That is a good point about the lens situation. The lack of affordable or 3rd party lenses dramatically increases the final cost of the camera system. I would still choose the M6 -2 with a bigger sensor and a larger choice of lenses.
@@timothykieper I sold my m6 ii and got the r10. I think the features of the r50 still outweigh the m6 ii (bird eye af and multi shot electronic shutter plus better lenses like the 800 f11).
I have this paired with an RP. Bought both for $1280 directly from Canon USA. I love what each camera is capable of. I am using the RF lenses on both bodies. There are no regrets so far.
As a long time M50 user, I'd call it a great replacement. The minor upgrades are a nice plus for how I shoot. Too bad Canon doesn't have a full spectrum option.
I did consider a R50 as a low profile camera on the streets which fits in my pocket while i leave my full frames at in my bag. In the end the nikon Z30 won me over because i don't really need a very powerful AF tracking with the kind of subjects i shoot, and small entry level cameras come with terrible viewfinders with low magnification anyways - i rarely use them unlike on full frame. The Z30 has a more substantial grip with two Fn buttons in front near the mount like their full frames, two mechanical dials in front and behind the grip, is weather sealed, and only second behind sony in lens selection, not to mention there's a power zoom ultrawide coming soon.
Excellent. There is a dire need for more offerings in this segment. Looking forward to Sony and Fuji responding to this. Thanks for another great review!
To Canon's credit, you can well control focus points both with touchscreen, and using the "+" (5 points) button. And you can use the touchscreen to switch very fast what you want the dial to control (aperture, shutter, ISO etc). Plus, all the Canon RF (even kit) lenses have a ring, which can be used to control something on the camera. Though, if you are not a super-beginner, the R10 is significantly better for only a bit of extra price, in my opinion - you get a deeper grip, an additional dial, a joystick (very useful, and insane to have it as this level in the range!). Plus much better buffer in photos, better video specs (4k60 cropped, 4k30 no limit), and at least 2 extra buttons + 1 switch.
I have been using the R50 with the EF-S 10-18mm for the past five weeks, and am impressed with it, given its price. I had intended to test it with my full frame RF lenses as well, but.....around these parts it keep raining.
@@firefrogs2464 - For the past six months I have been using RF lenses exclusively (mainly the RF 24mm F1.8), but when I used the EF-S 10-18mm, it was fine. I think the RF lenses are more confident - if that makes sense.
Did love the m50 and m6 mark ii due to its size. Looking forward to see canon bringing over the m lens selection, this would be pretty cool. Great review as usual, I myself did go for the r10 as b cam as it’s a lil bit better for what i need. Have a nice weekend 😊👍🏻
@@mostlymessingabout you cannot physical use M lenses on an R mount, but it is theoretically possible to use R lenses on an M mount. The problem is that the adaptor has to be only 2mm in thickness
@@tristan6509 You can't go either way. While M is shorter register, the 2mm difference isn't enough to make up for the mount diameter. the bayonet of the RF mount interferes with any possible adapters. Canon does need to re-house the EF-M primes into RF-S form. The 22/2 and 32/1.4 in particular would be great to see.
Uh-Oh.... no sensor cleaning? I would definitely not be recommend the R50. I had Canon D30, D60, 20D, and Rebel XT. When Canon incorporated a self cleaning sensor in the 60D I was ecstatic and immediately got rid of the older models. Manually cleaning the sensor of my previous Canons never worked for me. I would never go back to a interchangeable lens digital camera that did not have one. YMMV
Great little camera for beginners! The fact you can start off today with the RF mount on budget crop sensor cameras is amazing. A huge improvement over the beloved M50. Great job canon, now give us native 6K Raw out of the R6 Mii :)
I'm a lover of full frame powerfull cameras, I enjoy working with them.... And I can't avoid to think that this is probably one of the cutest and capable cameras that I've ever seen!
A few features this camera lacks compared to its more expensive siblings in the EOS R system: Fv mode, C1/C2 custom shooting modes, and a remote switch port. All of these are important to me (which is why Canon knows I would spring for the R10 over the R50). That said, the R50's computational photography (Advanced A+ mode) sounds interesting.
Hi Christ! I think might be you seldom use Speed light flash to take photographs. R50 hot shoe can’t support conventional flash because it “removed” the single metal contact point on it’s hotshoe! Sony Nikon and Fujifilm also have budget models in their system but they never do this like Canon does. In my opinion, APS-C due to smaller size then Full frame CMOS，it means they need better light source to make good photo or video shot. This kind of “lighting limitation” was insulting “photo”grapy. If a newbie ask me which mirrorless budget system should go for, I will definitely recommend Nikon Z fc for sure. Just pay a little bit more but much better then R50 in all dimensions!😂
Consider the amount of people who will use a external/additional flash on a entry level camera... Your view is extremely niche. I can see people using high power LED on it to solve most of your concern. Recommend anyone to get Zfc is basically demolishing their future passion in photography. Zfc has below average AF-C capability for modern mirrorless, has nice control wheels but terrible grip handling. Lens selections are poor on both Z DX and RF-S mount, but Canon at least has small RF IS primes that can compensate the RF-S bodies. Zfc is just for the looks. And if you are going for a toy, might as well go for Fuji.
good review. it is pleasant to listen and watch your reviews. I am always interested to see if Canon is keeping up with its competition and sounds like they are in the unique ways Canon does.
The problem I have with the Canon APSC mirrorless system is the clear lack of lenses. If tomorrow, Micro four thirds stop producing, there are still 60+ native lenses to work with. Fuji and Sony have a ton of native lenses but Canon have still just 8 lenses for a mount that's been around for almost a decade.
Great for the money. No center pin for the flash hot shoe means you have to get the adapter, however. Yeah, if you want to be getting good lenses for APS-C it's Sony all the way.
I used to shoot Canon and was loyal. With mirrorless they got left behind for a time and I now shoot a mix of Sony FF (60 Mp) and Fuji Crop 40 Mp and 26 Mp. Both have very wide lens line ups and glass is much less costly than Canon as a general rule. At this point in time I wouldn't recommend a beginner to buy this or the R10, or R7 for that matter. Canon cameras have some brilliant features yet my sense is they are recreating their line up from the DSLR age at a time when the market has moved and smart phones have cannibalised the lower end.
About the lens thing with other lenses not being supported, it's why I want to get an FX30. That and it's Netflix approved and can be found for twice the price of the R50 with a lens. I'm so considering it. Alas, I'm in the L mount ecosystem with my Lumix S5... But I have considered selling it to get the FX30. I wish other companies would open up to more lens manufacturers. If I could go and buy a Viltrox lens with autofocus for my S5, I'd be beyond thrilled. I've thought about the R50 but it still feels like a downgrade to my S5 and I'd be in the same situation with my wanting 3rd party lenses to try out something new.
They desperately need the M6II ported over to the RF mount. It's one of the only compact flip up and over screen cameras out there with good AF and lenses for us street, travel, and documentary photographers. I really don't want to have to buy an X-E4. 😬
LOL - you'll be lucky to find an X E 4 (sold out most places) - rumor is that Fuji will have an X E 5 out late 23.....as both a Canon user (2 x M 1x M3 1X M6) and Fuji (XT 1 /XH 1 /XT4) user I can state 'fairly' that if you were to try a Fuji, almost any Fuji, the images will blow you away...happy camera hunting
@@michaelwhiles5282 I've been a long time fujifilm user (6 years). I generally prefer the look of my girlfriend's Canon. I'm looking for that flip up screen specifically now that my X70 and X-T2 has died. My somebody releases one of them soon, I currently have no cameras at all. 😂
Awesome review! I own an R6, but wanted something to use that was smaller for documenting life around the house / around town with the family. Looks like this might be a decent buy.
I have an R6 - great camera, but yes, you do need something smaller for "recording things" or, for that matter, going on holiday - for some reason airport security always think I've got Semtex or C4 hidden in the soles of my Doc Martens, so I get the full security treatment, while £7,000 of camera equipment passes throught the scanners completely unattended. Really stressful!
I have R6 too, and as a second body I can suggest you the R10, like I have; the controls layout is very similar to R6, and it also has the joystick, that for me is invaluable! R10 is already pretty small (if you are used to a R6; of course if you are used to just a phone, the R10 is gigantic ahah!), and some controls are already pretty cramped; I didn't have the R50 in my hands, but I'm pretty sure is not so easy to handle, being even smaller than the R10.
@@brianode11 surely using a super telephoto lens on a R50 would be more like "attaching the camera to the lens" then "attaching the lens to the camera", meaning you mainly handle the lens, which is supporting the weight of the camera.
@@ritrattoaziendale - I have small hands but I still keep pushing by accident the Drive Mode button on the R50. Not an insurmountable problem, though. I seriously considered an R10, but as I had always intended to acquire an M50 mark III (!) I stuck with the R50. there was an element of snobbery about it, as otherwise I am a "full-frame" man. You can always excuse buying an APS-C camera because it is "dinky"...lol.
I have this camera. Love it, but the flash shoe supports only the latest Speedlite EL-5 flash, which is 75% the price of the camera. Yes there is the AD-E1 adapter but can't find that thing in stock anywhere since I bought the camera. Be aware of this issue if someone is considering using a flash.
You could make a pretty competent budget cinema rig with this camera. 4K 24/30 downsampled from 6k in 10 bit 4:2:2 is not bad. It doesn't have C-LOG 3 but it does have HDR PQ mode which is based off of C-LOG 2 and is good for color grading. There's a lot of APS-C/Super 35 cinema lens out there that would work with this camera and really allow you to get the most out of it, especially in low light.
Hey Ik you posted this months ago but you seem knowledgeable, I have the r50 and want to shoot mainly cinematic videos with it, I just bought the rf 35mm 1.8, but what is the difference between a cine lense and a regular lense? Am I still able to get the cinematic look with a regular rf lense? Thanks
A good cheap camera need good cheap lenses. I hope Canon allow third party AF lenses, at least the APSC ones. The sigma trio + the 18-50mm f2.8 would be amazing on the R50
Hello Christ, could you please make a review on your sony A7Rii camera ? I'm about to get one as an upgrade to my old canon 70D. Thank you for all your reviews, they really help me a lot.
Don't get it.... If you can afford, a7r3a is the least. A7r2 isn't faster than 70D, and you need post production to make use of it. Otherwise the poor jpeg out of a7r2 is a waste of the good sensor.
Great review Christopher. I have to say though, my M50 makes a more compelling case at this point and really, the R50 is not really an upgrade. The AF is slightly better, the but the AF on the M50 was already very very good. The additional FPS burst shooting is also welcome, as I mainly use my M50 to shoot junior sports and it does a tremendous job at that. However, currently I have 7 EF-M autofocus lenses and 4 EF lenses with a regular Canon adapter AND a speedbooster. This combo makes the M50 an absolute killer. The R50's debilitating achilles heel is the lack of lenses. Canon unfortunately is going down the same path of neglecting its APS-C users. Sure they have the R50, R10 and R7 bodies but how can you release 3 different bodies and only two pretty average kit lenses? In both cases they are ported over EF-M lenses and are actually worse in image quality and look. I love Canon's menu system and AF but to be honest, they are pushing alot of people towards Sony with their lack of 3rd party support and also lack of their own native APS-C lenses. The non-"L" lenses are just ok, so you are really looking at "L" full frame lenses or just two poor kit lenses. The M50 II until this day is still King even after 3 years, because it is a more complete solution for APS-C shooters who want to remain with Canon
I have canon M50 but due to lack of affordable 3rd party lenses like Sigma 16mm f1.4 I am waiting to new Sony apsc camera to replace it. With clear image zoom I will have 16-22mm at f1.4 lens. All I need for my use in RU-vid studio.
Excellent review as always.. My main issue with the EOS R crop line are the lenses.. The 18-45 is not wide as the 15-45 from the EOS M. 18mm are boring for pretty much everything.. i've used it for years in my previous dslr bodies kit lenses. And as for field view, its like having 28mm in FF, while 24mm (or 15mm crop) which is more versatile. The 15-45 from eos M has taken care of most of my landscape and travel work.. Locked at f/8 sacrifices a little on quality but weights nothing and i can carry it with my EOSM50 everywhere and that kit fits almost in my jacket's pocket. So re-spend 800+ euros for the new R50 compared to my M50 for travelling purposes, No sir i'll pass!
Could you review the Panasonic Lumix S5 II as well? I've been looking into this camera since its recent mark II launch and I've been positively surprised. Very attractive lenses and camera actually. Perhaps interesting to have a look at these lenses and body on your channel too. Keep up the good work
I'd say that, except of course for the AF, the Z30 seems better for around the same price ( even if the Z30 don't have an EVF but with a better build ) and the fact the nikon's kit lenses are really good ( and a little brighter than canon's RF-S ), but that's clearly a great upgrade from the M50 canon did there, all canon's lover have now a really great low price option, let's hope they stat to make good RF-S lenses or finaly get third party lenses, would be a shame to waste a great little camera like that with thoses RF-S kits or having no other options than old EF-S or full frame RF.
Hoefully this sells millions to the point it makes sense to update those 10-18 efs or the 11-22 efm for the RF mount. I would love the 22efm prime on RF mount too.
Thanks for the detailed review, Mr. Frost! I was curious about the colors you see in RAW. How do you process your RAW files to compare colors? In the editing software I use (Darktable), the default settings tend to render RAW files as very flat and low-saturation. Once I boost saturation and mess with the curves, they look fine, but I'd be keen to know how you make an apples-to-apples comparison of RAW color.
I am looking forward to upgrading from my sony alpha 6000. The lense choices are a bit of a killer tho. Can Anybody with Canon experience tell me a bit about adapting lenses of other mounts?
Primarily, folks adapt Canon glass to other formats not the other way around. This is due to Canon being a huge player for so many years. You will likely struggle to adapt your Sony lenses to a Canon and I would not recommend trying to do so. Also, the lens selection for RF can be quite expensive and somewhat limited in variety. There are exceptions to this with there being wider availability of pro red ring RF glass, but even then, I know and hear professionals are still eagerly awaiting for more variety. Either way, this means RF glass = $$$$$. As for adapting EF to RF, that is another option, but keep in mind that everyone else is also doing the same thing and the price of used EF glass still continues to be expensive as everyone is holding out or buying out what deals arise to adapt to their RF mount or try and squeeze the last bit of life out of their old EF DSLR. If I were you, I wouldn’t ditch a body and lens format (Sony) that I’d already invested in. Sony makes great gear, stick with what you’ve already bought into.
I do use the sigma 18-35 with my R10 and R7 and it works like a Charme, and also my tamron 95 macro does it’s job. But especially with this small body it’s sort of strange. That said, with the 24 and 35 f1.8 primes and also the 16mm rf it really works great without sacrificing size too much. Hope though that they change the m Mount lenses to rf mount.
@@funknick but the old Canon lenses won't fit on this one now? Sry I am new to the Canon eco system. And would there be a way to adapt the old Canon lenses onto this new mount?
@@Gauner420 The old Canon lenses (EF) do not directly fit onto the RF mount. You have to buy an EF to RF converter for around $100 USD. If you have old EF lenses, this will work just fine. The adapter is quite good. If you DO NOT already own EF lenses, keep in mind that the market for them is still hot. Used EF glass is often still expensive (sometimes the same as brand new) because lots of people are buying up EF glass to mount to their RF cameras to try and save money.
The problem with RF mount is its lens offering. The low budget lenses are ok at best but most of them are just bad. However, this is a complaint from a long-time photographer like me. For someone who just think about getting into photography, the lackluster lenses won't be much of a problem.
Hi Chris, great review, would you re-review the humble 18-45 kit lens with this camera? Most folks would buy that lens with the R10 or R50 so your review with the (very demanding) R7 sensor might put some people off…at the end it might not be so much worse than Nikons kit lens, which was reviewed on a 20MP camera…Regards, Flavio
I got the R50 last month, immediately pair it with RF100-400 and the Viltrox EF-R3 speedbooster with EF lenses. It's a joy to use. If Canon acts quicker on converting all the EF-M to RF-S. And allows 3rd party to release those EF-M primes in RF-S. No one will moan about it as much as it's now
could you please make a review of the canon eos R10? I know it very similar to the R50, but some specs and the design are quiete different. I would like to know if it value is indeed greater as the R50.
When using the EF to RF adapter, do you lose any effectiveness of the third party EF mount lenses at all or does the adapter provide full usability of those lenses?
Hi, I am a newbie.. can you help me to choose which lens I should buy? I want to buy the Canon R50, but I don't know which lens I should buy. I need to do manly photos to my family.. so for example to a person (bokeh effect) or to group of persons. Which one of these lens you recommend to me? 1) CANON RF-S 55-210MM F5-7.1 IS STM 2) Canon RF 50mm F1.8 STM 3) CANON RF 24MM F1.8 MACRO IS STM 4) Canon RF-S 18-45mm F4.5-6.3 IS STM
Has anyone upgraded to this one for macro photography? I’m debating whether there is a big advantage over the old Canon T6 for instance. I guess with the adapter we can use any lens that was compatible with the EF-S mount, right? I know it’s not the most comfortable but better than nothing while we wait for Canon to be more flexible with third party lenses.
Well, if we still needed conformation (we didn't) that the Canon M system is dead. Shame but Canon never supported it fully. Love my Canon M's ( I have 4) but moved my main interest (and thus money) into Fuji an age ago and have never regretted my move. This new Canon will sell by the boat load - smart move Canon.
You forgot to mention that RF lenses are extremely expensive compared with the EF lenses. So I guess before buying an R-Camera as a newcomer I would have a close look at Nikon or Sony cameras and most probably go for either of those. Not to forget there are no third party lenses to fit on R cameras which is a shame!
@@zegzbrutal Compare e.g. EF 70-200 f4 L IS with the RF equivalent lense. Look at the cheap RF tele lenses, which are ridiculously dark. Compare with Sony. If I didn´t have very good EF L lenses to use I would have left Canon for Sony. One of my colleages at work did exactly this.
@@DL6UK EF 70-200L f4 wasn't cheap when it was first out. RF100-400 on paper is darker than e mount 100-400/70-300, but no where close to RF's weight and AF performance. All these lenses aren't for low light anyway, might as well go for the lightest.
Thanks for another great review. It's physically possible to mount the RF800mm lens on the R50. Would the results be acceptable? What about the RF100-400 zoom?
I have the R50 and the 100-400. It is a bit front heavy of course, but works well. I have no complaints. I recently dove into photography with this paired with an RP. Loving what each camera is capable of.
