Canon M50 Mark II - an underrated camera?

KEG wrote:

Nigge wrote:

It is just to strange that Canon didn’t put the 32MP sensor in the 50ii. Why do they put in a dated sensor when they have a more up to date one??? Unbelievable.

Because:

1. M50 is a budget camera
2. canon is protecting sales of M6 mk II and RP by not using it
3. In all reality the 24 MP sensor is actually really good

4.  It's possible to create decent AF improvements over the Mk1 even with the old sensor and same processor.

thunder storm wrote:

KEG wrote:

Nigge wrote:

It is just to strange that Canon didn’t put the 32MP sensor in the 50ii. Why do they put in a dated sensor when they have a more up to date one??? Unbelievable.

Because:

1. M50 is a budget camera
2. canon is protecting sales of M6 mk II and RP by not using it
3. In all reality the 24 MP sensor is actually really good

4. It's possible to create decent AF improvements over the Mk1 even with the old sensor and same processor.

5. M50 was actually rather good in AF, especially for a budget cam

Risto456 wrote:

On the AF subject (hopefully I'm not hijacking the thread):

recently upgraded from the M6 to the M6.II, based on my experience with EyeAF on the RP.

Everything is fine with M6.II, but one thing I found a little disappointing, when tested side by side (the key test being done with 50mm on the RP vs 30mm on the M6.II): the RP's EyeAF was able to pick the eyes from over 10ft (3m) away, while the M6.II only from about 3ft (1m).

I've noticed this too, comparing the R with the M6II. I would say the R will pick up an eye from as far as 20 feet away with a 50mm mounted, and the M6II will get an eye from about 10 feet away with the 32 mounted. But the M6II tracks just as well as the R, if not better. All things considered, I would put the AF of the M6II and the R (and RP) as pretty much the same. I've never failed to get a perfectly sharp eye with the M6II, even when face detect only selects the face and not the eye. It could be that eye detect is working even when the square on the screen (or in the EVF) is only showing the face. As for the AF in the M50II, I would be very surprised if it were better than the M6II.

Probably most would say that at such distances the face detection would suffice, but I found the RP's behavior much more reassuring.

I'm wondering whether to go for the M50.II instead of M6.II if the AF behaves more like the RP (when the stock availability improves).

Would you know, especially the lucky few who managed to put their hands on the M50.II so far, if that behavior is similar there?

I recently got the M50 Mark II and I honestly love it!

I had the M5 which when I got it at launch felt like such a great camera but in terms of AF, it is now showing its age. I feel the M series has so much potential and I enjoy using it but altering owning and using bodies like the A7III and R6 the M5’s AF was frustrating for me.

I feel the M50 Mark II’s AF is much closer to my R6 and I can happily use it without feeling like it’s a big step down. I will say I wish it had IBIS, I’ve become so used to dragging the shutter on the A7III and R6 that I often go too slow of a shutter speed on the M50 Mark II.

The only other annoyance is the lack of IR sensor. Even the R6 has one so I need to buy the BR-E1 just for the R6. Here’s a few photos with the M50 Mark II.