M6 Mark II: Very portable and capable

With the M6 Mark II Canon has taken the M series to another level of power and capability: Higher resolution, faster performance, and even better image quality than before.

Qualities of M6 I wrote about in my M6 review all apply to the Mark II as well. Beyond the M6 Canon has continued to reduce the performance and image quality gap with full frames: With the M3 or M6, when I felt I needed to generate the highest quality results I would reach for my full frame DSLR; but with the M6 Mark II, I don't.

To me the main reason to get an M series camera remains the small size; the Mark II is just a bit larger than the original M6 but still highly portable, and much easier to grab and take with you than say the 5DIV. I was initially excited about the Canon RP, thinking it would satisfy my "small camera" need, but in hand it is significantly larger than the M series.

I know some folks are disappointed in the lack of a built-in EVF on the M6 Mark II, but assuming that helps make the camera smaller, I'm fine with it. I have the original external DC1 which I occasionally use on sunny days, and enjoy the flexibility of having it be optional.

As far as performance, I've measured the M6 Mark II as capable of 21 shot bursts at 12 frames per second with an older CF card; with a newer Lexar UHS-II card I was able to get 14 frames/sec for 23 shots. On the M6 the best I saw was 17 shot burst at 9 frames/sec. These are with RAW shots; with JPEG you get much longer bursts, of course.

Some complain about lack of lenses for the M series. True, there aren't as many native EF-M lenses as say EF lenses, but there is a reasonable variety covering the 11 to 200mm range, including some highly capable ones, such as the Canon EF-M 32mm, 11-22mm, and the recently introduced Sigma primes. Of course all Canon EF and EF-S lenses are also available to use, with the EF-M adapter.

For instance the Tamron EF 150-600mm:

Full moon with the Tamron 150-600mm lens on the M6 Mark II, hand-held

Tamron also makes a smaller native EF-M lens which covers a practical 18-200mm range:

San Francisco from Sausalito on a foggy morning, Tamron EF-M 18-200mm at 189mm

Tamron EF-M 18-200mm at 42mm

Note that the Tamron 18-200mm, which I bought for the M3, did need firmware updates to work with both the M6 and the M6 Mark II. In both cases Tamron applied the fixes quickly; with my only out-of-pocket expense being the shipment out.

As mentioned above the Canon EF-M 32mm is a wonderful lens:

Spider with the EF-M 32mm. Prior to the M6 Mark II, I would have reached for the 5DIV for this shot.

Despite the increase in resolution (from M6's 24MP to 32MP, highest for an APS-C camera I believe), The M6 Mark II is very good in low light:

Black cat in a dimly lit room? No problem for the M6 Mark II with the EF-M 32mm attached. ISO 6400.

And another cat, as a part of a series of shots with the EF-M 32mm at ISO 3200. Here I was able to quickly reach for the camera and grab a series of about 20 shots before she noticed me and left in a huff:

Lucky the cat can't believe I disturbed her cleaning session.

Since the M6 was already a pretty capable camera, at first I was hesitant about moving to the M6 Mark II; however, the higher resolution and the positive pre-review write-ups won me over. I'm glad I upgraded; the M6 Mark II is a better camera than the M6 in almost every way.

If you have an earlier M camera that you use, consider upgrading to the M6 Mark II. Other than the cost of course, the only sticking point is likely to be the lack of built-in EVF, for those of you who can't do without it.

If you have a Canon full frame, the M6 Mark II is a very capable companion for cases where a smaller camera is handy, and it ability to share lenses with the bigger sibling is a bonus.

For my needs the M6 Mark II ticks all the boxes, so gets 5 stars.

I really like my M6 MK1 and do believe that MK2 is even better, but I'm not happy because of one thing - the lack of built-in EVF. This is so annoying, I don't want it as optional. There are other compact cameras with built-in EVF (Sony A6000, Fuji XE3), they're really compact and budget friendly as well. My previous camera was Sony A6000 and I thought that lack of EVF in new Canon will not be a problem, but I miss it.

And there is no other EOS M cameras to upgrade. They have built-in EVF, but M50 has only one control dial (it's not enough for photography), M5 is nice and has everything what I need but too outdated. No EVF is OK for cameras like M100/200 but not for the level of M6.

Canon M is actually good for selection of compact lenses: 11-22 wide-angle, 22mm f2 pancake, 32mm f 1.4 really sharp, very compact 55-200 and tons compatible EF lenses via adapters, but selection of cameras is poor.

merkator wrote:

I really like my M6 MK1 and do believe that MK2 is even better, but I'm not happy because of one thing - the lack of built-in EVF. This is so annoying, I don't want it as optional. There are other compact cameras with built-in EVF (Sony A6000, Fuji XE3), they're really compact and budget friendly as well. My previous camera was Sony A6000 and I thought that lack of EVF in new Canon will not be a problem, but I miss it.

And there is no other EOS M cameras to upgrade. They have built-in EVF, but M50 has only one control dial (it's not enough for photography),

I recently shot a wedding with the M50 - it was a smallish "destination" wedding where as a guest I stood in for the photographer that pulled out on the 11th hour. For sure I wish I had my wedding workhorse (5DIII) but managed just fine with the M50( with 22/2, 15-45 and EF85/1.8) - in fact for certain aspects (such as focusing) I felt that the M50 performed better.. Yes I agree that it would have been better with a 2nd dial on the top but I would not go as far as saying that its "not enough for photography". 
Regardless, I think we agree in one thing that the M6II with a built-in EVF would make the ultimate mirrorless camera for so many people..

M5 is nice and has everything what I need but too outdated. No EVF is OK for cameras like M100/200 but not for the level of M6.

Agree 100%

Canon M is actually good for selection of compact lenses: 11-22 wide-angle, 22mm f2 pancake, 32mm f 1.4 really sharp, very compact 55-200 and tons compatible EF lenses via adapters, but selection of cameras is poor.

Add the Sigma 56/1.4 to the list - very impressive IQ - my favourite EF-M lens now..

Alexis wrote:

I recently shot a wedding with the M50 - it was a smallish "destination" wedding where as a guest I stood in for the photographer that pulled out on the 11th hour. For sure I wish I had my wedding workhorse (5DIII) but managed just fine with the M50( with 22/2, 15-45 and EF85/1.8) - in fact for certain aspects (such as focusing) I felt that the M50 performed better.. Yes I agree that it would have been better with a 2nd dial on the top but I would not go as far as saying that its "not enough for photography".

Thanks for your experience. In m50 I like some eye detect functionality btw. It should help in events and portrait photography.

Regardless, I think we agree in one thing that the M6II with a built-in EVF would make the ultimate mirrorless camera for so many people..

The hypothetical M6II with a built-in EVF is my dream camera right now

Canon M is actually good for selection of compact lenses: 11-22 wide-angle, 22mm f2 pancake, 32mm f 1.4 really sharp, very compact 55-200 and tons compatible EF lenses via adapters, but selection of cameras is poor.

Add the Sigma 56/1.4 to the list - very impressive IQ - my favourite EF-M lens now.

I agree, the lens is very interesting Indeed. Probably I will buy it some day.

merkator wrote:

Alexis wrote:

I recently shot a wedding with the M50 - it was a smallish "destination" wedding where as a guest I stood in for the photographer that pulled out on the 11th hour. For sure I wish I had my wedding workhorse (5DIII) but managed just fine with the M50( with 22/2, 15-45 and EF85/1.8) - in fact for certain aspects (such as focusing) I felt that the M50 performed better.. Yes I agree that it would have been better with a 2nd dial on the top but I would not go as far as saying that its "not enough for photography".

Thanks for your experience. In m50 I like some eye detect functionality btw. It should help in events and portrait photography.

Agreed. Also, the "touch and drag" feature whilst looking through the EVF (I use the bottom right quadrant) is by far my favourite feature on the M50 - so convenient and fast..

Regardless, I think we agree in one thing that the M6II with a built-in EVF would make the ultimate mirrorless camera for so many people..

The hypothetical M6II with a built-in EVF is my dream camera right now

Canon M is actually good for selection of compact lenses: 11-22 wide-angle, 22mm f2 pancake, 32mm f 1.4 really sharp, very compact 55-200 and tons compatible EF lenses via adapters, but selection of cameras is poor.

Add the Sigma 56/1.4 to the list - very impressive IQ - my favourite EF-M lens now.

I agree, the lens is very interesting Indeed. Probably I will buy it some day.

The MKII is certainly capable, honestly from the samples posted i do fee this new sensor is not an update from canons 24mp in terms of sharpness, DR and high ISO.

Miguel-C wrote:

The MKII is certainly capable, honestly from the samples posted i do fee this new sensor is not an update from canons 24mp in terms of sharpness, DR and high ISO.

It's definitely an improvement in terms of DR and high ISO. I've had the M6 for a couple of years, so I'm in a pretty good position to judge. In my case, I don't have to rely on feelings that come from seeing what others post. I have my own M6 and M6II to compare. As for sharpness, that's a property of lenses, not sensors. A sharp lens will give a sharp result with the M6II, as with the M6. If you were talking about detail, as opposed to sharpness, then you will get more detail with the M6II than with the M6. No surprise there. It has more MP.

1. Louis203 wrote:

Do your means the a6100 is better than m6 ii from dpreview staff?

And Autofocus is more more important than body build quality, handling and controls ?

How to choose ?

You can look at their conclusions and decide what is most important for you. For the M6 Mark II here’s what they say:

What we like:

• Very good image quality
• Dual Pixel AF offers good focus speed and accuracy
• Compact, yet plenty of controls
• Fast burst shooting with continuous AF

What we don't:

• Limited battery life
• USB charging appears to demand PD-type adapters
• 4K footage isn't very detailed

The first three positives I consider important for myself; the fourth one is occasionally interesting; as far as the negatives, the battery life seems much better in real life, and the other two i don’t care much about.

in addition of course, I am biased towards Canon, as owner of other Canon gear. I rented Sony a couple of times, and while it got the job done didn’t push me over.

So you choose by looking at reviews and images and decide what’s important to you and what’s not. Many of the ~$1000 mirrorless cameras out there are very capable.

Ali wrote:

1. Louis203 wrote:

Do your means the a6100 is better than m6 ii from dpreview staff?

And Autofocus is more more important than body build quality, handling and controls ?

How to choose ?

You can look at their conclusions and decide what is most important for you. For the M6 Mark II here’s what they say:

What we like:

• Very good image quality
• Dual Pixel AF offers good focus speed and accuracy
• Compact, yet plenty of controls
• Fast burst shooting with continuous AF

What we don't:

• Limited battery life
• USB charging appears to demand PD-type adapters
• 4K footage isn't very detailed

The first three positives I consider important for myself; the fourth one is occasionally interesting; as far as the negatives, the battery life seems much better in real life, and the other two i don’t care much about.

Yes, I got 4000 images from one battery charge in burst shooting. As for USB charging, yes, you need PD-type adapters, but they are available around $20 from Amazon. I use the one I got from Amazon for my iPad Pro. Works perfectly for both camera and iPad. 4K footage is more than detailed enough for me. Video is either viewed on phones/tablets close up, or big TVs at a distance. Either way, the supposed softness doesn't show up. Pixel-peeping screenshots from video is just plain stupid.

Agonizing over the fact that one DPR roundup put the M6II ahead of the 6100, and the other didn't is also really stupid. Probably it was just a matter of different staff members making the decision.

Alastair Norcross wrote:

Miguel-C wrote:

The MKII is certainly capable, honestly from the samples posted i do fee this new sensor is not an update from canons 24mp in terms of sharpness, DR and high ISO.

It's definitely an improvement in terms of DR and high ISO. I've had the M6 for a couple of years, so I'm in a pretty good position to judge. In my case, I don't have to rely on feelings that come from seeing what others post. I have my own M6 and M6II to compare. As for sharpness, that's a property of lenses, not sensors. A sharp lens will give a sharp result with the M6II, as with the M6. If you were talking about detail, as opposed to sharpness, then you will get more detail with the M6II than with the M6. No surprise there. It has more MP.

Would you be able to do a direct comparison? Since you have both.

I dont, so all i can comment on are on the pictures posted here or the DPR tool.

Miguel-C wrote:

Alastair Norcross wrote:

Miguel-C wrote:

The MKII is certainly capable, honestly from the samples posted i do fee this new sensor is not an update from canons 24mp in terms of sharpness, DR and high ISO.

It's definitely an improvement in terms of DR and high ISO. I've had the M6 for a couple of years, so I'm in a pretty good position to judge. In my case, I don't have to rely on feelings that come from seeing what others post. I have my own M6 and M6II to compare. As for sharpness, that's a property of lenses, not sensors. A sharp lens will give a sharp result with the M6II, as with the M6. If you were talking about detail, as opposed to sharpness, then you will get more detail with the M6II than with the M6. No surprise there. It has more MP.

Would you be able to do a direct comparison? Since you have both.

I dont, so all i can comment on are on the pictures posted here or the DPR tool.

Doesn't something like this from the DPR tool give you that comparison?  Clear difference, and it is even more pronounced if you choose JPEG.

Ali wrote:

Miguel-C wrote:

Alastair Norcross wrote:

Miguel-C wrote:

The MKII is certainly capable, honestly from the samples posted i do fee this new sensor is not an update from canons 24mp in terms of sharpness, DR and high ISO.

It's definitely an improvement in terms of DR and high ISO. I've had the M6 for a couple of years, so I'm in a pretty good position to judge. In my case, I don't have to rely on feelings that come from seeing what others post. I have my own M6 and M6II to compare. As for sharpness, that's a property of lenses, not sensors. A sharp lens will give a sharp result with the M6II, as with the M6. If you were talking about detail, as opposed to sharpness, then you will get more detail with the M6II than with the M6. No surprise there. It has more MP.

Would you be able to do a direct comparison? Since you have both.

I dont, so all i can comment on are on the pictures posted here or the DPR tool.

Doesn't something like this from the DPR tool give you that comparison? Clear difference, and it is even more pronounced if you choose JPEG.

I find that difference to be incredibly small, for an 8mpx increase. It might be diminishing returns, or it may be the lenses indeed.

M6ii is very tempting - it checks all the boxes for upgrading my M1, M2, or M50 to be a good companion to my 6D and, more importantly, serve as my main travel kit -- EXCEPT -- I would miss the built in EVF. If it had that I would have already ordered it. Perhaps the M50 (or something else) will be upgraded to the M6ii specs plus have the EVF - that would be worth waiting for. In the meantime, I'll continue to enjoy and learn more about the M50 and all its features. It has become my go-to camera for more & more photos except for low light events when the 6D provides more keepers.