Canon M50 or Panasonic GX9

[PeterK36]

Hi,

New poster here, looking for some advice. I currently have a Canon G7X mk ii that I enjoy a lot. Great camera, and the 1" performance in combination with a fast lens and a good range is very convenient. However, I want to get more serious with photography, and also want an EVF especially (or probably only) for shooting in strong sun light.

I am doubting between the Panasonic GX9 and the Canon M50 (don't want a big camera, as I know I will not be carrying it). Have seen a lot of reviews, and played with the dpreview studio seen raws of both. I'm fine with the EVF of both (not used to one, so any EVF is a step up for me).

I like the GX9 for it's build quality, lens selection, IBIS and quality of 4K. Disadvantages: bad video AF (but touch to focus is sufficient for what I do, so I am mostly ok), and the ability to have a shadower DOF (at a relatively normal cost).

I like the M50 for it's color science (even though I mostly shoot RAW/process with DXO), the autofocus in video, the slightly higher resolution, better ability for shallow DOF, and the inexpensive but sharp UWA). Better grip as well. Disadvantages: no IBIS, soft 4K and a huge crop (and probably even worse AF than the GX9).

My questions:

- is there anyone who has both, and can comment on the IQ, especially low light performance and Dynamic range between the 2

- I have a slight preference for the M50, but I have the impression that some shots with people (so focus in a few meters) are a bit soft (not due to the sensor, as I have seen plenty of sharp images), but due to a very minor focus accuracy issue. Saw a video as well of a professional who claimed that some 40% of his images where soft/not precisely in focus. This was after I noted this myself, so not biased because of it. Zooming in on some portraits, they are not razor sharp (eyes). Question: is this something you have noted, or related to settings (such a perhaps better to use a single focus area vs using eye af).

Looking at M50+18-150 (maybe 15-45), the 22mm and the Sigma 56mm 1.4 (and later the 11-22).

Thanks!

Peter

 

[jalywol]

Hi,

New poster here, looking for some advice. I currently have a Canon G7X mk ii that I enjoy a lot. Great camera, and the 1" performance in combination with a fast lens and a good range is very convenient. However, I want to get more serious with photography, and also want an EVF especially (or probably only) for shooting in strong sun light.

I am doubting between the Panasonic GX9 and the Canon M50 (don't want a big camera, as I know I will not be carrying it). Have seen a lot of reviews, and played with the dpreview studio seen raws of both. I'm fine with the EVF of both (not used to one, so any EVF is a step up for me).

I like the GX9 for it's build quality, lens selection, IBIS and quality of 4K. Disadvantages: bad video AF (but touch to focus is sufficient for what I do, so I am mostly ok), and the ability to have a shadower DOF (at a relatively normal cost).

I like the M50 for it's color science (even though I mostly shoot RAW/process with DXO), the autofocus in video, the slightly higher resolution, better ability for shallow DOF, and the inexpensive but sharp UWA). Better grip as well. Disadvantages: no IBIS, soft 4K and a huge crop (and probably even worse AF than the GX9).

My questions:

- is there anyone who has both, and can comment on the IQ, especially low light performance and Dynamic range between the 2

- I have a slight preference for the M50, but I have the impression that some shots with people (so focus in a few meters) are a bit soft (not due to the sensor, as I have seen plenty of sharp images), but due to a very minor focus accuracy issue. Saw a video as well of a professional who claimed that some 40% of his images where soft/not precisely in focus. This was after I noted this myself, so not biased because of it. Zooming in on some portraits, they are not razor sharp (eyes). Question: is this something you have noted, or related to settings (such a perhaps better to use a single focus area vs using eye af).

Looking at M50+18-150 (maybe 15-45), the 22mm and the Sigma 56mm 1.4 (and later the 11-22).

Thanks!

Peter

Ok, I came from Micro 4/3 land over to Canon R and M cameras.

There are two big things you have to consider when thinking of the differences between M43 and Canon M. The first is...Lenses. Micro 4/3 has a very, very, extensive ecosystem of native lenses that run the gamut from cheap to expensive, and wide to long, and they give you vastly more options than the native lens choices in the Canon M series.


The second is video. Panasonic does a lot with their video features, so if you are planning to do a lot of video work, I would lean towards their offerings. Also, IBIS means you can use manual adapted legacy lenses and still get great stabilization in video. Canons can't do that (yet), and it is a big deal for hand-held video work.

Now we get to the smaller stuff:

Tracking AF is probably going to be better on the M50. S-AF is going to be comparable on both, although Panasonic has great S-AF in general (it's what I use the most on both cameras). Low light AF is fairly comparable, but Panasonic usually wins that one over most others, by a hair.

In terms of usage? The GX9 has a full contingent of control dials, which is definitely a bonus in use. The M50 has one. Canon's done a pretty good job of ergonomics that way, but Panasonic is actually a master of control flexibility, so I would give them the edge there, too.

Now, as to low light IQ and DR: The M50 is better...but not by that much. The 20MP Panasonic sensor is quite credible (I have a GX8, which has the same sensor), and it's pretty good. I would say that the M50 sensor is maybe a hair better, but it's not a marked difference. If you want to do a lot of low light work, both will do ok, but neither will be as good as a FF.

The one area that the M50 trounces the Panasonic is in the EVF. I don't know why they still are using the one they do in that camera, as they have made really excellent ones in other models, but it's terrible. M50's is fine.

So, my suggestion would be to see if you can try both of them out at a store, or maybe rent them? Both are good cameras; it's just a matter of which is going to meet your needs the best (and don't forget about lenses....)

-J

 

[Max Iso]

Hi,

New poster here, looking for some advice. I currently have a Canon G7X mk ii that I enjoy a lot. Great camera, and the 1" performance in combination with a fast lens and a good range is very convenient. However, I want to get more serious with photography, and also want an EVF especially (or probably only) for shooting in strong sun light.

I am doubting between the Panasonic GX9 and the Canon M50 (don't want a big camera, as I know I will not be carrying it). Have seen a lot of reviews, and played with the dpreview studio seen raws of both. I'm fine with the EVF of both (not used to one, so any EVF is a step up for me).

I like the GX9 for it's build quality, lens selection, IBIS and quality of 4K. Disadvantages: bad video AF (but touch to focus is sufficient for what I do, so I am mostly ok), and the ability to have a shadower DOF (at a relatively normal cost).

I like the M50 for it's color science (even though I mostly shoot RAW/process with DXO), the autofocus in video, the slightly higher resolution, better ability for shallow DOF, and the inexpensive but sharp UWA). Better grip as well. Disadvantages: no IBIS, soft 4K and a huge crop (and probably even worse AF than the GX9).

My questions:

- is there anyone who has both, and can comment on the IQ, especially low light performance and Dynamic range between the 2

- I have a slight preference for the M50, but I have the impression that some shots with people (so focus in a few meters) are a bit soft (not due to the sensor, as I have seen plenty of sharp images), but due to a very minor focus accuracy issue. Saw a video as well of a professional who claimed that some 40% of his images where soft/not precisely in focus. This was after I noted this myself, so not biased because of it. Zooming in on some portraits, they are not razor sharp (eyes). Question: is this something you have noted, or related to settings (such a perhaps better to use a single focus area vs using eye af).

Looking at M50+18-150 (maybe 15-45), the 22mm and the Sigma 56mm 1.4 (and later the 11-22).

Thanks!

Peter

I have an EM1 mark 1, i have owned a GX7 twice, a GX8, and G9. I also own an M50 right now. What i have noticed is the M50 AF box, if you are focusing on a subject that is smaller than the box and also backlit, sometimes it will simply go after contrast, either the edges of the subject (rather than front surface like a face) or lock to the BG.

The problem is, most ML will do this, even my G9 which is much higher end than the GX9. ML are very greedy when it comes to contrast, where a DSLR has lower standards so to speak. A DSLR will focus on the closest surface as long as it has enough contrast to lock, ML may ignore a surface if it has far less contrast than something else in the AF box.

I don't have my G9 to compare side by side but i'd say the M50 is as reliable in SAF and more reliable in CAF. It doesn't have as many AF tricks and settings, there's no pinpoint AF, you can't adjust the AF box or shape your AF grid, but it works very well still. Just be aware of the size of the AF box in relation to the subject.

 

[PeterK36]

Hi,

New poster here, looking for some advice. I currently have a Canon G7X mk ii that I enjoy a lot. Great camera, and the 1" performance in combination with a fast lens and a good range is very convenient. However, I want to get more serious with photography, and also want an EVF especially (or probably only) for shooting in strong sun light.

I am doubting between the Panasonic GX9 and the Canon M50 (don't want a big camera, as I know I will not be carrying it). Have seen a lot of reviews, and played with the dpreview studio seen raws of both. I'm fine with the EVF of both (not used to one, so any EVF is a step up for me).

I like the GX9 for it's build quality, lens selection, IBIS and quality of 4K. Disadvantages: bad video AF (but touch to focus is sufficient for what I do, so I am mostly ok), and the ability to have a shadower DOF (at a relatively normal cost).

I like the M50 for it's color science (even though I mostly shoot RAW/process with DXO), the autofocus in video, the slightly higher resolution, better ability for shallow DOF, and the inexpensive but sharp UWA). Better grip as well. Disadvantages: no IBIS, soft 4K and a huge crop (and probably even worse AF than the GX9).

My questions:

- is there anyone who has both, and can comment on the IQ, especially low light performance and Dynamic range between the 2

- I have a slight preference for the M50, but I have the impression that some shots with people (so focus in a few meters) are a bit soft (not due to the sensor, as I have seen plenty of sharp images), but due to a very minor focus accuracy issue. Saw a video as well of a professional who claimed that some 40% of his images where soft/not precisely in focus. This was after I noted this myself, so not biased because of it. Zooming in on some portraits, they are not razor sharp (eyes). Question: is this something you have noted, or related to settings (such a perhaps better to use a single focus area vs using eye af).

Looking at M50+18-150 (maybe 15-45), the 22mm and the Sigma 56mm 1.4 (and later the 11-22).

Thanks!

Peter

Ok, I came from Micro 4/3 land over to Canon R and M cameras.

Thanks for the extensive and helpful answer Jalywol, very much appreciated. Your answer seems balanced between the too, maybe even slightly more towards the advantages of M4/3 / GX9. May I ask why you moved over to M (the R is a clear step up, so here it is clear), as the lenses between M and R cannot be shared anyway?

Or if you continue to use both, which is the camera you grab when you had out the door for a trip / which gives you the most pleasure?

There are two big things you have to consider when thinking of the differences between M43 and Canon M. The first is...Lenses. Micro 4/3 has a very, very, extensive ecosystem of native lenses that run the gamut from cheap to expensive, and wide to long, and they give you vastly more options than the native lens choices in the Canon M series.

Thanks, that is valuable advice. For the time being, the EOS-M pretty much has what I foresee to use. My only wish would be a native 50mm in the quality of the 32mm, as the 56mm Sigma is slightly longer than I would wish for inside. Thought about the EF 50mm 1.8, which is cheap, but not sharp wide open and I think is a step back from either the Sigma or on M4/3 the Panny 42.5/1.7.

The second is video. Panasonic does a lot with their video features, so if you are planning to do a lot of video work, I would lean towards their offerings. Also, IBIS means you can use manual adapted legacy lenses and still get great stabilization in video. Canons can't do that (yet), and it is a big deal for hand-held video work.

Video is nice/important, but only for holiday stuff. The stills part is more important for me. The image stabilization of non-stabilized lenses is indeed a major plus for the GX9.

Now we get to the smaller stuff:

Tracking AF is probably going to be better on the M50. S-AF is going to be comparable on both, although Panasonic has great S-AF in general (it's what I use the most on both cameras). Low light AF is fairly comparable, but Panasonic usually wins that one over most others, by a hair.

Tracking is less important to me, as I don't shoot much action. Focus accuracy on a single shot is important, perhaps more important than super quick AF. The little Canon G7X is not exactly an AF speed beast, but it is ok for what I do, so I guess both cameras will be an upgrade for me.

In terms of usage? The GX9 has a full contingent of control dials, which is definitely a bonus in use. The M50 has one. Canon's done a pretty good job of ergonomics that way, but Panasonic is actually a master of control flexibility, so I would give them the edge there, too.

Indeed, I do like the handling on the GX9, and the build quality as well, and I very much agree with your insight. The single dial of the M50 is not a deal breaker though, somehow the handling of the M50 is quite ok with the touch screen (which is good on both cameras btw) and I do like the grip.

Now, as to low light IQ and DR: The M50 is better...but not by that much. The 20MP Panasonic sensor is quite credible (I have a GX8, which has the same sensor), and it's pretty good. I would say that the M50 sensor is maybe a hair better, but it's not a marked difference. If you want to do a lot of low light work, both will do ok, but neither will be as good as a FF.

Thanks, that is a helpful answer, and a bit as I expected.

The one area that the M50 trounces the Panasonic is in the EVF. I don't know why they still are using the one they do in that camera, as they have made really excellent ones in other models, but it's terrible. M50's is fine.

I need to find a store that has one, and in a demo model. I did play with a GX80 2 years back, and I was fine with it then, so I suspect this is still the case. Upfront, having an EVF is important, but I do like to shoot from the lcd, so it is really only meant for super bright light. I probably should just not look through a much better/high end EVF, and I will be fine .

So, my suggestion would be to see if you can try both of them out at a store, or maybe rent them? Both are good cameras; it's just a matter of which is going to meet your needs the best (and don't forget about lenses....)

-J

This is a good suggestion, thanks. I didn't think about renting, and sort of assumed only more high end stuff was available for rent, but I did look just now and did find a place (or rather a person) through gearbooker where I can rent the M50, which is well worth the money.

Thanks again for your helpful answer!

 

[Luke Forrest]

Hi,

New poster here, looking for some advice. I currently have a Canon G7X mk ii that I enjoy a lot. Great camera, and the 1" performance in combination with a fast lens and a good range is very convenient. However, I want to get more serious with photography, and also want an EVF especially (or probably only) for shooting in strong sun light.

I am doubting between the Panasonic GX9 and the Canon M50 (don't want a big camera, as I know I will not be carrying it). Have seen a lot of reviews, and played with the dpreview studio seen raws of both. I'm fine with the EVF of both (not used to one, so any EVF is a step up for me).

I like the GX9 for it's build quality, lens selection, IBIS and quality of 4K. Disadvantages: bad video AF (but touch to focus is sufficient for what I do, so I am mostly ok), and the ability to have a shadower DOF (at a relatively normal cost).

I like the M50 for it's color science (even though I mostly shoot RAW/process with DXO), the autofocus in video, the slightly higher resolution, better ability for shallow DOF, and the inexpensive but sharp UWA). Better grip as well. Disadvantages: no IBIS, soft 4K and a huge crop (and probably even worse AF than the GX9).

My questions:

- is there anyone who has both, and can comment on the IQ, especially low light performance and Dynamic range between the 2

- I have a slight preference for the M50, but I have the impression that some shots with people (so focus in a few meters) are a bit soft (not due to the sensor, as I have seen plenty of sharp images), but due to a very minor focus accuracy issue. Saw a video as well of a professional who claimed that some 40% of his images where soft/not precisely in focus. This was after I noted this myself, so not biased because of it. Zooming in on some portraits, they are not razor sharp (eyes). Question: is this something you have noted, or related to settings (such a perhaps better to use a single focus area vs using eye af).

Looking at M50+18-150 (maybe 15-45), the 22mm and the Sigma 56mm 1.4 (and later the 11-22).

Thanks!

Peter

Ok, I came from Micro 4/3 land over to Canon R and M cameras.

There are two big things you have to consider when thinking of the differences between M43 and Canon M. The first is...Lenses. Micro 4/3 has a very, very, extensive ecosystem of native lenses that run the gamut from cheap to expensive, and wide to long, and they give you vastly more options than the native lens choices in the Canon M series.

The second is video. Panasonic does a lot with their video features, so if you are planning to do a lot of video work, I would lean towards their offerings. Also, IBIS means you can use manual adapted legacy lenses and still get great stabilization in video. Canons can't do that (yet), and it is a big deal for hand-held video work.

Now we get to the smaller stuff:

Tracking AF is probably going to be better on the M50. S-AF is going to be comparable on both, although Panasonic has great S-AF in general (it's what I use the most on both cameras). Low light AF is fairly comparable, but Panasonic usually wins that one over most others, by a hair.

In terms of usage? The GX9 has a full contingent of control dials, which is definitely a bonus in use. The M50 has one. Canon's done a pretty good job of ergonomics that way, but Panasonic is actually a master of control flexibility, so I would give them the edge there, too.

Now, as to low light IQ and DR: The M50 is better...but not by that much. The 20MP Panasonic sensor is quite credible (I have a GX8, which has the same sensor), and it's pretty good. I would say that the M50 sensor is maybe a hair better, but it's not a marked difference. If you want to do a lot of low light work, both will do ok, but neither will be as good as a FF.

The one area that the M50 trounces the Panasonic is in the EVF. I don't know why they still are using the one they do in that camera, as they have made really excellent ones in other models, but it's terrible. M50's is fine.

I actually disagree with this. I've owned both cameras and kept the GX9. I found the M50 to be more tunnel like and the GX9 to be quite clear and easier to compose with. I've heard that the sequential evf does effect some more than others though.

So, my suggestion would be to see if you can try both of them out at a store, or maybe rent them? Both are good cameras; it's just a matter of which is going to meet your needs the best (and don't forget about lenses....)

-J

Personally I think the GX9 is a better camera. Better built and more responsive. It honestly feels like it cost a lot more to make it. The Canon feels a bit cheap in comparison. Considering there isn't a big price difference between them, this is something to consider. Of course lens selection and price is important, so this should be researched before choosing a system. The Sigma lenses are terrific value for money and they suit the 1.6X crop factor better than the 2X crop. M43 has a wider selection of lenses but that doesn't matter much if M mount offers what you need.

There isn't a big difference in image quality, at least I can't see it and ergonomics are both fine. I prefer the Panasonic slightly but the Canon is good. Tilt screen vs FAS must be considered too.

I think the great thing about the M system is that it isn't so expensive to get a range of lenses from UWA to telephoto with a few nice primes. The great thing about Panasonic is that they are just really nice to use. I know I'd pick the Panasonic but I can see why the M50 might appeal more to some. Apologies if this doesn't help much

 

[SantaMaria]

, but: I think the GX9 is a better camera. Better built and more responsive. It honestly feels like it cost a lot more to make it. The Canon feels a bit cheap in comparison. Considering there isn't a big price difference between them, this is something to consider. Of course lens selection and price is important, so this should be researched before choosing a system. The Sigma lenses are terrific value for money and they suit the 1.6X crop factor better than the 2X crop. M43 has a wider selection of lenses but that doesn't matter much if M mount offers what you need.

There isn't a big difference in image quality, at least I can't see it and ergonomics are both fine. I prefer the Panasonic slightly but the Canon is good. Tilt screen vs FAS must be considered too.

Agree with GX9 but: amazingly, the M50 is a smaller & lighter camera despite the bigger sensor...

 

[jalywol]

Thanks for the extensive and helpful answer Jalywol, very much appreciated. Your answer seems balanced between the too, maybe even slightly more towards the advantages of M4/3 / GX9. May I ask why you moved over to M (the R is a clear step up, so here it is clear), as the lenses between M and R cannot be shared anyway?

Well, you CAN share lenses if you have EF lenses and adapters....which I did get for the RP initially, since they fit my purposes (and budget) better than the selection of native RF lenses which were initially released.

In any case, I did the switch because even though I had a lot of M43 gear, I really missed having some of the advantages of FF. So, I bought an RP when it came out last year, with the plan to use that for mostly wide and low light work, while keeping the M43 only for long tele.

However, it's really a pain in the butt to use two different systems, so I decided to look into the M series so I could use my adapted EF lenses on both, and get the advantage of crop sensor view on the longer lenses. The long and short of it is that I ended up deciding to get an M body for my crop sensor camera, and sell my M43 gear (except for the tiny GM5 and its kit lenses, which I never will sell).

After trying the M6ll and the M50, I decided to go with the M50, as I got a good deal on the two lens kit with a bunch of extras, including the EF-M adapter.

However, I wasn't impressed with the 15-45mm, at all, so I ended up getting an 11-22mm, which is just terrific. Then I got the 28mm macro, which I like a great deal.

Of course, shortly after that, the special on the M6 with the 18-150mm AND the detachable EVF popped up...so I decided to get that and sell the M6 body and EVF, and just keep the 18-150mm lens. (You know where this is going...)

Of course, after using the M6, with all of its lovely dials, I have taken quite a liking to it, so it is now the camera that goes with me when I reach for the bag out the door. The M50 is better in a few ways, but there is something about the M6 that makes me really enjoy using it....Go figure.

At this point I have to get my act together and decide what to sell, as the bills are shortly coming due for all of this camera buying profligacy. Do I sell the M50? Do I keep both M bodies and sell the RP? I have decided to sell the GX8 and 100-300mm, but I haven't gotten around to it yet....The rest? I supposed once it gets warm out and I start taking the cameras out shooting again, I will make my decision based on what goes with me then.

Or if you continue to use both, which is the camera you grab when you had out the door for a trip / which gives you the most pleasure?

Right now the M6 with one short and one long lens (the 11-22mm or 22mm f2, or 28mm macro, and 18-150). Once spring birding season comes along, it will be one of the M bodies, not sure which, and the adapted EF 70-300mm II...I suspect that will behave better on the M50, as the AF on the M50 is faster and better than on the M6, though).

There are two big things you have to consider when thinking of the differences between M43 and Canon M. The first is...Lenses. Micro 4/3 has a very, very, extensive ecosystem of native lenses that run the gamut from cheap to expensive, and wide to long, and they give you vastly more options than the native lens choices in the Canon M series.

Thanks, that is valuable advice. For the time being, the EOS-M pretty much has what I foresee to use. My only wish would be a native 50mm in the quality of the 32mm, as the 56mm Sigma is slightly longer than I would wish for inside. Thought about the EF 50mm 1.8, which is cheap, but not sharp wide open and I think is a step back from either the Sigma or on M4/3 the Panny 42.5/1.7.

The second is video. Panasonic does a lot with their video features, so if you are planning to do a lot of video work, I would lean towards their offerings. Also, IBIS means you can use manual adapted legacy lenses and still get great stabilization in video. Canons can't do that (yet), and it is a big deal for hand-held video work.

Video is nice/important, but only for holiday stuff. The stills part is more important for me. The image stabilization of non-stabilized lenses is indeed a major plus for the GX9.

If stills are more important, I would get the Canons. I think they are just enough better than the M43 sensors that that is a better direction to go. As I said, the 20MP Panasonic sensor is good, but the Canon 24MP is just a wee bit better in terms of noise, DR, and tonal and color gradation. Not a giant difference for sure, and not everyone would even notice, but in critical situations, it's there.

Now we get to the smaller stuff:

Tracking AF is probably going to be better on the M50. S-AF is going to be comparable on both, although Panasonic has great S-AF in general (it's what I use the most on both cameras). Low light AF is fairly comparable, but Panasonic usually wins that one over most others, by a hair.

Tracking is less important to me, as I don't shoot much action. Focus accuracy on a single shot is important, perhaps more important than super quick AF. The little Canon G7X is not exactly an AF speed beast, but it is ok for what I do, so I guess both cameras will be an upgrade for me.

In terms of usage? The GX9 has a full contingent of control dials, which is definitely a bonus in use. The M50 has one. Canon's done a pretty good job of ergonomics that way, but Panasonic is actually a master of control flexibility, so I would give them the edge there, too.

Indeed, I do like the handling on the GX9, and the build quality as well, and I very much agree with your insight. The single dial of the M50 is not a deal breaker though, somehow the handling of the M50 is quite ok with the touch screen (which is good on both cameras btw) and I do like the grip.

I do like how the M50 feels in hand, I agree.

Now, as to low light IQ and DR: The M50 is better...but not by that much. The 20MP Panasonic sensor is quite credible (I have a GX8, which has the same sensor), and it's pretty good. I would say that the M50 sensor is maybe a hair better, but it's not a marked difference. If you want to do a lot of low light work, both will do ok, but neither will be as good as a FF.

Thanks, that is a helpful answer, and a bit as I expected.

The one area that the M50 trounces the Panasonic is in the EVF. I don't know why they still are using the one they do in that camera, as they have made really excellent ones in other models, but it's terrible. M50's is fine.

I need to find a store that has one, and in a demo model. I did play with a GX80 2 years back, and I was fine with it then, so I suspect this is still the case. Upfront, having an EVF is important, but I do like to shoot from the lcd, so it is really only meant for super bright light. I probably should just not look through a much better/high end EVF, and I will be fine .

Well, I don't mind the sequential EVF, but the coke-bottle lens that Panasonic puts in front of it gives me a wicked headache. Also, the 16:9 aspect ratio makes the viewable area essentially smaller, since you can't use the full EVF for the native 4:3 ratio of the sensor.

So, my suggestion would be to see if you can try both of them out at a store, or maybe rent them? Both are good cameras; it's just a matter of which is going to meet your needs the best (and don't forget about lenses....)

-J

This is a good suggestion, thanks. I didn't think about renting, and sort of assumed only more high end stuff was available for rent, but I did look just now and did find a place (or rather a person) through gearbooker where I can rent the M50, which is well worth the money.

Thanks again for your helpful answer!

 

[PeterK36]

Hi,

New poster here, looking for some advice. I currently have a Canon G7X mk ii that I enjoy a lot. Great camera, and the 1" performance in combination with a fast lens and a good range is very convenient. However, I want to get more serious with photography, and also want an EVF especially (or probably only) for shooting in strong sun light.

I am doubting between the Panasonic GX9 and the Canon M50 (don't want a big camera, as I know I will not be carrying it). Have seen a lot of reviews, and played with the dpreview studio seen raws of both. I'm fine with the EVF of both (not used to one, so any EVF is a step up for me).

I like the GX9 for it's build quality, lens selection, IBIS and quality of 4K. Disadvantages: bad video AF (but touch to focus is sufficient for what I do, so I am mostly ok), and the ability to have a shadower DOF (at a relatively normal cost).

I like the M50 for it's color science (even though I mostly shoot RAW/process with DXO), the autofocus in video, the slightly higher resolution, better ability for shallow DOF, and the inexpensive but sharp UWA). Better grip as well. Disadvantages: no IBIS, soft 4K and a huge crop (and probably even worse AF than the GX9).

My questions:

- is there anyone who has both, and can comment on the IQ, especially low light performance and Dynamic range between the 2

- I have a slight preference for the M50, but I have the impression that some shots with people (so focus in a few meters) are a bit soft (not due to the sensor, as I have seen plenty of sharp images), but due to a very minor focus accuracy issue. Saw a video as well of a professional who claimed that some 40% of his images where soft/not precisely in focus. This was after I noted this myself, so not biased because of it. Zooming in on some portraits, they are not razor sharp (eyes). Question: is this something you have noted, or related to settings (such a perhaps better to use a single focus area vs using eye af).

Looking at M50+18-150 (maybe 15-45), the 22mm and the Sigma 56mm 1.4 (and later the 11-22).

Thanks!

Peter

I have an EM1 mark 1, i have owned a GX7 twice, a GX8, and G9. I also own an M50 right now. What i have noticed is the M50 AF box, if you are focusing on a subject that is smaller than the box and also backlit, sometimes it will simply go after contrast, either the edges of the subject (rather than front surface like a face) or lock to the BG.

The problem is, most ML will do this, even my G9 which is much higher end than the GX9. ML are very greedy when it comes to contrast, where a DSLR has lower standards so to speak. A DSLR will focus on the closest surface as long as it has enough contrast to lock, ML may ignore a surface if it has far less contrast than something else in the AF box.

I don't have my G9 to compare side by side but i'd say the M50 is as reliable in SAF and more reliable in CAF. It doesn't have as many AF tricks and settings, there's no pinpoint AF, you can't adjust the AF box or shape your AF grid, but it works very well still. Just be aware of the size of the AF box in relation to the subject.

Thanks Max, that is useful information! I decided to rent one in a week when I should have some time, and give it a try. This is very helpful and what I was looking for.

 

[Max Iso]

Any time. And also remember, the EF adapters work seamlessly, i use the 50 STM and 100 f/2 USM with a 3rd party adapter, zero issues. I do have the 15-45mm native to compare to as well. Lots of choices if you go with M mount bodies, it's one of the reasons i got one even though i still own MFT.

With that said, MFT is very capable too and have their own advantages.

 

[PeterK36]

Hi,

New poster here, looking for some advice. I currently have a Canon G7X mk ii that I enjoy a lot. Great camera, and the 1" performance in combination with a fast lens and a good range is very convenient. However, I want to get more serious with photography, and also want an EVF especially (or probably only) for shooting in strong sun light.

I am doubting between the Panasonic GX9 and the Canon M50 (don't want a big camera, as I know I will not be carrying it). Have seen a lot of reviews, and played with the dpreview studio seen raws of both. I'm fine with the EVF of both (not used to one, so any EVF is a step up for me).

I like the GX9 for it's build quality, lens selection, IBIS and quality of 4K. Disadvantages: bad video AF (but touch to focus is sufficient for what I do, so I am mostly ok), and the ability to have a shadower DOF (at a relatively normal cost).

I like the M50 for it's color science (even though I mostly shoot RAW/process with DXO), the autofocus in video, the slightly higher resolution, better ability for shallow DOF, and the inexpensive but sharp UWA). Better grip as well. Disadvantages: no IBIS, soft 4K and a huge crop (and probably even worse AF than the GX9).

My questions:

- is there anyone who has both, and can comment on the IQ, especially low light performance and Dynamic range between the 2

- I have a slight preference for the M50, but I have the impression that some shots with people (so focus in a few meters) are a bit soft (not due to the sensor, as I have seen plenty of sharp images), but due to a very minor focus accuracy issue. Saw a video as well of a professional who claimed that some 40% of his images where soft/not precisely in focus. This was after I noted this myself, so not biased because of it. Zooming in on some portraits, they are not razor sharp (eyes). Question: is this something you have noted, or related to settings (such a perhaps better to use a single focus area vs using eye af).

Looking at M50+18-150 (maybe 15-45), the 22mm and the Sigma 56mm 1.4 (and later the 11-22).

Thanks!

Peter

Ok, I came from Micro 4/3 land over to Canon R and M cameras.

There are two big things you have to consider when thinking of the differences between M43 and Canon M. The first is...Lenses. Micro 4/3 has a very, very, extensive ecosystem of native lenses that run the gamut from cheap to expensive, and wide to long, and they give you vastly more options than the native lens choices in the Canon M series.

The second is video. Panasonic does a lot with their video features, so if you are planning to do a lot of video work, I would lean towards their offerings. Also, IBIS means you can use manual adapted legacy lenses and still get great stabilization in video. Canons can't do that (yet), and it is a big deal for hand-held video work.

Now we get to the smaller stuff:

Tracking AF is probably going to be better on the M50. S-AF is going to be comparable on both, although Panasonic has great S-AF in general (it's what I use the most on both cameras). Low light AF is fairly comparable, but Panasonic usually wins that one over most others, by a hair.

In terms of usage? The GX9 has a full contingent of control dials, which is definitely a bonus in use. The M50 has one. Canon's done a pretty good job of ergonomics that way, but Panasonic is actually a master of control flexibility, so I would give them the edge there, too.

Now, as to low light IQ and DR: The M50 is better...but not by that much. The 20MP Panasonic sensor is quite credible (I have a GX8, which has the same sensor), and it's pretty good. I would say that the M50 sensor is maybe a hair better, but it's not a marked difference. If you want to do a lot of low light work, both will do ok, but neither will be as good as a FF.

The one area that the M50 trounces the Panasonic is in the EVF. I don't know why they still are using the one they do in that camera, as they have made really excellent ones in other models, but it's terrible. M50's is fine.

I actually disagree with this. I've owned both cameras and kept the GX9. I found the M50 to be more tunnel like and the GX9 to be quite clear and easier to compose with. I've heard that the sequential evf does effect some more than others though.

So, my suggestion would be to see if you can try both of them out at a store, or maybe rent them? Both are good cameras; it's just a matter of which is going to meet your needs the best (and don't forget about lenses....)

-J

Personally I think the GX9 is a better camera. Better built and more responsive. It honestly feels like it cost a lot more to make it. The Canon feels a bit cheap in comparison. Considering there isn't a big price difference between them, this is something to consider. Of course lens selection and price is important, so this should be researched before choosing a system. The Sigma lenses are terrific value for money and they suit the 1.6X crop factor better than the 2X crop. M43 has a wider selection of lenses but that doesn't matter much if M mount offers what you need.

Thanks Luke, and I agree. The GX9 has more options, such as an electronic shutter that works up to 1/16000's, more AF options etc. And the build quality is nice, it is actually somewhat important. The lens selection for M mount is fine for me currently. Biggest disadvantage for me is the DOF, I'd like to be able to shoot some shallow DOF as well, which is very easy on headshots (definitively do not need more than the 42.5/F1.7), but gets a bit more difficult on half-body / full body shots. Not a major difference, but still, on the M50, possible with the Viltrox speedbooster, there is a difference.

There isn't a big difference in image quality, at least I can't see it and ergonomics are both fine. I prefer the Panasonic slightly but the Canon is good. Tilt screen vs FAS must be considered too.

I think the great thing about the M system is that it isn't so expensive to get a range of lenses from UWA to telephoto with a few nice primes. The great thing about Panasonic is that they are just really nice to use. I know I'd pick the Panasonic but I can see why the M50 might appeal more to some. Apologies if this doesn't help much

It does help a lot, although, I am indeed still undecided

Have to find a way to test the GX9 too; just don't like to buy and try and return, as I do not want used items myself either. But renting appears to be impossible. Maybe I should buy second hand and sell again with a small loss.

 

[PeterK36]

Thanks for the extensive and helpful answer Jalywol, very much appreciated. Your answer seems balanced between the too, maybe even slightly more towards the advantages of M4/3 / GX9. May I ask why you moved over to M (the R is a clear step up, so here it is clear), as the lenses between M and R cannot be shared anyway?

Well, you CAN share lenses if you have EF lenses and adapters....which I did get for the RP initially, since they fit my purposes (and budget) better than the selection of native RF lenses which were initially released.

Ah yes, of course, that does make sense.

In any case, I did the switch because even though I had a lot of M43 gear, I really missed having some of the advantages of FF. So, I bought an RP when it came out last year, with the plan to use that for mostly wide and low light work, while keeping the M43 only for long tele.

It is a great camera indeed. Even the RP, with a low dynamic range, impressed me in the dpreview samples, somehow I really like the output. But, the lenses get to big for traveling for me, so..decided that I want to go smaller.

However, it's really a pain in the butt to use two different systems, so I decided to look into the M series so I could use my adapted EF lenses on both, and get the advantage of crop sensor view on the longer lenses. The long and short of it is that I ended up deciding to get an M body for my crop sensor camera, and sell my M43 gear (except for the tiny GM5 and its kit lenses, which I never will sell).

After trying the M6ll and the M50, I decided to go with the M50, as I got a good deal on the two lens kit with a bunch of extras, including the EF-M adapter.

However, I wasn't impressed with the 15-45mm, at all, so I ended up getting an 11-22mm, which is just terrific. Then I got the 28mm macro, which I like a great deal.

Of course, shortly after that, the special on the M6 with the 18-150mm AND the detachable EVF popped up...so I decided to get that and sell the M6 body and EVF, and just keep the 18-150mm lens. (You know where this is going...)

Of course, after using the M6, with all of its lovely dials, I have taken quite a liking to it, so it is now the camera that goes with me when I reach for the bag out the door. The M50 is better in a few ways, but there is something about the M6 that makes me really enjoy using it....Go figure.

At this point I have to get my act together and decide what to sell, as the bills are shortly coming due for all of this camera buying profligacy. Do I sell the M50? Do I keep both M bodies and sell the RP? I have decided to sell the GX8 and 100-300mm, but I haven't gotten around to it yet....The rest? I supposed once it gets warm out and I start taking the cameras out shooting again, I will make my decision based on what goes with me then.

I guess, listening to this, I'd probably sell the M50 and stick to the M6 and the R, but, just continuing to read on the birding, I'd say give it a try first

Or if you continue to use both, which is the camera you grab when you had out the door for a trip / which gives you the most pleasure?

Right now the M6 with one short and one long lens (the 11-22mm or 22mm f2, or 28mm macro, and 18-150). Once spring birding season comes along, it will be one of the M bodies, not sure which, and the adapted EF 70-300mm II...I suspect that will behave better on the M50, as the AF on the M50 is faster and better than on the M6, though).

There are two big things you have to consider when thinking of the differences between M43 and Canon M. The first is...Lenses. Micro 4/3 has a very, very, extensive ecosystem of native lenses that run the gamut from cheap to expensive, and wide to long, and they give you vastly more options than the native lens choices in the Canon M series.

Thanks, that is valuable advice. For the time being, the EOS-M pretty much has what I foresee to use. My only wish would be a native 50mm in the quality of the 32mm, as the 56mm Sigma is slightly longer than I would wish for inside. Thought about the EF 50mm 1.8, which is cheap, but not sharp wide open and I think is a step back from either the Sigma or on M4/3 the Panny 42.5/1.7.

The second is video. Panasonic does a lot with their video features, so if you are planning to do a lot of video work, I would lean towards their offerings. Also, IBIS means you can use manual adapted legacy lenses and still get great stabilization in video. Canons can't do that (yet), and it is a big deal for hand-held video work.

Video is nice/important, but only for holiday stuff. The stills part is more important for me. The image stabilization of non-stabilized lenses is indeed a major plus for the GX9.

If stills are more important, I would get the Canons. I think they are just enough better than the M43 sensors that that is a better direction to go. As I said, the 20MP Panasonic sensor is good, but the Canon 24MP is just a wee bit better in terms of noise, DR, and tonal and color gradation. Not a giant difference for sure, and not everyone would even notice, but in critical situations, it's there.

Thanks, sort of what I wanted to hear. Still makes me doubt because of the benefits of IBIS, that won't work in all situations, but I am used to a stabilized lens, hmm.

Now we get to the smaller stuff:

Tracking AF is probably going to be better on the M50. S-AF is going to be comparable on both, although Panasonic has great S-AF in general (it's what I use the most on both cameras). Low light AF is fairly comparable, but Panasonic usually wins that one over most others, by a hair.

Tracking is less important to me, as I don't shoot much action. Focus accuracy on a single shot is important, perhaps more important than super quick AF. The little Canon G7X is not exactly an AF speed beast, but it is ok for what I do, so I guess both cameras will be an upgrade for me.

In terms of usage? The GX9 has a full contingent of control dials, which is definitely a bonus in use. The M50 has one. Canon's done a pretty good job of ergonomics that way, but Panasonic is actually a master of control flexibility, so I would give them the edge there, too.

Indeed, I do like the handling on the GX9, and the build quality as well, and I very much agree with your insight. The single dial of the M50 is not a deal breaker though, somehow the handling of the M50 is quite ok with the touch screen (which is good on both cameras btw) and I do like the grip.

I do like how the M50 feels in hand, I agree.

Now, as to low light IQ and DR: The M50 is better...but not by that much. The 20MP Panasonic sensor is quite credible (I have a GX8, which has the same sensor), and it's pretty good. I would say that the M50 sensor is maybe a hair better, but it's not a marked difference. If you want to do a lot of low light work, both will do ok, but neither will be as good as a FF.

Thanks, that is a helpful answer, and a bit as I expected.

The one area that the M50 trounces the Panasonic is in the EVF. I don't know why they still are using the one they do in that camera, as they have made really excellent ones in other models, but it's terrible. M50's is fine.

I need to find a store that has one, and in a demo model. I did play with a GX80 2 years back, and I was fine with it then, so I suspect this is still the case. Upfront, having an EVF is important, but I do like to shoot from the lcd, so it is really only meant for super bright light. I probably should just not look through a much better/high end EVF, and I will be fine .

Well, I don't mind the sequential EVF, but the coke-bottle lens that Panasonic puts in front of it gives me a wicked headache. Also, the 16:9 aspect ratio makes the viewable area essentially smaller, since you can't use the full EVF for the native 4:3 ratio of the sensor.

That lens is indeed a bit of a worry. I have read a bit too many of these impressions. I guess there is only one way to find out if I have the same issue.

So, my suggestion would be to see if you can try both of them out at a store, or maybe rent them? Both are good cameras; it's just a matter of which is going to meet your needs the best (and don't forget about lenses....)

-J

This is a good suggestion, thanks. I didn't think about renting, and sort of assumed only more high end stuff was available for rent, but I did look just now and did find a place (or rather a person) through gearbooker where I can rent the M50, which is well worth the money.

Thanks again for your helpful answer!

Thanks again Jalywol, appreciate the extensive answers.

 

[Luke Forrest]

Hi,

New poster here, looking for some advice. I currently have a Canon G7X mk ii that I enjoy a lot. Great camera, and the 1" performance in combination with a fast lens and a good range is very convenient. However, I want to get more serious with photography, and also want an EVF especially (or probably only) for shooting in strong sun light.

I am doubting between the Panasonic GX9 and the Canon M50 (don't want a big camera, as I know I will not be carrying it). Have seen a lot of reviews, and played with the dpreview studio seen raws of both. I'm fine with the EVF of both (not used to one, so any EVF is a step up for me).

I like the GX9 for it's build quality, lens selection, IBIS and quality of 4K. Disadvantages: bad video AF (but touch to focus is sufficient for what I do, so I am mostly ok), and the ability to have a shadower DOF (at a relatively normal cost).

I like the M50 for it's color science (even though I mostly shoot RAW/process with DXO), the autofocus in video, the slightly higher resolution, better ability for shallow DOF, and the inexpensive but sharp UWA). Better grip as well. Disadvantages: no IBIS, soft 4K and a huge crop (and probably even worse AF than the GX9).

My questions:

- is there anyone who has both, and can comment on the IQ, especially low light performance and Dynamic range between the 2

- I have a slight preference for the M50, but I have the impression that some shots with people (so focus in a few meters) are a bit soft (not due to the sensor, as I have seen plenty of sharp images), but due to a very minor focus accuracy issue. Saw a video as well of a professional who claimed that some 40% of his images where soft/not precisely in focus. This was after I noted this myself, so not biased because of it. Zooming in on some portraits, they are not razor sharp (eyes). Question: is this something you have noted, or related to settings (such a perhaps better to use a single focus area vs using eye af).

Looking at M50+18-150 (maybe 15-45), the 22mm and the Sigma 56mm 1.4 (and later the 11-22).

Thanks!

Peter

Ok, I came from Micro 4/3 land over to Canon R and M cameras.

There are two big things you have to consider when thinking of the differences between M43 and Canon M. The first is...Lenses. Micro 4/3 has a very, very, extensive ecosystem of native lenses that run the gamut from cheap to expensive, and wide to long, and they give you vastly more options than the native lens choices in the Canon M series.

The second is video. Panasonic does a lot with their video features, so if you are planning to do a lot of video work, I would lean towards their offerings. Also, IBIS means you can use manual adapted legacy lenses and still get great stabilization in video. Canons can't do that (yet), and it is a big deal for hand-held video work.

Now we get to the smaller stuff:

Tracking AF is probably going to be better on the M50. S-AF is going to be comparable on both, although Panasonic has great S-AF in general (it's what I use the most on both cameras). Low light AF is fairly comparable, but Panasonic usually wins that one over most others, by a hair.

In terms of usage? The GX9 has a full contingent of control dials, which is definitely a bonus in use. The M50 has one. Canon's done a pretty good job of ergonomics that way, but Panasonic is actually a master of control flexibility, so I would give them the edge there, too.

Now, as to low light IQ and DR: The M50 is better...but not by that much. The 20MP Panasonic sensor is quite credible (I have a GX8, which has the same sensor), and it's pretty good. I would say that the M50 sensor is maybe a hair better, but it's not a marked difference. If you want to do a lot of low light work, both will do ok, but neither will be as good as a FF.

The one area that the M50 trounces the Panasonic is in the EVF. I don't know why they still are using the one they do in that camera, as they have made really excellent ones in other models, but it's terrible. M50's is fine.

I actually disagree with this. I've owned both cameras and kept the GX9. I found the M50 to be more tunnel like and the GX9 to be quite clear and easier to compose with. I've heard that the sequential evf does effect some more than others though.

So, my suggestion would be to see if you can try both of them out at a store, or maybe rent them? Both are good cameras; it's just a matter of which is going to meet your needs the best (and don't forget about lenses....)

-J

Personally I think the GX9 is a better camera. Better built and more responsive. It honestly feels like it cost a lot more to make it. The Canon feels a bit cheap in comparison. Considering there isn't a big price difference between them, this is something to consider. Of course lens selection and price is important, so this should be researched before choosing a system. The Sigma lenses are terrific value for money and they suit the 1.6X crop factor better than the 2X crop. M43 has a wider selection of lenses but that doesn't matter much if M mount offers what you need.

Thanks Luke, and I agree. The GX9 has more options, such as an electronic shutter that works up to 1/16000's, more AF options etc. And the build quality is nice, it is actually somewhat important. The lens selection for M mount is fine for me currently. Biggest disadvantage for me is the DOF, I'd like to be able to shoot some shallow DOF as well, which is very easy on headshots (definitively do not need more than the 42.5/F1.7), but gets a bit more difficult on half-body / full body shots. Not a major difference, but still, on the M50, possible with the Viltrox speedbooster, there is a difference.

I was actually thinking about changing again because of the dof advantage for portraits. The sigma 56mm is amazing value. However I know I will feel like I’ve just downgraded my camera and I really enjoy using the Panasonic. Instead I’ve decided to buy a used pan leica 42.5mm 1.2. It’s still nearly double the cost of the sigma. However changing systems will cost me money so the difference will be smaller. Starting from scratch like you are, is a different story. The canon might be the way to go for price/dof advantage.

There isn't a big difference in image quality, at least I can't see it and ergonomics are both fine. I prefer the Panasonic slightly but the Canon is good. Tilt screen vs FAS must be considered too.

I think the great thing about the M system is that it isn't so expensive to get a range of lenses from UWA to telephoto with a few nice primes. The great thing about Panasonic is that they are just really nice to use. I know I'd pick the Panasonic but I can see why the M50 might appeal more to some. Apologies if this doesn't help much

It does help a lot, although, I am indeed still undecided

Have to find a way to test the GX9 too; just don't like to buy and try and return, as I do not want used items myself either. But renting appears to be impossible. Maybe I should buy second hand and sell again with a small loss.

I’m lucky I live in Tokyo. Trying out cameras is so easy. The downside is that it feeds GAS.

 

[drif8r]

Any time. And also remember, the EF adapters work seamlessly, i use the 50 STM and 100 f/2 USM with a 3rd party adapter, zero issues.

How is AFC with 100mm F2 compred to native EFM lenses?

 

[dpeete]

Fast. It is as good as native.

 

[soumyajit92]

Hi,

New poster here, looking for some advice. I currently have a Canon G7X mk ii that I enjoy a lot. Great camera, and the 1" performance in combination with a fast lens and a good range is very convenient. However, I want to get more serious with photography, and also want an EVF especially (or probably only) for shooting in strong sun light.

I am doubting between the Panasonic GX9 and the Canon M50 (don't want a big camera, as I know I will not be carrying it). Have seen a lot of reviews, and played with the dpreview studio seen raws of both. I'm fine with the EVF of both (not used to one, so any EVF is a step up for me).

I like the GX9 for it's build quality, lens selection, IBIS and quality of 4K. Disadvantages: bad video AF (but touch to focus is sufficient for what I do, so I am mostly ok), and the ability to have a shadower DOF (at a relatively normal cost).

I like the M50 for it's color science (even though I mostly shoot RAW/process with DXO), the autofocus in video, the slightly higher resolution, better ability for shallow DOF, and the inexpensive but sharp UWA). Better grip as well. Disadvantages: no IBIS, soft 4K and a huge crop (and probably even worse AF than the GX9).

My questions:

- is there anyone who has both, and can comment on the IQ, especially low light performance and Dynamic range between the 2

- I have a slight preference for the M50, but I have the impression that some shots with people (so focus in a few meters) are a bit soft (not due to the sensor, as I have seen plenty of sharp images), but due to a very minor focus accuracy issue. Saw a video as well of a professional who claimed that some 40% of his images where soft/not precisely in focus. This was after I noted this myself, so not biased because of it. Zooming in on some portraits, they are not razor sharp (eyes). Question: is this something you have noted, or related to settings (such a perhaps better to use a single focus area vs using eye af).

Looking at M50+18-150 (maybe 15-45), the 22mm and the Sigma 56mm 1.4 (and later the 11-22).

go for this. also i dont think m50 has worse af than gx9. can't be.

Thanks!

Peter

 

[R2D2]

at M50+18-150 (maybe 15-45), the 22mm and the Sigma 56mm 1.4 (and later the 11-22).

go for this. also i dont think m50 has worse af than gx9. can't be.

Too late. Poor Peter already went with the GX9. ;-)

R2

 

[PeterK36]

at M50+18-150 (maybe 15-45), the 22mm and the Sigma 56mm 1.4 (and later the 11-22).

go for this. also i dont think m50 has worse af than gx9. can't be.

Too late. Poor Peter already went with the GX9. ;-)

R2

Not a lost soul though, for EOS-M! Really enjoyed shooting with the M50 and liked the output too.

in the end, I went with the GX9 as I found the IQ very similar (the M50 having slightly better high iso, but this is more often than not compensated. by IBIS/allowing a lower shutter speed). Liked the build quaility a bit better, the 4K is really good , IBIS is very nice on video too, fully useable eshutter, movie modes in shutter or aperture modes too, a better selection of standard zooms, and I liked the 14-140 better than the Canon 18-150.

That said, the M6ii provides better IQ than either M50 or GX9, and I am eye-ing it. I wanted an EVF, but now that I have one (and it is totally a fine one for me, sharp and not small at all), I realize I am so much used to shooting from the screen, that I hardly use the EVF. And the Gx9 screen is actually fine in sunlight. And now I have a camera with one anyway.

So..I did start to think it could be nice to add a second system, so I can pick the nicest lenses for either system (like the cheap 11-22 is better than the Oly 9-18 and still cheaper, the Sigma 56/1.4 would work nicer on the M6ii, etc.)

The lockdown months proof to be cheap too, already one vacation that got cancelled, no drinks, dinners etc. So...if I find a good deal by June, I’ll likely jump on it!

 

[Dr Hal]

I have the GX9 and now the M6 Mark II. I do not mind that the EVF is removable. You cannot lose with either camera. I have been shooting M3 for many years and have been really happy with the GX9 but there is no question in my mind that I am enjoying the M6 more. I have loved the GX with the PL15mm attached but the M6 with the 22mm is just as small and even better.

Hal

 

[Max Iso]

Any time. And also remember, the EF adapters work seamlessly, i use the 50 STM and 100 f/2 USM with a 3rd party adapter, zero issues.

How is AFC with 100mm F2 compred to native EFM lenses?

sorry for the late reply I've been on vacation but it is every bit as good the 100 USM is slightly faster than my 50 m m s t m but both of them are fairly comparable to my native kit lens. I'm not convinced that adapted EF lenses have any kind of CAF disadvantages and all.

 

[Max Iso]

Hi,

New poster here, looking for some advice. I currently have a Canon G7X mk ii that I enjoy a lot. Great camera, and the 1" performance in combination with a fast lens and a good range is very convenient. However, I want to get more serious with photography, and also want an EVF especially (or probably only) for shooting in strong sun light.

I am doubting between the Panasonic GX9 and the Canon M50 (don't want a big camera, as I know I will not be carrying it). Have seen a lot of reviews, and played with the dpreview studio seen raws of both. I'm fine with the EVF of both (not used to one, so any EVF is a step up for me).

I like the GX9 for it's build quality, lens selection, IBIS and quality of 4K. Disadvantages: bad video AF (but touch to focus is sufficient for what I do, so I am mostly ok), and the ability to have a shadower DOF (at a relatively normal cost).

I like the M50 for it's color science (even though I mostly shoot RAW/process with DXO), the autofocus in video, the slightly higher resolution, better ability for shallow DOF, and the inexpensive but sharp UWA). Better grip as well. Disadvantages: no IBIS, soft 4K and a huge crop (and probably even worse AF than the GX9).

My questions:

- is there anyone who has both, and can comment on the IQ, especially low light performance and Dynamic range between the 2

- I have a slight preference for the M50, but I have the impression that some shots with people (so focus in a few meters) are a bit soft (not due to the sensor, as I have seen plenty of sharp images), but due to a very minor focus accuracy issue. Saw a video as well of a professional who claimed that some 40% of his images where soft/not precisely in focus. This was after I noted this myself, so not biased because of it. Zooming in on some portraits, they are not razor sharp (eyes). Question: is this something you have noted, or related to settings (such a perhaps better to use a single focus area vs using eye af).

Looking at M50+18-150 (maybe 15-45), the 22mm and the Sigma 56mm 1.4 (and later the 11-22).

go for this. also i dont think m50 has worse af than gx9. can't be.

Not possible. I had the G9 and my M50 is better. The G9 had more AF features/options but pure AF performance the M50 is a clear winner.