How substantial is the image quality difference between M50 and M6 markii?

I've been trying to understand how substantial the jump in image quality is between the two cameras, but the only thing I find are general claims that M6 mark ii should be quite a bit better. While that is clear from a tech standpoint, how does it translate in practice? A few comparisons I did find used the kit lens and didn't really tell me much.

The question assumes that we're using the best lens for the mount: Canon 32mm 1.4, Sigma 56, Canon 22mm etc.

vostokstreetphoto wrote:

I've been trying to understand how substantial the jump in image quality is between the two cameras, but the only thing I find are general claims that M6 mark ii should be quite a bit better. While that is clear from a tech standpoint, how does it translate in practice? A few comparisons I did find used the kit lens and didn't really tell me much.

The question assumes that we're using the best lens for the mount: Canon 32mm 1.4, Sigma 56, Canon 22mm etc.

Hello,

I have the one year older M6 to compare to (24 MP), and not the M50, but they’re pretty similar in IQ from what all the reviews show.

With the M6ii you’ll get a slight bump up in detail (when images are equalized for output size), and a little better noise handling (likely due to the finer-grained character of the noise).  DxO seems to do a little better with the 32 MP files.

The bigger differences between the M50 and M6ii lie in their capabilities, features, and ergos however.  You’ll have to see how any of that fits with what and how you shoot.  And as always it’s best to try one out in person if at all possible.

Best of luck to you!

R2

vostokstreetphoto wrote:

I've been trying to understand how substantial the jump in image quality is between the two cameras, but the only thing I find are general claims that M6 mark ii should be quite a bit better. While that is clear from a tech standpoint, how does it translate in practice? A few comparisons I did find used the kit lens and didn't really tell me much.

The question assumes that we're using the best lens for the mount: Canon 32mm 1.4, Sigma 56, Canon 22mm etc.

https://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm#Canon%20EOS%20M50,Canon%20EOS%20M6%20Mark%20II,Canon%20EOS%20RP

https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/image-comparison?attr18=daylight&attr13_0=canon_eosm6ii&attr13_1=canon_eosm50_studio&attr13_2=canon_eosrp&attr13_3=canon_eosr7&attr15_0=raw&attr15_1=raw&attr15_2=raw&attr15_3=raw&attr16_0=6400&attr16_1=6400&attr16_2=6400&attr16_3=6400&normalization=full&widget=1&x=-0.3992100320481272&y=-0.6623989506870972

I'll try to quantify for you what "quite a bit better" means to me.

The casual photographer who doesn't crop much, uses jpg instead of RAW, doesn't use processing software like dxo photolab, uses mostly kit lenses, will likely not see much of a difference.  The feature set and the IQ of the M50II might serve their needs.

Whereas I look for the combination of small IQ advantages, that when considered in total, make a difference to me.  Here is a list of small advantages to consider:

1) The cropping power of the 32.5 MPXL sensor over the 24 MPXL sensor gives close to a 20% cropping advantage -- that is an IQ advantage to me that is important because I do a lot of artistic cropping of my images.

2) The RP is known to have about a 1 stop noise advantage at high iso over the m6II.  You can study the links above.  The M6II has about 1/2 stop advantage over the M50/M50II.

3) The M6II has a dynamic range advantage over the M50/M50II

4) With the M6II and f1.4 lenses @ f1.4 in direct sunlight, you can use the m6II's e-shutter and get ss of 1/16,000.  Whereas, you'd have to use ss 1/4000 and use ND filters with M50 that would potentially degrade your IQ -- as well as being a pain to mess with.

5) Kit lenses will not show as much benefit because they will not fully resolve on the higher mpxl sensor -- whereas great lenses like the 32 f1.4 and 56 f1.4 more fully resolve on the higher mpxl sensor and show blazing sharpness.  At high iso when you are dealing with noise -- you want blazing sharpness and you do not want to sharpen images because sharpening exasperates noise.  So the combination of blazing sharp lenses without sharpening with post processing, use of dxo Photolab for class leading Noise Reduction that can give you 1 -2 stop advantage over other software, and the 1/2 stop advantage over the M50/M50II, this all adds up to a significant advantage to me.

YMMV, but for me, my m6II approaches my RP's FF IQ when I combine all of the above.

Happy shooting!

R2D2 wrote:

vostokstreetphoto wrote:

I've been trying to understand how substantial the jump in image quality is between the two cameras, but the only thing I find are general claims that M6 mark ii should be quite a bit better. While that is clear from a tech standpoint, how does it translate in practice? A few comparisons I did find used the kit lens and didn't really tell me much.

The question assumes that we're using the best lens for the mount: Canon 32mm 1.4, Sigma 56, Canon 22mm etc.

Hello,

I have the one year older M6 to compare to (24 MP), and not the M50, but they’re pretty similar in IQ from what all the reviews show.

With the M6ii you’ll get a slight bump up in detail (when images are equalized for output size), and a little better noise handling (likely due to the finer-grained character of the noise). DxO seems to do a little better with the 32 MP files.

Imo the dynamic range of the M6II is substantial as well. Imo that might be the biggest difference for IQ when shooting in bright daylight or in back lit situations.

The bigger differences between the M50 and M6ii lie in their capabilities, features, and ergos however.

Minimum shutter speed. A lot of dials. And it has the full mechanical shutter my A7IV lacks, so you don't have to mess around with filters to avoid both cut of bokeh and subject deformation with fast moving subjects.  Not bad for a discontinued crazy compact crop camera.

You’ll have to see how any of that fits with what and how you shoot. And as always it’s best to try one out in person if at all possible.

Best of luck to you!

R2

My experience is within the same sensor size, the improvements are incremental from generations.

The most noticeable things you will see are noise and resolution improvements.

If you want a real noticeable bump in IQ, you need to go to a bigger sensor.

thunder storm wrote:

R2D2 wrote:

vostokstreetphoto wrote:

I've been trying to understand how substantial the jump in image quality is between the two cameras, but the only thing I find are general claims that M6 mark ii should be quite a bit better. While that is clear from a tech standpoint, how does it translate in practice? A few comparisons I did find used the kit lens and didn't really tell me much.

The question assumes that we're using the best lens for the mount: Canon 32mm 1.4, Sigma 56, Canon 22mm etc.

Hello,

I have the one year older M6 to compare to (24 MP), and not the M50, but they’re pretty similar in IQ from what all the reviews show.

With the M6ii you’ll get a slight bump up in detail (when images are equalized for output size), and a little better noise handling (likely due to the finer-grained character of the noise). DxO seems to do a little better with the 32 MP files.

Imo the dynamic range of the M6II is substantial as well. Imo that might be the biggest difference for IQ when shooting in bright daylight or in back lit situations.

The bigger differences between the M50 and M6ii lie in their capabilities, features, and ergos however.

Minimum shutter speed. A lot of dials.

And it has the full mechanical shutter my A7IV lacks, so you don't have to mess around with filters to avoid both cut of bokeh and subject deformation with fast moving subjects.

yikes, cut off bokeh with your f1.2/f1.4 lenses on A7IV?

Not bad for a discontinued crazy compact crop camera.

You’ll have to see how any of that fits with what and how you shoot. And as always it’s best to try one out in person if at all possible.

Best of luck to you!

R2

MAC wrote:

thunder storm wrote:

R2D2 wrote:

vostokstreetphoto wrote:

I've been trying to understand how substantial the jump in image quality is between the two cameras, but the only thing I find are general claims that M6 mark ii should be quite a bit better. While that is clear from a tech standpoint, how does it translate in practice? A few comparisons I did find used the kit lens and didn't really tell me much.

The question assumes that we're using the best lens for the mount: Canon 32mm 1.4, Sigma 56, Canon 22mm etc.

Hello,

I have the one year older M6 to compare to (24 MP), and not the M50, but they’re pretty similar in IQ from what all the reviews show.

With the M6ii you’ll get a slight bump up in detail (when images are equalized for output size), and a little better noise handling (likely due to the finer-grained character of the noise). DxO seems to do a little better with the 32 MP files.

Imo the dynamic range of the M6II is substantial as well. Imo that might be the biggest difference for IQ when shooting in bright daylight or in back lit situations.

The bigger differences between the M50 and M6ii lie in their capabilities, features, and ergos however.

Minimum shutter speed. A lot of dials.

And it has the full mechanical shutter my A7IV lacks, so you don't have to mess around with filters to avoid both cut of bokeh and subject deformation with fast moving subjects.

yikes, cut off bokeh with your f1.2/f1.4 lenses on A7IV?

No, just messing around with filters.  The Samyang 85mm f/1.4 mkII has the same filter size as the 50mm GM, however, the Sigma 85mm Art DN might be a bit better for IQ, and that one has a different (bigger) filter size.

Yesterday I ordered the 50mm GM, it will arrive tomorrow.  The money tree will need 3 years or so to recover, so the 85mm will have to wait. Not a problem as the R5+105mm will take care of the 85mm tasks, and at f/1.2  50mm might do as well.

Not bad for a discontinued crazy compact crop camera.

You’ll have to see how any of that fits with what and how you shoot. And as always it’s best to try one out in person if at all possible.

Best of luck to you!

R2

thunder storm wrote:

MAC wrote:

thunder storm wrote:

R2D2 wrote:

vostokstreetphoto wrote:

I've been trying to understand how substantial the jump in image quality is between the two cameras, but the only thing I find are general claims that M6 mark ii should be quite a bit better. While that is clear from a tech standpoint, how does it translate in practice? A few comparisons I did find used the kit lens and didn't really tell me much.

The question assumes that we're using the best lens for the mount: Canon 32mm 1.4, Sigma 56, Canon 22mm etc.

Hello,

I have the one year older M6 to compare to (24 MP), and not the M50, but they’re pretty similar in IQ from what all the reviews show.

With the M6ii you’ll get a slight bump up in detail (when images are equalized for output size), and a little better noise handling (likely due to the finer-grained character of the noise). DxO seems to do a little better with the 32 MP files.

Imo the dynamic range of the M6II is substantial as well. Imo that might be the biggest difference for IQ when shooting in bright daylight or in back lit situations.

The bigger differences between the M50 and M6ii lie in their capabilities, features, and ergos however.

Minimum shutter speed. A lot of dials.

And it has the full mechanical shutter my A7IV lacks, so you don't have to mess around with filters to avoid both cut of bokeh and subject deformation with fast moving subjects.

yikes, cut off bokeh with your f1.2/f1.4 lenses on A7IV?

No, just messing around with filters.

ugh, filters are a pain and might even degrade IQ

I did see a review where your A7IV has mechanical shutter that you can turn off efcs when you get above ss 1000 - if you remember to do it through your menu system

of course with the m6II we don't have to remember to turn off efcs - it doesn't have efcs - so no worry about cut-off bokeh at high ss- but worry about shutter shock at low ss

The Samyang 85mm f/1.4 mkII has the same filter size as the 50mm GM, however, the Sigma 85mm Art DN might be a bit better for IQ, and that one has a different (bigger) filter size.

Yesterday I ordered the 50mm GM, it will arrive tomorrow. The money tree will need 3 years or so to recover, so the 85mm will have to wait. Not a problem as the R5+105mm will take care of the 85mm tasks, and at f/1.2 50mm might do as well.

50 fov is my choice too

one thing here though - I saw one of Chris's early videos where he said the A7IV reverts from 14 bit raw to 12 bit raw in e-shutter taking a DR hit - and they do this for continuous shooting buffer reasons

whereas my information shows the m6II doesn't take a hit in DR with single shot using one shot e-shutter and stays in 14 bit. You have to spend huge on an R3 to get an RF body that stays in 14 bit with e-shutter and keeps the DR

Not bad for a discontinued crazy compact crop camera.

You’ll have to see how any of that fits with what and how you shoot. And as always it’s best to try one out in person if at all possible.

Best of luck to you!

R2

I think we're getting a bit off topic now.  To wrap it up: picking my poison using a good filter is the best work around.

The M6II has full mechanical shutter. The M50 has not (just like the A7IV, RP, and a whole lot other cameras). The OP want's to use the camera with f/1.4 lenses with very high IQ.  I think it's worth it to get the M6II, mainly because of the Mp-count and dynamic range. Less so for avoiding cut of bokeh, but the full mechanical shutter is an advantage there.

I've always found the handling of the M50 being good enough for me. Using a button to toggle functions for that single dial works pretty well. The three dials of the M6II are better of course, but the M50 is workable. The M50 has more pleasing SOOC colours for portraits, and the eye AF recognizes eyes being smaller in the frame (further away).

Personally I've been thinking about the M50II, but I hate the lack of a minimum shutter speed.  I love to shoot in AV + minimum shutter speed + auto ISO.

thunder storm wrote:

R2D2 wrote:

Imo the dynamic range of the M6II is substantial as well. Imo that might be the biggest difference for IQ when shooting in bright daylight or in back lit situations.

Oh yeah, missed the DR advantage.

Always in a hurry! Thanks guys. 

R2

As others have said, the IQ difference between the M6ii and the M50ii/M200 etc isn't huge. For most images which aren't cropped a lot and displayed or printed at normal resolutions, I've found there is nearly no difference.

The M6ii sensor is only about 16% more linear resolution on each axis (height and width). The main benefit for me is that you can crop in closer, and you have more latitude in correction perspective with M6ii images, along with the obvious better 'telephoto reach' the M6ii shares with the R7 for things like BIF and wildlife photography, when paired with a sharp lens.

In my experience the Canon EF-M 32mm f1.4 seems to be the only native EF-M lens which can fully resolve the 32 MP across the entire frame, but even the kit lenses still come close near the center and when stopped down, and all lenses give better results on 32 MP than with 24 MP due to the extra information in the image.

For low light performance, I found the M6ii has about 1/2 to 2/3 EV advantage over the M50ii and M200. I can confidently push M200 images using DxO PL6 to at least ISO 8k-10k, whereas with the M6ii I can still get good results to ISO 12k - 16k with very sharp primes.

vostokstreetphoto wrote:

Thanks guys.

I think I'll try to score a second hand M6m2 as a backup or replacement for my M50. I'm thinking that with EF-M being discontinued, there will be people selling them for good prices while they move on to other mounts.

M prices are going up. The one in the link below is in good condition. One in like new condition would be closer to $300 ? For the original M ?

I should have held on to mine !

https://www.mpb.com/en-us/product/canon-eos-m

vostokstreetphoto wrote:

Thanks guys.

I think I'll try to score a second hand M6m2 as a backup or replacement for my M50. I'm thinking that with EF-M being discontinued, there will be people selling them for good prices while they move on to other mounts.

I have to sell my M6II.  PM me if you're interested.

MAC wrote:

yikes, cut off bokeh with your f1.2/f1.4 lenses on A7IV?

yikes is right !   I did not know this.

vostokstreetphoto wrote:

I've been trying to understand how substantial the jump in image quality is between the two cameras, but the only thing I find are general claims that M6 mark ii should be quite a bit better. While that is clear from a tech standpoint, how does it translate in practice? A few comparisons I did find used the kit lens and didn't really tell me much.

The question assumes that we're using the best lens for the mount: Canon 32mm 1.4, Sigma 56, Canon 22mm etc.

The big difference is no mechanical shutter causing stuff like this when using manual focus lenses and cut off bokeh balls .

The effect below happens with Canon AF lenses too so the camera has to push up the darker part.

vostokstreetphoto wrote:

I've been trying to understand how substantial the jump in image quality is between the two cameras, but the only thing I find are general claims that M6 mark ii should be quite a bit better. While that is clear from a tech standpoint, how does it translate in practice? A few comparisons I did find used the kit lens and didn't really tell me much.

The question assumes that we're using the best lens for the mount: Canon 32mm 1.4, Sigma 56, Canon 22mm etc.

I don’t think it is very substantial at all. In normal practical use I see very little difference between the pictures from my M6, M200 and M6II. I like some of the features (and buttons/wheels) on the M6II though. And I love the size/weight of the M200.

m100 wrote:

MAC wrote:

yikes, cut off bokeh with your f1.2/f1.4 lenses on A7IV?

yikes is right ! I did not know this.

Doing a bit more research MAC found for me the A7IV does come with full mechanical shutter, so no filters required.

Don't worry, I will find other downsides of the A7IV.

thunder storm wrote:

m100 wrote:

MAC wrote:

yikes, cut off bokeh with your f1.2/f1.4 lenses on A7IV?

yikes is right ! I did not know this.

Doing a bit more research MAC found for me the A7IV does come with full mechanical shutter, so no filters required.

Don't worry, I will find other downsides of the A7IV.

They put some Sony cameras on display at the local Best Buy but they are locked up in a display cabinet.  The Canons are out in the open to play with.

I should ask for them to take a Sony out for me to try.

They are locked up at Best Buy.  That is the only downside I can think of.

m100 wrote:

thunder storm wrote:

m100 wrote:

MAC wrote:

yikes, cut off bokeh with your f1.2/f1.4 lenses on A7IV?

yikes is right ! I did not know this.

Doing a bit more research MAC found for me the A7IV does come with full mechanical shutter, so no filters required.

Don't worry, I will find other downsides of the A7IV.

They put some Sony cameras on display at the local Best Buy but they are locked up in a display cabinet. The Canons are out in the open to play with.

I should ask for them to take a Sony out for me to try.

They are locked up at Best Buy. That is the only downside I can think of.

Storm owned the m50 and sold it. He owned the m6II and is selling it. So he brings a tremendous number of experiences to the m forum to share his experiences and answer questions. I appreciate this and hope he visits from time to time to share his experiences.

Storm originally taught me about mirrorless and risk of cut off bokeh. I'm glad I could help him with cut off bokeh on his new camera by finding information he was needing. He'll be fine in FF, he doesn't mind the weight and costs, and the IQ and value is better in the 3rd party glass FF where he is going.

for me, my m32 f1.4 is my sharp wide open 50 fov f2.2 equivalent. I'll not get an RF 50 f1.8. I've had five nifty fifties over the past 20 years and I had to stop them down to f2.8 to be as sharp as my m32 f1.4 is at f1.4.

I use my 32 f1.4 for shallow dof and smooth bokeh.

32 F1.4 @ f1.4 on my m6II is the FF equivalent of 50 fov F2.2 on FF.

I don't really want F1.2 on FF which is so thin dof that one could more often miss getting both eyes in focus.

for example, at 6 feet and f1.4, I have about 6 inches of dof to get both eyes in focus with my spot focus technique on the eyes which is very accurate. And I get two extra stops of light with dxo PL6.

whereas, at f1.2, Storm would be relying on the continuous eye autofocus, to get both eyes in focus with only 3 inches of dof -- yikes, and add action to that, and not using dxo, that is the cut off light capability by not using the latest software technology also.

not to mention the $3K price differential

the bokeh of my 32 f1.4 is smooth and creamy enough for me to be the 50 fov for me