M200

[shadowz]

To users of M200,

sorry if this has already been discussed earlier[I could not find any such thread upon using the search function]

Understanding that the M200 body wears a tiny retractable flash on it's shoulder ,how does it[flash] work out in actual usage indoors[ for non professional /hobbyist usage ] for informal captures of friends and family ?

thanks

regards

--
CONTENT IS KING!

 

[bengrulz]

I'm not an experienced flash user, but I think it's great when you have a white ceiling. You can pull it back with a finger and bounce it off the ceiling for good fill lighting.

 

[shadowz]

I'm not an experienced flash user, but I think it's great when you have a white ceiling. You can pull it back with a finger and bounce it off the ceiling for good fill lighting.

thank you sir

 

[allineedislight]

To users of M200,

sorry if this has already been discussed earlier[I could not find any such thread upon using the search function]

Understanding that the M200 body wears a tiny retractable flash on it's shoulder ,how does it[flash] work out in actual usage indoors[ for non professional /hobbyist usage ] for informal captures of friends and family ?

thanks

regards

I only have an M100 but I guess it works the same in the M200.

You simply open the flash, and then you take your picture. In most scene modes the flash is in "auto" mode, so the camera decides whether it will fire the flash. In the creative exposure modes (manual, aperture priority etc) you can set the flash to always fire, not fire, or auto. You can also choose whether you want to have it fire at 1st or 2nd curtain etc.

I found the flash to be very accurate. If you find that it overexposes you can also dial in some flash exposure compensation. And as others have commented, you can bounce the flash so that it generates indirect light.

In fact, I bought the M100 because it has the little flash built in - it is very handy. Personally, I don't like to carry extra speed lights with extra batteries (even tiny ones such as the Canon 90ex).

Another "must" feature for me is in-camera raw development. I am a JPG+RAW shooter, and this helps enormously to set up the JPG picture styles to your taste, and to fix the occasional white balance error (and this was the reason I went for the M100 over the M200, because M100 has proper in-camera raw redevelopment, whereas M200 only has "create assist" mode to process raws).

 

[Andy01]

I think the flash is really too small & weak to use bounce effectively unless you have a very low, very bright white ceiling.

It is a typical compact camera flash (in size & power) with the one difference that it is "hinged" at the top of the pop-up arm allowing the angle to be changed. Same as several of the other M bodies (I had a M3 before the M5 and it was like that).

The downside with the M200 is that there is no hotshoe, so no options around add-on flashes like 270 EX ii. You may be able to use the M200 flash to trigger optically another Canon flash off camera - not sure though.

Colin

 

[shadowz]

To users of M200,

sorry if this has already been discussed earlier[I could not find any such thread upon using the search function]

Understanding that the M200 body wears a tiny retractable flash on it's shoulder ,how does it[flash] work out in actual usage indoors[ for non professional /hobbyist usage ] for informal captures of friends and family ?

thanks

regards

I only have an M100 but I guess it works the same in the M200.

You simply open the flash, and then you take your picture. In most scene modes the flash is in "auto" mode, so the camera decides whether it will fire the flash. In the creative exposure modes (manual, aperture priority etc) you can set the flash to always fire, not fire, or auto. You can also choose whether you want to have it fire at 1st or 2nd curtain etc.

I found the flash to be very accurate. If you find that it overexposes you can also dial in some flash exposure compensation. And as others have commented, you can bounce the flash so that it generates indirect light.

In fact, I bought the M100 because it has the little flash built in - it is very handy. Personally, I don't like to carry extra speed lights with extra batteries (even tiny ones such as the Canon 90ex).

Another "must" feature for me is in-camera raw development. I am a JPG+RAW shooter, and this helps enormously to set up the JPG picture styles to your taste, and to fix the occasional white balance error (and this was the reason I went for the M100 over the M200, because M100 has proper in-camera raw redevelopment, whereas M200 only has "create assist" mode to process raws).

thanks for your response .

i was actually feeling attracted to the m200 , but will look at the m100 too.

 

[shadowz]

I think the flash is really too small & weak to use bounce effectively unless you have a very low, very bright white ceiling.

It is a typical compact camera flash (in size & power) with the one difference that it is "hinged" at the top of the pop-up arm allowing the angle to be changed. Same as several of the other M bodies (I had a M3 before the M5 and it was like that).

The downside with the M200 is that there is no hotshoe, so no options around add-on flashes like 270 EX ii. You may be able to use the M200 flash to trigger optically another Canon flash off camera - not sure though.

Colin

hmmm .... thanks Colin !

 

[allineedislight]

thanks for your response .

i was actually feeling attracted to the m200 , but will look at the m100 too.

yes, do have a close look!

The M100 has one button more than then M200. The M100 has a video button and a wifi button whereas the M200 only has the video button (which also moved from the top of the camera to the back, which is why with the M200 there needs to be a virtual movie button on screen).

M100 has Digic 7, M200 has Digic 8 ,which means M200 has (limited) 4K video. Limited because is is in crop mode and without fast autofocus. So in the end you will most likely also use the same HD video as with M100.

An advantage of the M200 is that is has ambience preferred auto white balance (AWB) as well as neutral AWB whereas M100 only has neutral AWB. So if you are shooting e.g under tungsten and want warm light then you need to explicitly set tungsten WB on the M100. but that is no big deal. Especially if you shoot raw+JPG so you can change after the fact (with the m100 in-camera raw redevelopment).

Finally, M200 has clean HDMI out of the box - which is needed if you like to use it as webcam or record externally. However, on the M100 you can get the same clean HDMI (plus removal of the 30 minute limit) by putting a Canon basic script on the SD card.

So all in all, I think M100 it is for me. Especially the in camera raw developer was the deciding factor (weirdly this was removed/crippled in M200). Plus that the M100 is a steal to buy - both brand new and used. (so I suggest get the M100 instead of the M200, and with the money saved you buy the 22mm prime lens).

I think of it as a mini M6

PS: there is also porting of CHDK on the way for M100:

https://chdk.setepontos.com/index.php?topic=13943.0

 

[shadowz]

thanks for your response .

i was actually feeling attracted to the m200 , but will look at the m100 too.

yes, do have a close look!

The M100 has one button more than then M200. The M100 has a video button and a wifi button whereas the M200 only has the video button (which also moved from the top of the camera to the back, which is why with the M200 there needs to be a virtual movie button on screen).

M100 has Digic 7, M200 has Digic 8 ,which means M200 has (limited) 4K video. Limited because is is in crop mode and without fast autofocus. So in the end you will most likely also use the same HD video as with M100.

An advantage of the M200 is that is has ambience preferred auto white balance (AWB) as well as neutral AWB whereas M100 only has neutral AWB. So if you are shooting e.g under tungsten and want warm light then you need to explicitly set tungsten WB on the M100. but that is no big deal. Especially if you shoot raw+JPG so you can change after the fact (with the m100 in-camera raw redevelopment).

Finally, M200 has clean HDMI out of the box - which is needed if you like to use it as webcam or record externally. However, on the M100 you can get the same clean HDMI (plus removal of the 30 minute limit) by putting a Canon basic script on the SD card.

So all in all, I think M100 it is for me. Especially the in camera raw developer was the deciding factor (weirdly this was removed/crippled in M200). Plus that the M100 is a steal to buy - both brand new and used. (so I suggest get the M100 instead of the M200, and with the money saved you buy the 22mm prime lens).

I think of it as a mini M6

PS: there is also porting of CHDK on the way for M100:

https://chdk.setepontos.com/index.php?topic=13943.0

Thanks for the detailed write up .....

 

[bengrulz]

i was actually feeling attracted to the m200 , but will look at the m100 too.

One major thing to note between the two is that the M200 focuses much better in low light than the M100. This is the main reason I upgraded, as the M100 was quite frustrating in lower light settings, it would endlessly hunt.

Here is a youtube video which demonstrates this.

For reference, as far as focusing goes

M6 = M5 = M100

and

M50 = M200

 

[shadowz]

i was actually feeling attracted to the m200 , but will look at the m100 too.

One major thing to note between the two is that the M200 focuses much better in low light than the M100. This is the main reason I upgraded, as the M100 was quite frustrating in lower light settings, it would endlessly hunt.

Here is a youtube video which demonstrates this.

For reference, as far as focusing goes

M6 = M5 = M100

and

M50 = M200

ok...ok.. yes... AF is important....

Thanks

--
CONTENT IS KING!

 

[allineedislight]

Sure the Digic 8 in the M200/M50 also improves AF.

But personally I haven't noticed any issues with correct focusing with the M100.

Because it has an AF assist lamp that will briefly illuminate a scene when focusing in near darkness .. in the above video this is turned off...

 

[thunder storm]

i was actually feeling attracted to the m200 , but will look at the m100 too.

One major thing to note between the two is that the M200 focuses much better in low light than the M100. This is the main reason I upgraded, as the M100 was quite frustrating in lower light settings, it would endlessly hunt.

Here is a youtube video which demonstrates this.

For reference, as far as focusing goes

M6 = M5 = M100

and

M50 = M200

No. The M200 has a better rating than the M50. The M200 is supposed to be better, and I assume the M50mkII will be on par with the M200.

 

[shadowz]

i was actually feeling attracted to the m200 , but will look at the m100 too.

One major thing to note between the two is that the M200 focuses much better in low light than the M100. This is the main reason I upgraded, as the M100 was quite frustrating in lower light settings, it would endlessly hunt.

Here is a youtube video which demonstrates this.

For reference, as far as focusing goes

M6 = M5 = M100

and

M50 = M200

No. The M200 has a better rating than the M50. The M200 is supposed to be better, and I assume the M50mkII will be on par with the M200.

Well This is indeed interesting info ....I will be obliged if you can kindly give me a link to this write up that you refer to ,and oblige ...

.thanks ......

 

[allineedislight]

I think this correct - both M50 mark 2 and m200 have eye detect AF, so it looks they have the same AF software.

 

[allineedislight]

in any case, to choose between M100 and M200 I would recommend watching the M200 cameralabs review:

he actually recommends in the end getting the M100 if you can still find one

 

[shadowz]

in any case, to choose between M100 and M200 I would recommend watching the M200 cameralabs review:

he actually recommends in the end getting the M100 if you can still find one

Ok thanks ...will look it up right away....

 

[thunder storm]

i was actually feeling attracted to the m200 , but will look at the m100 too.

One major thing to note between the two is that the M200 focuses much better in low light than the M100. This is the main reason I upgraded, as the M100 was quite frustrating in lower light settings, it would endlessly hunt.

Here is a youtube video which demonstrates this.

For reference, as far as focusing goes

M6 = M5 = M100

and

M50 = M200

No. The M200 has a better rating than the M50. The M200 is supposed to be better, and I assume the M50mkII will be on par with the M200.

Well This is indeed interesting info ....I will be obliged if you can kindly give me a link to this write up that you refer to ,and oblige ...

.thanks ......

Sorry, I wrote this several times on this forum, you can google it yourself. AF-sensitivity. The digital picture provides detailed spec sheets, but there are other sources as well.

 

[thunder storm]

in any case, to choose between M100 and M200 I would recommend watching the M200 cameralabs review:

he actually recommends in the end getting the M100 if you can still find one

That is a very bad advice if you want good AF.

 

[allineedislight]

in any case, to choose between M100 and M200 I would recommend watching the M200 cameralabs review:

he actually recommends in the end getting the M100 if you can still find one

That is a very bad advice if you want good AF.

if you are on a fixed budget, I think its better to get a M100 plus the 22mm prime

than M200 with just the kit lens.

just my 2cents.