I have two M50's and I can attest the M50 is a 1080p workhorse! Never was too interested in 4K due to slow uploads and storage space but the M50 renders a very nice quality 1080p.
I think Canon made a mistake not supporting m mount. They could have given Fuji a run fit e their money. Canon R cameras I don't think they can make them as small as the m mount cameras?
I still have the original M50. Its still a workhorse especially for its intended target market. When you start to leave the casual photographer phase thats when this camera will show its weaknesses. The video capabilities are still very solid. 1080p is a little soft-looking but still looks great even when put on a 4k timeline. The 4k is mint and not bad at all. It still looks like more of a 2k output I think due to bitrate or whatever but with a little sharpening in post you can still make it work. Obviously the crop and the loss of dual pixel autofocus in 4k was disappointing it didn't really matter to me, 1. Its more of a photo-first camera. 2. I'm not a video guy so most of the video stuff doesn't apply to me. The photography side of things are mint as well. It does alot more than what it was advertised to its target market. The autofocus is very accurate and direct. The eye autofocus still works well when the subject isn't moving. The continuous autofocus can be a little better as I've had issues with it tracking the lower body instead of the head or face but I can always re-adjust. The ISO performance isn't the best but you can still get exceptional results with iso 3200 and even 6400. The amount of Shutters per second it takes is not bad either for a camera like this. I haven't really missed shots with how fast it takes pictures. The buffer could be a little better maybe its an SD card issue of mine or the specs but I get either 8 or 6 shots per buffer. The lens mount is basically a lost cause hence why im getting ready to upgrade soon but for the casual the lens selection is alright. The zooms will get the job done and for people trying to move out the casual phase the 2 primes kind of blow expectations especially with the EF-M 32mm F1.4 STM. The best lens in the entire selection due to its sharpness. I still think the camera is worth it because I've done client work with it and worked events and the camera hasn't failed me. Oh and one more thing! The battery life could be a little better too. But for its price I guess its not a real complaint you can get 2 hours of useability on and off and that's about 230 shots. You can get a little close to 300 using it on and off with battery-saving techniques. So you'd probably want to get 2-3 batteries. Overall this camera is still a workhorse and you can still save a tad bit of money when getting it used. Alot of people hate on this camera because they didn't get the point that this camera is meant for casuals, people who want to up their youtube game or upgrade from a smartphone. Once you get out of the casual phase and want to start taking photography/videography seriously than its understandable to hate the flaws. Hence why my next camera will be the EOS R or RP. Edit: one more final thing! The ergonomics could be better too. I'm 15 and my hands are a little small but man I wish the grip was better. My pinky always slips off and it can be annoying somettimes.
I was trying to find a Cannon M100 a few days ago and all of them are selling used for around $300 or more. I’m not sure why the price of the M100 has gone up so high lately. I’m going to keep looking though ‘cause I’d really like to try that camera.
I know the m50 was laughable compared to its competition upon release (and even more so today), but it still satisfies most of my needs regardless. My main gripes are the kinda over-sharpened/digital looking video (imo), and the lack of a clear upgrade path to the RF mount. Adapting EF/EF-S lenses is an option to get around this, one that I've taken, but it's obviously not ideal. If only canon had made the mount big enough for full frame sensors back in 2012. I kinda regret not having gone with Sony, but a camera sales person talked me into the m50 back in 2018 before I really knew anything about cameras. I'm constantly jealous of Sony's superior lens ecosystem, low light performance, dynamic range, and wealth of configurability + features. This isn't to say the m50 is a bad camera, but given its mount and dumbed down feature set, I'd hesitate to recommend it unless someone could find one at a really good price (mainly because the a6000 exists which is less limiting imo and can be had for $300 if u know where to look). Nice job on the video, I enjoyed seeing your take on the camera.
Thanks! And yeah, that’s true. From my perspective as someone who likes taking pictures but also makes RU-vid videos, the M50 does everything I need. That’s why I don’t use my Sony A6000 for this channel. The lack of articulating screen and no mic input is a bummer. But I think my biggest regret in terms of Sony is not getting an A6100 back when they were first released. I saw one for $498 “open box” back then and I thought, I’ll just wait a while ‘til that price comes down lower. Wow, was I wrong about that! 😂. I had no idea they’d be selling used for $700 - $800 nowadays.
I had Sony Nex APSC and I sold my cameras and lenses. I like more the Canon system, the pictures are better, I know, less DR, less low light performance, etc, but the overall rendition of the pictures is better and are easier to edit. Sony have weird colors sometimes and the pictures behave in crazy ways when editing. Canon images are more predictable and easier to edit. When you need to edit hundred pictures that makes a big difference, much bigger than one stop of DR. If you know how to expose in the right way then lack of DR is not a big problem. The Canon user interface and touchscreen are better too, the overall process to take the picture is more enjoyable for me. About lenses, I only buy EF and EF-S. Is a hobby for me to browse the Facebook marketplace and find old cheap lenses, like a 70-210 f4 from 1987 that I got for 50usd or a ton of different 50mm 1.8, or kit lens from film era for near nothing, or old Sigma, Tamron and Tokinas. Old film era EF lenses gives a different look, less sharp, more enjoyable in certain ways. Well, as you can see, Sony is not the better alternative for everyone.
Ah, beautiful English-style rain! :) As an M10 owner, I’d love to upgrade to an M50 but nothing about the system is cheap, however many videos call it “entry-level”!
Thanks for pointing that out - camera companies have normalized this notion of $800 - $1,000 “entry level” cameras. I’d love to see something much more affordable. Like, I want a $300 entry level camera. Lol
Hey Steven, I'm seriously considering this camera however, the comments about blown out skies is a concern. I don't really need video so if you want better dynamic range on an APSC camera at this price point, what would you recommend? Many thanks, MMMD
Probably the closest thing for better dynamic range in this price point would be the Sony ZV-E10. It actually does pretty well and has a good lens selection.
I use the M50 on the Zhiyun Weebill S gimbal and combine Viltrox 23, 33 and 56 lenses. I change them without rebalancing the gimbal. I compensate small differences in lens weight with a few step rings. I'm very happy with that combination. A few days ago I bought a Portkeys PT5 monitor. Now I have a setup that isn't heavy and works great.
Really excellent review Steve. You started off with the Oly EM1 Mk2. How do the two compare? Love the B-roll and the slow-mo of the kittens. Until the next time.....
These reviews are really enjoyable and on point information-wise. I love the more practical/analog approach. A camera is a tool, not just a technical gadget and you get that.
Love the this review! everything you said is spot on. Did you shoot all of the M50 stuff in Standard profile straight out of camera? Your M50 footage looks really Great. I noticed the tattoo on your left arm of the crows. Is that based on the wine label from Ravens Wood Winery?
Thanks and wow, you’re literally the first person to ever spot the Ravenswood logo. I’ve had this tattoo for 13 years and literally no one has ever noticed. As far as picture profile, I’m in the auto profile with the sharpness settings modified. I’m at sharpness strength 4, sharpness fineness 2 and sharpness threshold 4. Then the color grading is based on a lut that I made a long time ago for my 70D. I kind of added more greens in the HSL section since I’m always in nature and brought down the reds a little since Canon tries to overdo them a bit for my taste. Hope that helps!
I got the M100, two of them, for 150usd each, with kit lens. I will wait for the M50 mk II being in the 200-250usd to get one. I think when the R10 hit the market, a year after that, the M50 mk II and the M6 mk II will be very cheap. I want to get both, replacing my M100s
That’s really interesting. I was looking for an M100 to review on this channel, but every one that I found was around $300 - $350 used. I kept thinking they used to be more affordable than that. So I guess that price really has gone up lately. I’m gonna keep looking though.
I live in Australia where everything is expensive. I have an addiction to purchasing second hand cameras. Mainly digital with the occasional 35/120mm film. I've been looking for a good M50 for what feels like years. Here they still command a ridiculous second hand price. Commonly $700 upwards. If you're lucky you might get a lens as an extra.
Great review. I appreciate what you're doing with this channel. My 2 cents: the M50 is a great camera - especially for its price point. But the ergonomics are so unbelievably terrible that I couldn't wait to get rid of it.
Thanks! For me the M50 is always on a tripod and I’m standing in front of it, so the ergonomics don’t really effect me, but I could totally see that for anyone using it in more normal circumstances.
@@steve_heise you’re absolutely right. This camera on a tripod is pretty much devoid of any downside for its price. And maybe it’s also worth noting for anyone that may read this thread and is considering this camera used vs the mark ii, just stick with the original. My understanding is that the mark ii version is such a minimal upgrade that it really only detracts from the fact that this camera is a great value proposition. Not much changed under the hood.
Hey steven, i was wondering if you will do a video about older Panasonic dslr such as lumix L1 or the lumix LC1 or even the LC5....i love your older ccd sensor camera videos
I’ve never used an M50, but I have a Canon M6 (original, not Mk II) and love it. No 4K, no built in EVF, but it was the first EF-M camera with Dual Pixel AF and so it works great for video, it has a cool flip up screen, and takes all the great, cheap, EF-M lenses. I also love using EF lenses with the Viltrox speed booster adapter; they can get kind of front heavy, but it makes for a pretty cool tiny “full frame look” setup. Plus it was super cheap. Nobody is buying the lenses so those great Sigma Art lenses are cheap, that pancake is cheap, the macro lens is pretty cheap… and then all the bodies are dropping in price. Seems like a great time to buy an M50 for sure.
I used to have an M100. Very good device for transition from DSLR to MILC! I now want to replace such a device with an M50! What do you think about the recording capabilities of 4k, if someone gets used to the M50 image cropping solution and the negative caused by the dual pixel when recording 4k video?
I was confuse about now I'm using canon 6D for photography the photo come very nice but auto focus is suck.I was thinking am I have to change canon 6D to M50 for photo and video but I'm worries about the image quality will very different.Pls give me some advice.....
The m50 was one of the worst Canon cameras I ever owned. Took a big loss on it. Soft video, poor iso, af sucked. I replaced it with a Sony a6100, and it fills in all the void.
