Replace M6II for Travel

[Robert Sheldon]

I am looking to move out of the M series to the R series. I currently have the M6II and have previously used the M5. I definitely preferred the built in viewer on the M5.

I am looking at the R50 with the RF-S 10-18 and 18-150 lenses. I have the equivalent M lenses.

I used to carry full DSLR set of cameras and lenses, but now at my age small and light are top priority for travel.

Is there anything I am going to miss on the M6II? I do not think the 24 vs 32 mp will be a problem. I used to travel with cameras with a lot less resolution and was very happy with them.

 

[drsnoopy]

I am looking to move out of the M series to the R series. I currently have the M6II and have previously used the M5. I definitely preferred the built in viewer on the M5.

I am looking at the R50 with the RF-S 10-18 and 18-150 lenses. I have the equivalent M lenses.

I used to carry full DSLR set of cameras and lenses, but now at my age small and light are top priority for travel.

Is there anything I am going to miss on the M6II? I do not think the 24 vs 32 mp will be a problem. I used to travel with cameras with a lot less resolution and was very happy with them.

 

[Andy01]

I am looking to move out of the M series to the R series. I currently have the M6II and have previously used the M5. I definitely preferred the built in viewer on the M5.

I am looking at the R50 with the RF-S 10-18 and 18-150 lenses. I have the equivalent M lenses.

I used to carry full DSLR set of cameras and lenses, but now at my age small and light are top priority for travel.

Is there anything I am going to miss on the M6II? I do not think the 24 vs 32 mp will be a problem. I used to travel with cameras with a lot less resolution and was very happy with them.

I recently moved from 6D ii + L lenses and M5 + EF-M lenses to a dual R body setup to prepare for some retirement travel.

I chose R10 + RF-S 18-150 (the lens kit only cost a couple of hundred more just body), R8, RF 24-105L, RF 15-30 & RF 100-400. I also got an adapter and have kept my EF 100-400L ii for when I need the extra light.

My old "travel" kit involved M5 + 18-150 & 11-22, and 6D ii, EF 24-105L ii, EF 100-400L ii & EF 35 f2 IS plus accessories in a Think Tank Airport Commuter backpack, and a Sirui N-2204X CF tripod. The backpack typically weighed over 11kg, and the tripod in bag weighed around 2.5kg.

As I have got older and plan to travel more, this was just too heavy. My new kit fits into a Think Tank Retrospective 10 and weighs around 5.5kg, and I bought a Ulanzi Zero Y tripod that weighs around 1.2kg in it's bag (and is a fraction of the "volume" so it takes up far less suitcase space.

Personally I would suggest an R10 over R50 for the extra features and functionally. It is light years ahead of the M5 (in very respect) - completely different league, and especially so if using a larger lens (because it has a MUCH deeper grip). The R10 is almost exactly the same size and weight as M5 - my R10 + RF-S 18-150 fits into the same slot in my old TT Mirrorless Mover 25i as my M5 + 18-150 lived in. I went on a 10km (6 mile) walk 2 days after getting the R10 - I used my old "M" bag (TT MM 25i) with R10 + 18-150 and RF 15-30, and it was just like carrying my old M kit.

The sensor on the R10 also appears to be a notable step up from the M5 sensor - especially with DR & noise (it is effectively ISO invariant from around ISO 200 from memory. The AF is game changing, and the burst rates (I have only really used up to 15fps so far) is far faster than M5. You really do need to get a decent UHS-II fast card though (I use Sandisk Extreme Pro 128Gb UHS-II 300Mb/s).

 

[R2D2]

I am looking to move out of the M series to the R series. I currently have the M6II and have previously used the M5. I definitely preferred the built in viewer on the M5.

I am looking at the R50 with the RF-S 10-18 and 18-150 lenses. I have the equivalent M lenses.

I used to carry full DSLR set of cameras and lenses, but now at my age small and light are top priority for travel.

Is there anything I am going to miss on the M6II? I do not think the 24 vs 32 mp will be a problem. I used to travel with cameras with a lot less resolution and was very happy with them.

I'm still waiting for an M6ii replacement myself! I REALLY want a tilting LCD, or else I would own the aforementioned R10 right now. As mentioned it has a good set of controls, and excellent capabilities. Be sure to check it out in person (you might even go for an R50).

Good luck with your search!

R2

 

[Dareshooter]

Check out the hot shoe on the R50. It needs an adapter for most Canon flashes as the hot shoe pins have been omitted . Also there is no ultrasonic sensor cleaning on this model.I moved from the M system to the R system and considered the R 10 but eventually opted for the R50 despite the drawbacks I pointed out earlier. I don’t use flash anymore so the hotshoe wasn’t an issue and the lack of sensor cleaning has not been an issue either despite frequent lens changes. I bought mine with the 18-45 and 55-210 and the IQ from both are nothing to complain about,much better than I was expecting especially the 55-210 which punches way above its weight.

 

[CamerEyes]

I am looking to move out of the M series to the R series. I currently have the M6II and have previously used the M5. I definitely preferred the built in viewer on the M5.

I am looking at the R50 with the RF-S 10-18 and 18-150 lenses. I have the equivalent M lenses.

I used to carry full DSLR set of cameras and lenses, but now at my age small and light are top priority for travel.

Is there anything I am going to miss on the M6II? I do not think the 24 vs 32 mp will be a problem. I used to travel with cameras with a lot less resolution and was very happy with them.

The only thing I wished my M6 Mark II years ago had was IBIS, which the R7 addressed. So if you're happy with the image quality of the M6 Mark II, the R7 is an easy decision. In case you wanna go FF without spending too much, the R8 is the way to go. It has not IBIS, however, just like the M6 Mark II.

 

[Ali]

I am looking to move out of the M series to the R series. I currently have the M6II and have previously used the M5. I definitely preferred the built in viewer on the M5.

I am looking at the R50 with the RF-S 10-18 and 18-150 lenses. I have the equivalent M lenses.

I used to carry full DSLR set of cameras and lenses, but now at my age small and light are top priority for travel.

Is there anything I am going to miss on the M6II? I do not think the 24 vs 32 mp will be a problem. I used to travel with cameras with a lot less resolution and was very happy with them.

I moved from the M6II to the R50. Slightly larger but lighter, fits in the same camera bag, generally more capable. Enjoying the built in EVF. The 10-18 and 18-150 are both good. While I wish it had 32MP or more, 24 gets the job done.

The only thing I miss is the EF-M 32mm f/1.4. Until the Sigma RF-S equivalent hits the market I am making do with the RF 28mm f/2.8 and a MF 35 f/1.4.

 

[Rock and Rollei]

I've still got my M6 II and lenses, but I've taken to using R kit mostly for travel these days.

I've a lot of kit with all sorts of options, but my main travel kit is, or is a subset of, R8 plus 24-240, R50 plus 18-150, 10-20 L, 10-18 RF-S if R50 only, 24mm f1.8. (Lots of other lenses available to me that I sometimes take instead or as well). I can get all this (only 1 of the wideangles) plus a couple of polarisers and a decent number of batteries (5 spares) in a LowePro Nova 180 bag, which is pretty unobtrusive and easy to carry.

For me, the R50 is the standout model in the current crop range for my needs. It's a LOT smaller than the R7, and still a fair bit smaller and lighter than the R10; it doesn't have the horrible joystick, something I absolutely hate; and the auto subject sensing AF is much better for travel for me than the R10 or R7 systems. Oh, and it's cheaper. And the limitations of the camera don't trouble me in the slightest for travel. In manual mode, there's a dial for shutter speed, the lens ring for aperture, and a button to access ISO, which works well for me.

The R50 and the 2 RF-S lenses is nearly as compact as M6 II and 11-22 and 18-150. Yes, a few less pixels, but video is good and I've come to really enjoy this little camera, certainly more than my M50.

 

[Andy01]

I've still got my M6 II and lenses, but I've taken to using R kit mostly for travel these days.
I've a lot of kit with all sorts of options, but my main travel kit is, or is a subset of, R8 plus 24-240, R50 plus 18-150, 10-20 L, 10-18 RF-S if R50 only, 24mm f1.8. (Lots of other lenses available to me that I sometimes take instead or as well). I can get all this (only 1 of the wideangles) plus a couple of polarisers and a decent number of batteries (5 spares) in a LowePro Nova 180 bag, which is pretty unobtrusive and easy to carry.
For me, the R50 is the standout model in the current crop range for my needs. It's a LOT smaller than the R7, and still a fair bit smaller and lighter than the R10

R50 is 6mm narrower, 2mm less "tall", and 14.5mm less "deep" (front to back - almost entirely due to the much shallower grip) - than R10 - so really the cameras are effectively the same "size" once a lens is fitted (that protrudes beyond the grip). R50 is also 54g lighter (which is fairly insignificant).

R50 lacks a few of the controls, dials & joystick of the R10, including an "AF On" button. It also only has (according specs) 6 custom functions vs 18 custom functions plus button & dial customization on R10 - so quite a lot more basic.

So, it really depends on what the OP wants it for and what lenses are to be used - if shooting moving subjects, the the AF ON button might be important if wanting to use dual button BBF. If shooting with larger/longer/heavier lenses then the deeper grip might be important. I could imagine that a heavier lens like RF 24-240 might be more unwieldy on R50 ? Another thing to consider (depending on use) is that R50 only supports UHS-I and has a MUCH smaller buffer than even R10, so R50 will be very limiting for any kind of fast moving shooting (wildlife, birds, sport etc).

For me, the extra "size" of the R10 compared to R50 or M5/M50 is almost entirely due to the grip depth (as above, the other dimensions are almost the same, and the weights are almost the same), but it doesn't take away any of the camera's portability or packabilty (in a bag) once a lens is fitted - and the larger grip adds a lot to the camera's usability with larger or heavier lenses.

; it doesn't have the horrible joystick, something I absolutely hate

Are you referring to the more "traditional" R10 joystick, or the unusual one that R7 has ?

; and the auto subject sensing AF is much better for travel for me than the R10 or R7 systems.

Which is easy to get around because R10 & R7 have Custom modes (which R50 doesn't) so a subject detection group of settings (like servo, faster shutter speeds, higher ISO etc) can be set to C1 or C2 for times when it is required and otherwise just use a "normal" mode (like Av) with One Shot and single AF point.

Oh, and it's cheaper.

And much more basic.

And the limitations of the camera don't trouble me in the slightest for travel.

It depends what the travel involves - if it includes things like a wildlife safari, then the R50 may not cut it. If it is just friends, family, and street & landscape, then it might be perfectly fine. Personally I saw sensor cleaning on a mirrorless camera with an exposed sensor as being quite important.

In manual mode, there's a dial for shutter speed, the lens ring for aperture, and a button to access ISO, which works well for me.
The R50 and the 2 RF-S lenses is nearly as compact as M6 II and 11-22 and 18-150. Yes, a few less pixels, but video is good and I've come to really enjoy this little camera, certainly more than my M50.

The R50 is certainly closer to the M6 ii is size (mostly because of it's small grip), but quite different to M6 ii in that it only has 1 dial vs 3 (on the camera).

This is a very personal preference thing though - it is like the old EVF vs no EVF debate. I would (and did) gladly pay the extra for the R10 because (to me) it offers a LOT more camera. To anyone used to a basic camera like a M100 or basic Rebel, the R50 would be OK, but to anyone coming from a more "performance" orientated camera, I suspect it might be lacking. There is just too much "missing" from R50 IMO for anyone coming from M6 ii (or even M5 /M6).

Perhaps an R8 + RF 24-105 STM might be one to consider ? It is generally better than any of them in most respects - except on price.

 

[RLight]

"Fun"

As someone who has owned, now does not, an R50 and 18-55, 55-210, let me say the R50 itself is a blast. The 55-210 is a blast. However it still, lacks a 22mm equivalent, still lacks a 32mm equivalent, which that Sigma is coming, but the 32mm still even compared to the Sigma, stands alone. 15-45? That 18-45 isn't nearly as wide, or fast, and it does matter. Manual focus glass, think Rokinons? Those are "fun". That 32MP sensor? It's still, more powerful than that R50.

Now that said, if, you're using a telephoto lens a lot? The R50 AF is utterly superior to the M6 II. The 55-210? Makes both the EF-M 55-200 and EF-S 55-250 look really archiac. Oversampled 4K? Man the video is really good on that R50.

It makes it a mixed bag, in short.

Now, rumor has it an R10 II is coming next year, 32MP sensor. That'll fix part of the trouble as that M6 II sensor is a bit more beefy in low light than the R50, and it matters in crop format, especially with those slower RF-S lenses... Those Sigma's are coming, that sorta solves the 32mm problem. But, if you're using that 22mm at all, or that 15-45 at all? I'd think really hard if the M6 II isn't doing it for you or you just want to "upgrade".

The R50 in my eyes, is still a side-grade. Not an upgrade from the M6 II. Don't hear what I'm not saying, I think the R50 makes a lot of sense for amateur sports or zoo stuff, video making where it's an upgrade. But in the stills department otherwise? It's a downgrade. Choose carefully depending upon your photographic needs. Consider not selling the M6 II and lenses, first, trying the R50 and RF-S, is my 2 cents if unsure.

 

[beagle1]

I am looking to move out of the M series to the R series. I currently have the M6II and have previously used the M5. I definitely preferred the built in viewer on the M5.

I am looking at the R50 with the RF-S 10-18 and 18-150 lenses. I have the equivalent M lenses.

I used to carry full DSLR set of cameras and lenses, but now at my age small and light are top priority for travel.

Is there anything I am going to miss on the M6II? I do not think the 24 vs 32 mp will be a problem. I used to travel with cameras with a lot less resolution and was very happy with them.

I think you will miss the small size and less(er) weight

I'm keeping my M6ii and 22/2 and 55-250 until they pry it out of my cold dead hands

 

[Robert Sheldon]

Yes, my DSLRs were the 5DIV and the 7DII. The lack of manual control in the R50 was bothering me but I did not pick up on the lack of custom modes C1 and C2. I use them a lot and actually miss the C3 from the DSLRs. Even though at this time I do not plan on using it for wildlife or sports, the R10 may be a better option for me.

 

[drsnoopy]

"Fun"

As someone who has owned, now does not, an R50 and 18-55, 55-210, let me say the R50 itself is a blast. The 55-210 is a blast. However it still, lacks a 22mm equivalent, still lacks a 32mm equivalent, which that Sigma is coming, but the 32mm still even compared to the Sigma, stands alone. 15-45? That 18-45 isn't nearly as wide, or fast, and it does matter. Manual focus glass, think Rokinons? Those are "fun". That 32MP sensor? It's still, more powerful than that R50.

Now that said, if, you're using a telephoto lens a lot? The R50 AF is utterly superior to the M6 II. The 55-210? Makes both the EF-M 55-200 and EF-S 55-250 look really archiac. Oversampled 4K? Man the video is really good on that R50.

It makes it a mixed bag, in short.

Now, rumor has it an R10 II is coming next year, 32MP sensor. That'll fix part of the trouble as that M6 II sensor is a bit more beefy in low light than the R50, and it matters in crop format, especially with those slower RF-S lenses.

Rumours, rumours. Don’t bank on them. Maybe even an R9, who knows?

 

[Andy01]

Yes, my DSLRs were the 5DIV and the 7DII. The lack of manual control in the R50 was bothering me but I did not pick up on the lack of custom modes C1 and C2. I use them a lot and actually miss the C3 from the DSLRs. Even though at this time I do not plan on using it for wildlife or sports, the R10 may be a better option for me.

To me, from a functionality PoV, the R50 to R10 may be similar to comparing a Rebel SL1 with a 80D (for example) - different intended end-user IMO. Yes, R50 is a shade smaller than R10 (as I said, not that most would notice with a 18-150 fitted to each - because the lens sticks out much further than the grip), and a few grams lighter (not that most would notice), and clearly cheaper. But that is only the tip of the iceberg regarding the differences between them.

If you wanted a second small light basic camera for travel and happy to forego many of the features you are used (coming from 5D iv & 7D ii) then the R50 is probably a decent option, but if this is going to be your main / only camera, I think the R10 (or R8) is probably a far better option. Comparing my R10 to my old 6D ii (ignoring the obvious FF vs APS-C differences), the only feature I can think of that the R10 (and every other R body) is missing is GPS - I think that the R10 is superior is every other way to 6D ii, and probably better in most performance areas (obviously not durability, dual cards etc) than your 5D iv & 7D ii.

 

[RLight]

"Fun"

As someone who has owned, now does not, an R50 and 18-55, 55-210, let me say the R50 itself is a blast. The 55-210 is a blast. However it still, lacks a 22mm equivalent, still lacks a 32mm equivalent, which that Sigma is coming, but the 32mm still even compared to the Sigma, stands alone. 15-45? That 18-45 isn't nearly as wide, or fast, and it does matter. Manual focus glass, think Rokinons? Those are "fun". That 32MP sensor? It's still, more powerful than that R50.

Now that said, if, you're using a telephoto lens a lot? The R50 AF is utterly superior to the M6 II. The 55-210? Makes both the EF-M 55-200 and EF-S 55-250 look really archiac. Oversampled 4K? Man the video is really good on that R50.

It makes it a mixed bag, in short.

Now, rumor has it an R10 II is coming next year, 32MP sensor. That'll fix part of the trouble as that M6 II sensor is a bit more beefy in low light than the R50, and it matters in crop format, especially with those slower RF-S lenses.

Rumours, rumours. Don’t bank on them. Maybe even an R9, who knows?

Actually think that was in the cards… Funny you say that.

 

[tilted_horizon]

I am looking to move out of the M series to the R series. I currently have the M6II and have previously used the M5. I definitely preferred the built in viewer on the M5.

I am looking at the R50 with the RF-S 10-18 and 18-150 lenses. I have the equivalent M lenses.

I used to carry full DSLR set of cameras and lenses, but now at my age small and light are top priority for travel.

Is there anything I am going to miss on the M6II? I do not think the 24 vs 32 mp will be a problem. I used to travel with cameras with a lot less resolution and was very happy with them.

I recently moved from 6D ii + L lenses and M5 + EF-M lenses to a dual R body setup to prepare for some retirement travel.

I chose R10 + RF-S 18-150 (the lens kit only cost a couple of hundred more just body), R8, RF 24-105L, RF 15-30 & RF 100-400. I also got an adapter and have kept my EF 100-400L ii for when I need the extra light.

My old "travel" kit involved M5 + 18-150 & 11-22, and 6D ii, EF 24-105L ii, EF 100-400L ii & EF 35 f2 IS plus accessories in a Think Tank Airport Commuter backpack, and a Sirui N-2204X CF tripod. The backpack typically weighed over 11kg, and the tripod in bag weighed around 2.5kg.

As I have got older and plan to travel more, this was just too heavy. My new kit fits into a Think Tank Retrospective 10 and weighs around 5.5kg, and I bought a Ulanzi Zero Y tripod that weighs around 1.2kg in it's bag (and is a fraction of the "volume" so it takes up far less suitcase space.

Personally I would suggest an R10 over R50 for the extra features and functionally. It is light years ahead of the M5 (in very respect) - completely different league, and especially so if using a larger lens (because it has a MUCH deeper grip). The R10 is almost exactly the same size and weight as M5 - my R10 + RF-S 18-150 fits into the same slot in my old TT Mirrorless Mover 25i as my M5 + 18-150 lived in. I went on a 10km (6 mile) walk 2 days after getting the R10 - I used my old "M" bag (TT MM 25i) with R10 + 18-150 and RF 15-30, and it was just like carrying my old M kit.

The sensor on the R10 also appears to be a notable step up from the M5 sensor - especially with DR & noise (it is effectively ISO invariant from around ISO 200 from memory. The AF is game changing, and the burst rates (I have only really used up to 15fps so far) is far faster than M5. You really do need to get a decent UHS-II fast card though (I use Sandisk Extreme Pro 128Gb UHS-II 300Mb/s).

I'll second the R10 - it replaced my M50 and is one of my favorite cameras, ever. It has all the right physical controls in all the right places, imo. Great ergonomics, light weight, onboard flash, full mechanical shutter, solid sensor, killer autofocus, responsive touch screen. The slightly larger size compared to R50 makes it better suited for FF primes like the 24/1.8. One minor complaint is the sound of the shutter, which is a bit loud, even with EFCS. But it's got the fun factor, I use it constantly.

R10, 10-18mm, 18-150mm, 24/1.8mm is a near-perfect minimal kit - everything stabilized, low light and 1:2 close-up capability with the 24mm, which also makes a great standard prime at 38.4mm equivalent.

 

[JoWinter]

I am looking to move out of the M series to the R series. I currently have the M6II and have previously used the M5. I definitely preferred the built in viewer on the M5.

I am looking at the R50 with the RF-S 10-18 and 18-150 lenses. I have the equivalent M lenses.

I used to carry full DSLR set of cameras and lenses, but now at my age small and light are top priority for travel.

Is there anything I am going to miss on the M6II? I do not think the 24 vs 32 mp will be a problem. I used to travel with cameras with a lot less resolution and was very happy with them.

I think you will miss the small size and less(er) weight

I'm keeping my M6ii and 22/2 and 55-250 until they pry it out of my cold dead hands

Same here. I have an R6ii and an R7, I am happy with both - but for hiking, for business trips, and travel with people whose primary interest is not photography (ahem) nothing beats the M6ii with the 18-150, the 22 or 32, and perhaps the 11-22. I will not give up on my beloved M6ii until Canon introduces an RF-S camera with a similar form factor.

 

[citytrader]

Translator

I am looking to move out of the M series to the R series. I currently have the M6II and have previously used the M5. I definitely preferred the built in viewer on the M5.

I am looking at the R50 with the RF-S 10-18 and 18-150 lenses. I have the equivalent M lenses.

I changed my M6KII for my R6MKII because special needs that the M6KII was lacking. I travel ever with my R6MKII + RF15-35 F4 and RF135 F1.8.

The question is what is missing in M6MKII that other camera will give you?

I will never ever buy the R50 no matter what lenses arrives in RFS...

 

[Alastair Norcross]

I am looking to move out of the M series to the R series. I currently have the M6II and have previously used the M5. I definitely preferred the built in viewer on the M5.

I am looking at the R50 with the RF-S 10-18 and 18-150 lenses. I have the equivalent M lenses.

I used to carry full DSLR set of cameras and lenses, but now at my age small and light are top priority for travel.

Is there anything I am going to miss on the M6II? I do not think the 24 vs 32 mp will be a problem. I used to travel with cameras with a lot less resolution and was very happy with them.

I recently moved from 6D ii + L lenses and M5 + EF-M lenses to a dual R body setup to prepare for some retirement travel.

I chose R10 + RF-S 18-150 (the lens kit only cost a couple of hundred more just body), R8, RF 24-105L, RF 15-30 & RF 100-400. I also got an adapter and have kept my EF 100-400L ii for when I need the extra light.

My old "travel" kit involved M5 + 18-150 & 11-22, and 6D ii, EF 24-105L ii, EF 100-400L ii & EF 35 f2 IS plus accessories in a Think Tank Airport Commuter backpack, and a Sirui N-2204X CF tripod. The backpack typically weighed over 11kg, and the tripod in bag weighed around 2.5kg.

As I have got older and plan to travel more, this was just too heavy. My new kit fits into a Think Tank Retrospective 10 and weighs around 5.5kg, and I bought a Ulanzi Zero Y tripod that weighs around 1.2kg in it's bag (and is a fraction of the "volume" so it takes up far less suitcase space.

Personally I would suggest an R10 over R50 for the extra features and functionally. It is light years ahead of the M5 (in very respect) - completely different league, and especially so if using a larger lens (because it has a MUCH deeper grip). The R10 is almost exactly the same size and weight as M5 - my R10 + RF-S 18-150 fits into the same slot in my old TT Mirrorless Mover 25i as my M5 + 18-150 lived in. I went on a 10km (6 mile) walk 2 days after getting the R10 - I used my old "M" bag (TT MM 25i) with R10 + 18-150 and RF 15-30, and it was just like carrying my old M kit.

The sensor on the R10 also appears to be a notable step up from the M5 sensor - especially with DR & noise (it is effectively ISO invariant from around ISO 200 from memory. The AF is game changing, and the burst rates (I have only really used up to 15fps so far) is far faster than M5. You really do need to get a decent UHS-II fast card though (I use Sandisk Extreme Pro 128Gb UHS-II 300Mb/s).

I'll second the R10 - it replaced my M50 and is one of my favorite cameras, ever. It has all the right physical controls in all the right places, imo. Great ergonomics, light weight, onboard flash, full mechanical shutter, solid sensor, killer autofocus, responsive touch screen. The slightly larger size compared to R50 makes it better suited for FF primes like the 24/1.8. One minor complaint is the sound of the shutter, which is a bit loud, even with EFCS. But it's got the fun factor, I use it constantly.

R10, 10-18mm, 18-150mm, 24/1.8mm is a near-perfect minimal kit - everything stabilized, low light and 1:2 close-up capability with the 24mm, which also makes a great standard prime at 38.4mm equivalent.

Given your username, you really should go for the R7. It has a cool feature that can take care of that.

 

[tilted_horizon]

I am looking to move out of the M series to the R series. I currently have the M6II and have previously used the M5. I definitely preferred the built in viewer on the M5.

I am looking at the R50 with the RF-S 10-18 and 18-150 lenses. I have the equivalent M lenses.

I used to carry full DSLR set of cameras and lenses, but now at my age small and light are top priority for travel.

Is there anything I am going to miss on the M6II? I do not think the 24 vs 32 mp will be a problem. I used to travel with cameras with a lot less resolution and was very happy with them.

I recently moved from 6D ii + L lenses and M5 + EF-M lenses to a dual R body setup to prepare for some retirement travel.

I chose R10 + RF-S 18-150 (the lens kit only cost a couple of hundred more just body), R8, RF 24-105L, RF 15-30 & RF 100-400. I also got an adapter and have kept my EF 100-400L ii for when I need the extra light.

My old "travel" kit involved M5 + 18-150 & 11-22, and 6D ii, EF 24-105L ii, EF 100-400L ii & EF 35 f2 IS plus accessories in a Think Tank Airport Commuter backpack, and a Sirui N-2204X CF tripod. The backpack typically weighed over 11kg, and the tripod in bag weighed around 2.5kg.

As I have got older and plan to travel more, this was just too heavy. My new kit fits into a Think Tank Retrospective 10 and weighs around 5.5kg, and I bought a Ulanzi Zero Y tripod that weighs around 1.2kg in it's bag (and is a fraction of the "volume" so it takes up far less suitcase space.

Personally I would suggest an R10 over R50 for the extra features and functionally. It is light years ahead of the M5 (in very respect) - completely different league, and especially so if using a larger lens (because it has a MUCH deeper grip). The R10 is almost exactly the same size and weight as M5 - my R10 + RF-S 18-150 fits into the same slot in my old TT Mirrorless Mover 25i as my M5 + 18-150 lived in. I went on a 10km (6 mile) walk 2 days after getting the R10 - I used my old "M" bag (TT MM 25i) with R10 + 18-150 and RF 15-30, and it was just like carrying my old M kit.

The sensor on the R10 also appears to be a notable step up from the M5 sensor - especially with DR & noise (it is effectively ISO invariant from around ISO 200 from memory. The AF is game changing, and the burst rates (I have only really used up to 15fps so far) is far faster than M5. You really do need to get a decent UHS-II fast card though (I use Sandisk Extreme Pro 128Gb UHS-II 300Mb/s).

I'll second the R10 - it replaced my M50 and is one of my favorite cameras, ever. It has all the right physical controls in all the right places, imo. Great ergonomics, light weight, onboard flash, full mechanical shutter, solid sensor, killer autofocus, responsive touch screen. The slightly larger size compared to R50 makes it better suited for FF primes like the 24/1.8. One minor complaint is the sound of the shutter, which is a bit loud, even with EFCS. But it's got the fun factor, I use it constantly.

R10, 10-18mm, 18-150mm, 24/1.8mm is a near-perfect minimal kit - everything stabilized, low light and 1:2 close-up capability with the 24mm, which also makes a great standard prime at 38.4mm equivalent.

Given your username, you really should go for the R7. It has a cool feature that can take care of that.

Lol, holding out for R7M2!