Upgrade to m6 ii or RP for family memories in low light

SteveC

M50 & T6i
Sep 3, 2019
379
233
Update: Today was my 4th day with my rental RP and I'm happy to report that after evaluating it all weekend... I bought one! This camera is awesome and really exceeded my expectations. It has to be one of the best values in cameras today, a mirrorless full-frame for under $1,000 with EF adapter included. That's just amazing. It may not be the camera for everyone, but for me it's got everything I need. Depending on my "portability" and IQ needs, I can happily bounce back and forth between the RP and the M6 to fit what I'm doing for the day. The new RP should be here Tuesday, right when my rental goes back, and I look forward to getting the new one all set up. (y) (y)
I'm probably going to solve this particular conundrum by buying both.

I DID just buy an M6 mk II.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Travel_Photographer

Travel_Photographer

Travel, Landscape, Architecture
Aug 30, 2019
40
35
I'm probably going to solve this particular conundrum by buying both.

I DID just buy an M6 mk II.
Great! That M6 II is a great camera. I follow your posts in the other threads (regarding some bigger / higher IQ lenses for the M line) and I rented the Sigma 16mm F1.4 for a week in December. I'm curious to see how it feels. Looking forward to it.

I really like having options. I've always had three sizes of Canon cameras so I could choose the size according to the needs of the day: Small, Medium, and Large. Up until recently, that was Canon 5D II (large), a Rebel (medium), and an S90 (small). All have been recently upgraded so now it's RP, M6, and G7 X II. (Funny though how the RP, which I'm counting as my "large" is pretty much the size of a Rebel. :D ) This new set should last me a while.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pape and SteveC

KKCFamilyman

EOS 7D MK II
Mar 17, 2012
495
2
40
Chicago
www.allophotography.com
I did give the m6 ii a test drive and compared the video quality to my m50 with the 22m f2 and 15-45 kit lens. The video was cleaner and more detailed. I did notice and extra details gained were lost with increased noise at iso 2000 and above. The option to bounce the flash was nice. I just got the RP kit and will test that to decide and report back.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Travel_Photographer

Act444

EOS 6D MK II
May 4, 2011
1,028
120
Update: Today was my 4th day with my rental RP and I'm happy to report that after evaluating it all weekend... I bought one! This camera is awesome and really exceeded my expectations. It has to be one of the best values in cameras today, a mirrorless full-frame for under $1,000 with EF adapter included. That's just amazing. It may not be the camera for everyone, but for me it's got everything I need. Depending on my "portability" and IQ needs, I can happily bounce back and forth between the RP and the M6 to fit what I'm doing for the day. The new RP should be here Tuesday, right when my rental goes back, and I look forward to getting the new one all set up. (y) (y)
I know - as soon as the price settled down to the $1K mark, I immediately saw the value and had to go for it. While it doesn't (and can't) replace my 5D4, I find it remarkable that it can output 95% of the quality in a package 50% smaller/lighter. To me, this is what MILC is all about.

It's now my first compact choice (over the M6)...
 

KKCFamilyman

EOS 7D MK II
Mar 17, 2012
495
2
40
Chicago
www.allophotography.com
Which of these are you prioritizing over the other -- stills shooting at low ISO's or 4K video?

As others have stated, the RP wouldn't autofocus all that well in 4K since it doesn't use dual pixel autofocus in 4K. I believe it's also a 1.7x crop in 4K. (Someone correct me if I'm wrong). So even the RF 35mm F1.8, you're at about 60mm full-frame equivalent. That is not wide at all, if wider than 60mm is what you'd need.

Personally, and this is just my opinion, I'm not a fan of 4K in this class of camera. For family videos, vacations, etc., I think the look of 1080p shot at 60fps with a shutter of 1/60th, and aperture set for desired DoF, with Auto ISO for exposure is the way to go. I have the original M6 and video shot with those settings is awesome. I rented an M6 II for a week to see what 4K was like. It's an excellent camera, but after comparing video on my M6 taken with the settings described above, compared to M6II 4K at less frame rate, I much preferred the 1080/60p. Again, all subjective.

For stills, yeah you may want to see if you can get your hands on them to do your own high ISO comparison. I was *this* close to buying an RP the other day. It's currently $999 with the EF lens adapter included, which I would have paid $100 for, so basically $899 for a full-frame camera. That's just awesome. I read and watched a huge amount of reviews and while the camera was generally universally loved at that price point, the one thing that kept coming up in my research was the high ISO performance was not what you might expect from a full-frame sensor. Now this is just a bunch of random web reviewers, but it came up enough that it made me hesitate. If I'm going to upgrade for the purpose of high ISO performance, I want the ISO performance to be stellar in comparison to what I'm getting now with my M6, which I think is pretty excellent already. I didn't get the impression it was going to be a *huge* upgrade in high ISO IQ going from my M6 to the RP. I decided to wait for the next R camera, whenever that is.
I am prioritizing both video and high Iso. I know I cannot get them both for my budget. I did like the m6 ii video over the m50 as it seemed cleaner. The high Iso was worse guessing either lower quality M mount lenses or higher pixel density. I am now going to test the RP and will report what I decide. Thanks again for all the feedback.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Travel_Photographer

Travel_Photographer

Travel, Landscape, Architecture
Aug 30, 2019
40
35
To me, this is what MILC is all about.
Agreed. The size and capability of the RP is amazing. I was relatively late to the MILC game, but now that I've been using them for about a year, I love all the advantages that mirrorless brings. There's of course still a place for D-SLRs for times when an optical viewfinder may be necessary, but for me, 99% of the time the advantages of mirrorless make it my go-to choice.

I am prioritizing both video and high Iso. I know I cannot get them both for my budget. I did like the m6 ii video over the m50 as it seemed cleaner. The high Iso was worse guessing either lower quality M mount lenses or higher pixel density. I am now going to test the RP and will report what I decide. Thanks again for all the feedback.
Sounds good. Enjoy your test of the RP. If the size works for you, I think you'll probably love it. The IQ is incredible. If the 4K on the RP doesn't work great for you because of the crop and / or autofocus, definitely try it in manual video mode at 1080p, 60fps, shutter 1/60th second, aperture as wide as you can go for the scene, and auto ISO. Those settings have produced the best results for me and the quality is awesome.
 

OneSnark

Canon Fanboy
Aug 20, 2019
36
14
Agreed. The size and capability of the RP is amazing. I was relatively late to the MILC game, but now that I've been using them for about a year, I love all the advantages that mirrorless brings. There's of course still a place for D-SLRs for times when an optical viewfinder may be necessary, but for me, 99% of the time the advantages of mirrorless make it my go-to choice.

Sounds good. Enjoy your test of the RP. If the size works for you, I think you'll probably love it. The IQ is incredible. If the 4K on the RP doesn't work great for you because of the crop and / or autofocus, definitely try it in manual video mode at 1080p, 60fps, shutter 1/60th second, aperture as wide as you can go for the scene, and auto ISO. Those settings have produced the best results for me and the quality is awesome.
So - - in this thread I am seeing a number people are comparing the M6-II to the RP. With the black Friday specials (including a good special on a RAW program I have an eye on. .). . . my CC is once again itchy. (its good for the economy)

I am getting a bit muddled in all the back-and-forth.

So - - -STRAIGHT UP IMAGE QUALITY. . .what is the thought between the RP and the new M6-II? What I value most is High Iso noise performance (I often shoot moving subjects in low light, often at a 125 shutter, ISO 3200) and dynamic range (travel landscapes where I have dark shadows and bright skies; and don't have the choice to return when lighting is perfect). I understand the RP sensor is the 6D-II. . which has it's own history; and the MK6 sensor is much improved . . .but is still an APS-C.

The cost is not a factor (after buying accessories)
Video is not a factor.
Burst mode is not a factor. (if I want 14 FPS, then I shoot video. . .)

All I care about is the captured image.

* I will shoot RAW, primarily with EF glass on both. . .although I will likely get the 15-45M for the MK6, or the 24-105/4L for the RP. So. . .I imagine the glass on the "RP option" will generally be better. I don't really envision walking about with a 16-35/2.8 on the Mk6?
* AF performance will be of interest (afterall. . .I don't care about dynamic range is the shot is blurry)

Yes. . . .I know one is full frame; one is APS-C. That is a factor for the lenses, which I understand (and I am much more accustomed to APS-C)
 

Travel_Photographer

Travel, Landscape, Architecture
Aug 30, 2019
40
35
So - - -STRAIGHT UP IMAGE QUALITY. . .what is the thought between the RP and the new M6-II? What I value most is High Iso noise performance (I often shoot moving subjects in low light, often at a 125 shutter, ISO 3200) and dynamic range (travel landscapes where I have dark shadows and bright skies; and don't have the choice to return when lighting is perfect).
Short Answer: The Canon RP has better image quality across the board. It's going to be tough to beat a full-frame sensor with an APS-C. That's not to say the M6 II is not excellent. It is. It's just that the RP is better, especially at high ISOs. As mentioned in my previous posts, I also think the autofocus in the RP is incredible, especially eye-detect AF. If size of the body and lenses is not a major factor, I'd go with the RP for the type of photography you describe.

The M6 II's advantage of course is it's size. For a tiny form factor, when *size* is the primary consideration but you still want excellent overall IQ at lower ISOs up to 1600, that camera is awesome.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: HeavyPiper

KKCFamilyman

EOS 7D MK II
Mar 17, 2012
495
2
40
Chicago
www.allophotography.com
I did compare the RP with my M50 and definetly at least 1 to 1 1/2 stops cleaner still’s and 1080p video. I just need to decide if the gains are worth the cost and size as there is current not an 24-70 f4 option to make it more portable. Also not having 4k will leave me wanting a new body when one is released. I am thinking of swinging for the $999 m6 ii kit and hoping for more M mount lens options. Really just need an 16-55 2.8 m mount lens and I would be happy. Like a transformer can shrink it down or add a larger lens when needed. I feel the RP is not as versatile yet since there are only larger L lenses.
 
Mar 15, 2018
41
39
United States
From my perspective, money should always be a consideration. The cost of the body is only one part of that cost. To replicate the focal range of your M-mount 15-45, 55-200, 22mm lenses on the RP, plus the cost of the body itself, would easily take you into $3-4k territory. Yes, the images and video would be better with the RP and RF lenses, but marginally so. You're not doing commercial work here. If you're just trying to satisfy GAS, the M6II will get you there at a fraction of the cost, and you'll already have a nice, very compact lens selection.

However, I'll make another proposal. Instead of trying to get RED camera quality in low light from a sub $1000 body (you will be disappointed), get yourself a $50-100 on-camera light attachment, like from FalconEyes, or a Godox flash with on-camera trigger and think ways of diffusing that light to bring it on target more softly. Watch some youtube videos on controlling the light. Or... have you considered a tripod? The M50 is a very capable camera, and accessories like this will do more to improve your image quality at a small fraction of the cost that forking over >$1k for a new body. At the very least, if you decide to upgrade the body later, you'll already have a light source, tripod, etc., which can be used to improve image quality with any body.
 
  • Like
Reactions: KKCFamilyman

koenkooi

EOS 7D MK II
Feb 25, 2015
514
304
From my perspective, money should always be a consideration. The cost of the body is only one part of that cost. To replicate the focal range of your M-mount 15-45, 55-200, 22mm lenses on the RP, plus the cost of the body itself, would easily take you into $3-4k territory. Yes, the images and video would be better with the RP and RF lenses, but marginally so. You're not doing commercial work here. If you're just trying to satisfy GAS, the M6II will get you there at a fraction of the cost, and you'll already have a nice, very compact lens selection.

However, I'll make another proposal. Instead of trying to get RED camera quality in low light from a sub $1000 body (you will be disappointed), get yourself a $50-100 on-camera light attachment, like from FalconEyes, or a Godox flash with on-camera trigger and think ways of diffusing that light to bring it on target more softly. Watch some youtube videos on controlling the light. Or... have you considered a tripod? The M50 is a very capable camera, and accessories like this will do more to improve your image quality at a small fraction of the cost that forking over >$1k for a new body. At the very least, if you decide to upgrade the body later, you'll already have a light source, tripod, etc., which can be used to improve image quality with any body.
A Canon EL-100 or Godox V350C pointed at the ceiling also make a big difference. The EL-100 is quite small and feels quite nice on an M camera. I keep it on the camera all the time in these dark winter times, it only comes off when going outside.
The V350C is half the price of an EL-100 and lasts a lot longer due to its battery, but it's bulkier and doesn't automatically wake up from sleep, which all the Canon flashes do, as do the bigger Godox flashes.
 

OneSnark

Canon Fanboy
Aug 20, 2019
36
14
From my perspective, money should always be a consideration. The cost of the body is only one part of that cost. To replicate the focal range of your M-mount 15-45, 55-200, 22mm lenses on the RP, plus the cost of the body itself, would easily take you into $3-4k territory. Yes, the images and video would be better with the RP and RF lenses, but marginally so. You're not doing commercial work here. If you're just trying to satisfy GAS, the M6II will get you there at a fraction of the cost, and you'll already have a nice, very compact lens selection.

However, I'll make another proposal. Instead of trying to get RED camera quality in low light from a sub $1000 body (you will be disappointed), get yourself a $50-100 on-camera light attachment, like from FalconEyes, or a Godox flash with on-camera trigger and think ways of diffusing that light to bring it on target more softly. Watch some youtube videos on controlling the light. Or... have you considered a tripod? The M50 is a very capable camera, and accessories like this will do more to improve your image quality at a small fraction of the cost that forking over >$1k for a new body. At the very least, if you decide to upgrade the body later, you'll already have a light source, tripod, etc., which can be used to improve image quality with any body.
This is a healthy perspective.

Money is always a factor; but not the only factor.

In my case, I have had GAS for 15+ years. I have a nice collection of EF glass to show for it. This glass (I think) is much more suited for a RP, rather than a EOS M. The appeal of the "M" is the small size. . .which I think kinda defeated if your favorite lenses are a 10-22 and 24-105. Vacations with a sack of Canon (X0D with three lenses ; plus a rebel and two EF-S for the better half) gets old. . .when you get old.

The appeal of the RP is simply superior image quality. . .which is nothing to sneeze at; and a quite compelling argument.

As for lighting. . . I am a huge fan of flash units. I used to go to parties with three flash units. I stopped doing that because setting up the flashes was interfering with the main objective. . .which was to party. Now, I generally use a single flash - and get 90% of the benefit with 20% of the work. Of course, for lots of situations, I can't use flash. . ..(interference with the event; subjects too far away (which often also means faster shutter times to stop subject motion). . .which accounts for my obsession with fast glass and high iso performance.
 
  • Like
Reactions: KKCFamilyman

larusejunior

EOS T7i
Dec 17, 2014
84
6
larusejunior.smugmug.com
I was in the same situation "rp or m6 mark ii?, I just bought a eos rp + RF 35 f1.8 STM for 1094€ (this is a crazy price, thanks german black friday :)). I was originally interested in M6 mkII, so i will have had a compact system when i don't want take the 5D mark IV. But in France / EU the price of m6 mark ii is too high in my opinion (~850/900€).
 

KKCFamilyman

EOS 7D MK II
Mar 17, 2012
495
2
40
Chicago
www.allophotography.com
I was in the same situation "rp or m6 mark ii?, I just bought a eos rp + RF 35 f1.8 STM for 1094€ (this is a crazy price, thanks german black friday :)). I was originally interested in M6 mkII, so i will have had a compact system when i don't want take the 5D mark IV. But in France / EU the price of m6 mark ii is too high in my opinion (~850/900€).
Yeah that is a option but I would most likely use the 24-105L and that tends to be much bigger and heavier than the m6 ii.
 

Travel_Photographer

Travel, Landscape, Architecture
Aug 30, 2019
40
35
Yeah that is a option but I would most likely use the 24-105L and that tends to be much bigger and heavier than the m6 ii.
Looking at the discussion as whole and your original needs, I'm thinking your best bet may just be to hold off a little while more and wait for either of these two things:

* The introduction of some smaller lenses for the RP that meet your size requirements
(or)
* The introduction of a new M-series camera that meets your high ISO performance requirements

Your M50 has excellent image quality, has the same Digic 8 processor as the M6 II, and I don't think you'd see any *very significant* high-ISO improvements going from your M50 to an M6 II that would warrant the $800+.

You'd do better with an RP if they introduce some smaller lenses to match the form factor you're looking for. If they introduce another M-series in 2020, maybe it would have high-ISO significantly better than your M50. Who knows. But right now, it doesn't look like either of the two existing options is a perfect match for what you're seeking.

If you're looking for something sooner to get an immediate bump in high ISO IQ, then I'd stick with my original recommendation of going for the RP, and just hoping that some smaller lenses get introduced shortly in 2020 that will bring the size / weight back toward more what you're looking for.
 

Travel_Photographer

Travel, Landscape, Architecture
Aug 30, 2019
40
35
OP was referring to using the 24-105 on an RP, not an M6 II (it was in response to the suggestion of using an RP with the RF 35mm 1.8 for a relatively lightweight setup).

For the record though, I agree, no lens is too big for an M6-size body with a little getting used to it. I frequently use my 400mm F5.6L on my M6 for a 640mm FF equivalent for wildlife and it's awesome. That's handheld too, no tripod needed. I actually prefer the 400mm on the M6 compared to heavier bodies as it's much easier to carry around.