Canon EOS M50 Mark II Specifications [CR2]

[ashmadux]

NO.IBIS.

WTH? These bodies already have issues with shutter shock, it's the main reason I can't rely on my m50 and have been awaiting new model. Elec shutter has its own limitations.

32mp in a cheap no weight body(m50 feels fragile as hell) and no ibis means blurry pics everywhere, exactly what my experience was with this M50. The lens oc can only do so much, and there won't be any grips at all not even the metal plates, as Asian 3rd party companies seems to have given up on making accesories for the M line. (Correct me if I'm wrong, but my fotodiox metal grip made me m1 actually usable).

This is only the second Canon body that I've bought that's been for the most part unusable for me...I've never been able to bring it to one shoot because I couldn't consistently get good pictures with it.

Super dissapointed, eventually I'll just wait for the tests to see if the AF is better than the m62. Goddamnit, I really needed that ibis for what I'll be using it for. Argh

 

[dsphatlite]

NO.IBIS.

WTH? These bodies already have issues with shutter shock, it's the main reason I can't rely on my m50 and have been awaiting new model. Elec shutter has its own limitations.

Are there not any other cameras you can use? Or is a Canon a must for you?

I get that users want IBIS but if a company doesn’t do what you want go elsewhere. I personally switched from Nikon because they didn’t have a mirrorless line at the time that suited what I wanted. Didn’t go Sony because they couldn’t design a UI that is easy to use/understand.

Still have the Nikon gear that I will use from time to time, but switched to EOS M purely for the weight, compactness and ease of use.

Vote with your feet if something comes up short.

So far my Sigma 30mm prime has come up a treat when I used it for a party shoot yesterday. Worked well at night with minimal fuss and only a couple of handshake photos. IBIS would be the icing on the cake, but not holding my breath.

 

[hachu21]

IBIS can't avoid blur with moving people in low light, that's why, for me, it's usefullness is limited to static subjects and long focal ranges.

 

[SteveC]

I am astounded at how, all of the sudden IBIS is an absolute must-have for so many people. I guess Canon's pre R5 and R6 models must have all been worthless.

This is the frigging M50 we are talking about here; it's one step above entry level (M100/200). It sells for something like 600 bucks. What the hell do you expect?

 

[-pekr-]

I am astounded at how, all of the sudden IBIS is an absolute must-have for so many people. I guess Canon's pre R5 and R6 models must have all been worthless.

This is the frigging M50 we are talking about here; it's one step above entry level (M100/200). It sells for something like 600 bucks. What the hell do you expect?

You are clever enough to know the answer, so why such a mental parade? Those pesky situations, where you wish to find a balance to the raised ISO, the shutter speed and avoidance to get a blurry image. IBIS was always useful, we just had to always live with the limitation.

It's 2020, but keep living in the stone age, if you wish so. I bet that the majority of ppl would pay 100 or 200 more, to have IBIS onboard.

 

[Nigel95]

I bet that the majority of ppl would pay 100 or 200 more, to have IBIS onboard.

For sure probably even more. Would love to have IBIS with my Sigma 18-35mm and Canon 60mm.

 

[SteveC]

It's 2020, but keep living in the stone age, if you wish so. I bet that the majority of ppl would pay 100 or 200 more, to have IBIS onboard.

The majority of us (i.e., the sorts of people interested enough in photography to post in a place like this) would be willing to do so...and in many cases we did, paying a LOT more than a mere 100-200 for a camera with IBIS.

The M50 is not meant for us. Begging for a feature that we know is expensive and saying we're willing to pay extra for it, is simply telling Canon that we're really interested in a different model, please upsell us. They're not going to abandon the M50s price point because some of their customers would rather have a more expensive camera. Especially not when the M50 as it is today sells VERY well. But somehow people saw this as an announcement of a latest and greatest model and assess it on that basis, instead of the one they should be using, which is: is it a good camera for its price point?

It absolutely is. Your complaint is off base because you're complaining it's inappropriate for a price point it's not even aimed at.

(And for the record: I personally own a (no mark number) M50 and never noticed this problem, perhaps because I usually adapt a big-ass lens on it (e.g., a Tamron 18-400) that may be heavy enough to damp the vibration, or even sometimes a native EF-M Tamron 18-200, which again is bigger and heavier than anything Canon ever made for the M series. That being said, I've hardly used it since I got my M6-II (which would be that higher model, even if it has no IBIS).)

 

[stevelee]

I don't think so, the logical extension of that would be that every camera model needs every technological innovation regardless of cost or actual practicality in that specific instance.

Specifically regarding IBIS, if most of lenses in the model range have IS doesn't that somewhat negate the need for IBIS?

What I read suggests that IBIS is least effective on longer lenses where the need for IS is the greatest. It certainly would come in handy on wider lenses without IS. Of course if putting lens and body IS together is as successfully implemented as I have read that it is, then it can be truly amazing over a wide range. That does not mean that we all need it.

 

[privatebydesign]

What I read suggests that IBIS is least effective on longer lenses where the need for IS is the greatest. It certainly would come in handy on wider lenses without IS. Of course if putting lens and body IS together is as successfully implemented as I have read that it is, then it can be truly amazing over a wide range. That does not mean that we all need it.

My point was to look at this from Canon's point of view, they sell a lot of M's and almost all in a kit with the 15-45, the 18-55, or the 18-150, all three of those lenses already have IS, as do almost all the lenses in the M range.

Canon gain practically nothing by putting IBIS in a body it is unusual to sell without a lens that already has IS. From a business perspective, not apologists or fanboy perspective, it makes little sense for Canon to put IBIS into the M, certainly the middle and lower model ranges.

 

[canonnews]

NO.IBIS.

WTH? These bodies already have issues with shutter shock, it's the main reason I can't rely on my m50 and have been awaiting new model. Elec shutter has its own limitations.

IBIS doesn't correct for shutter shock - actually it tends to exasperate it.
EFCS is needed for shutter shock - which the M50 has.

 

[Madbox]

I saw someone mention that there will be a follow up to the M5 - I want to upgrade but did not like the M6ii lack of viewfinder. I have the M5. Should I get this one with these rumored specs or is something better coming - I am confused if this is the upgrade I have been waiting for - I know earlier ppl said the m6ii was not much of an upgrade for the m5 and the specs on this m50ii appears to be the same as an m6ii with viewfinder. I don't want to get this if there is something better coming shortly with IBIS or even a full frame M system camera.

I bought my M50 as an upgrade from the Olympus zoom cameras I'd been using for years. I wanted the ability to have and use different lenses. The M50 got me into a bigger sensor and a fair selection of lenses inexpensively. People who say the M series cameras don't have a decent selection of lenses aren't really looking, and are just repeating what they've hear from others. I'm using EF, EF-S, M, and Pentax lenses just fine, and I'm waiting for the M5 Mark II to buy some Sigmas and others.

After my M50 purchase, I discovered what makes that camera different from the higher end M5 and M6 Mark II. My blooming interest in astro, infrared and macro photography showed me. The little M50 is a great camera, very capable, speedy, lightweight, has simplicity, and is terrific for stills photography. I expect all that and more with the Mark II. It's bigger brothers have the additional technical tricks that allow for a wider range of photo capabilities. Two seemingly simple additions can make a difference: focus bracketing for easier macro photography and a shutter control port for astrophotography. You can do those things the hard way with an M50 and additional hardware, but it's all done in camera with the likes of the M6 Mark II. Everyone hates it not having the EVF built in, but the M6 never has. The M5 does however, and looking at the recently released M series cameras, it's easy to see what the Mark II will be.

Be aware there won't be an M series full frame camera that uses M series lenses. Like putting tiny wheels on your car. Full frame needs bigger lenses like the RF and EF. They don't even adapt the smaller lenses, and if you did, it would be horribly vignetted. That's not to say they couldn't make an M series camera with the big RF mount like what Nikon did with the Z50. Those big lenses are heavy and expensive. I may eventually go that route, but for now I'm really liking my better bang for the buck with M series cameras and lenses, and I'm perfectly happy puttering along with an M50 while I wait. When the new M5 Mark II comes out with all it's new tricks, I'll be all over it.

 

[Madbox]

GH5 is a much bigger camera with a smaller sensor but it is weather sealed unlike M50

The M50 body only is $500 and the GH5 is $1200+

 

[Madbox]

Yeah, but isn't that a weak and insipid argument against progress? Photographers got by without AF and 35mm film canisters for decades too.

Was the first half of your statement even needed, or was it just to make you feel superior?

 

[Madbox]

I own an M5 and am waiting for an M5 mkll. I am torn on the IBIS issue for this series. On the one hand, the understanding is that size does matter and adding IBIS would have to increase the size of the body and possibly introduce heat issues. I'm too technically challenged to know by how much. It's true that almost all of the EF-M lenses have IS, but those are the "consumer" lenses and not the systems' best, which understandably are the primes.
I have the aforementioned 22 and 32 primes and am entertaining the notion of picking up the Sigma 16 and possibly the 56 if Canon do not release equivalents. Since the primes available for the M series don't have IS (28 macro notwithstanding), it would be nice to have it in camera. To summarize, I don't know what I want...

I think you're doing just fine. I'm also waiting, and I think the M5 Mark II will be an amazing camera. I don't believe there will be much problem adding IBIS to the Mark II. It's been in other cameras that are smaller for years. I'm excited about IS and IBIS working together. It's not cheating to have these features, it's all about capturing the light. Easy enough to take a terrible picture with the finest and most expensive of cameras and lenses.

I keep eyeballing the Sigma primes. They'll be my present to myself when the Mark II comes out. I can wait a bit.

 

[Kit.]

I don't understand all the excuses in the IBIS department. I will repeat it for you - no IBIS, no buy, pass, period. I will never ever buy another camera without one. It HAS TO become a commodity, as with the smartphones. Are you going to negletct IBIS on R5 / R6, just because your lens might have IS?

How many smartphones have IBIS?

 

[zim]

How many smartphones have IBIS?

I think the one on HarryFilm's desk has IBIS

 

[peters]

4K@60FPS!? If you thought there were overheating problems with the R5 and R6, just wait for this camera...just a Wild Guess.

lower res sensor, only half thrle sensor size... shouldnt be a problem. Many other aps-c cameras havr lle 4k60

 

[dsphatlite]

I bought my M50 as an upgrade from the Olympus zoom cameras I'd been using for years. I wanted the ability to have and use different lenses. The M50 got me into a bigger sensor and a fair selection of lenses inexpensively. People who say the M series cameras don't have a decent selection of lenses aren't really looking, and are just repeating what they've hear from others. I'm using EF, EF-S, M, and Pentax lenses just fine, and I'm waiting for the M5 Mark II to buy some Sigmas and others.

I hear you on that one. Allowed me to switchover relatively inexpensively. Switched over with an EOS M3 and haven’t looked back since. Perfect camera for what I need and I suspect a lot of other users. It’s sized and price very well.
When I was looking at upgrading my M3, I looked at the RF mount cameras and price of body and lenses was a bridge to far. So went with the M6 Mark 2 and Sigma Primes

 

[Ozarker]

Was the first half of your statement even needed, or was it just to make you feel superior?

Your interpretation of my mindset on this is wayyyyyy off. You'd do better to just keep talking to yourself, or quit trying to stir poop where there ain't none. But thanks for taking the time to comment. I now feel superior to at least one human after this.

 

[stevelee]

How many smartphones have IBIS?

The iPhone has had some sort of optical stabilization under gyroscopic control since about iPhone 6.