Canon EOS M50 - an accidental 4K Digital Bolex

[will d]

As an old Bolex person and owner of a lot of old C mount glass this is exciting news. Can you put it in crop mode for stills?  I use some c's on an old Panasonic G3 but I'm sure the color on this camera far eclipses that.  Love to use the c mounts for stills and video.

 

Thank you

[MdB]

On 5/27/2018 at 2:17 AM, samuel.cabral said:

It runs EOS firmware. Not a Powershot firmware like the EOS M5 and M6. 

That is super interesting. It also means that IPB codec options are available on it. Plus I think this has a lot to do with the improved colour compared to the M3/M5/M6 etc (which were not great). 

On 5/27/2018 at 5:20 PM, kye said:

If they did decide to jump head-first into the mirrorless market how long would it take for them to build up a decent lens selection?  It would be interesting to know how long it took them to build previous lens systems - I'm assuming they happened slowly and steadily but I could be wrong.

It was fairly easy to adapt manual lens designs to PDAF in SLRs. This made the transition really very easy (for pretty much everyone). Going mirrorless is however a completely different design requirements and is far less easy. On the other hand Canon are relying on you adapting their existing lenses. 

On 5/27/2018 at 9:18 PM, tweak said:

Why can't canon just do something half decent? I'd kill for an APS-C canon version of a6500 or GH5 etc... Yeah I know why, but still it would be nice.

TELL ME ABOUT IT! I bought the M50 in a bit of desperation, honestly it is rubbish. It is probably the worst camera I have ever purchased (taken in context). BUT there are some nice things Canon COULD be doing if they wanted to. I think the next batch of Canon APS-C is going to be fairly interesting. 

On 5/27/2018 at 9:52 PM, tyger11 said:

Hilariously bad compared to an a6500; not even remotely in the same class.

Nope, definitely in different classes. 

On 5/27/2018 at 11:07 PM, Andrew Reid said:

But price difference?!

Yep

On 5/27/2018 at 11:07 PM, Andrew Reid said:

And colour.

Yep

On 5/27/2018 at 11:07 PM, Andrew Reid said:

And C-mount glass.

Sure, although you can do the same thing on Sony. 

On 5/27/2018 at 11:07 PM, Andrew Reid said:

And ergonomics & menus.

Uhm, no...

On 5/27/2018 at 11:29 PM, newfoundmass said:

Yeah, the ergonomics and color science alone make this more appealing to me than the a6500. The Canon color really is leaps and bounds above Sony.

Have you used it? Sounds like a typical throw away comment. Colour yes. Ergonomics... yeah no. 

On 5/27/2018 at 11:54 PM, mercer said:

So the 1080p on it isn’t that good?

Really isn't. It is maybe serviceable as a home movies type camera (the AF helps there too). 

On 5/27/2018 at 11:54 PM, mercer said:

It seems from what I’ve been reading, it’s the star of the camera? Clean and detailed with a lot of focus points for the DPAF?

Compared to what? Yes it is definitely better than say my 7D II (which I would never use for video). The DPAF is a little better as well. 

On 5/27/2018 at 11:59 PM, DaveAltizer said:

1080p is good for sure but it’s not any better than all the other canon dslrs and the 5dmk4 1080p and super35 1080p on 1DC are in a different class than that really. 

Yep. The 1DC S35 (and 1080p out) are a world away from the M50. It's ok. It's better than older Canon 1080p mush. 

On 5/27/2018 at 11:59 PM, DaveAltizer said:

4k is where it’s at. Perfect happy medium. It’s not mind blowingly sharp like GH5 but it’s really usable and runs so smooth on my base model MBP. It’s a shame the rolling shutter is so so bad. I’m putting the camera in a cage to add some weight and make me use it more like a real camera. I think once you add the weight and stuff it’s usable. 

The RS really is just unusable IMO in the 4K mode. Hopefully their next outing will be faster in this regard and maintain the DPAF. Because the footage IMO is actually very nice looking, it's just unusable. 

[MdB]

On 5/28/2018 at 12:45 AM, DaveAltizer said:

I guess that Rokinon 12mm f2 and the upcoming Laowa 9mm f2.8 EF-M would be a better option. Both will work at APSC and 4K. 

All your normal UWA zooms too, like Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 and 14-20mm f/2 etc. Plus the wider ones like Sigma 8-16mm. 

On 5/28/2018 at 12:49 AM, mercer said:

They have a few of those smaller aps-c lenses. I’ve used the 12 and the 21mm, which I liked for their size and smooth operation. They also have a fast 35mm. So on the M50 with 4K crop, the 3 lenses would give about a 28mm, 50mm, and 85mm FOV respectively... hell, it almost sounds like they were made for the 4K crop of the M50.

Those Rokinons are all awesome, have had the 12/2, 21/1.4, 35/1.2 and 50/1.2. The 21/1.4 is the weakest, but still fantastic. 

On 5/28/2018 at 6:30 AM, tyger11 said:

All true, but with the Sony, you get IBIS, 6K to 4K downsampling, 30p, no crop in 4K, much better bitrate, and a much better native lens selection (and a much better selection of lenses if you're willing to use and adapter). Things could get more interesting on that front if MetaBones comes out with an EF to EF-M SpeedBooster. Supposedly they had one ready back in the day, but never bothered to bring it to market when the M tanked.

If you're willing to shoot in Slog and grade your footage, the Canon color advantage goes away.

Price and ergonomics are the only advantages. In its price class, though, yeah, the M50 is a quite good 1080 camera. I;'m hoping the Magic Lantern folks can turn it into a beast.

I wouldn't call it a 'good' 1080p camera, just slightly better than some previous Canons. I also wouldn't be giving the 'ergonomics' nod to the M50 either, it's kind of junk in every possible way. 

ML could be really, really interesting! 

On 5/29/2018 at 9:34 AM, Dustin said:

I also don’t shoot video enough to warrant purchasing a $1k camera but even with warp stabilizer I want my next camera to have IBIS to at least help out my shakiness. This camera does have everything else I’d need.

How about a lens with IS? Seems like a good start to me. 

On 5/29/2018 at 12:01 PM, kye said:

Trying to get nice 1080 while casual handheld shooting with an ILC is a mine-field I've been trying to cross for some time.

To grossly over-simplify:

• All cinema cameras are out because they're either too heavy or too attention grabbing
• Canon non-cinema cameras are deliberately crippled to protect their cinema line
• Canon with ML is unreliable and has a steep learning curve
• The GH5 either can't focus reliably or people can't work out how to do it
• The Sonys all seem to overheat (although depending on what you shoot this might not be an issue) and the smaller/cheaper ones have bad RS
• The Fuji XH-1 chews batteries and the extra grip costs extra and makes it pretty heavy
• Things like the original BMPCC need a rig and becomes cumbersome (BMPCC needs external power)
• Going modular with things like the BMMCC requires a rig and BMMCC has almost no controls and so you can't use it to adapt to changing situations

Mostly the way I see people getting around this combination is to either choose Canons soft 1080, sacrifice reliability and use Canon ML RAW, get a fast fixed-lens camera like RX100 or RX10, accept RS and overheating with a6300/6500, or accept a fixed focal length and give a big middle-finger to the whole industry and use their phone (where with up to 4k60 and 1080p240 it beats everything up to 10x or 20x the price).   Or just put it on a tripod, and accept that you'll get hassled or barred from most places you go.

The basic issue is that industry assumes that consumers who want convenience don't want image quality (compact point-and-shoots), consumers who want image quality only take photos (Canon DSLRs take lovely photos), or that if you want image quality then you're a pro and you can use a tripod and don't mind a huge camera.  We're caught between the other users basically.

New Blackmagic Pocket 4K should be good to go without major rigging IMO. 

Fuji, the X-T2 is a lot cheaper. But yes the Fujis are a bit lacking. 

Canon, yep pretty much only cinema line (for now). 

GH5... nah. Although focus issues are probably around the 4K modes more so than the 1080p. 

Sony's don't overheat in 1080p (or haven't for a VERY long time now). In Sony the best options for nice 1080p are the A7S (original is cheap as these days and still produces stunning 1080p) and the A6000 (still better than the A6300/A6500) and the A7 III is pretty darn good (and really good 24/25/30/50/60/100/120p modes throughout). 

Personally though, the C100 is still one of the best, if not best if you want just really nice 1080p. Plus it has all the other benefits and as other have mentioned is reasonably small when the handle it removed, but you don't want to go without the side handle. 

How about the little box camera Canon make for industrial purposes based on the C100 II? Looks awesome for drones and gimbals and stuff too. Nobody talks about it. I want to say MS20 something... 

On 5/29/2018 at 4:26 PM, tweak said:

Personally I wouldn't choose this camera over a6500 (having shot both) and I'm pretty much a Canon fanboy and own and shoot with 5Dmkiii and several EOSM1s all with ML.

Me either. I own the camera and has been nothing but regret. It's not nice. There is very little I can say about it that is good. 

On 5/30/2018 at 8:54 AM, kye said:

If they took the XC10 and added ILC mount and DPAF it would be great - they could even make it a bit bigger, but just not three times the size like the C100.

I'd be happy enough with the guts of the XF400 in the XC10/15 body. They are kind of from the same family. But the newer sensor has DPAF and 4K60 and 120fps 1080 etc. The XF400 actually kind of looks like it fits your needs. Only downside for me on that camera is lack of C-Log (but does have Wide DR). 

On 5/30/2018 at 9:17 AM, webrunner5 said:

If Canon made a XC20 with what you ask for it would cost 4000 bucks or more.

I would be surprisingly ok with that. Canon have nothing in their range below the C200, except the underpowered XC10/15. An updated version of those that sits between would be wonderful. In fact RED threatened for years to produce something like that and never did. 

On 5/30/2018 at 9:17 AM, webrunner5 said:

The C100 mkII is smaller as is the C200 body wise than that original C100 mk I shown.

C200 is quite a bit bigger than C200. C100 MkI to MkII is nominal at best, the EVF pokes out a lot more on the MkII. Are you thinking of the C300 / C500? 

On 5/30/2018 at 11:00 AM, Trek of Joy said:

The XC10/15 and EOS-M need to have a love child - the EOS-MXC using the C200's sensor and the EOS-M lenses. I dig the XC15, but the fixed lens is a deal breaker for me. So is the m50's rolling shutter. 

Yes please! In fact let's not really bring anything from the M50 except maybe the processing to finally get Canon files into smallish codecs (straight to cheap SD cards). Oh and the nice 4K output on the M50 please. 

 

On 5/31/2018 at 12:06 PM, kye said:

 

Where did the lens go? That doesn't look right. 

[kye]

2 hours ago, MdB said:

I would be surprisingly ok with that. Canon have nothing in their range below the C200, except the underpowered XC10/15. An updated version of those that sits between would be wonderful. In fact RED threatened for years to produce something like that and never did. 

......

Where did the lens go? That doesn't look right. 

A camera in-between the XC10/15 and C200 would be absolutely fantastic.

The C100 is sized closer to the C200 than XC10 but only does 1080.  Those industrial cameras you mention only do 1080 (link link) and would be large and attention grabbing by the time you rigged them up so they had screens and the proper ergonomics.

You're right about the camerasize.com images looking strange, for some reason they cropped the lens out of the top angle!

[newfoundmass]

3 hours ago, MdB said:

Have you used it? Sounds like a typical throw away comment. Colour yes. Ergonomics... yeah no

I dislike the Sony a6xxx ergonomics, so yes, the M50's ergonomics are better in my opinion. 

[mercer]

4 hours ago, MdB said:

Yep. The 1DC S35 (and 1080p out) are a world away from the M50. It's ok. It's better than older Canon 1080p mush. 

Well, a $600 camera shouldn’t compare with the 1DC... I’d be kinda pissed if it did if I were a 1DC owner.

But to your larger point, I don’t know if it’s nostalgia, but I’ve always been fond of the soft (mushy) 1080p from the t2i and other earlier Canon offerings.

As long as you rely on close ups and don’t throw the widest lens in the world on it (like most videographers tend to do) it’s really quite flattering.

Look at Kendy Ty’s stuff. In my opinion his work took a visual hit when he abandoned his t2i for the a6300.

With that being said, point noted and appreciated. Every bit of info helps.

[MdB]

3 hours ago, newfoundmass said:

I dislike the Sony a6xxx ergonomics, so yes, the M50's ergonomics are better in my opinion. 

Not sure disliking the Sony makes the M50 better. Have you used the M50? It’s worse than anything I’ve ever used, by a long, long way. I’ve used most of the Sony’s at one point or another and they are WAY better. Canon automatically having better ergonomics is total BS, repeated as a trope or discussion point from those with nothing to contribute. 

2 hours ago, mercer said:

Well, a $600 camera shouldn’t compare with the 1DC... I’d be kinda pissed if it did if I were a 1DC owner.

But to your larger point, I don’t know if it’s nostalgia, but I’ve always been fond of the soft (mushy) 1080p from the t2i and other earlier Canon offerings.

As long as you rely on close ups and don’t throw the widest lens in the world on it (like most videographers tend to do) it’s really quite flattering.

Look at Kendy Ty’s stuff. In my opinion his work took a visual hit when he abandoned his t2i for the a6300.

With that being said, point noted and appreciated. Every bit of info helps.

Well the 1DC is how old now? It was the first 4K DSLR. It’s 1080p surely could have trickled down by now, especially as the M50 actually represents their best current 1080p outside of a C series. 

Well if that’s the case I think you’ll love the M50. Honestly to my eye it’s one of the only Canon’s not to have unusable 1080p. Which is such a shame as their really good cameras have a really good image. They just don’t do much in the entry level. M50 is a step in the right direction. 

Couple other (hopefully) interesting observations:

M50 is the first non-camcorder to use a compressed H.264 codec for their 4K. The XF400 also does similar and from a similar era. This is probably the single biggest leap, really if the 5D IV did this (crop and all) I’d definitely have one right now. I would have had one for ages. So that’s going to be a big deal. 

Second is the M50 outputs a (somewhat) clean 4K through the HDMI AFAICT. This again is new. The 5DIV and 1DX II don’t, their max is 1080p. I say it is ‘somewhat’ clean in that the displays are overlayed and it is the only output when used (no EVF or monitor). These aren’t things I’ve had to worry about for years, kind of took me wayyyyyy back. The touch screen is obviously not active when you use a monitor then. Also the only way to get a ‘clean’ output is to turn all the displays off AND the AF, otherwise you’re going to have crud all over the display. 

On the plus side though the 4K HDMI output is rather nice. But if you want to use the 1080p and DPAF, then don’t bother. 

I think the M5 II that is rumoured to be coming will be a lot of things this isn’t. I still think the quirky and poorly planned aspects of this camera carry through the entire line. But a few extra dials, less RS and less crop will be an absolute winner. Canon are on the cusp of finally, finally doing 4K well in the consumer category. 

[newfoundmass]

2 hours ago, MdB said:

Not sure disliking the Sony makes the M50 better. Have you used the M50? It’s worse than anything I’ve ever used, by a long, long way. I’ve used most of the Sony’s at one point or another and they are WAY better. Canon automatically having better ergonomics is total BS, repeated as a trope or discussion point from those with nothing to contribute. 

No, I haven't, I was simply giving my opinion that the ergonomics (as someone with larger hands) and the Canon color has me more interested in it than the a6500. I'm sorry for not "contributing" enough to your liking. 

[Kisaha]

@MdB haha! That s a good one!

Seriously, have you ever use a Sony camera??!!

There are millions of pages on the net about the worst ergonomics, button placement, menu system and touch interface (not!) in business.

Unfortunatelly, from time to time I have to work with an A7 camera, and the difference between those and my NX1s are night and day.

A few weeks ago we were shooting with some A7s cameras, and I asked the owner of the camera to change something and it took him several minutes to find the menu and change it.

In any segment Sony has issues with their ergonomics and menus, that applies to C100 vs FS5 and C300 vs FS7, in my humble opinion of course.

[MdB]

6 hours ago, newfoundmass said:

No, I haven't, I was simply giving my opinion that the ergonomics (as someone with larger hands) and the Canon color has me more interested in it than the a6500. I'm sorry for not "contributing" enough to your liking. 

Well this is just continuing the noise that a Canon ‘must’ be better. The A6500 destroys this junker for ‘ergonomics’. Colour is another thing entirely. And yes I would agree about the preference of colour on the M50 (the other Canon mirrorless like M3, M5 etc not so much). But it’s also very hard to gauge colour on this camera with its poor representations on both the LCD and especially the EVF. 

Sorry I don’t blindly assume Canon have better ergonomics because... Canon. 

6 hours ago, Kisaha said:

@MdB haha! That s a good one!

Seriously, have you ever use a Sony camera??!!

There are millions of pages on the net about the worst ergonomics, button placement, menu system and touch interface (not!) in business.

Unfortunatelly, from time to time I have to work with an A7 camera, and the difference between those and my NX1s are night and day.

A few weeks ago we were shooting with some A7s cameras, and I asked the owner of the camera to change something and it took him several minutes to find the menu and change it.

In any segment Sony has issues with their ergonomics and menus, that applies to C100 vs FS5 and C300 vs FS7, in my humble opinion of course.

Ugh another blind follower. 

When did this have ANYTHING to do with your NX1 (Nikon DSLR clone) or the A7? The fact that the C series Canons have good ergonomics (for the most, but not all part) does not automatically mean this tiny POS has better ergonomics. It really doesn’t. 

For reference, knowing some bumbling idiot that doesn’t know how to use their camera doesn’t make the camera a poor design. There is a reason Canon (you know, the brand you blindly think have great ergonomics) copied Sony in their recent turn to improve ergonomics in their mirrorless cameras. Sadly the M50 doesn’t follow that design (not that it is anywhere near as well implemented). 

I really do love how the sheep who have never even touched these products always bleet when someone disagrees with their simplistic view of the world. 

[Kisaha]

9 hours ago, MdB said:

Well this is just continuing the noise that a Canon ‘must’ be better. The A6500 destroys this junker for ‘ergonomics’. Colour is another thing entirely. And yes I would agree about the preference of colour on the M50 (the other Canon mirrorless like M3, M5 etc not so much). But it’s also very hard to gauge colour on this camera with its poor representations on both the LCD and especially the EVF. 

Sorry I don’t blindly assume Canon have better ergonomics because... Canon. 

Ugh another blind follower. 

When did this have ANYTHING to do with your NX1 (Nikon DSLR clone) or the A7? The fact that the C series Canons have good ergonomics (for the most, but not all part) does not automatically mean this tiny POS has better ergonomics. It really doesn’t. 

For reference, knowing some bumbling idiot that doesn’t know how to use their camera doesn’t make the camera a poor design. There is a reason Canon (you know, the brand you blindly think have great ergonomics) copied Sony in their recent turn to improve ergonomics in their mirrorless cameras. Sadly the M50 doesn’t follow that design (not that it is anywhere near as well implemented). 

I really do love how the sheep who have never even touched these products always bleet when someone disagrees with their simplistic view of the world. 

You are obviously full of animal crap.

All the Sonys I have used are the worst in their tier. A lot of words and insults for something as simple as that, that even Sony users know and most admit.

You believe you are the wolf (or the pig) and you try to impose your views on the "sheep" but we are not on Animal Farm.

[MdB]

49 minutes ago, Kisaha said:

You are obviously full of animal crap.

All the Sonys I have used are the worst in their tier. A lot of words and insults for something as simple as that, that even Sony users know and most admit.

You believe you are the wolf (or the pig) and you try to impose your views on the "sheep" but we are not on Animal Farm.

So as expected you have nothing? Clueless and assume the position. Good on you champ. I always knew there were a lot of sheep around, just hard to fathom how devoted they are to causes they seemingly have little interest in. 

‘Obviously’, I mean one says Canon and the other Sony. One must be very good and the other one rubbish. These are givens because the internet tells me how to feel and I’m incapable of thinking for myself - Love, Kisaha. 

[Kisaha]

4 minutes ago, MdB said:

So as expected you have nothing? Clueless and assume the position. Good on you champ. I always knew there were a lot of sheep around, just hard to fathom how devoted they are to causes they seemingly have little interest in. 

‘Obviously’, I mean one says Canon and the other Sony. One must be very good and the other one rubbish. These are givens because the internet tells me how to feel and I’m incapable of thinking for myself - Love, Kisaha. 

I am not aware from what culture you are coming from but calling names to people you do not know, is not a good start to make friends on a new environment, and as you are new to this forum, we have debated and argue about the lack of any ergononics (whatsoever) on a6xxx and A7 cameras for hundrends of pages. Just do a little research and you will also find my opinions there.

The only Canon I own is the AE-1 and a set of FD lenses, so I have no horse in this race, but for professional reasons I have to use Sony cameras all the time, and they are seriously lacking in so many respects, that I do not have the time to state here but are very well documented here, and in other forum and special press articles.

The market seems to favor these Canon cameras, and I do agree, as these are perfectly placed (cost wise as well) for entry level and slightly more advanced users, together with the ultra cheap and quite good 11-22, 22mm pancake and maybe the 55-200, and the kit 15-45 is sufficient for such a use. Small, light and cheap.

You obviously disagree, but you can state your disagreement with a milder and more civilized manner, and be ready to face different point of views.

[mercer]

Yeah, I’m unsure why there needs to be lines drawn in the sand about camera brands and more specifically, product lines within camera brands.

I had an a 6500 and I didn’t find it unwieldy at all. The ibis was nice and even found sLog3 to be quite usable under the right circumstances. The level of detail and dr in 8bit was the closest to Raw video that I ever used.

With that being said, the M50 isn’t even a comparable camera at half the cost. It definitely has its issues but even some of its issues are what makes it appealing as a grab and go, leisure camera. For one, I welcome the 4K crop. For the most part, I have little interest in 4K video right now, but the 4K crop offers me a chance to use my crappy old c-mount lenses with it while enjoying the benefits of Canon color and a little extra resolution. For the same type of leisurely, family photos and videos, the 1080p seems plenty good enough when married with the 22mm for videos with a street shooting vibe and DPAF.

Now the rumor sites speculate that the next generation of the M5 may fix some of the issues the M50 suffers from... who knows... if it does, I may look into that as well. Or maybe this time next year, Sony will release an a5200 in this price range or Nikon will release a mirrorless D5700. If so, maybe I’ll give them a try as well.

The good thing about this market segment is that you can buy and sell within it without too much of a loss. 

[MdB]

4 hours ago, Kisaha said:

I am not aware from what culture you are coming from but calling names to people you do not know, is not a good start to make friends

I'm not here to be your buddy. 

4 hours ago, Kisaha said:

we have debated and argue about the lack of any ergononics (whatsoever) on a6xxx and A7 cameras for hundrends of pages

That's fine. I don't know what culture you're from, but your comprehension skills are very, very poor. It matters ZERO how poorly you think of the Sony's. That doesn't AUTOMATICALLY make a Canon (regardless of any features and abilities) better than those cameras in the ergonomics stakes. YES the A6xxx series are not my ideal design, far from it. BUT the M50 is worse. WAY worse. This idea from people on the internet who like to make claims they cannot substantiate in ANY way other than to say 'oh the Sony's are known to be bad' and just follow this idea that Canon MUST be better... because Canon is really rather pathetic. I DO own this camera, you haven't even touched it. I don't own a Sony, especially not an A6xxx series, but I have owned one and know them quite well. The Sony thumps this dreadful little Canon in every way. Touch interface on the Canon is better, BUT the camera is so small and fiddly and poxy that the touchscreen gets lost. 

4 hours ago, Kisaha said:

The only Canon I own is the AE-1 and a set of FD lenses, so I have no horse in this race, but for professional reasons I have to use Sony cameras all the time, and they are seriously lacking in so many respects, that I do not have the time to state here but are very well documented here, and in other forum and special press articles.

I don't need your feeble points to 'special press articles', I have used all the Sony's. Are they perfect? No. Are they better than the M50? HELL YES. Not even a debate. 

4 hours ago, Kisaha said:

The market seems to favor these Canon cameras, and I do agree, as these are perfectly placed (cost wise as well) for entry level and slightly more advanced users, together with the ultra cheap and quite good 11-22, 22mm pancake and maybe the 55-200, and the kit 15-45 is sufficient for such a use. Small, light and cheap.

Honestly, I think that makes you just a sheep. This camera was more expensive than the A6300 where I am. It is cheap, plastic, has an awful control scheme with such basic customisation. The 11-22mm is a nice cheap UWA. The 22mm is ok, pretty far from amazing, but it's pretty small. I guess if you're a Samsung holdout you probably don't have that high standards anyway. 

4 hours ago, Kisaha said:

You obviously disagree, but you can state your disagreement with a milder and more civilized manner, and be ready to face different point of views.

You're the one who flew off the handle the moment I suggested a 'perfect' Canon could be worse than a Sony. Honestly you keep saying 'read the forums', I'm trying to give you a real user perspective and you've got nothing to contribute when all you want to do is argue based on brand loyalty. Come back to me when you have something you can actually discuss, with detail and facts. I'm more than happy to be wrong - Are you? 

[MdB]

42 minutes ago, mercer said:

Yeah, I’m unsure why there needs to be lines drawn in the sand about camera brands and more specifically, product lines within camera brands.

Me either! Who cares what brand is on the front? I love my Canon gear, but I am deeply disappointed at how poor this particular product is. I feel like those reviewing it just have a really distorted perspective of what else is out there. Like the number of people I read who talk about Canon mirrorless as being good, who haven't used any of the other mirrorless systems at all. None. I had the M6 and I've had a bunch of M1's. The M50 is just so disappointing. Nothing to do with brand allegiance. 

45 minutes ago, mercer said:

I had an a 6500 and I didn’t find it unwieldy at all. The ibis was nice and even found sLog3 to be quite usable under the right circumstances. The level of detail and dr in 8bit was the closest to Raw video that I ever used.

I've never really enjoyed the A6xxx series. In fact I don't particularly like any of the Sony ILCs, but it isn't really about the 'ergonomics'. In fact the later A7 series have excellent ergonomics (apart from maybe a few minor things), but I just don't really love the cameras. The A6xxx are reasonably capable and as mentioned I think they simply outclass the Canon in every way. 

48 minutes ago, mercer said:

With that being said, the M50 isn’t even a comparable camera at half the cost.

Where I am the A6300 is cheaper at the moment the M50 cost me. 

48 minutes ago, mercer said:

It definitely has its issues but even some of its issues are what makes it appealing as a grab and go, leisure camera.

I am really struggling to find things I do like about this camera. I think that its actually pretty ok when I pair it with my 22mm pancake as a basic point and shoot. So yes. But there are so many other cameras that fill that roll just as well if not better to much, much better. An X-E3 comes to mind - A WAY better camera than this thing. Again going off prices where I am. 

52 minutes ago, mercer said:

For one, I welcome the 4K crop. For the most part, I have little interest in 4K video right now, but the 4K crop offers me a chance to use my crappy old c-mount lenses with it while enjoying the benefits of Canon color and a little extra resolution.

I mean, this is kind of interesting if you have a load of these lenses. However this has been an option with cameras like the GX85 for a long time now. That camera is WAY better than this M50. Yes Canon colour is appealing, their 4K is nice too, but the rolling shutter plus EIS just work totally against it. I'm not fussed by the crop either. The lack of DPAF is quite sucky though. 

54 minutes ago, mercer said:

For the same type of leisurely, family photos and videos, the 1080p seems plenty good enough when married with the 22mm for videos with a street shooting vibe and DPAF.

Maybe. If you can get over how awful it is to use first. Still think there are better options out there. 

55 minutes ago, mercer said:

Now the rumor sites speculate that the next generation of the M5 may fix some of the issues the M50 suffers from... who knows... if it does, I may look into that as well. Or maybe this time next year, Sony will release an a5200 in this price range or Nikon will release a mirrorless D5700. If so, maybe I’ll give them a try as well.

Yes I really should have held off. People like Andrew and Dave were just saying such nice positive things about this little camera I was so temped to have a nice compact Canon option. The M5 II would be really interesting with this processing and with a faster sensor. 

Then there is the complete lack of lenses. Sure adapt people say, well it's still missing really key lenses. 35mm f/1.4 is meant to be coming. They need a 50-60mm f/1.8 or similar too. Heck what they REALLY need is Sigma to release their DN series primes for the mount. The 16/30/56mm f/1.4s on the M5 II could be quite a thing. Canon just need then to sort out their controls a bit better and unify their menus and they'd have a very nice product on their hands. 

As it stands now I give the M50 1-star. 

[mercer]

14 minutes ago, MdB said:

Me either! Who cares what brand is on the front? I love my Canon gear, but I am deeply disappointed at how poor this particular product is. I feel like those reviewing it just have a really distorted perspective of what else is out there. Like the number of people I read who talk about Canon mirrorless as being good, who haven't used any of the other mirrorless systems at all. None. I had the M6 and I've had a bunch of M1's. The M50 is just so disappointing. Nothing to do with brand allegiance. 

I've never really enjoyed the A6xxx series. In fact I don't particularly like any of the Sony ILCs, but it isn't really about the 'ergonomics'. In fact the later A7 series have excellent ergonomics (apart from maybe a few minor things), but I just don't really love the cameras. The A6xxx are reasonably capable and as mentioned I think they simply outclass the Canon in every way. 

Where I am the A6300 is cheaper at the moment the M50 cost me. 

I am really struggling to find things I do like about this camera. I think that its actually pretty ok when I pair it with my 22mm pancake as a basic point and shoot. So yes. But there are so many other cameras that fill that roll just as well if not better to much, much better. An X-E3 comes to mind - A WAY better camera than this thing. Again going off prices where I am. 

I mean, this is kind of interesting if you have a load of these lenses. However this has been an option with cameras like the GX85 for a long time now. That camera is WAY better than this M50. Yes Canon colour is appealing, their 4K is nice too, but the rolling shutter plus EIS just work totally against it. I'm not fussed by the crop either. The lack of DPAF is quite sucky though. 

Maybe. If you can get over how awful it is to use first. Still think there are better options out there. 

Yes I really should have held off. People like Andrew and Dave were just saying such nice positive things about this little camera I was so temped to have a nice compact Canon option. The M5 II would be really interesting with this processing and with a faster sensor. 

Then there is the complete lack of lenses. Sure adapt people say, well it's still missing really key lenses. 35mm f/1.4 is meant to be coming. They need a 50-60mm f/1.8 or similar too. Heck what they REALLY need is Sigma to release their DN series primes for the mount. The 16/30/56mm f/1.4s on the M5 II could be quite a thing. Canon just need then to sort out their controls a bit better and unify their menus and they'd have a very nice product on their hands. 

As it stands now I give the M50 1-star. 

Really 1 Star? 

I had two GX85s and I wanted to like them but I just don’t get along well with Panasonic color. But it was fun to use my c-mounts with IBIS. In fact, I’ve contemplated getting a G85 or G9 for that reason alone. 

I get gear crazy every summer, so I doubt I’ll get one but if I do it would really be as glove box cam. I bought a Q7 a few years back just to use a bunch of D mount lenses I acquired over the years. It was fun for a few minutes but that camera, with its pluses and it had a couple, had the worst RS I had ever seen, you literally couldn’t even frame your shot without a dose of Dramamine.

But to your broader point, I agree, the M line is the redheaded step sister of the Canon lens lineup. The fact that they don’t already have a nifty fifty after 5 years is an issue and a symbol that they don’t see the M line as being anything more than a base consumer model for pocketbook shutterbugs. Man, I hope they go EF for their FF mirrorless. 

[MdB]

1 minute ago, mercer said:

Really 1 Star? 

Sadly, yeah. It's really, really awful to use. I mean, it was nearly $900, so keep in mind that's my benchmark when people have been buying A6300's for less. It's also only ever so slightly cheaper than the M5. 

3 minutes ago, mercer said:

I had two GX85s and I wanted to like them but I just don’t get along well with Panasonic color. But it was fun to use my c-mounts with IBIS. In fact, I’ve contemplated getting a G85 or G9 for that reason alone. 

I didn't much like the GX85 either. The EVF was terrible! But the controls were better. However that body is heavy for it's size and complete lack of grip (with shiny, slippery, non-grippy 'leather' texture). I still think the GX85 was more useful and with better controls and more usable output. A G9 is only an extra $600 for me over the M50, so an extra 2/3's... I should have got a G9. But I have pretty much all Canon now, so thus the M50. 

6 minutes ago, mercer said:

get gear crazy every summer, so I doubt I’ll get one but if I do it would really be as glove box cam. I bought a Q7 a few years back just to use a bunch of D mount lenses I acquired over the years. It was fun for a few minutes but that camera, with its pluses and it had a couple, had the worst RS I had ever seen, you literally couldn’t even frame your shot without a dose of Dramamine.

I had the original Q when they were Mag-alloy (and darn expensive!). Wouldn't the BM Pocket be a better choice for all of this? I mean surely if you like the crop factor that has the better image. They are cheap and the speed boosters are cheap for them now s/h. Even rigging them up is cheap (most will come with everything needed). Or like a micro? 

[mercer]

1 hour ago, MdB said:

had the original Q when they were Mag-alloy (and darn expensive!). Wouldn't the BM Pocket be a better choice for all of this? I mean surely if you like the crop factor that has the better image. They are cheap and the speed boosters are cheap for them now s/h. Even rigging them up is cheap (most will come with everything needed). Or like a micro?

Yeah I had both the Pocket and the Micro. I loved the Micro but hated rigging it up. And the Pocket I got around the same time that I first experimented with ML Raw on the 50D... the color and ease of grading was just way better with the Canon, so eventually I went that route with the 5D3. And for all intents and purposes, I couldn’t be happier. I could shoot with that camera for the next five years and be happy with the results.

For messing around with c-mounts, those cameras just aren’t worth the trouble. IBIS is really the best option for those lenses and my interest in using them. With my EF lenses and c-mounts, the M50 seemed like fun, but after your glowing review, I’ll probably wait to see what else comes around.

[newfoundmass]

@MdB seems to just want to argue. He called me a sheep and I don't even shoot Canon or have any plan to! He seems unable to process that people actually hate the ergonomics of the a6xxx cameras and prefer a more traditional DSLR body. Weird guy and a bit of a jerk.