DPReview.com is closing April 10th - Find out more

R50 vs M50 MkII

Started 1 month ago | Discussions
KevinRA Senior Member • Posts: 1,456
Re: R50 vs M50 MkII

RLight wrote:

Larry Rexley wrote:

AF looks so good that I"m tempted to go for it plus the RF-S 18-150 and sell off an M200 and my EF-M 18-150 (keeping my M6ii's and all the 'wider' M primes and zooms).

When I think deeply about why I would do that... it would be to get the better AF with long lenses (Siggy 100-600 C, EF-S 5-250 IS STM and better downsampled 4k video. Upgrade cost probably around $300 - $400 with the mentioned sell-offs.

When I think MORE deeply about the consequences of that R50 upgrade... I realize I would lose reach for the telephoto shots (24 MP vs 32 MP for my M6ii's),

Yes - but the R10 is very good detail at the pixel level - the R7 does seem slightly sharper than the M6II also. So I don't think you lose that much linear resolution / pixels per duck as the raw specs.

Watch out though for possible AF issues with the siggy 150-600 - Duade finds issues on the R7 and R10 - R50, ? the same?

and the video isn't all that much of an upgrade from the M6ii, really... the more logical upgrade for me would be the R7 with the much better IBIS and CLOG3 video...

But for the R7 + RF-S 18-150 we're now talking a $1000 upgrade cost, even if I 'replace' one of my M6ii's and the EF-M 18-150, which I've already decided is too much money - plus the R7 doesn't have that 'tiny' M form factor and the tilting finder and removable EVF I like so much.

Which leaves me keeping exactly what I've got with the 'very good' M system!

The R50 is a logical upgrade.

The R10 to me is more logical "upgrade" than R50 - more controls and also smaller than most R's. Already it's lost 1 control dial vs the M6II and even M5 - but 2 is workable - 1 dial in the R50 would hamper me to point of using my smart phone.

The R7 to your point is big and expensive relatively speaking.

It's not exactly big - but yes relatively I guess. R7 also only 2 control dials

I like the R7 size probably best (as a new owner of one, alongside the M6II, R10 and R5 - apart from the those tiny EF-M's that are good like the 11-22, 32, 15-45 my copy - hence M6II is a keeper!).

 KevinRA's gear list:KevinRA's gear list
Canon EOS M6 II Canon EOS R5 Canon EOS R7 Canon EOS R10 Canon EF-S 60mm f/2.8 Macro USM +14 more
Larry Rexley Senior Member • Posts: 1,238
Re: R50 vs M50 MkII
4

KevinRA wrote:

RLight wrote:

Larry Rexley wrote:

AF looks so good that I"m tempted to go for it plus the RF-S 18-150 and sell off an M200 and my EF-M 18-150 (keeping my M6ii's and all the 'wider' M primes and zooms).

When I think deeply about why I would do that... it would be to get the better AF with long lenses (Siggy 100-600 C, EF-S 5-250 IS STM and better downsampled 4k video. Upgrade cost probably around $300 - $400 with the mentioned sell-offs.

When I think MORE deeply about the consequences of that R50 upgrade... I realize I would lose reach for the telephoto shots (24 MP vs 32 MP for my M6ii's),

Yes - but the R10 is very good detail at the pixel level - the R7 does seem slightly sharper than the M6II also. So I don't think you lose that much linear resolution / pixels per duck as the raw specs.

Watch out though for possible AF issues with the siggy 150-600 - Duade finds issues on the R7 and R10 - R50, ? the same?

Good point, I did watch his video on that issue and it is a consideration. I'm in no hurry to upgrade. At this point it's just a fun intellectual exercise to think through possible future options. I really like my current lens line-up.

There are too many nice native M lenses I can't replace at this point with anything comparable in RF-S mount - with the IQ of those that I have combined with the optimal 'M' size and weight, at the more gentle 'M' price points.

Oh and dropping the available aperture in some of the RF-S kit zooms is a bit of a kick in the shins too.... 18-45mm f4.5-6.3 (instead of f3.5) and 55-210mm f5-7.1. Appreciating those EF-M 15-45 f3.5-6.3 and EF-M 55-200 f4.5-6.3 lenses a bit more now! Even the older EF-M 18-55mm f3.5-5.6 which I also use is good optically, has a wider range than the RF-S 18-45, is brighter throughout its whole range, and has a good build quality.

The only slight gain for the RF-S kit lenses is the long end of the 55-210mm.

and the video isn't all that much of an upgrade from the M6ii, really... the more logical upgrade for me would be the R7 with the much better IBIS and CLOG3 video...

But for the R7 + RF-S 18-150 we're now talking a $1000 upgrade cost, even if I 'replace' one of my M6ii's and the EF-M 18-150, which I've already decided is too much money - plus the R7 doesn't have that 'tiny' M form factor and the tilting finder and removable EVF I like so much.

Which leaves me keeping exactly what I've got with the 'very good' M system!

The R50 is a logical upgrade.

The R10 to me is more logical "upgrade" than R50 - more controls and also smaller than most R's. Already it's lost 1 control dial vs the M6II and even M5 - but 2 is workable - 1 dial in the R50 would hamper me to point of using my smart phone.

The R7 to your point is big and expensive relatively speaking.

It's not exactly big - but yes relatively I guess. R7 also only 2 control dials

I like the R7 size probably best (as a new owner of one, alongside the M6II, R10 and R5 - apart from the those tiny EF-M's that are good like the 11-22, 32, 15-45 my copy - hence M6II is a keeper!).

 Larry Rexley's gear list:Larry Rexley's gear list
Canon EOS M6 II Canon EOS M200 Canon EF-M 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS STM Canon EF-M 22mm f/2 STM Canon EF-M 11-22mm f/4-5.6 IS STM +21 more
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads