M50, improved

Larry Rexley wrote:

thunder storm wrote:

Larry Rexley wrote:

R2D2 wrote:

RLight wrote:

If AF is a concern, you should have a hard look at the M6 Mark II

+1 Using Spot AF with Servo (doing the tracking myself), I’m confident that I could shoot anything on the planet with an M6ii. The (Spot) AF is lightning fast to acquire, and sticks like glue. Here’s a previous thread that details some of what it’s capable of…

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/64108171

IMHO RLight’s evaluation is right on the money.

R2

I've found a case where the spot focus isn't as effective as the 'Tracking' focus mode - Amtrak trains moving at 70 mph, especially in lighting close to sunset. They really fly and you have just a fraction of a second to the get the best shot as they whiz by in a roar of sound and dust, using either slow or high speed drive mode.

Both the M6ii and the M50ii can't track the train using spot focus --- the shutter won't even fire and I've lost the whole shot for that day several times, as you only get one chance.

Setting to 'Tracking mode' works just fine, except the tendency for both cameras to focus on blades of grass or tree branches that might happen to be in the frame closer than the train. 'Zone AF' focusing seems to work the best and I still use spot focus on the slower moving freights, so I can pick the spot with optimal focus with my thumb on the screen as I shoot in single-shot or low-speed drive mode.

I'd guess that the problem is that the details of the train are both moving laterally, at the same time the features are scaling 'larger' very rapidly -- and the AF can't deal with that. When in tracking mode it must use some sort of optimization algorithm that can find an 'edge' or contrasty feature in a larger area it can lock onto, and its best guess is good enough.

Amtrak 17 & 513 (vintage Dash-8 loco), Canon M50ii, EF-M 11-22mm IS STM, 21mm, f5.6, 1/1000s, ISO 160, high-speed continuous tracking mode, Tracking AF

Nice shot. To be very honest with you, for trains I don't use AF at all. I use a tripod to make the composition at forehand, set the aperture wide open, switch the AF off, focus manually using 10x magnification, stop down, keep AF switched off, and just use burst mode.

Using this method I get good pictures with the M100 + Sigma 18-35mm f/1.8 Art, as without AF even the M100 gives you 8 frames per second (which is better than the 70D). The M50 (mark 1) goes up to 10 frames per second without AF.

Interesting --- I can see how that approach works for some types of shots. There are some bridge shots where the composition is well-defined when the train hits a certain spot, and I also frame those in advance.

At night I use several manual-focus lenses a lot: a very sharp adapted Nikon DX 35mm f1.8 I got for $50, any of several good fast fifties, and a sharp Minolta MC Celtic 135mm f2.8. For those manual pre-focus is the only option --- focus peaking works but 10x magnifier is far, far better.

My problem with the M50 Mark ii's drive modes are that even the slower mode fills up the buffer too fast leaving me with no camera for much of the rest of the time the train passes.

Two seconds is enough for me.

For that reason I default to the M6 Mark ii which has a much bigger buffer for the part of the sequence I need more shots for. When I do shoot with the M50ii in drive mode I tend to shoot short bursts of 2-3 shots, then pause, then shoot another burst --- sometimes even that fills the buffer.

For a chosen composition generally just one position of the train is the right one.  In the rare case do want shots of different positions I use a second body.

My favorite train lens is the EF-M 18-150 ---- great range allowing me to get shots of the train a little more distant but still filling the frame --- in the telephoto shots the engineers are much more likely to be visible. But some of the nicest looking whole-train photos are like the image above with a wide-angle lens, when the locomotive looms large close to the camera.

I selfdom use telephoto focal lengths for trains.  If you're seeing an American train on what looks like Russian gauge something went wrong with the perspective. ;).  The sigma 18-35mm is generally fine for my use cases, sometimes I use 50mm on crop, but that's the longest focal length I use....   except for snap shots on stations, if something really interesting is happening at a large distance (a nice shunting loco for example) while I'm waiting to get another shot.... but this is also done on a second body as I don't want to risk to miss the intended shot.

What works very well is to use two bodies --- usually the 18-150 on the first one, then as the train gets close I pick up the other one with the EF-M 11-22 also hanging around my neck, already on and ready to go.

We're still on topic --- as I'll show now how I use my second body M50 Mark II effectively

This is shot after sunset so very challenging low-conditions. Since it was not long after sunset there was still mostly full-spectrum, high-quality light on the scene allowing me to push the first shot to an amazing ISO 25,600 in post! I never shoot higher than ISO 6400 in-camera, since the M6ii & m50ii both are ISO invariant at & above ISO 5000 --- better to push in PP. If you expose at higher ISOs than 6400 in camera all you are doing is throwing away dynamic range and reducing what you have to work with in the image later.

First shot with the M6ii using the vintage Minolta 135mm f2.8 lens -- second shot I used the other body with the wonderful EF-M 22mm f2 to get the 'rear' (really the front) of the trailing locomotive on the train.

Canon M6ii, vintage Minolta MC Celtic 135mm f2.8 lens at f4, 1/250s, exposed at ISO 6400 pushed to ISO 25,600 in PL4

Canon M50ii, EF-M 22mm f2 at f2.8, 1/125s, exposed at ISO 2000 pushed to ISO 4000 in DxO PL4

For that ISO 25,600 shot I used a new technique to get good results: I first processed in DxO; using Deep prime (strength 80), sharpened, applied CA, pushed exposure 2 stops, brought shadows up a further +32, increased contrast +29, increased saturation and vibrancy, and saved as 16-bit full-resolution TIFF file.

This produced a very good low-noise image which still looked somewhat flat. Then I bumped it up even more in contrast, saturation, vibrancy --- and applied more noise reduction (HQ + 30), and downsized to 2160 pixels high using bicubic downsample sharpening, resulting in the final image.

I've found this two stage processing to work very effectively --- especially when areas need to be masked and then dodged or burned using DxO's control points. If you try to mask the original image you get very grainy masks with very undesirable results.

But masking the second low-grain image is like masking a low-ISO shot --- you get really clean, well-defined masks and great results.

Those are great pics, although personally I like to shoot a bit more environmental.

Hello...

RLight wrote:

TL;DR:

The M50 Mark II represents in my book, the most approachable and budget friendly interchangeable lens camera offering on the market. It builds upon the same success as the original M50: easy to use menus and interface, excellent straight out of camera colors, budget friendly price, small and light, very fun.

I agree 100%

Who's it for:

Those wanting to expand their photography beyond the smartphone

Second camera for pros and want a DSLR form-factor with a EVF+hotshoe

Folks already shooting a Point and Shoot and want to upgrade to something "better"

Rebel or Canon XXD shooters looking for something smaller, lighter and more powerful

.

Where it stands apart from the original:

Improved autofocus, in particular eye-detection

Improved low-light sensitivity

YouTube livestream support (with account and minimum number of subscribers)

Improved automatic exposure and metering

Improved beginner menus and options

.

Suggestions:

Use High Speed, or Low Speed (tracking priority) continuous shooting modes to “get the shot”

Use C-RAW to get the most shots before buffer kicks in

Consider the SanDisk Extreme Pro UHS-I card (64GB version or larger) or other comparable 95mb/sec UHS-I card to free the buffer quicker when shooting continuous bursts

Canon’s EF-M 11-22 and 32mm f/1.4 Lenses are top-notch offerings for those more advanced, or first time landscape (for the 11-22) or professional portrait (32mm f/1.4) shooters.

The Sigma f/1.4 lens trio (16mm, 30mm, 56mm) are also recommended for those wanting more f/1.4 options on a budget (compared to full frame offerings)

Avoid the 4K video. The rolling shutter and crop factor diminish the benefits of 4K on the M50 Mark II.

Consider the 15-45 and 55-200 bundle to save on the 55-200 which pairs well with both the M50 Mark II, and the use cases the M50 Mark II suits.

VS the original EOS M50

The original M50 is a great little camera, and even today is a formidable offering. Those who have it are rewarded with satisfying image quality, fun and reliable results. However, those with the M50 looking to the M50 Mark II as an upgrade, I will say that unless the price is right, the true upgrade to the M50 is the M6 Mark II presently. Uncropped 4K, 32MP with better ISO handling, 14FPS and faster readout leading to improved autofocus for critical applications, the M6 II sits above the M50 Mark II, even though it’s older. Both come recommended for different users and different price points, and form factors (as the M6 Mark II needs an added electronic viewfinder for DSLR-like experience).

.

Beautiful photographs - thank you for sharing. 

VS the A6100

Spectacular autofocus, really good 1080P, but, it’s handling, colors and approachability are (still) lacking. In my book the M50 Mark II is the superior option for the folks considering it. Special considerations: The Sony Platform does have more native lens offerings, however comma, the price tag adds up quick and the base complaints I have with it still aren’t solved by higher end offerings if you “upgrade”. However comma, if you’ve got Sony glass in tow, sure. But said bunch with Sony glass already on hand, probably is gunning for a higher price point anyways. For entry-level, it’s not as competitive.

.

VS the Z50

This actually popped up on my radar, and I looked HARD at it. Solid image quality, excellent handling and SOOC colors. But, it’s bigger (not by a lot though). More expensive. The autofocus isn’t as good, and as a traditional Canon shooter, having the zoom in reverse is annoying. Also the ecosystem for the Z50 isn’t as good at this point (lacks ultra wide native zoom, native macro lens, doesn’t have access to the Sigma trio). It’s a good alternative to the M50 if you’re a Nikon shooter with Nikon glass you want to adapt and want something smaller and more powerful than your standard full frame rig. But for beginners? Again, M50 is the better option, still.

.

VS the Fuji X series

Fuji’s 26MP sensor is a fierce foe. Faster readout, more detail, IBIS, uncropped 4K. But, you’ve gotta come up in price point for the X-T30 or X-S10 to get it. And in particular, the X-S10 which has the more modern interface/layout, has more weight, bulk, especially when you start adding lenses (which further raises the cost to entry or add). The benefits though of the Fuji ecosystem are stronger lens offerings like the 16-55 f/2.8, but, at that point, you’re entering full frame price and bulk where a f/4 lens on say a Z5, RP, might’ve been a wiser choice in the long run. Excellent colors for skin tones, but in terms of landscapes? Those saturated colors actually can hinder nature-shooting. Autofocus implementation is also iffy. Compared to it’s peers from Canon and Sony, it’s lagging, especially for the beginners. All to say depending what you want, this is where I may diverge a bit and say there are logical choices for both, that start to make more sense but most folks will be better served by the M50 with those wanting particular use cases benefitting from the Fuji (say that f/2.8 zoom lens, or IBIS with a prime lens, but the latter is Sony territory with it’s superior AF and lens offerings in that realm).

.

VS the PowerShot G1X Mark III

They both share Canon 80D sensor, Canon handling and SOOC colors, are both compact. But, the G1X Mark III has some edges: Hikers, will glean more detail out of the better lens on the G1X Mark III (vs the stock 15-45 on the M50 Mark II) for static subjects like landscape shooting it’s a win. Weather sealing, and super-compact form factor are also pluses. But non-hikers need to look at the more modern M50 Mark II, parents, and general shooters will appreciate the improved hit-rate in terms of autofocus, image stabilization efficiency, ability to swap a lens, and of course price point. The 1080P video is quite a bit better on the M50 Mark II. It boils down to if your subject moves, the M50 Mark II will do better. If your subject doesn’t? G1X Mark III can be a better choice.

.

VS the M6 Mark II

This a contentious. There is presently no M5 Mark II, just the M6 Mark II which you can add an EVF too (which will tie up the hotshoe). The short version is the M50 Mark II has better handling, and is cheaper, lighter and smaller if you’re using the EVF full time (I do). It also has a fully articulating screen which some love, some hate. That’s it. The M6 Mark II has more megapixels, more frames per second, uncropped 4K, better ISO and dynamic range. It’s the “better” camera so to speak. But depending what you want to do, each makes sense in different scenarios and price points. And for those wondering? The M6 II has the better autofocus. It comes down to the readout speed on the M6 II sensor makes the difference even though the M50 Mark II has newer software.

.

As an early critic of the software-only upgrade of the M50 Mark II, when you look at the landscape of other offerings out there, what Canon’s brought to the table, some extra polish to the wildly popular M50, makes sense. It fits the first-time interchangeable lens camera box / smartphone upgraders well for what you get and what you pay.

.

Additional Samples Here:

https://flic.kr/s/aHsmWU3fBg

R2D2 wrote:

RLight wrote:

If AF is a concern, you should have a hard look at the M6 Mark II

+1 Using Spot AF with Servo (doing the tracking myself), I’m confident that I could shoot anything on the planet with an M6ii. The (Spot) AF is lightning fast to acquire, and sticks like glue. Here’s a previous thread that details some of what it’s capable of…

I have found a case where the M6ii with spot AF and servo cannot reliably track and shoot... an Amtrak train moving towards you at 70 mph!

I have tried this multiple times, and most of the time the M6ii can't even lock on the nose of the train when its 100-200 feet away, either in spot or single-point AF. The train appears to be moving just too quickly. I have lost entire sequences as the M6ii sometimes never even locks on the train and the shutter won't fire.

In 'Tracking' AF mode with servo on, it works brilliantly. 14 fps drive mode - and every frame is sharp. The M50ii could do this as well in AF tracking mode.

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/64108171

IMHO RLight’s evaluation is right on the money.

R2

Larry Rexley wrote:

R2D2 wrote:

RLight wrote:

If AF is a concern, you should have a hard look at the M6 Mark II

+1 Using Spot AF with Servo (doing the tracking myself), I’m confident that I could shoot anything on the planet with an M6ii. The (Spot) AF is lightning fast to acquire, and sticks like glue. Here’s a previous thread that details some of what it’s capable of…

I have found a case where the M6ii with spot AF and servo cannot reliably track and shoot... an Amtrak train moving towards you at 70 mph!

I have tried this multiple times, and most of the time the M6ii can't even lock on the nose of the train when its 100-200 feet away, either in spot or single-point AF. The train appears to be moving just too quickly. I have lost entire sequences as the M6ii sometimes never even locks on the train and the shutter won't fire.

In 'Tracking' AF mode with servo on, it works brilliantly. 14 fps drive mode - and every frame is sharp. The M50ii could do this as well in AF tracking mode.

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/64108171

IMHO RLight’s evaluation is right on the money.

R2

Side question; with the EF-S 55-250 IS STM in use?

I ask as I recently had a theory about AF and non-EF-M glass. Not adapted, just not EF-M, less pins, less bandwidth... AF on the EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM was quite spotty, mind you this is both an IS enabled and USM driven lens. It was spotty on both the M6 II and M50 II, the former has more power, faster readout, the latter less battery power (USM is hungry) but slower readout, but newer software. I'm starting to think AF on adapted lens doesn't drive as well as native full pin EF-M glass.

Edit: Actually I think this may have to deal more with the legacy of the glass in question with the 17-55 f/2.8... The M6 II + 70-300 IS USM (nano-usm) actually had some of the highest, actually the highest hitrate of any combo, to date.

Still, curious what glass we're talking.

RLight wrote:

Larry Rexley wrote:

R2D2 wrote:

RLight wrote:

If AF is a concern, you should have a hard look at the M6 Mark II

+1 Using Spot AF with Servo (doing the tracking myself), I’m confident that I could shoot anything on the planet with an M6ii. The (Spot) AF is lightning fast to acquire, and sticks like glue. Here’s a previous thread that details some of what it’s capable of…

I have found a case where the M6ii with spot AF and servo cannot reliably track and shoot... an Amtrak train moving towards you at 70 mph!

I have tried this multiple times, and most of the time the M6ii can't even lock on the nose of the train when its 100-200 feet away, either in spot or single-point AF. The train appears to be moving just too quickly. I have lost entire sequences as the M6ii sometimes never even locks on the train and the shutter won't fire.

In 'Tracking' AF mode with servo on, it works brilliantly. 14 fps drive mode - and every frame is sharp. The M50ii could do this as well in AF tracking mode.

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/64108171

IMHO RLight’s evaluation is right on the money.

R2

Side question; with the EF-S 55-250 IS STM in use?

I ask as I recently had a theory about AF and non-EF-M glass. Not adapted, just not EF-M, less pins, less bandwidth... AF on the EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM was quite spotty, mind you this is both an IS enabled and USM driven lens. It was spotty on both the M6 II and M50 II, the former has more power, faster readout, the latter less battery power (USM is hungry) but slower readout, but newer software. I'm starting to think AF on adapted lens doesn't drive as well as native full pin EF-M glass.

Edit: Actually I think this may have to deal more with the legacy of the glass in question with the 17-55 f/2.8... The M6 II + 70-300 IS USM (nano-usm) actually had some of the highest, actually the highest hitrate of any combo, to date.

Still, curious what glass we're talking.

I just checked, the most recent two times it happened were with the EF-M 18-150 IS STM. I like that lens due to its range and sharpness at f5 and below, I can zoom and pan from quite a distance to when the train is very close to me.

Both times I was zooming and panning. Works beautifully in AF tracking mode, but not spot or single point AF mode. I guess this is why there is a tracking mode

I do the same sequence with black m6ii with the EF-S 55-250 IS STM + kenko 1.5x C-AF SHQ teleconverter before switching to the silver m6ii with the EF-M 18-150 IS STM, and the 55-250 works fine in either focus mode, probably because the train is farther away so its rate of change of distance is relatively less than when the train is close to the camera.

Larry Rexley wrote:

RLight wrote:

Larry Rexley wrote:

R2D2 wrote:

RLight wrote:

If AF is a concern, you should have a hard look at the M6 Mark II

+1 Using Spot AF with Servo (doing the tracking myself), I’m confident that I could shoot anything on the planet with an M6ii. The (Spot) AF is lightning fast to acquire, and sticks like glue. Here’s a previous thread that details some of what it’s capable of…

I have found a case where the M6ii with spot AF and servo cannot reliably track and shoot... an Amtrak train moving towards you at 70 mph!

I have tried this multiple times, and most of the time the M6ii can't even lock on the nose of the train when its 100-200 feet away, either in spot or single-point AF. The train appears to be moving just too quickly. I have lost entire sequences as the M6ii sometimes never even locks on the train and the shutter won't fire.

In 'Tracking' AF mode with servo on, it works brilliantly. 14 fps drive mode - and every frame is sharp. The M50ii could do this as well in AF tracking mode.

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/64108171

IMHO RLight’s evaluation is right on the money.

R2

Side question; with the EF-S 55-250 IS STM in use?

I ask as I recently had a theory about AF and non-EF-M glass. Not adapted, just not EF-M, less pins, less bandwidth... AF on the EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM was quite spotty, mind you this is both an IS enabled and USM driven lens. It was spotty on both the M6 II and M50 II, the former has more power, faster readout, the latter less battery power (USM is hungry) but slower readout, but newer software. I'm starting to think AF on adapted lens doesn't drive as well as native full pin EF-M glass.

Edit: Actually I think this may have to deal more with the legacy of the glass in question with the 17-55 f/2.8... The M6 II + 70-300 IS USM (nano-usm) actually had some of the highest, actually the highest hitrate of any combo, to date.

Still, curious what glass we're talking.

I just checked, the most recent two times it happened were with the EF-M 18-150 IS STM. I like that lens due to its range and sharpness at f5 and below, I can zoom and pan from quite a distance to when the train is very close to me.

Both times I was zooming and panning. Works beautifully in AF tracking mode, but not spot or single point AF mode. I guess this is why there is a tracking mode

The tracking mode on the M6 II, works virtually flawlessly in my prior ownership. I only ever toggled away from it for specific use cases. Interesting you're seeing an opposite effect here. That lends credit there may some kind of lack of phase detect on the area encompassed by the point, which the broader area selection is picking up via surrounding pixels, or, software flaw. Heaven forbid the latter, but they do happen and I can see more attention being given to the tracking mode over point. Does and doesn't make sense obviously.

I do the same sequence with black m6ii with the EF-S 55-250 IS STM + kenko 1.5x C-AF SHQ teleconverter before switching to the silver m6ii with the EF-M 18-150 IS STM, and the 55-250 works fine in either focus mode, probably because the train is farther away so its rate of change of distance is relatively less than when the train is close to the camera.

Larry Rexley wrote:

RLight wrote:

Larry Rexley wrote:

R2D2 wrote:

RLight wrote:

If AF is a concern, you should have a hard look at the M6 Mark II

+1 Using Spot AF with Servo (doing the tracking myself), I’m confident that I could shoot anything on the planet with an M6ii. The (Spot) AF is lightning fast to acquire, and sticks like glue. Here’s a previous thread that details some of what it’s capable of…

I have found a case where the M6ii with spot AF and servo cannot reliably track and shoot... an Amtrak train moving towards you at 70 mph!

I have tried this multiple times, and most of the time the M6ii can't even lock on the nose of the train when its 100-200 feet away, either in spot or single-point AF. The train appears to be moving just too quickly. I have lost entire sequences as the M6ii sometimes never even locks on the train and the shutter won't fire.

In 'Tracking' AF mode with servo on, it works brilliantly. 14 fps drive mode - and every frame is sharp. The M50ii could do this as well in AF tracking mode.

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/64108171

IMHO RLight’s evaluation is right on the money.

R2

Side question; with the EF-S 55-250 IS STM in use?

I ask as I recently had a theory about AF and non-EF-M glass. Not adapted, just not EF-M, less pins, less bandwidth... AF on the EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM was quite spotty, mind you this is both an IS enabled and USM driven lens. It was spotty on both the M6 II and M50 II, the former has more power, faster readout, the latter less battery power (USM is hungry) but slower readout, but newer software. I'm starting to think AF on adapted lens doesn't drive as well as native full pin EF-M glass.

Edit: Actually I think this may have to deal more with the legacy of the glass in question with the 17-55 f/2.8... The M6 II + 70-300 IS USM (nano-usm) actually had some of the highest, actually the highest hitrate of any combo, to date.

Still, curious what glass we're talking.

I just checked, the most recent two times it happened were with the EF-M 18-150 IS STM. I like that lens due to its range and sharpness at f5 and below, I can zoom and pan from quite a distance to when the train is very close to me.

The M6II focuses definitely faster than ef-m 18-150mm can handle, let alone the ef-s 55-250mm stm.  Tracking with the ef-s 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM is crazy fast, also with the Sigma 18-35mm f/1.8 Art, the 50mm f/1.4 Art, and with the Sigma 70-200 f/2.8 Sports it's the same story.  USM or HSM lenses show what the little powerhouse really can do as it comes to fast tracking.  I wouldn't be surprised if it can handle the 70 Mph of those combustion engine powered trains. With an electric TGV or ICE running up to 200 Mph it will fail at some point, but I think 70 should be doable as long as you use a lens with capable focus motors.

thunder storm wrote:

Larry Rexley wrote:

RLight wrote:

Larry Rexley wrote:

R2D2 wrote:

RLight wrote:

If AF is a concern, you should have a hard look at the M6 Mark II

+1 Using Spot AF with Servo (doing the tracking myself), I’m confident that I could shoot anything on the planet with an M6ii. The (Spot) AF is lightning fast to acquire, and sticks like glue. Here’s a previous thread that details some of what it’s capable of…

I have found a case where the M6ii with spot AF and servo cannot reliably track and shoot... an Amtrak train moving towards you at 70 mph!

I have tried this multiple times, and most of the time the M6ii can't even lock on the nose of the train when its 100-200 feet away, either in spot or single-point AF. The train appears to be moving just too quickly. I have lost entire sequences as the M6ii sometimes never even locks on the train and the shutter won't fire.

In 'Tracking' AF mode with servo on, it works brilliantly. 14 fps drive mode - and every frame is sharp. The M50ii could do this as well in AF tracking mode.

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/64108171

IMHO RLight’s evaluation is right on the money.

R2

Side question; with the EF-S 55-250 IS STM in use?

I ask as I recently had a theory about AF and non-EF-M glass. Not adapted, just not EF-M, less pins, less bandwidth... AF on the EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM was quite spotty, mind you this is both an IS enabled and USM driven lens. It was spotty on both the M6 II and M50 II, the former has more power, faster readout, the latter less battery power (USM is hungry) but slower readout, but newer software. I'm starting to think AF on adapted lens doesn't drive as well as native full pin EF-M glass.

Edit: Actually I think this may have to deal more with the legacy of the glass in question with the 17-55 f/2.8... The M6 II + 70-300 IS USM (nano-usm) actually had some of the highest, actually the highest hitrate of any combo, to date.

Still, curious what glass we're talking.

I just checked, the most recent two times it happened were with the EF-M 18-150 IS STM. I like that lens due to its range and sharpness at f5 and below, I can zoom and pan from quite a distance to when the train is very close to me.

The M6II focuses definitely faster than ef-m 18-150mm can handle, let alone the ef-s 55-250mm stm.

now you got it

stm doesn't handle fast paced sports

Tracking with the ef-s 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM is crazy fast, also with the Sigma 18-35mm f/1.8 Art, the 50mm f/1.4 Art,

and with the Sigma 70-200 f/2.8 Sports

yep, sports lens handle speed

it's the same story. USM or HSM lenses show what the little powerhouse really can do as it comes to fast tracking.

well, all USM is not equal - for example my 100L, no matter what delimiter switch, isn't as good as my sports lens, 70-200 L

I wouldn't be surprised if it can handle the 70 Mph of those combustion engine powered trains. With an electric TGV or ICE running up to 200 Mph it will fail at some point, but I think 70 should be doable as long as you use a lens with capable focus motors.

I just wish I could use my nano usm RF 24-105L on my m6II ...

MAC wrote:

thunder storm wrote:

Larry Rexley wrote:

RLight wrote:

Larry Rexley wrote:

R2D2 wrote:

RLight wrote:

If AF is a concern, you should have a hard look at the M6 Mark II

+1 Using Spot AF with Servo (doing the tracking myself), I’m confident that I could shoot anything on the planet with an M6ii. The (Spot) AF is lightning fast to acquire, and sticks like glue. Here’s a previous thread that details some of what it’s capable of…

I have found a case where the M6ii with spot AF and servo cannot reliably track and shoot... an Amtrak train moving towards you at 70 mph!

I have tried this multiple times, and most of the time the M6ii can't even lock on the nose of the train when its 100-200 feet away, either in spot or single-point AF. The train appears to be moving just too quickly. I have lost entire sequences as the M6ii sometimes never even locks on the train and the shutter won't fire.

In 'Tracking' AF mode with servo on, it works brilliantly. 14 fps drive mode - and every frame is sharp. The M50ii could do this as well in AF tracking mode.

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/64108171

IMHO RLight’s evaluation is right on the money.

R2

Side question; with the EF-S 55-250 IS STM in use?

I ask as I recently had a theory about AF and non-EF-M glass. Not adapted, just not EF-M, less pins, less bandwidth... AF on the EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM was quite spotty, mind you this is both an IS enabled and USM driven lens. It was spotty on both the M6 II and M50 II, the former has more power, faster readout, the latter less battery power (USM is hungry) but slower readout, but newer software. I'm starting to think AF on adapted lens doesn't drive as well as native full pin EF-M glass.

Edit: Actually I think this may have to deal more with the legacy of the glass in question with the 17-55 f/2.8... The M6 II + 70-300 IS USM (nano-usm) actually had some of the highest, actually the highest hitrate of any combo, to date.

Still, curious what glass we're talking.

I just checked, the most recent two times it happened were with the EF-M 18-150 IS STM. I like that lens due to its range and sharpness at f5 and below, I can zoom and pan from quite a distance to when the train is very close to me.

The M6II focuses definitely faster than ef-m 18-150mm can handle, let alone the ef-s 55-250mm stm.

now you got it

stm doesn't handle fast paced sports

Tracking with the ef-s 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM is crazy fast, also with the Sigma 18-35mm f/1.8 Art, the 50mm f/1.4 Art,

and with the Sigma 70-200 f/2.8 Sports

yep, sports lens handle speed

it's the same story. USM or HSM lenses show what the little powerhouse really can do as it comes to fast tracking.

well, all USM is not equal - for example my 100L, no matter what delimiter switch, isn't as good as my sports lens, 70-200 L

It worked for running kids, but they didn't go 70Mph.....

I wouldn't be surprised if it can handle the 70 Mph of those combustion engine powered trains. With an electric TGV or ICE running up to 200 Mph it will fail at some point, but I think 70 should be doable as long as you use a lens with capable focus motors.

I just wish I could use my nano usm RF 24-105L on my m6II ...

I think the OP could just buy an EF version. Prices of both RF and EF L standard zooms are going through the roof though.....

I have the 18-35mm f/1.8 Art, so it never happens, but I could use the EF 24-70mm mkII on my M6II. At 70mm & 32Mp on crop the lack of IS (or IBIS) is limiting though.

Fun idea!