Hard To Compete on Price With The SL2

[fstopx2]

I saw a great deal on an SL2 posted yesterday - brand new SL2 with the 18-55 for $479.

Thats freaking amazing if you ask me. SL2 has the same sensor as the M's, the 80D and others.

How can anything really compete with a price like that. I wanted to buy one but by the time I saw it they were sold out.

This is why Canon is not going to abandon APS-C anytime soon with the new R. Canon will get you sucked into the mount and there you go.

 

[MikeJ9116]

I have been using the SL2 for over a year. It is an absolutely fantastic camera. It is small, lightweight and is just fun to use. Add to it the very good EF-S lenses to be had and it really is the most economical path to having a very capable kit regardless of brand, IMO. I think the M50 will eventually be the M version of the SL2 as its price drops in the future.

 

[Alexsfo]

I found M50 is better in every way and worth the extra cost. 22mm f2 pancake, excellent 11-22mm and finally outstanding 32mm f1.4 makes it a better choice than any Canon’s cropped dslr.

 

[DevilsCry]

I agree with Alexsfo. I had to choose between SL2 vs an M camera. I made choice based on the lenses I was gonna use.

15-45mm won over 18-55mm because of the extra 3mm at widest. The extra 10mm at end was not useful to me because the lens gets terribly slow soon after 20mm.

I mostly use the 22mm which is not only wider than the 24mm lens but is also a stop faster.

 

[justmeMN]

This is why Canon is not going to abandon APS-C anytime soon with the new R.

To compare "official USA prices":

Canon R with lens: $3399.00

Canon M50 with lens: $699.99

Canon M100 with lens: $449.99

 

[jwilliams]

I have one and love it. Along with the 10-18, 18-135 and 55-250 it is the best deal going in photography. That camera and 3 lenses for what they cost, beat anything out there in photography.

Also consider that you can get an SL2 (or any Canon APSC DSLR) and your lenses will work on a future R if you desire to upgrade. This is something that those shooting the M cameras cannot do.

 

[MikeJ9116]

I have one and love it. Along with the 10-18, 18-135 and 55-250 it is the best deal going in photography. That camera and 3 lenses for what they cost, beat anything out there in photography.

I have $1,000 into my SL2 kit and I have an effective range of 16-400mm along with the EF 50mm STM. Plus, it is lightweight and fits in a small bag.

Also consider that you can get an SL2 (or any Canon APSC DSLR) and your lenses will work on a future R if you desire to upgrade. This is something that those shooting the M cameras cannot do.

If we see a R APS-C camera in the future the EF-S lenses should work well on it.

 

[lumenite]

I agree with Alexsfo. I had to choose between SL2 vs an M camera. I made choice based on the lenses I was gonna use.

15-45mm won over 18-55mm because of the extra 3mm at widest. The extra 10mm at end was not useful to me because the lens gets terribly slow soon after 20mm.

I mostly use the 22mm which is not only wider than the 24mm lens but is also a stop faster.

Yep. Pricewise, sl2 is winner, but sizewise m is.

Moreover, regarding 22mm and 32mm, sl has no alternatives for them.

 

[Techvet]

I had a SL2 with the the 10-18, the 18-55, the 55-250 and the EF-S 24. I used it on a European vacation this summer and a trip out west to Moab Utah as well as family gatherings and general photography. This summer, I bought my daughter the M50 kit and was very attracted to the lighter weight and the tad smaller size of the M50. Plus the photos from the M50 were definitely more consistent than the SL2. So, I gave the SL2 kit to my nephew so he could start his photography hobby and went whole hog into the M series with my own M50 and now 6 of the 8 lenses. The SL2 was/is fantastic, although some of the functionality is crippled. For instance you can select simultaneous RAW and JPEG, but the only JPEG option is the L size. Then there are the limited focus points when using the viewfinder and the super small buffer. Nevertheless, I was perfectly happy with it until I met the M50. The value factor of the SL2 kit is awesome and I’d still recommend it to anyone.

 

[007peter]

I saw a great deal on an SL2 posted yesterday - brand new SL2 with the 18-55 for $479. Thats freaking amazing if you ask me. SL2 has the same sensor as the M's, the 80D and others.

Agree. You also get the fully articulating LCD screen + Ext Mic input + Dual CMOS AF as in 80D. SL2 is pratically a mini-80D for less money & less weight

How can anything really compete with a price like that. I wanted to buy one but by the time I saw it they were sold out.

You CANNOT COMPETE @that price. If I want a small Running Run Vlogging Setup. I can buy either the highly recommended

$899 Canon M50 (smallest dual cmos AF mirrorless with articulating LCD screen) or

$479 Canon SL2 (smallest dual cmos AF DSLR with articulating LCD screen) or

Its almost HALF OFF. While I prefer small sizes, I'm not an Idiot in recognizing the minimal size & weight increase for nearly 50% off the price tag.

Sadly. This also the MAIN reason why Canon EOS-M continue to be a Sale Failure in the USA. In other part of the world, there is NOT a huge disparity between a Canon SL2 vs Canon M50. America with its Canon Refurbish Equipment & Black Friday sales has destroy much of the market for canon's own APS-C EOS-M mirrorless.

Most American would not paid

• $400 premium for a slightly smaller M50 over SL2

Most American would rather

• save $400 buying a slightly Bigger & Heavier SL2

In this fatherland of Walmart & Costco, PRICE is everything, size is not even a consideration in people's mind, particularly when it comes to small SL2 vs smallest M50.

 

[istscott]

I saw a great deal on an SL2 posted yesterday - brand new SL2 with the 18-55 for $479.

Thats freaking amazing if you ask me. SL2 has the same sensor as the M's, the 80D and others.

I had the SL2 before getting into EF-M. It's certainly a versatile camera. The features on the video side of that camera were a big positive toward improving the quality of online videos I make. That said, the M50 is better in almost every way I can think of with photo and video. The only positive I see is the battery life of the SL2 compared to the M50.

With respect to the EOS R and people starting out, but have intention to get into RF (though don't currently have the cash I guess?)... the SL2 makes more sense of course.

 

[fstopx2]

People keep saying the M50 is better in every way. How? Other than the size of the camera what does the M50 do better than the SL2?

I want to understand because my M/M3 is not as good as an SL1 (which I should have bought instead of them).

 

[Dareshooter]

People keep saying the M50 is better in every way. How? Other than the size of the camera what does the M50 do better than the SL2?

M50 shoots at 10fps, has many many more AF points,white balance can be set in terms of Kelvin. You can choose to use C Raw and also set raw plus large,medium and small jpeg.That's all I can think of for now but having used both cameras plus the SL1 I can tell that IMHO the M50 a more well rounded camera and worth every penny of the asking price.

I want to understand because my M/M3 is not as good as an SL1 (which I should have bought instead of them).

 

[Ed P]

I saw a great deal on an SL2 posted yesterday - brand new SL2 with the 18-55 for $479. Thats freaking amazing if you ask me. SL2 has the same sensor as the M's, the 80D and others.

Agree. You also get the fully articulating LCD screen + Ext Mic input + Dual CMOS AF as in 80D. SL2 is pratically a mini-80D for less money & less weight

How can anything really compete with a price like that. I wanted to buy one but by the time I saw it they were sold out.

You CANNOT COMPETE @that price. If I want a small Running Run Vlogging Setup. I can buy either the highly recommended

$899 Canon M50 (smallest dual cmos AF mirrorless with articulating LCD screen) or

$479 Canon SL2 (smallest dual cmos AF DSLR with articulating LCD screen) or

Its almost HALF OFF. While I prefer small sizes, I'm not an Idiot in recognizing the minimal size & weight increase for nearly 50% off the price tag.

Sadly. This also the MAIN reason why Canon EOS-M continue to be a Sale Failure in the USA. In other part of the world, there is NOT a huge disparity between a Canon SL2 vs Canon M50. America with its Canon Refurbish Equipment & Black Friday sales has destroy much of the market for canon's own APS-C EOS-M mirrorless.

Most American would not paid

• $400 premium for a slightly smaller M50 over SL2

Most American would rather

• save $400 buying a slightly Bigger & Heavier SL2

In this fatherland of Walmart & Costco, PRICE is everything, size is not even a consideration in people's mind, particularly when it comes to small SL2 vs smallest M50.

Not quite...

Amazon U.S. prices as of this posting:

SL2 with 18-55 lens: $649

M50 with 15-45 lens: $699

 

[justmeMN]

For people who can tolerate the lack of a viewfinder, the price winner is the M100. On the Canon USA website, the M100 is $449.99 and the SL2 is $649.99. It's also the winner for people who want maximum compactness.

 

[Gesture]

All good points on both sides of the issue. But I hardly consider an entry level DSLR with kit lens at $479 a bargain.

 

[fstopx2]

For people who can tolerate the lack of a viewfinder, the price winner is the M100. On the Canon USA website, the M100 is $449.99 and the SL2 is $649.99. It's also the winner for people who want maximum compactness.

But neither one fits in your pocket like a smartphone.

 

[fstopx2]

All good points on both sides of the issue. But I hardly consider an entry level DSLR with kit lens at $479 a bargain.

Considering it has the same chip as the 80D I wouldnt call it entry level.

If you shot a picture with an 80D, SL2 and the M50 would you be able to tell the difference? I am betting the answer is no.

 

[MikeJ9116]

For people who can tolerate the lack of a viewfinder, the price winner is the M100. On the Canon USA website, the M100 is $449.99 and the SL2 is $649.99. It's also the winner for people who want maximum compactness.

I would agree that the M100 is the small form factor winner. It is the one M camera that keeps calling my name. It is a perfect match for the 22mm and 15-45mm lenses. As for an all around capable camera though, the SL2 is the winner between them and it can be found regularly on Canon's refurbished site under $500.

 

[plantdoc]

The SL2 would be a more useful camera if it included MFA. Without it you can not adjust focus errors without sending gear to Canon. On my SL1, 3 lenses will not focus accurately except in live view. I now use just the 2 lenses that will. I bought a 70d for MFA and can fine tune the problem lenses but it is a sometimes tedious task. On my M5, no problems at all because it's live view all the time. I wish there was a mirrorless version of SL2. No adapter, no M lenses, better ergonomics.

greg