M50 vs M6 mark ii vs 90D vs eos RP photography mainly

nolten wrote:

I certainly don't want to get in between you and AdamT but most of your arguments seem to be very narrow opinions to me.

I have both the M6II and 90D. They are both excellent cameras but useful for very different purposes.

thunder storm wrote:

No. Thet handling is good with the M6mkII, as you can use it with the viewfinder, and bad with the 90D, as it's crazy heavy to hold in front of you.

I don't like using the rear viewfinder on either camera for general photography. I mostly use the EVF with my M and G and the optical viewfinder with my DSLRs. Holding the camera to your eye is much more stable than holding a camera cell phone style. However I've successfully used all my flip screen display cameras for odd positioning such as overhead or close to the ground when necessary. Finally, its the size of the lens that affects the stability of using the rear LCD.

For crop cameras there are no better options on this "endless" list for the

- Samyang 12mm f/2.0

- Canon 11-22mm

- Sigma 16mm

- Sigma 30mm

- Sigma 56mm

There are also no better options for crop cameras than the adapted Sigma 18-35mm and 50-100mm f/1.8, as those won't work properly on the 90D.

Furthermore: every lens that can be mounted on a 90D can be adapted on a M6mkII.

When it comes to glass options there's just one conclusion possible: M wins. Period.

Wrong! All of the M lenses you mention, with one exception, are fast non-IS primes. The Samyang is not only manual focus but manual exposure. This may suit your style of shooting but its not universal. I prefer IS zooms for the convenience, flexibility and the stabilization.

That's o.k., in that case M - except for the 11-22mm - doesn't have an advantage over ef-s for your shooting needs. At the same time it still doesn't have a disadvantage as it comes to lens collection.

I really try to keep my lens changes to a minimum while traveling. I've been in digital photography for 18 years and the only non-IS lenses I own for my DSLRs are the 24mm TSE, and a 20mm Voightlander pancake. For the M I have the Samyang Rokinon 12 and Sigma 56 but I consider both of these special use lenses.

Special or not, those are options hard to replace with ef-s equivalents.

The main lenses I use on my M are the 11-22, EF-S 35 f2.8 IS macro, and either the 55-250 or 70-300 IS II.

I can't imagine spending all day in a dusty Toyota Landcruiser in the Serengeti with my 100-400 on the M. Besides the ergonomics and the lack of weather sealing, the M is rated for 305 images while the 90D is rated for 1300.

You could buy a 12v plug with USB C PD connection to charge the M6mkII.

Even for a day at the zoo I'd prefer the 70-300 II on the 90D.

I don't see why it's a problem to change a battery at the zoo?

The excellent EF-S 15-85 or 24-70 f4 L are much more ergonomic on the 90D.

I loved the 15-85mm on my M50 as my lightweight walk around zoom. Way lighter compared to the sigma 18-35mm f/1.8. Not using those zooms anymore as I have a 24-70mm f/2.8 for my R now.

And this is personal, but I prefer an optical viewfinder to electronic.

Yes that's a good point. My wife prefers optical viewfinders too. Optical viewfinders are kind of irreplaceable as they don't suffer from moving pixel pattern things with diagonal lines like EFVs do. For me it's not a problem, but if you hate that aspect of EVFs the OVF is still the way to go.

The M6II is a very versatile camera to have in your daypack with the lenses I listed above. Even so I supplement it with my G1X3 to fill in the lack of an excellent standard M zoom.

I've used the 15-85mm IS USM and the sigma 18-35mm f/1.8 without any problems on my M50.  I've never bought the ef-m 18-150mm, however, I don't see what's wrong with that lens, as it will be kind of on par with the ef-s 15-85mm IS USM.

The M is a handy accessory with my full frame DSLRs and EF zooms. So I'm not saying your preferences are wrong for you, just that you can't apply them universally.

The only thing I applied universally is the option to mount lenses on M being better than ef-s equivalents.  If those lenses suite your needs is another thing.

thunder storm wrote:

xeppelin wrote:

* 28 Macro (it is very good optically and useful, even at f/3.5)

Could be right, it's not on my list due to my lack of knowledge. I know there's a 35mm f/2.8 IS stm macro for ef-s. I don't know how this lens exactly compares. The 28mm is a bit more useful as a walk around focal length, however, the longer focal length and larger max aperture of the ef-s is more useful for portraits. Impossible to declare a clear winner here.

I have both and have used both extensively on my M6II and the 35 on my 80 and 90Ds.  Both are equivalent optically, excellently sharp, so choose for other criteria.  The 28 can go 1.2:1 vs 1:1, but at 28 mm it has less working distance.  The 35 is f2.8 vs f3.5 which is not important for macro work.  28 vs 35 FOV is personal preference.  Both have excellent stabilization.  M wins for size, but both are very light.

If you are going all M mount choose the 28.  Since I always have the EF adapter with my M, I usually carry the 35 since its faster, has a bit more reach/working distance, and more evenly fills the gap between the 11-22 and 55-250.  I like both for more than just macro and love the M6II's focus stacking feature with these lenses.

thunder storm wrote:

nolten wrote:

That's o.k., in that case M - except for the 11-22mm - doesn't have an advantage over ef-s for your shooting needs. At the same time it still doesn't have a disadvantage as it comes to lens collection.

The M and the lenses I choose to use with it certainly have a size weight advantage over my DSLRs even if this doesn't include many primes.

For the M I have the Samyang Rokinon 12 and Sigma 56 but I consider both of these special use lenses.

Special or not, those are options hard to replace with ef-s equivalents.

I fully agree! For the price and weight they are worth it even if they are not regular carries. The Samyang is still a bit of an experiment since I haven't had it in the field yet. I got it to do night skies. We're going out the desert in a week and I want to experiment with it and the 22 f2. I'm hoping it will work for auroras when I get back to Alaska.

You could buy a 12v plug with USB C PD connection to charge the M6mkII.

Yes I have those. For wildlife tours access to the van or jeep for charging is problematic. Spare batteries are easy enough. Besides in-body charging I have a light weight dual USB charger for nights in camps. Even in the Serengeti the tour companies provide power for recharging.

Even for a day at the zoo I'd prefer the 70-300 II on the 90D.

I don't see why it's a problem to change a battery at the zoo?

This was not a power reference but an ergonomic one. The 70-300 is the largest lens I find convenient to use with the M. If I'm not otherwise burdened with a heavy pack then the 90D is just as convenient. I will admit however that the EVF of the M allows for hand held focus stacking which I wouldn't try with the 90D.

The excellent EF-S 15-85 or 24-70 f4 L are much more ergonomic on the 90D.

I loved the 15-85mm on my M50 as my lightweight walk around zoom. Way lighter compared to the sigma 18-35mm f/1.8. Not using those zooms anymore as I have a 24-70mm f/2.8 for my R now.

And this is personal, but I prefer an optical viewfinder to electronic.

Yes that's a good point. My wife prefers optical viewfinders too. Optical viewfinders are kind of irreplaceable as they don't suffer from moving pixel pattern things with diagonal lines like EFVs do. For me it's not a problem, but if you hate that aspect of EVFs the OVF is still the way to go.

My wife likes the 15-85 on her 77D. An 80 or 90D is too heavy, the M6II is too complicated and the lens is too heavy for an SL2. She mostly uses her cell phone unless we're traveling. Its all down to personal preference.

I've used the 15-85mm IS USM and the sigma 18-35mm f/1.8 without any problems on my M50. I've never bought the ef-m 18-150mm, however, I don't see what's wrong with that lens, as it will be kind of on par with the ef-s 15-85mm IS USM.

I agree. The 15-85 is really my wife's lens and it takes nice images. I usually travel with a 5D (now IV) and 24-105 and 100-400 Ls and the V20. I use my G1X3 as alternate. For wildlife specific trips I've been using my 80D, now 90D. For non-wildlife I'm wondering about using the M + 11-22 + 70-300 as supplement to my 5D + 24-70 f4 L since the M could also use the 24-70 if needed. This would give me the option of two bodies. I'd still probably take the G as its just so useful. Covid has given me too much time to think about this.

The only thing I applied universally is the option to mount

[fast prime]

lenses on M being better than ef-s equivalents. If those lenses suite your needs is another thing.

I was never arguing about this aspect. The M is great for M mount fast primes. These are affordable, light weight, and of good quality. That is why I got the Sigma 56. I'd never get enough use out of an 85 f1.4 IS L to justify its cost and its too heavy for me to take it traveling. But the lack of EF-S primes or light, cheap EF primes is no reason to dismiss the 90D.  There are EF 24, 28, 35 f2.8 or f2 primes with IS and there is the EF 50 f1.4 and EF-S 60 f2.8 so the 90D's prime selection isn't empty.  There are quality EF and EF-S zooms and telephotos that mount more ergonomically on the 90D.

I'm not arguing which is the better camera or the more convenient to take along. After PP the images from all these options, from FF to P&S, are really hard to distinguish unless one is really being picky. I'm sure the EF-M 18-150 is fine, though its not my cup of tea. Its all good!

nnowak wrote:

thunder storm wrote:

AdamT wrote:

Been there, done that. Holding my 70D in front of me just to get the best AF for shooting persons wasn't a great handling experience for me.

Neither is doing the same with an M6-II

- you don't have to, as you can have mirrorless AF while using the viewfinder

- If you do this, the experience will be better as it's a way lighter camera.

as the M6-II but with EFCS so no shutter shock , it uses his existing lenses without an adapter,

OP can use the existing EF(-s)lenses with adapter on M, while you can't use excellent ef-m lenses on the 90D.

there aren`t many excellent M lenses and unlikely to be any more , the 11-22 and two primes

No. There are 6 excellent lenses for M which simply can't be replaced by ef-s lenses or EF lenses on a 90D.

samyang 12mm f/2.0

canon 11-22mm

sigma 16mm f/1.4

sigma 30mm f/1.4

canon 32mm f/1.4

sigma 56mm f/1.4

There's one exception: the 32mm f/1.4 can be replaced with the EF 35mm f/1.4 USM mkII.

That is not exactly a resounding endorsement of a system when two thirds of the "excellent lenses" are from third party manufacturers.

Context:  I was comparing M to Canon crop DSLRs.

For Canon crop DSLRs it's not exactly a resounding endorsement when you can't use third party glass without AF inconsistency problems.

nnowak wrote:

thunder storm wrote:

There are 6 excellent lenses for M which simply can't be replaced by ef-s lenses or EF lenses on a 90D.

samyang 12mm f/2.0

canon 11-22mm

sigma 16mm f/1.4

sigma 30mm f/1.4

canon 32mm f/1.4

sigma 56mm f/1.4

There's one exception: the 32mm f/1.4 can be replaced with the EF 35mm f/1.4 USM mkII.

That is not exactly a resounding endorsement of a system when two thirds of the "excellent lenses" are from third party manufacturers.

Heck, I don’t care if they’re built by elves in a hollow tree!  I’m delighted to have them in the M System!  

R2

R2D2 wrote:

nnowak wrote:

thunder storm wrote:

There are 6 excellent lenses for M which simply can't be replaced by ef-s lenses or EF lenses on a 90D.

samyang 12mm f/2.0

canon 11-22mm

sigma 16mm f/1.4

sigma 30mm f/1.4

canon 32mm f/1.4

sigma 56mm f/1.4

There's one exception: the 32mm f/1.4 can be replaced with the EF 35mm f/1.4 USM mkII.

That is not exactly a resounding endorsement of a system when two thirds of the "excellent lenses" are from third party manufacturers.

Heck, I don’t care if they’re built by elves in a hollow tree! I’m delighted to have them in the M System!

R2

Totally agree

AlbertH wrote:

Wow didnt expect so many replies! thanks all for input!!

i think i will going to get a M6 mark ii body + ef-m canon 32mm 1.4 lens.
i hope i will get used to shooting with the screen, otherwise i will try to get a EVF-DC2 second hand or when its on sale.

I think this is a good decision for your use case Albert. Just be forewarned that your plan to adapt EF-S 18-135mm to M6 II may not get you what you hope for. I would advise to buy the combo with 15-45mm lens and EVF and save some money that way. I also have 80D with 17-55mm IS 2.8, which is a great lens for APS-C sensor, but it is too heavy on my M6 II (I have the EF-M adapter as well, so speaking from experience). I love the compactness and portability of M6 II, so a small standard zoom would probably get more use on it, than 18-135 with adapter. M-series cameras make much more sense if you use EF-M mount lenses with them. I currently have 22mm, 11-22mm, and 15-45mm, and plan to get 32mm this summer. I just think that with one EF-M prime you may find your options too limited for travel photography. BTW, 22mm 2.0 is a great lens, very versatile focal distance and very affordable. I would encourage you to put it high on your list (perhaps trade that 18-135 for 22mm prime?)