Canon Reviews

Here are a couple of Canon EOS M6 Mark II reviews

If you are a Canon RF user, even if you aren’t interested in buying the M6 Mark II you should be interested in the reviews as it’s a precursor to better performance on the EOS RF mount.  The M6 Mark II gives us a glance into a future world of high performance Canon mirrorless cameras.

The M6 Mark II is quite the little camera, and I am certainly looking forward to it being in my greedy little hands soon.

Now onto the reviews.

The first one isn’t really a review, but a continuation of the Field Tests of the M6 Mark II by Imaging-Resource.

I just had to copy this image from Imaging-Resource, because I think it shows great things to come.  A 100% magnification of 30 (yes, I said THIRTY) fps auto focus. While not perfect, it’s actually quite excellent given the fps.  Consider that this is the same pixel density as an 83MP full frame sensor, and you can imagine that with more relaxed pixel density shown by a 24 or 30MP full frame camera, it would be even better.

(Image Credit: Mike Tomkins of Imaging-Resource)

Mik Tomkins was seriously impressed by the M6 II’s autofocus performance;

Burst after burst, the M6 II nailed the focus the overwhelming majority of the time. I have bursts as long as 70+ frames where the focus remains locked on the driver’s helmet down almost the entire length of the back straight, with the kart literally filling the entire frame by the end of the sequence. Only a handful of those frames aren’t spot on, focus-wise, and even when it did stray the AF system always corrected itself within just two or three frames, keeping losses to a minimum.

Read imaging-resources’s field test 1 and field test 2 of the M6 Mark II.

Next up is Gordon Laing from CameraLabs, who I’ve always enjoyed reading.  He was impressed with the M6 Mark II, and he found that he enjoyed using the autofocus in the M6 Mark II more than in the EOS 90D. He gave the camera his recommended seal of approval. He also lauded the autofocus;

But then in a bigger surprise, the M6 II actually delivers more assured burst shooting than the 90D, making it the preferred choice for sports and wildlife. I photographed Brighton’s seagulls side-by-side with the M6 II and 90D, both using the same EF 70-200mm f2.8 zoom and I was struck at how much more successful the mirrorless camera was than the DSLR. The 90D’s viewfinder autofocus proved lacklustre, and while the 90D’s tracking improved greatly in Live View, it’s almost impossible to follow fast action with a long lens using its screen only. Of course as a mirrorless camera, the M6 II is permanently in Live View, so you can use its viewfinder and also enjoy the faster burst speed of 14fps.

You can read Gordon’s full review here

canonnews

EOS RP
Dec 27, 2017
347
298
Canada
www.canonnews.com
If you are a Canon RF user, even if you aren’t interested in buying the M6 Mark II you should be interested in the reviews as it’s a precursor to better performance on the EOS RF mount.  The M6 Mark II gives us a glance into a future world of high performance Canon mirrorless cameras.
The M6 Mark II is quite the little camera, and I am certainly looking forward to it being in my greedy little hands soon.

Now onto the reviews.
The first one isn’t really a review, but a continuation of the Field Tests of the M6 Mark II by Imaging-Resource.
I just had to copy this image from Imaging-Resource, because I think it shows great things to come.  A 100% magnification of 30 (yes, I said THIRTY) fps auto focus. While not perfect, it’s actually quite excellent given the fps.  Consider that this is the same pixel density as an 83MP full frame sensor, and you can imagine that with more relaxed pixel density shown by a 24 or 30MP full frame camera, it...
Continue reading...
 
Last edited by a moderator:

mb66energy

EOS 6D MK II
Dec 18, 2011
1,299
206
Germany
www.MichaelBockhorst.de
I'm waiting for M5 II and the M50 II before deciding to upgrade or pass. I love my M50. I nearly always have it with me.
Same here, with EF-M 32 it is hard to beat as small, lightweight, reliable allrounder - and I was oft shortly before pulling the trigger to order a 2nd body to replace the 200D because DPAF is mileslightyears ahead for cameras in the same price range.

I think something is in the pipe and will be released soon: the orange online giant hasn't the M50 bodies anymore (only as market place offer) and some photo equipment sellers here in Germany do not have it at least in their online shops.

So I will wait for the next generation of M cameras with built-in EVF which is essential for me (bright sunlight, better stabilization).

My guess: M5 ii with IBIS at 1200 EUR and M50 ii without at 700 EUR. No easy choice because I want to come back to two identical bodies soon (40D and 5D i (2nd hand)) were great cameras but heavy and clumsy if you lug around two of them. With two M50 and EF-M 32 plus 70-200 f/4 just a small photo backpack leaves enough room for some clothing in the photo compartment!
 
  • Like
Reactions: pj1974 and Joaquim
May 18, 2019
3
2
Same here, with EF-M 32 it is hard to beat as small, lightweight, reliable allrounder - and I was oft shortly before pulling the trigger to order a 2nd body to replace the 200D because DPAF is mileslightyears ahead for cameras in the same price range.

I think something is in the pipe and will be released soon: the orange online giant hasn't the M50 bodies anymore (only as market place offer) and some photo equipment sellers here in Germany do not have it at least in their online shops.

So I will wait for the next generation of M cameras with built-in EVF which is essential for me (bright sunlight, better stabilization).

My guess: M5 ii with IBIS at 1200 EUR and M50 ii without at 700 EUR. No easy choice because I want to come back to two identical bodies soon (40D and 5D i (2nd hand)) were great cameras but heavy and clumsy if you lug around two of them. With two M50 and EF-M 32 plus 70-200 f/4 just a small photo backpack leaves enough room for some clothing in the photo compartment!
I hope you are right.
 
Oct 3, 2018
2
3
I'm waiting for M5 II and the M50 II before deciding to upgrade or pass. I love my M50. I nearly always have it with me.
So was I for a while, until about one and a half months ago, when I decided to buy the R as a replacement for my 6D and 7D (both mark I).
For all practical purposes, the R beats the original 7D hands down (did some action shooting during a corporate event, RIBs going quite fast over the water, and it kept up pretty well, black out didn't bother me, focus was fast enough though sometimes on the bow of RIB instead of the faces but I was more or less expecting that with the EF 400 5.6L and it being my first serious action photography with the camera).

Now, faster is always better, in most cases, but, while I was very sceptical about the R one year ago, I think Canon is on the right path in the land of mirrorless. Especially since the latest firmware update for the R. I'm lovin' it (to steal another company's slogan :p )
 

AlanF

Canon 5DSR II
Aug 16, 2012
5,817
3,336
Continue reading...


I know CR hardly posts any reviews.. but I did say people have to put up with me while I'm helping Mr CR out ;)
The 30 fps burst mode is for the 32.5 Mpx sensor cropped to 18 Mpx. So, it isn't done with the pixel equivalent of an 83 Mpx sensor. If the burst was done at the same data transfer rate for the 32.5 Mpx, it would drop to 16.6/s. The Gordon Laing review of the AF of M6 II of seagulls at Brighton is not a good test of AF for BIF - the seagulls there virtually hover along the seafront when I have seen them.
 
Dec 6, 2018
115
158
I think Canon is on the right path in the land of mirrorless. Especially since the latest firmware update for the R. I'm lovin' it (to steal another company's slogan :p )
Canon may be on the better path. Sony reminded me of taking a shortcut that's the shortest distance between two points, but no necessarily the best route. Canon seems to be knitting quite a few innovations together at the same time, included a great RF mount, and interesting tools like the AI flash unit they developed.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Architect1776

mpb001

EOS T7i
Sep 10, 2016
75
60
I use a 5DIV, but the M6II has my attention for a couple of reasons. The new sensor and the compactness of the camera. It doesn’t bother me to attach the EVF. The dilemma for me is just wait for the next generation of Canon FF sensors in a RPII or just wait to see what comes along. Ideally, I would like a compact FF for travel, but not interested in the sensor used in the RP.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SteveC

analoggrotto

EOS T7i
Aug 27, 2016
98
44
Hype for the next generation RF Full Frame is practically deafening. Canon is making a lot of different moves about the map that everyone expects to intersect upon a camera mimicing the 5D's price point. This time next year, what will DPR be saying about Canon?
 
I think it points to Canon splitting lines: RF-mount cameras for full-frame, M-mount cameras for APS-C. Makes sense to me.
It would make more sense if there was any cross-compatibility on lenses at all. But if you have an RF-mount full frame with RF lenses, they're useless on the EF-M mount APS-C camera. The only commonality to cross lenses back and forth is via EF mount - not exactly a sustainable option if Canon wants to sell RF mount lenses alongside their RF-mount bodies. Personally, I think that an APS-C RF-mount camera is inevitable at some point in the future. Not that I think that the EF-M mount is doomed. Nay, I think that as long as it keeps on selling, Canon will keep on producing them. And from what I understand, the M line sells extremely well in Asia. But like everyone else here, that's nothing more than my own brand of educated guessing.
 

privatebydesign

Would you take advice from a cartoons stuffed toy?
Jan 29, 2011
7,970
1,182
119
EDIT: I see no mechanical or optical reason why there couldn't be an RF lens to EOS-M body adapter. The RF lens has a 20mm registry distance and the EF-M an 18mm distance, Ed Mika was making FD-EOS adapters thinner than 2mm years ago. As Illustrated below very well by koenkooi there cannot be an RF to M adapter, Canon have made it so and I believe that was deliberate. I am still very skeptical that there will be an RF APS camera but all any of us can do at this point is speculate.

Having said that I think the EOS-M series is fine for what it is, the best selling MILC system on the planet, and the clamor for exotic glass for it is just a niche thing populated by the same kinds of people that populate camera forums and so their opinions get amplified out of all proportion. I doubt if Canon see any benefit to APS-C RF bodies as they are selling the M in bulk to replace the Rebels and the enthusiasts need to be pushed into better profit margin FF RF line bodies.

Mind you the EF range still has some miles in it, the 1DX MkIII and the 5D MkV are both going to be hot items and will keep many actual users, as opposed to over opinionated and vocal wish listers, happy for years yet.
 
Last edited:

Joaquim

I'm New Here
Aug 20, 2019
17
9
Everybody who was karting with their visor open should have been black flagged!

Also, I really hope Canon makes an M5 Mark II.
I so agree with the last part. I love my little M5 and aside from accepting the lack of dual cards, I would definitely buy an M5ii. The AF-On button is a game changer apart from the speed an AF. I'll keep my Fujis purely for video then unless its a big event and I can't risk shooting to just one card.
 

Joaquim

I'm New Here
Aug 20, 2019
17
9
Same here, with EF-M 32 it is hard to beat as small, lightweight, reliable allrounder - and I was oft shortly before pulling the trigger to order a 2nd body to replace the 200D because DPAF is mileslightyears ahead for cameras in the same price range.

I think something is in the pipe and will be released soon: the orange online giant hasn't the M50 bodies anymore (only as market place offer) and some photo equipment sellers here in Germany do not have it at least in their online shops.

So I will wait for the next generation of M cameras with built-in EVF which is essential for me (bright sunlight, better stabilization).

My guess: M5 ii with IBIS at 1200 EUR and M50 ii without at 700 EUR. No easy choice because I want to come back to two identical bodies soon (40D and 5D i (2nd hand)) were great cameras but heavy and clumsy if you lug around two of them. With two M50 and EF-M 32 plus 70-200 f/4 just a small photo backpack leaves enough room for some clothing in the photo compartment!
Always great to dream, but I seriously doubt Canon would put IBIS in an M5ii body. Not only is the space too small, the LP-E17 would not be able to handle the power demands.

Having said that, I definitely would like an M5ii.
 

koenkooi

EOS 7D MK II
Feb 25, 2015
521
307
I see no mechanical or optical reason why there couldn't be an RF lens to EOS-M body adapter. The RF lens has a 20mm registry distance and the EF-M an 18mm distance, Ed Mika was making FD-EOS adapters thinner than 2mm years ago.
[..]
The RF bayonet doesn't fit into the EF-M mount, so you lose more than 2mm due to that. Which means you need optics :(

IMG_5150.jpeg
IMG_5151.jpeg
 

blackcoffee17

EOS RP
Sep 17, 2014
228
188
It would make more sense if there was any cross-compatibility on lenses at all. But if you have an RF-mount full frame with RF lenses, they're useless on the EF-M mount APS-C camera. The only commonality to cross lenses back and forth is via EF mount - not exactly a sustainable option if Canon wants to sell RF mount lenses alongside their RF-mount bodies. Personally, I think that an APS-C RF-mount camera is inevitable at some point in the future. Not that I think that the EF-M mount is doomed. Nay, I think that as long as it keeps on selling, Canon will keep on producing them. And from what I understand, the M line sells extremely well in Asia. But like everyone else here, that's nothing more than my own brand of educated guessing.
RF lenses would not be exactly useless. Of course, it's a bit pointless to mount a 24-70 RF on M body but a 100-400 would be nice to be used with APS-C sensors which are still a lot more pixel-dense and cheaper.
Sony done it much better in my opinion. Buy a 200-600 and use it on a cheap A6000 if you want or buy a more expensive full frame for it, or both.
 

Cat_Interceptor

M6 II fanboy
Oct 20, 2019
14
13
alliancemotorsport.org
The Gordon Laing review of the AF of M6 II of seagulls at Brighton is not a good test of AF for BIF - the seagulls there virtually hover along the seafront when I have seen them.
I am now quite certain the M6 II has the AF to be a great BIF camera - it tracks birds incredibly well from what I could manage last week.

Two issues - I'm absolute garbage at BIF. And there's no denying you need to change your panning technique to adjust for the M6's light weight - smeone better than me will get results

Actually three issues. It was damn near impossible to hold the camera while it had a big lens in the face of 90+kph winds due to it's weight balance being so forward. So add to that and the BIF's became more either barely hovering or feathered missiles.

Edit : Honestly the more I use my M6 II the more I wonder what that sensor would be like in a 7D II style bomb proof body, dual cards slots, dual DIGIC 9's etc. Kinda feel like now people have seen that the M6 is right up there and it's "just" an enthusists camera, it's got Canon shooters excited for the future.
 
Last edited:

Hector1970

EOS 6D MK II
Mar 22, 2012
1,095
273
No doubt the M6 II is a very decent camera and very compact. Sales seem to be pretty good. My doubts are with the sustainability of the M line longer term. Canon is in a much tougher situation now and will have to make some decisions on what it keeps investing in. Supporting three mounts is potentially not sustainable in a falling market. They are pining their future on the R mount and the EF has a large existing customer base. Close to the M size could be achieved with an R mount.Just like the 1DX III may the high point of EF the M 6 II might be the high point of the M series.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Joaquim