Canon EOS M50 Mark II coming in 2020 [CR2]

ReflexVE

EOS M50
May 5, 2020
58
67
Renton, WA
Meanwhile everyone wants the M5 mk2 since the M50 is just so-so. Oh you love it? maybe because you never had an M5
I feel like you are trolling here. The M5 is a great little camera, but there are logical reasons to choose an M50 over it, which is why I did. The latter has better ergonomics, a faster CPU, a fully articulating display and was $200 less.

If they fixed those things and added a couple features beyond what I listed above for an M50 successor in a new M5 Mk II, I'd certainly consider it, but for the M50 vs M5 I made that choice with intention and I'm happy with the results. But in no way do I consider the M5 a bad camera, it just didn't meet the needs I felt were most important for my goals at that time.
 

mb66energy

EOS R
Dec 18, 2011
1,404
279
Germany
www.MichaelBockhorst.de
"the EOS M50 is surprisingly Canon’s best selling ILC"

Really a surprise? - The M50 is reasonably priced, has sufficient controls (o.k., a 2nd dial would be VERY helpful), is very fast / responsible, has high image and video quality, works flawless with e.g. my 70-200 f/4 IS lens (electrically and ergonomics wise), has the flexible flippy screen which is a must for me as someone who likes to take photos not only from eye level ... without laying in the dirt or lugging a ladder around :)

The icing on top for me is the phantastic EF-M 32 with large aperture, great overall IQ and the handy 1:4 max. reproduction ratio. Feels like the Canon AE-1 + FD 1.4 50 S.S.C. in ancient times: A compact and flexible package.
 

Kane Clements

I'm New Here
Dec 6, 2019
13
17
The M50 might be seen as the sleeper of the Canon lineup. It is just good enough at everything in a compact form factor. I bought one as my first mirrorless camera as an upgrade from an ancient 100D. In the twelve month I've had it I've managed to capture some really good images (the limitations are behind the camera). The popularity doesn't surprise me because it is capable of more than the sum of it's specs. It is also really popular with vloggers.

I recently rationalised my kit bag (a lot) and I now have an RP and the M50 as my bodies. And on the latter I kept my M mount 22 mm and Sigma 56 mm however I now largely use an EF-S 15-85 and EF 70-300 IS USM II adapted to it.

I don't know what a 'big' upgrade might mean. I guess IBIS is a given. To keep vloggers on side a headphone jack? If the power and mode selection is moved to the left of the EVF that would make room for a second control wheel. Full 4k video also seems a must have.

I suppose the big question is what is going to happen to the consumer DSLR ranges. The EF-S range of lenses provide affordable and generally good quality glass and I can't see Canon wanting to discontinue that particular cash cow even though the 90D and 850D are probably the last of their kind.

I could see Canon introducing a couple of mid sized mirrorless consumer offerings that would mount EF-S lenses natively.

Anyway it is good news about the M50 and with IBIS alone I'd be in there for the upgrade.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mb66energy

drama

EOS M6 Mark II
Sep 1, 2016
93
227
It's weird. I thought the M6 Mk II was the "throw everything at the wall" end of the EOS-M, but if Canon makes a full pivot to mirrorless, then the range becomes it's entry level, and much more important. Wonder if this means we're getting any new / better EOS-M lenses next year?
 
  • Like
Reactions: CarlMillerPhoto

bbb34

5D mk V
Jul 24, 2012
146
154
Amsterdam
APS-C seems unlikely for the EOS R system, as it seems to be the full frame version of EOS M. What sense would it make to build an APS-C EOS R camera?
There are (at least) 4 different motivations to have an APS-C camera, instead of a full frame one:

- less volume and weight
- less cost
- higher pixel density for increased reach
- higher frame rate

If you are looking for small size and/or low cost, EF-M mount is better suited.

If you are instead looking for a work horse with higher pixel density and frame rate, without compromises, then you belong to the "R7 camp". The RF mount makes more sense for such a camera.
 
Last edited:

padam

EOS R
Aug 26, 2015
1,020
651
What most people are expecting for an M50 Mark II seems to be a considerably higher-end camera than an M50 Mark II would be (and there were rumours of such model coming for the M system).

While we have seen drastic improvements on the EOS R system, those new models were marketed at a higher class, while the M50 Mark II should be aimed at the same class as before.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Philip V
Mar 15, 2018
72
98
United States
By most accounts, the EOS M50 is surprisingly Canon’s best selling ILC.
It shouldn't be surprising to anyone. The M50 is a great option for light enthusiasts looking to up their instagram/youtube/social media game, with that 80D sensor, flippy screen, tons of features and super cute form factor. It's also a great "gift" choice, especially on sale, and is perfect for travel. Let's be honest: 90% of people buying the M50 know next to nothing about photography, except where to point the camera, focus the lens and press the shutter button. That camera is perfect for them, and there's a lot more of them than the people lining up for an R5.

Canon should keep the 80D's perfectly good sensor in the M50 Mark II. The M6II sensor should be reserved for the semi-pro models. (almost) No one is buying the M50 for resolution, and those 40% bigger file sizes are going to be a pain point. All the existing "camera" and "video" features are fine. If they want to add uncropped 4k30p, that's fine but mostly irrelevant to the target market. IBIS would be a big plus, because there's nothing more frustrating than shaky pictures during your night out with friends when you don't understand why. The latest DPAF and Eye Tracking tech need to be in there, for the same reasons - amateurs who miss focus blame the camera, not themselves. 99% of the development work should be on making this a bridge camera for smartphone users. That means ease of use and connectivity to social media should be top priorities. No silly and gimmicky wifi connections that require a PhD in networking. It should be one touch bluetooth connectivity, with photos available to share on social media and whatsapp within 10 seconds, even directly from the camera (SIM card?). Many carriers offer a data only line for $10-20/month, and plenty of young people prefer convenience to glitchy connections. Things just have to work, not get in the way.
 
Last edited:

unfocused

EOS-1D X Mark III
Jul 20, 2010
5,646
2,608
66
Springfield, IL
www.mgordoncommunications.com
...If you are instead looking for a work horse with higher pixel density and frame rate, without compromises, then you belong to the "R7 camp". The RF mount makes more sense for such a camera.
I don't think so. Reading this rumor and the one about a high end M camera makes me ask -- why not an M7 camera?

Canon already has a good start on the EF-M lens system. In fact, as near as I can tell, the EF-M line does not have any of the junk lenses that were all too common in the EF-S line (there are some good EF-S lenses, but they've released some stinkers too). One decent 15-85 mm would be all they need as a walk around for a 7D quality M body. What difference would it make to most 7D users to use an M adapter vs. an R adapter for telephotos.

Plus, looking at Canon's latest R lens releases, it's not hard to envision a few crop-sensor long telephoto zooms or primes tuned specifically for the EF-M mount. If you buy into the argument that most 7D users are really interested in using the camera for getting more reach with birds, wildlife or sports and will likely leave a single long lens on the body Canon might very well offer an EF-M long zoom or prime tuned to the EF-M mount.
 

ReflexVE

EOS M50
May 5, 2020
58
67
Renton, WA
I don't think so. Reading this rumor and the one about a high end M camera makes me ask -- why not an M7 camera?

Canon already has a good start on the EF-M lens system. In fact, as near as I can tell, the EF-M line does not have any of the junk lenses that were all too common in the EF-S line (there are some good EF-S lenses, but they've released some stinkers too). One decent 15-85 mm would be all they need as a walk around for a 7D quality M body. What difference would it make to most 7D users to use an M adapter vs. an R adapter for telephotos.

Plus, looking at Canon's latest R lens releases, it's not hard to envision a few crop-sensor long telephoto zooms or primes tuned specifically for the EF-M mount. If you buy into the argument that most 7D users are really interested in using the camera for getting more reach with birds, wildlife or sports and will likely leave a single long lens on the body Canon might very well offer an EF-M long zoom or prime tuned to the EF-M mount.
I like how you think. It's really unclear to me why if you want to go with an APS-C sensor you would want to add all the size/bulk/weight of the R system, plus all the expense of those lenses for what presumably would not be a significant quality difference. Why wouldn't you just grab an entry level FF R and run with that? It's not like you are going to save much money by just changing the sensor. The EOS R body starts at around $1600 currently, I can't imagine a hypothetical R7 going for significantly less than that.

A waterproof, ruggedized M7 sitting in the gap between a M5 Mk II and the EOS R would make a lot more sense to me. But I'm still newish to this scene so feel free to disregard!
 
  • Like
Reactions: SteveC
Dec 5, 2019
4
6
I've owned an M50 with the standard 15-45mm kit lens and the 55-200mm zoom for more than a year. It has become my go-to camera for street photography and travel. I have a 6D Mark II and many lenses, but I find myself grabbing the M50 for all but my most serious photo projects. I love the articulated screen (I rarely shoot video, but the flippy screen lets me shoot low- and high-angle still photos in portrait mode, something that would be impossible if the screen just tilted. I also enjoy using my Fotodiox EF-M adapter, which lets me use my Sigma Art 50mm F:1.4 as a nice 80mm portrait lens. I would certainly consider an upgraded Mark II version of the camera, but I would really like it if it incorporated three changes:

In my opinion, the Touch Shutter feature is far too easy to turn on. I rarely use it, and it's aggravating to touch the screen while selecting a focus point and find that I've just taken an unnecessary photo because I've managed to bump the screen and accidentally enabled Touch Shutter. Please, Canon, bury this annoying feature deep in some sub-menu!

On the other hand, please make the Flash Control feature much more accessible. I often use the pop-up flash, and having to open the main menu, select the first panel, scroll down to Flash Control, find the "Built-in flash settings" line, and finally adjust flash power is just too slow and fiddly.

Finally, although I love the swiveling screen, there are times when I'd rather just use the EVF and not worry about checking every shot. At those times, I'd like to swivel the screen inward to protect it, but then there's no way for me to select a focus point! I realize this is a screen-controlled camera, but having a way to steer the focus point while using the EVF would be a wonderful improvement.
 
  • Like
Reactions: idahobill

Fast351

70D
Sep 12, 2014
40
59
Minnesota
www.fast351.com
APS-C seems unlikely for the EOS R system, as it seems to be the full frame version of EOS M. What sense would it make to build an APS-C EOS R camera?
I like how you think. It's really unclear to me why if you want to go with an APS-C sensor you would want to add all the size/bulk/weight of the R system, plus all the expense of those lenses for what presumably would not be a significant quality difference. Why wouldn't you just grab an entry level FF R and run with that? It's not like you are going to save much money by just changing the sensor. The EOS R body starts at around $1600 currently, I can't imagine a hypothetical R7 going for significantly less than that.

A waterproof, ruggedized M7 sitting in the gap between a M5 Mk II and the EOS R would make a lot more sense to me. But I'm still newish to this scene so feel free to disregard!
The reason I see an APS-C sensored R camera making sense is the 7D2 user class. They don't mind paying for glass. And it seems like Canon is probably not going to be releasing many more EF lenses, and focusing their attention on RF glass. Add to that the ergonomics, build quality, and weather sealing that already exists on the R5/R6, it wouldn't be a large leap to go to an APS-C sensor for those people that want a smaller sensor for reach.

I think the M5 will stay the king of the EF-M mount. Unfortunately for long reach telephotos you're stuck with the EF line. Maybe Canon will release the 600 or 800 R lens with an M mount, but that's a waiting game.

I think ultimately when Canon releases their last DSLR, the EF-M line will carry the entry level/enthusiast users, and the RF line will carry the serious enthusiast/pro users. Hence the need for an R7.
 

SteveC

R5
Sep 3, 2019
1,205
972
Honestly I just wish they'd do an R adapter for the EF-M mount. It would be a nice way to make a slow transition.
It's physically impossible, without putting optics into the adapter which would cause all sorts of problems of its own.
 

Philrp

Waiting patiently for my APS-C EOS R
Sep 2, 2018
35
34
Like they've done with similar models having and not having an EVF, they could make an M mount and RF mount version of more or less the same crop sensor camera.

I will not buy anything with an M mount and can't afford the R6 or R5. It's up to Canon if they want my money.
 

stevelee

FT-QL
Jul 6, 2017
1,611
513
Davidson, NC
Last year I looked at the M50 in the store and had a good first impression. I seriously considered buying one for my travel camera, but decided to stick with the G series and bought a G5X II instead. In the end I decided a genuinely pocketable camera was more suited to my needs and interests. One of those interests was to take pictures on trips, but not let photography get in the way of my seeing and doing things. I have been pleased with the results, but not surprised. I really liked the G7X II. They changed the 5 enough that it suited me better than a 7 upgrade. I liked having the pop-up viewfinder for times in the bright sun that made using the screen difficult. If I could think of any reason that I might also want a mirrorless interchangeable lens camera, I'd definitely look again at the M50 or a successor.