of the M.
Sony is able to use the same mount for FF and APS-C with a diameter of 46,1 mm, the M-mount has 47 mm.
Click to expand...
You need to look at the entire mount from both the camera side and the lens side. The lens flange tabs on E mount are smaller than EF-M lenses. Also, the electrical contact block on E mount is more compact than that of the EF-M mount. While the EF-M mount does have a slightly larger diameter, the actual clear area for the image sensor is a few millimeters smaller. The Sony E mount is already considered a bit too small and restrictive for full frame use. The EF-M mount would have been even worse. Maybe Canon could have barely made it work, but that would be far from ideal when you are standardizing on a single mount for the foreseeable future.

Basically, Canon reacted to growing sales of tiny mirrorless cameras with the M system, and again reacted to growing professional use of mirrorless cameras with the R system. The initial design choices of the M system made it next to impossible to adapt to the performance needs served by the R system.
 
Sittatunga said:
rz64 said:
nnowak said:
OhdranSuzuki said:
Skux said:
I have mine and love it, Canon still doesn't have a photography-focused flat top-style camera for RF mount, and the larger RF mount gives their compact cameras a larger profile anyway, so there will never be something quite as small as the M6 II.
Click to expand...
Its too bad they ditched the line. I feel they never gave it a real chance
Click to expand...
It launched in 2012 and production ended in 2023. An 11 year run is not a real chance? There was even a time when the M50 was Canon's best selling camera. It had nothing to do with giving the system a chance and everything to do with Canon simplifying their lineup around one single mount for everything. If you want to blame anything, blame Canon for not making the EF-M mount just a couple millimeters larger so that it would have worked for full frame. Then the RF mount would have never been needed.
Click to expand...
A "real chance" would have existed, if Canon had offered the M5 ii and two or three bright zooms.

On the other hand, I really don't understand the problem with the "couple millimeters". This point must have been clear to the engineers from the beginning of the M.
Sony is able to use the same mount for FF and APS-C with a diameter of 46,1 mm, the M-mount has 47 mm.
Click to expand...
I was never interested in the M5 (too big and too expensive) and I don't think the combined sales of the M5 and M6 were that impressive so I can see why the Mark II of one of them was ditched.
Click to expand...
The M5 outsold the original M6 by a considerable margin, but the M50 outsold both of them combined by a considerable margin. An M5 II with IBIS might have been successful, but Canon still has yet to produce a body that small with IBIS. Expending the engineering effort to launch an M5 II with IBIS in 2019 would be very hard to justify when they were planning to launch the R system in 2018.
 
PowerMike G5 said:
I still have my M6 Mark II and its my main travel/everyday camera.

I haven't found anything as capable and fun for me in the same size equivalent. I tried to move over to the R50/R8 but it felt noticeably different with the size increase. Plus there's nothing else that has the 3 direct camera body dials in this size. Its really such a fun camera to use when on trips.

And its image quality is so similar to the R7, yet quite pocketable with a lens like the 22mm.
Click to expand...
I use the 11-22 with IS

and the 32 f1.4

and my 100 L is my macro setup
 
Used a Sony A6700 a bit, but the lower resolution compared to the M6 II shows.

Of course the AF is a different level, but not without flaws: it detects a face, but then tells the AF to focus the nearest object in that area, which is bad for water droplets, dirty glass and other obstructions. I'm used that Canon actually also uses the depth to focus the face corretly, and not just tells the AF on a 2D plane where to focus.

Sony even has a fullframe camera at the size of a A6700 that is not much bigger than an M6 II, Canon how about a small R5 variant?

But yea I'm switching to Fuji E5 to get the higher resoution of the M6 II back, Fuji (and third party manufacturers that obviously don't do M Mount anymore) even have some nice APSC 1.2 lenses in the line up. You can get the equivalent of a 135mm 1.8 full frame in a much smaller package with Viltrox 75mm 1.2.
 
nurf said:
Used a Sony A6700 a bit, but the lower resolution compared to the M6 II shows.

Of course the AF is a different level, but not without flaws: it detects a face, but then tells the AF to focus the nearest object in that area, which is bad for water droplets, dirty glass and other obstructions. I'm used that Canon actually also uses the depth to focus the face corretly, and not just tells the AF on a 2D plane where to focus.

Sony even has a fullframe camera at the size of a A6700 that is not much bigger than an M6 II, Canon how about a small R5 variant?

But yea I'm switching to Fuji E5 to get the higher resoution of the M6 II back, Fuji (and third party manufacturers that obviously don't do M Mount anymore) even have some nice APSC 1.2 lenses in the line up. You can get the equivalent of a 135mm 1.8 full frame in a much smaller package with Viltrox 75mm 1.2.
Click to expand...
before dropping close to $3000 on combos, you should look into the complaints of the fuji - EXPENSIVE, not resolving 40 mpxl, cheap viewfinder, cheap back panel, subject detection behind the leaders, no 23 f2 pancake, etc

with a heavy 75 f1.2, X-T5 is same cost

I like their IBIS approach, but this is not FF

I saw a canon R5 refurb for $2200. I'd much rather have it, and the 135 f2
 
JohnNewman said:
Thank you all for your thoughts - some of which at at variance with each other :-) but that's all good as it's given me some different viewpoints.

I've come away with the thought that the M6ii is a really nice camera but I also have some minor concerns about spares and repairs. If it was still available new obviously I could judge on the camera alone.

I originally said "Compacts are obviously a good choice (Leica DL8, Sony RX100vii or lately the new Canon V1) but all have some drawbacks, especially the lack of EVF on the V1.

An alternative is the Canon R50 with a kit lens but I've also seen recently on Amazon a M6 Mark II + EF-M 15-45mm IS STM + EVF-DC2 Black for £982 (UK) in allegedly as new condition."

I'd add that I've also seen the likes of the Fuji X-T50 with 15-45 kit lens going new for £1249 which is a comparable size, arguably 'better' sensor and 'probably' similar lens which for less than £300 will likely be an improved long-term investment (if any cameras can be called investments).

I've got some health issues ongoing that means I'm putting off a purchase for a little while but hopefully these will get resolved in a month or so so I will bear the M6ii in mind as an option but will likely look at a good compact or a small newer MILC like the Fuji (or maybe even a top of market iPhone).

I appreciate the correspondence and interaction between DPR members such as yourselves which is the joy of forums such as these and wish everyone the very best,

Regards,

John
Click to expand...
I just recently bought the M6II along with the Sigma 16mm 1.4 and Canon 32 1.4 as a small/light travel and fun kit! I find it a great companion with my R6II and several large/heavy Sigma Art and other lenses (all that can also be used on the M6:).

I live in Atlanta and KEH (a great used camera retailer) is about 3 miles from me. So, was able to go in and look over their stock of used M6 MKII’s along with the two lenses. Very happy with the purchase. I traded in my M6 (Original) along with the 18-135 kit lens for what I paid for it several years ago. I kept my EF adapter and view finder from the old system. A great upgrade to my travel kit!

I might just add the 22mm pancake and call it done!
 
Last edited:
plantdoc said:
For the money and looking for a very capable compact camera, consider the OM 5 and the excellent Oly 12-45 f4 pro lens. May still be on sale or consider used. The m4/3 sensor gets a bad rap with FF fixations. Unless you’re making very big prints or shooting fast action in low light, you should be fine. Plus there is wide selection of lenses for every need.
greg
Click to expand...
Alternatively, in the M4/3 world, the OP could get a LUMIX G100 and 12-32mm lens new for less. And with enough money left over for a second lens (the Sigma 56mm is extremely good). It comes to mind because I was looking over some images from a couple of years ago yesterday and two I really liked came from exactly this combo.

At the other end of the scale in terms of sensor size, the OP could probably get a used (or in the US, Canon refurbished) Canon RP and 24-105mm STM lens for about $1,000. Small, light and great image quality. For an additional $250 or so you could add an RF 28mm f/2.8 lens to make a very compact setup. And it is still in the Canon product line, available new. So repair services will available for some time.

We are so fortunate to have so many good choices!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

A
X-E5 as a Canon M6II replacement?
Replies
5
Views
1K
jhunna
J
Dick Dastardly
Canon M3- bad, but good?
Replies
15
Views
7K
HaroldC3
HaroldC3
R
Regarding the M6 II
2 3 4
Replies
76
Views
1K
Digirame
D
R
  • User review User review
Light and fun
Replies
3
Views
2K
Sittatunga
S
R
Side notes...
2 3
Replies
57
Views
645
RLight
R

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top