Canon M50 mirrorless camera features 4K video

[Kisaha]

The entry level to mid, are probably the biggest market in cameras right now, and I guess always was. In the sales charts that people post from time to time, at the top 20 are cameras JUST released (so there are people waiting for these) and the rest are older models selling for cheap. 

That no one buys cameras anymore, its a big fat lie, actually CIPA members sold almost 12.000.000 ILC cameras (system cameras, both dSLR and mirrorless) last year, and a similar number the year before, and it seems that this number has been stabilized. With all the new cameras we are having this year, it may exceed that number. And there are other camera manufacturers that do not belong to CIPA as well.

All the statistics are here, if anyone can waste 10 minutes of his/hers time, will realize that the only think that is going down, is the point and shoot market which honestly, their mobile phones are better for the intendent use. The market has corrected itself, after the "wild" years of the abundance, that everyone and their mom - literally - owned a dSLR (closets full of them at the moment!), that never did more than 99 clicks, now people that truly care about the image buy cameras. 

http://www.cipa.jp/stats/dc_e.html

The camera phone revolution, I believe will bring more young people into video/photography, and it seems that video creation will be a 1st grade course sooner or later! A long time ago I taught cinema in young kids in summer school, and some of them at the age of 7-8 had the basic knowledge to create short movies on their own. I would guess, after half a decade since then, kids are more video educated.

This camera, I won't buy, but it clearly shows that Canon (and there are evidence from the latest interviews) for the very first time is seeing mirrorless as it is, the future, and in the future, I would like to see what their top APS-C mirrorless could do.

[cantsin]

5 hours ago, mercer said:

But then I began to consider the possibilities of the crop... 4K, Canon colors and c-mount lenses sounds like a great combination. The c-mounts will soften the 4K video.

Most c-mount lenses will not cover the sensor, not even in the sensor crop mode for 4K recording.

Some math: The EOS-M50's APS-C sensor measures 22.3mm x 14.9mm. A 1.6x crop yields an effective sensor size of 14mm x 9.3mm in 4K video mode. The image circle is about 12% bigger than Super 16 (12.5mm x 7.4mm).

There are only few c-mount lenses that officially cover S16/1": the Zeiss Jena Tevidons, the Canon TV16s and Vxx zooms plus a few select Pentax/Cosmicar lenses. Others cover S16 inofficially, but only above 25mm (portrait tele  and above) focal length and often with blurry corners. With the EOS-M50, there's a risk that even lenses designed for 1" sensors won't properly cover the sensor.

[mercer]

22 minutes ago, cantsin said:

Most c-mount lenses will not cover the sensor, not even in the sensor crop mode for 4K recording.

Some math: The EOS-M50's APS-C sensor measures 22.3mm x 14.9mm. A 1.6x crop yields an effective sensor size of 14mm x 9.3mm in 4K video mode. The image circle is about 12% bigger than Super 16 (12.5mm x 7.4mm).

There are only few c-mount lenses that officially cover S16/1": the Zeiss Jena Tevidons, the Canon TV16s and Vxx zooms plus a few select Pentax/Cosmicar lenses. Others cover S16 inofficially, but only above 25mm (portrait tele  and above) focal length and often with blurry corners. With the EOS-M50, there's a risk that even lenses designed for 1" sensors won't properly cover the sensor.

With the 2.2x crop of the G7 and GX85, I was able to get the Fujinon 12.5mm and the Cosmicar 12.5mm f/1.9 to fully cover the sensor. Both are 1” lenses. But I was also able to get a 20mm Meopta to cover as well... which I believe is regular 16mm or S16mm. So at a 2.4x/2.5x crop (depending which article you read) I would imagine a 25mm S16 lens should cover it. And I should have no problem with the 12.5mm 1” lenses?

[Damphousse]

2 hours ago, mercer said:

Somebody must be buying Canon mirrorless cameras since they are in second place in mirrorless sales. I don’t think there’s a huge market for these entry level cameras but there must be some market.

It's been that way for years.  Video snobs just can be bothered to even do cursory market analysis.

I've said it before and I'll say it again I don't know anyone who uses are large sensor camera for video.  Actually I don't know anyone who would use anything more than a smartphone for video.  I also don't know anyone who owns a 4k TV.

I've sold thousands of dollars of video and photography all via online and I have never purchased a camera that costs more than $500.  I suppose my BMPCC once I bought the speedbooster and camera cage costed more than $1,000.

What I'm trying to say is there are plenty of hobbyists like me who buy sub $1,000 gear and have a lot of fun with it and some of us even make a little money on the side.  I come from the photography world where bodies are disposable.  I save my money for lenses.  An $800 APSC camera with DPAF and downscaled 4k from the entire sensor in a reasonable codec would be a very natural fit for me.  I would sell plenty of work from my hobby with that.  And frankly it wouldn't stop me from buying a C300 mk II if I needed to do video for my day job.  Maybe Canon fears losing some C100 sales.  But honestly if I had to do this on a schedule for clients on a mission critical project I wouldn't fool around... C series all the way.  Although you do need a good mirroless option for time lapse.

23 minutes ago, mercer said:

With the 2.2x crop of the G7 and GX85, I was able to get the Fujinon 12.5mm and the Cosmicar 12.5mm f/1.9 to fully cover the sensor.

Interesting that you mentioned the G7.  Once I read about the crop of the Canon m50 I immediately thought of the Panasonic G7.  You can pick those up on ebay for less than $500 new.  Why would one purchase this Canon vs the G7?  Canon colors, APSC for photo, already own Canon lenses?

[mercer]

26 minutes ago, Damphousse said:

It's been that way for years.  Video snobs just can be bothered to even do cursory market analysis.

I've said it before and I'll say it again I don't know anyone who uses are large sensor camera for video.  Actually I don't know anyone who would use anything more than a smartphone for video.  I also don't know anyone who owns a 4k TV.

I've sold thousands of dollars of video and photography all via online and I have never purchased a camera that costs more than $500.  I suppose my BMPCC once I bought the speedbooster and camera cage costed more than $1,000.

What I'm trying to say is there are plenty of hobbyists like me who buy sub $1,000 gear and have a lot of fun with it and some of us even make a little money on the side.  I come from the photography world where bodies are disposable.  I save my money for lenses.  An $800 APSC camera with DPAF and downscaled 4k from the entire sensor in a reasonable codec would be a very natural fit for me.  I would sell plenty of work from my hobby with that.  And frankly it wouldn't stop me from buying a C300 mk II if I needed to do video for my day job.  Maybe Canon fears losing some C100 sales.  But honestly if I had to do this on a schedule for clients on a mission critical project I wouldn't fool around... C series all the way.  Although you do need a good mirroless option for time lapse.

Interesting that you mentioned the G7.  Once I read about the crop of the Canon m50 I immediately thought of the Panasonic G7.  You can pick those up on ebay for less than $500 new.  Why would one purchase this Canon vs the G7?  Canon colors, APSC for photo, already own Canon lenses?

I agree with you about costs. I spent a ton of time and a ton of money trying to find the right camera that fit my needs and non-traditional way of shooting narratives.

After a dozen sub $1000 cameras I ended up trying the XC10... which I loved but the depreciation was way too much and way too quick for my budget minded way of shooting.

I tried the Pocket and the Micro but both are not really suitable for run and gun. And to make them suitable required me to use Micro 4/3 lenses... which I hate.

So on a lark, I bought a 50D and fell in love with Canon and ML Raw. But that camera is a pain for Raw video for narratives... so I tried a few other cameras and inevitably saved up for a 5D3 and I couldn’t be happier.

But the 5D3 is big and as you know, Raw video takes a lot of storage. So when I was cleaning out an old hard drive, I found a bunch of old tests and although the resolution of the various 4K cameras I owned “looked” better... my favorite videos were made with a Canon camera.

Seriously I liked my old t2i videos better than I liked the G7 videos. Obviously Panasonic makes a great product but I just find I prefer Canon video... I enjoy that soft and flattering shallow depth of field more than I like tack sharp wide angle shots. Also I find the Canon looks more cinematic.

So, that’s why I would choose the M50 over the G7 or the G85. Also I want to start doing more stills and the appeal of the aps-c sensor suits me more than the Micro 4/3. But for the occasional 4K video... I can deal with the crop. But this is just a casual camera for hobby shooting, so for what it is, it could be great. Of course I probably won’t buy one until they drop below $700 or a lot less... so who knows what will be released by then.

But if I was trying to make a living with video, I’d honestly buy an 80D until I could save up for a C100 II. That camera is just a workhorse and would pay for itself with a couple jobs. I work in the trade show industry and nine out of ten times, the videographers on the show floor are shooting with Canon DSLRs or C100s. It’s only on web forums where those cameras get looked down upon.

I’d love to know how you make a little extra cash? I’ve been thinking of ways to recoup a little of the money I spent over the past couple of years but I wouldn’t even know where to begin.

[cantsin]

3 hours ago, mercer said:

Somebody must be buying Canon mirrorless cameras since they are in second place in mirrorless sales. I don’t think there’s a huge market for these entry level cameras but there must be some market.

I use an EOS-M100 with the 22mm/f2 as my go-to, always-in-my-bag camera. Not for video, only for stills. I wouldn't have understood the popularity of the system either if I hadn't gathered practical experience with it. My entry drug was a second-hand EOS-M bought at a ridiculous price ($100 including the 22mm) for experimenting with MagicLantern and Super 8 lenses (see the parallel discussion thread.) 

The system is popular, IMHO,  because it is very well-rounded. You get bodies that are as small as MFT cameras. The M100 is even smaller and lighter than the Panasonic GX80 (108 x 67 x 35 mm/300g vs. 122 x 71 x 44 mm/380g). Still, it sports Canon's newest-generation APS-C sensor with about twice the ISO (and a half bit more color depth) than the GX80. The 22mm is optically superb, as small and light as Panasonic's pancake lenses but better because it's optically corrected, with almost zero distortion and no need of software geometry correction. The user interface is, typically Canon, very well thought out and manages to combine point & shoot with full manual controls through a both clever and practical combination of dials and touchscreen interface. Touchscreen focus+shutter in combination with Dual Pixel AF is simply superb. With the 22mm lens, the M100 is an excellent street photography camera, one that you can pull out of your bag, blindly dial from muscle memory to either full auto mode or manual/program setting, hit focus and nail the shot - everything in only a few seconds. Much better, in almost every respect, than the Panasonic GM1 + 20mm pancake combo that I had used before. 

Yes, the camera has less features than you get from other manufacturers. There's no level gauge, no silent/electronic shutter, sucky/nearly useless mush-o-vision video quality, and the sensor performance, while good, is still not as good as that of current-generation Sony APS-C sensors. The features which the cameras has, however, are really, really well implemented. There's no other APS-C mirrorless body/lens combo that competes for quick street shooting IMHO: the Fuji X100 series is bulkier despite having a fixed lens, less robust with its EVF, more expensive and made for slower shooting, the Sony A5100 - with about the same body size and weight as the M100 - is dated, has an inefficient, convoluted interface and most significantly lacks an equivalent of the 22mm/f2 lens.

[webrunner5]

4 hours ago, mercer said:

Somebody must be buying Canon mirrorless cameras since they are in second place in mirrorless sales. I don’t think there’s a huge market for these entry level cameras but there must be some market.

Probably Japan yes. Here I kind of doubt it.

34 minutes ago, mercer said:

I’d love to know how you make a little extra cash? I’ve been thinking of ways to recoup a little of the money I spent over the past couple of years but I wouldn’t even know where to begin.

Sell those 100 lenses you have acquired you never use Glenn. Heck I might buy a few from you.

[mercer]

@webrunner5 Don, buy away... let me know what you’re looking for... I’ll give you the grumpy old dude discount. Lol. 

[Yurolov]

I think there is a common thread from people that have used canon and tried other companies. A camera is much more than its specs, and that's why I will never purchase a sony again. I used to own a C100 and not only could no other camera at that price point compete with the ergonomics but I would argue that still to this day no dslr comes close to getting as good an image, including the GH5. Canons are just much more cinematic and easy to use. Look at all the films shot on the c300 and the documentaries of the time. They are all still beautiful till this day, and that is with minimal post-processing. That's from a 8 bit camera. In fact, you look at some of the movies shot on the 5d Mark II and damn do they look cinematic. 

I have a cinema camera but I want a nice portable camera to do quick run and gun type work for which a dslr or mirroless is perfect. Canon is the only company that has the ability to provide something that could cater to all my needs - it doesn't need to be 10 bit. Sony is all specs and no substance. Their cameras aren't intuitive nor do they create a pleasing image imo. 

Eventually there will be a 4k aps-c dpaf canon camera with a decent codec, and that will be the end of this conversation I hope. Cause if I am honest nothing comes close to competing.     

[mercer]

Back in 2013, I replaced my t2i with the OG eos-m for an insane $197 brand new. I loved that camera... still do. It’s the only camera I’ve kept after experimenting with other brands. I tried ML Raw but just couldn’t consistently get rid of the pink dots, so I gave up on it. I may try it again with MLV Lite or the experimental builds, but it isn’t top priority. 

A year and a half ago, I bought the M10 and thought it was a fun little camera to mess around with but never shot any stills with it.

In fact, up until recently I have never used any of these cameras for stills and like you said, the video on these powershot eos-m models isn’t the best, so I just sold it for a profit.

But I am gaining more of an appreciation for stills and I just have a fondness for the eos-m system (nostalgia I guess) so I am looking forward to the M50. It will live in my glove box for stills and the occasional 4K video... unless the 4K ends up being horrible but so far it looks okay... we’ll see as more footage gets released.

Thanks for the heads up on the 22mm. I think I’ll start looking around for one.

Regarding c-mounts... back when I owned the NX500 I bought a c-mount adapter for it, knowing the flange distance was only good enough for macro shots but with a similar sensor size and a similar crop, I had no issue getting coverage with a 25mm... I assume it will be close with the M50 as well?

7 minutes ago, Yurolov said:

I think there is a common thread from people that have used canon and tried other companies. A camera is much more than its specs, and that's why I will never purchase a sony again. I used to own a C100 and not only could no other camera at that price point compete with the ergonomics but I would argue that still to this day no dslr comes close to getting as good an image, including the GH5. Canons are just much more cinematic and easy to use. Look at all the films shot on the c300 and the documentaries of the time. They are all still beautiful till this day, and that is with minimal post-processing. That's from a 8 bit camera. In fact, you look at some of the movies shot on the 5d Mark II and damn do they look cinematic. 

I have a cinema camera but I want a nice portable camera to do quick run and gun type work for which a dslr or mirroless is perfect. Canon is the only company that has the ability to provide something that could cater to all my needs - it doesn't need to be 10 bit. Sony is all specs and no substance. Their cameras aren't intuitive nor do they create a pleasing image imo. 

Eventually there will be a 4k aps-c dpaf canon camera with a decent codec, and that will be the end of this conversation I hope. Cause if I am honest nothing comes close to competing.     

What kind of cinema camera do you have?

[Damphousse]

1 hour ago, mercer said:

I’d love to know how you make a little extra cash? I’ve been thinking of ways to recoup a little of the money I spent over the past couple of years but I wouldn’t even know where to begin.

It isn't a get rich quick scheme but I use stock agencies for photography and video.  I haven't uploaded in awhile because it is laborious.  I just upload pictures and videos from vacations or whatever.  Although it is kind of random what sells.  Obviously even if you have a pretty good picture of the Eiffel Tower it is doubtful it will sell.  But if you have a decent picture of some random thing that someone needs a picture of it will sell.

I enjoyed reading your post.  I own(ed) a bunch of those cameras.  I actually sold a couple of video clips from my 50D raw days.  I turned around and sold the 50D for the same price I bought it for after a few months.  I found it too fiddly.  But overall I was net cash positive from the experience.

I don't make much.  But sporadically I will get a check for $50 or a few hundred dollars depending on what the picture or video is used for.  Very, very rarely four figure situations drop in your lap.  Months go by with no sales.  I only have a small collection.  I really should upload more.

It is funny though.  I still have sales of images taken with an eight megapixel Canon rebel from my teenage days.  I sell BMPCC 1080p clips as well.  I've been denigrated by many a pixel peeper on this forum for my 1080p camera and taking pictures with a T3i.  Funny thing though is the checks still keep coming in.  I don't really want to contradict anyone but my real world experience is if I go out and get in demand content and shoot it well people will buy T3i pictures for ad campaigns and BMPCC output for their video productions.

Sure if money was no object I would be rocking a C series camera and a full frame Canon DSLR.

[mercer]

@Damphousse well Kendy Ty’s t2i videos are still amongst some of the best videos I have ever seen online.

And I know a filmmaker, well a friend of a friend, that shot a feature last year on a t3i and he had it distributed to WalMart. Here’s the trailer for it...

So the fact of the matter is... cliche or not... content is king. 

If I didn’t buy the 5D3, I would have settled on an 80D by now... with the 17-55mm and the 35mm f2, I ultimately would have been content.

Thanks for the info on stock footage... I may look into that this summer when my work slows down. Hell, even if I could make a $100 a year... it’s more than my short films will ever make...

[Yurolov]

2 hours ago, mercer said:

What kind of cinema camera do you have?

I was really into 90s indie and mumblecore and the freedom that s16 gave the community so I settled on an Ikonoskop A-cam which is as best a replication I can find out there. I picked it over some expensive newer cameras so it was a risky investment to say the least .I love the camera dearly for all its foibles because image to me is only second to content. In all great artwork the two are married inseparably. I miss my c100 though because it was simply a beast and gave me a good image for the price point, and certainly the most cinematic. 

I am an independent filmmaker so of necessity I like slow long takes, which luckily adheres to my viewing preferences. But if I am going out into a crowd shooting something I would like to have a small and compact camera to shoot quickly that has autofocus. I actually love the look of the raw files out of the canon eos m - they are so creamy and do remind me of s8 film. It would cut well with my a cam.

But I really think we all want something from canon to fill that void that still needs to be filled. Hopefully, it will be coming shortly.      

[Mattias Burling]

14 minutes ago, Yurolov said:

I was really into 90s indie and mumblecore and the freedom that s16 gave the community so I settled on an Ikonoskop A-cam which is as best a replication I can find out there. 

If you ever for some weird and unforseen reason should want to sell it, let me know... so jealous.

[Yurolov]

35 minutes ago, Mattias Burling said:

If you ever for some weird and unforseen reason should want to sell it, let me know... so jealous.

I know people in the community who are interested in selling if you are genuinely interested, but the question is always price haha. I was lucky to find an eager seller and a good price. It really is a one of a kind camera, so unfortunately I would never part with it. 

[Inazuma]

4 hours ago, mercer said:

@Damphousseif i didn’t buy the 5D3, I would have settled on an 80D by now... with the 17-55mm and the 35mm f2, I ultimately would have been content.

 

At least the 5d has raw. With the 80d you're just carrying around a big camera with no image advantages

[mercer]

5 hours ago, Inazuma said:

At least the 5d has raw. With the 80d you're just carrying around a big camera with no image advantages

Yeah, I guess.

But my point is that I  was tired of chasing “image advantages.” Sure there are 4K cameras in the 80D’s price range but a lot of them look too videoish to me. 

And if you look around on IG, or other sites, people are still shooting films with Canon firmware 5D Mark IIs... and they’re making beautiful films.

I think we’ve talked about this before... if Kendy Ty can use a t2i and make such amazing shorts, then surely an 80D would be good enough... if you work within and around its limitations. And the funny things is... now that Kendy has upgraded to an a6300, his short films do not look as good...

Somehow the magic got lost within the resolution.

[Kisaha]

1 hour ago, mercer said:

Yeah, I guess.

But my point is that I  was tired of chasing “image advantages.” Sure there are 4K cameras in the 80D’s price range but a lot of them look too videoish to me. 

And if you look around on IG, or other sites, people are still shooting films with Canon firmware 5D Mark IIs... and they’re making beautiful films.

I think we’ve talked about this before... if Kendy Ty can use a t2i and make such amazing shorts, then surely an 80D would be good enough... if you work within and around its limitations. And the funny things is... now that Kendy has upgraded to an a6300, his short films do not look as good...

Somehow the magic got lost within the resolution.

He lost his "mojo"   !! (the keyword of the day!)

[mercer]

59 minutes ago, Kisaha said:

He lost his "mojo"   !! (the keyword of the day!)

Haha... out of likes for the day.

[Kisaha]

18 minutes ago, mercer said:

Haha... out of likes for the day.

me too! Cheers!