Canon M50 Mark II - an underrated camera?

I am surprised not to find any review of the Canon EOS M50 Mark II camera anywhere (neither on dpreview nor on youtube)...

I am a dad of two kids and I realized after having rent a Sony A7III that face detection and eye AF were not just gimmicks but super useful features to take portraits of kids running around at full speed.

I rented a Fujifilm X-T3 that I didn't like much, and a Canon EOS R6 that I liked very much but I am still reluctant to spend 2500 dollars for mainly travel and family pictures (and some landscape photography from time to time).

I own an Olympus OMD EM10 Mk II which takes very pictures but struggles with continuous AF tracking of my 2,5 year old son. I also own a Canon M100 with a 22mm lens that is very convenient to carry everywhere, and I realized that I liked the pictures coming this tiny APS-C camera.

I made my wish list for a camera: state of the art AF with very good tracking and eye AF for portraits of my kids, compact (I found the Canon R6 a bit bulky compared to the sony A7), decent 1080p 24fps video (no need for 4K). No need for high speed fps.

So I decided to rent the Canon Eos M50 Mark II (I don't like the Sony A6XX range finder body style) and I really liked the autofocus capabilities (at least single shot drive), the compact body, responsive touchscreen, image quality (with lossless compressed raw).

Now this camera is difficult to purchase as it seems sold out in a lot of places, but can somebody explain me why nobody talks about this little gem? I understand that some people were expecting more from the Mark II with more pixels, 4K etc, but for somebody focused on still photography, it looks like a perfect carry everywhere camera.

I'd like to have other people opinion on this camera!

Cheers

I think it's because it's still hard to get. I expect we'll see more people talking about it once more people actually get their hands on it.

Namouze wrote:

I am surprised not to find any review of the Canon EOS M50 Mark II camera anywhere (neither on dpreview nor on youtube)...

I am a dad of two kids and I realized after having rent a Sony A7III that face detection and eye AF were not just gimmicks but super useful features to take portraits of kids running around at full speed.

I rented a Fujifilm X-T3 that I didn't like much, and a Canon EOS R6 that I liked very much but I am still reluctant to spend 2500 dollars for mainly travel and family pictures (and some landscape photography from time to time).

I own an Olympus OMD EM10 Mk II which takes very pictures but struggles with continuous AF tracking of my 2,5 year old son. I also own a Canon M100 with a 22mm lens that is very convenient to carry everywhere, and I realized that I liked the pictures coming this tiny APS-C camera.

I made my wish list for a camera: state of the art AF with very good tracking and eye AF for portraits of my kids, compact (I found the Canon R6 a bit bulky compared to the sony A7), decent 1080p 24fps video (no need for 4K). No need for high speed fps.

So I decided to rent the Canon Eos M50 Mark II (I don't like the Sony A6XX range finder body style) and I really liked the autofocus capabilities (at least single shot drive), the compact body, responsive touchscreen, image quality (with lossless compressed raw).

Now this camera is difficult to purchase as it seems sold out in a lot of places, but can somebody explain me why nobody talks about this little gem? I understand that some people were expecting more from the Mark II with more pixels, 4K etc, but for somebody focused on still photography, it looks like a perfect carry everywhere camera.

I'd like to have other people opinion on this camera!

Cheers

For most part it is because M50 does it almost all.

nnowak wrote:

Alastair Norcross wrote:

I think it's because it's still hard to get. I expect we'll see more people talking about it once more people actually get their hands on it.

Exactly. I believe the M50 II has not even been released in much of the world.

I think that is one of the primary reasons.

Namouze wrote:

KEG wrote:

Namouze wrote:

I am surprised not to find any review of the Canon EOS M50 Mark II camera anywhere (neither on dpreview nor on youtube)...

I am a dad of two kids and I realized after having rent a Sony A7III that face detection and eye AF were not just gimmicks but super useful features to take portraits of kids running around at full speed.

I rented a Fujifilm X-T3 that I didn't like much, and a Canon EOS R6 that I liked very much but I am still reluctant to spend 2500 dollars for mainly travel and family pictures (and some landscape photography from time to time).

I own an Olympus OMD EM10 Mk II which takes very pictures but struggles with continuous AF tracking of my 2,5 year old son. I also own a Canon M100 with a 22mm lens that is very convenient to carry everywhere, and I realized that I liked the pictures coming this tiny APS-C camera.

I made my wish list for a camera: state of the art AF with very good tracking and eye AF for portraits of my kids, compact (I found the Canon R6 a bit bulky compared to the sony A7), decent 1080p 24fps video (no need for 4K). No need for high speed fps.

So I decided to rent the Canon Eos M50 Mark II (I don't like the Sony A6XX range finder body style) and I really liked the autofocus capabilities (at least single shot drive), the compact body, responsive touchscreen, image quality (with lossless compressed raw).

Now this camera is difficult to purchase as it seems sold out in a lot of places, but can somebody explain me why nobody talks about this little gem? I understand that some people were expecting more from the Mark II with more pixels, 4K etc, but for somebody focused on still photography, it looks like a perfect carry everywhere camera.

I'd like to have other people opinion on this camera!

Cheers

For most part it is because M50 does it almost all.

This is true, but the autofocus seem greatly improved with continuous tracking, and eye AF similar to the EOS R6 (without the 20 fps). This improvement by itself puts it in another ballpark I'd say.

If the AF is on a level with the M6II, I agree that it's a big step forward over the M50. The M6II AF is leaps and bounds better than the M6, which I also have. From what I've read of the M50 AF, it's basically on a level with the M6, maybe a touch better. If you want good tracking and eye AF, the difference is definitely worth it. Given the popularity of the M50, I imagine the M50II will also sell very well, once it's widely available.

Namouze wrote:

(...) but can somebody explain me why nobody talks about this little gem? I understand that some people were expecting more from the Mark II with more pixels, 4K etc, but for somebody focused on still photography, it looks like a perfect carry everywhere camera.

I'd like to have other people opinion on this camera.

Well, sometimes images speak more than words.

I went with my family to the Sugar Loaf cable car in Rio de Janeiro.

I'd like to take a picture with my M50 of my wife inside the cable car, from the outside.

So, she and my daughter entered the cable car, and I took their picture.

SOOC

I liked this picture, but the window is too dark to see anyone within the cable car.

So, using DPP, I increased the exposure of this picture.

Processed with DPP

After overexposing the photo, finally I could see them both, but the Sugar Loaf at the background...

So, I put these 2 pictures together.

That is my final picture, exactly how I imagined it

It is really amazing what these little M cameras can accomplish.

I appreciate your starting this thread and discussion.  I too have been looking for more information on the M50ii.  I currently have the m6ii and like it a lot.  However, if the m50ii were equal to the m6ii in most important areas, I would switch because I like a DSLR style body, fully articulated screen, and an integrated viewfinder.  Keep this discussion going as the M50ii becomes more available and popular.  Thank you!

Karen Casebeer wrote:

I appreciate your starting this thread and discussion. I too have been looking for more information on the M50ii. I currently have the m6ii and like it a lot. However, if the m50ii were equal to the m6ii in most important areas, I would switch because I like a DSLR style body, fully articulated screen, and an integrated viewfinder

I own the M6 II and the old M50 I’ve only had the Mark II since the 23rd of Dec. I’ve found the M6 to be so much more than the M50.

The differences you mention were also concerns of mine especially the lack of a view finder so much so that I bought the DCF 2, it arrived before the camera. Other than a quick test I haven’t used it at all.

The M6 is much more customizable than the M 50 including the M50 MK II. While I like the M50 I love the M6 I have customized it so I don’t have to use the menu system near as much as the M50 . IMO going back to the M50 would be a huge step backward.

. Keep this discussion going as the M50ii becomes more available and popular. Thank you!

I do like my M6ii, except for the DCF 2 (and the non-articulating screen).  It works okay and I used it all the time.  It's kind of weird-looking, though.  I don't customize anything so I'm not sure I'd miss that.  Will probably have to try out the M50ii and compare it with my m6ii.

These look great!  Your input is helpful.  Will look forward to more information when the bodies are in better supply.

Good for you!  Let us know how you like your M50ii.  I hope you're right about the M5ii coming next year.

Advi wrote:

Namouze wrote:

(...) but can somebody explain me why nobody talks about this little gem? I understand that some people were expecting more from the Mark II with more pixels, 4K etc, but for somebody focused on still photography, it looks like a perfect carry everywhere camera.

I'd like to have other people opinion on this camera.

Well, sometimes images speak more than words.

I went with my family to the Sugar Loaf cable car in Rio de Janeiro.

I'd like to take a picture with my M50 of my wife inside the cable car, from the outside.

So, she and my daughter entered the cable car, and I took their picture.

SOOC

I liked this picture, but the window is too dark to see anyone within the cable car.

So, using DPP, I increased the exposure of this picture.

Processed with DPP

After overexposing the photo, finally I could see them both, but the Sugar Loaf at the background...

So, I put these 2 pictures together.

That is my final picture, exactly how I imagined it

It is really amazing what these little M cameras can accomplish.

I can make a similar photo with my phone.

1. Namouze wrote:

I am surprised not to find any review of the Canon EOS M50 Mark II camera anywhere (neither on dpreview nor on youtube)...

I am a dad of two kids and I realized after having rent a Sony A7III that face detection and eye AF were not just gimmicks but super useful features to take portraits of kids running around at full speed.

I rented a Fujifilm X-T3 that I didn't like much, and a Canon EOS R6 that I liked very much but I am still reluctant to spend 2500 dollars for mainly travel and family pictures (and some landscape photography from time to time).

I own an Olympus OMD EM10 Mk II which takes very pictures but struggles with continuous AF tracking of my 2,5 year old son. I also own a Canon M100 with a 22mm lens that is very convenient to carry everywhere, and I realized that I liked the pictures coming this tiny APS-C camera.

I made my wish list for a camera: state of the art AF with very good tracking and eye AF for portraits of my kids, compact (I found the Canon R6 a bit bulky compared to the sony A7), decent 1080p 24fps video (no need for 4K). No need for high speed fps.

So I decided to rent the Canon Eos M50 Mark II (I don't like the Sony A6XX range finder body style) and I really liked the autofocus capabilities (at least single shot drive), the compact body, responsive touchscreen, image quality (with lossless compressed raw).

Now this camera is difficult to purchase as it seems sold out in a lot of places, but can somebody explain me why nobody talks about this little gem? I understand that some people were expecting more from the Mark II with more pixels, 4K etc, but for somebody focused on still photography, it looks like a perfect carry everywhere camera.

I'd like to have other people opinion on this camera!

Cheers

Its the same camera as the m50, there's plenty of reviews about it.