# Review: Canon EOS M50 by TDP



## Canon Rumors Guy (Apr 10, 2018)

```
Bryan over at The-Digital-Picture has completed his extensive review of the brand new Canon EOS M50 mirrorless camera.</p>
<p><strong>From The-Digital-Picture:</strong></p>
<blockquote><p>While a complete beginner can use this camera to simply capture very high quality images, the advanced user who takes the time to learn this camera’s more advanced features can have great control over their imagery. And, with Canon’s entire EOS system accessories behind it, the M50’s capabilities are practically unlimited.</p>
<p>Whether it is tucked into a pocket, in a camera case for backup purposes or used as an always-in-hand primary camera, the Canon EOS M50 can always be there for you with professional-grade image quality. <a href="https://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EOS-M50.aspx">Read the full review</a></p></blockquote>
<p>The Canon EOS M50 looks to be a great option for an APS-C mirrorless camera from Canon, even if it didn’t hit the mark with a “real” 4K implementation.</p>
<span id="pty_trigger"></span>
```


----------



## DanCarr (Apr 10, 2018)

I agree with Bryan. This is a really capable camera with surprisingly good image quality. I'm really enjoying using it as my "other camera" alongside the big ones.


----------



## amorse (Apr 10, 2018)

Interesting - I've been more and more looking at Canon's crop mirrorless cameras with an EF-M to EF converter as an emergency backup to my 5D IV. After a few near tragedies last summer, I can't help but think a small/light/cheap secondary body may not be a bad idea for some of my camping trips. I shoot almost exclusively on tripod and really slowly, so I'm not too worried about the ergonomics/EVF performance, and I really don't want something bulky or heavy if I don't need it - I pack in way too much as it is!


----------



## YuengLinger (Apr 10, 2018)

Do competitors' EVF's also blackout during use?


----------



## peterzuehlke (Apr 11, 2018)

I use a Sony a6500, along with my Mark IV Canon. The big thing in favor of the Sony vs the Canon M is the in-body IS. Digital when shooting movies doesn't cut it for me. I love those cheap (but really good) Sigma lenses that don't have stabilization.


----------



## Devil007cz (Apr 11, 2018)

YuengLinger said:


> Do competitors' EVF's also blackout during use?


Sony A9 is blackout free.
Sony A6500 has minimal blackout comparable to OVF.


----------



## wazmunstr (Apr 11, 2018)

Devil007cz said:


> YuengLinger said:
> 
> 
> > Do competitors' EVF's also blackout during use?
> ...



what lens(s) are you using with the a6500? Did you go native? I want an a6500 because it's a lot of bang for your buck (I'm a vlogger) but I love my Canon lenses. Note: af has to work for me, most important feature when shooting video.


----------



## Bobbo (Apr 12, 2018)

TDP haven't reviewed the EF-M range so it's refreshing to see this one causing a stir. 
The Spec looks good for the pricepoint which is a change for Canon. Pity the 6Dii wasn't priced appropriately


----------



## neuroanatomist (Apr 12, 2018)

Bobbo said:


> TDP haven't reviewed the EF-M range...



M11-22, M28 Macro, and M55-200 reviews are posted, and M18-150 is coming soon.


----------



## YuengLinger (Apr 12, 2018)

wazmunstr said:


> Devil007cz said:
> 
> 
> > YuengLinger said:
> ...



Yes, but the a6500 has a buffer that takes *TWO MINUTES* to clear. Zzzzzzzzzzz... No thanks!


----------



## wsmith96 (Apr 12, 2018)

Bobbo said:


> TDP haven't reviewed the EF-M range so it's refreshing to see this one causing a stir.
> The Spec looks good for the pricepoint which is a change for Canon. Pity the 6Dii wasn't priced appropriately



Bobbo,
The EF-M reviews aren’t shown on the main page menu, but they are there. Click “review” twice and a new page comes up with the reviews listed.


----------



## woodman411 (Apr 12, 2018)

Bobbo said:


> ... Pity the 6Dii wasn't priced appropriately



Are you referring to the 6d2's price at launch? Because 5 months after launch, during the Black Friday period, authorized USA sellers were pricing it at $1350, it is now $1379 gray market. At the 1300 mark, I think it represents a very good value.


----------



## Talys (Apr 12, 2018)

This looks like a great camera.


----------



## ritholtz (Apr 12, 2018)

is there any improvement in IQ between 80d, SL2 and M50. There is a jump from digic 6 to 8 between them.


----------



## ajfotofilmagem (Apr 12, 2018)

ritholtz said:


> is there any improvement in IQ between 80d, SL2 and M50. There is a jump from digic 6 to 8 between them.


Probably the JPEG photo straight out of the camera, should be better with the DIGIC 8.
For RAW photos, it should not make a noticeable difference.


----------



## mb66energy (Apr 13, 2018)

ritholtz said:


> is there any improvement in IQ between 80d, SL2 and M50. There is a jump from digic 6 to 8 between them.



Maybe it helps to compare the images provided by dpreview under the M50 review
https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canon-eos-m50/6
between these cameras.
WARNING: M series and SLR cameras maybe use different lenses! So the results are maybe not absolutely comparable.

What I see: No real difference at all and definitely NO JUMP.


----------



## bdbender4 (Apr 14, 2018)

Need EOS-M primes besides the 22mm! There is a chorus of this out there; has been for quite a while.

I used my M5 with the adapter and EF lenses for most of 2017 while waiting for some non-consumer-zoom lenses. I figured the release of the M5 signaled Canon was finally getting serious about EOS-M. Not. 

The adapter works well, and I used the 24mm and 35mm IS EF lenses a lot. The images are great, but after a year I got really tired of a comparatively big honking lens on the small body. For me, it totally defeated the point of mirrorless giving good image quality while being small and light. I have since sold my entire EF system, since that was the only use I was making of it any more. (After using APS-C mirrorless, the 6D and 24-70 f/2.8 felt like carrying an anvil around.)

The 11-22 is a good lens, but slow in order to stay small. I am waiting for the rumored 35mm prime. A little doubtful about it, though, given the recent interviews with Canon brass at CP+ where they say mirrorless is the new entry-level APS-C even if it cannibalizes the cheap DSLRs.

Oh well. I have a Fuji X-T20 and Fuji has just about whatever lens you want other than long primes. I much prefer using the Canon M5 body, but Fuji just updated the X-T20 firmware, which can't hurt. So I will go use that with three Fuji primes while I watch to see what becomes of EOS-M.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Apr 14, 2018)

bdbender4 said:


> Need EOS-M primes besides the 22mm!



EF-M 28mm f/3.5 Macro IS STM. 




bdbender4 said:


> I used my M5 with the adapter and EF lenses for most of 2017 while waiting for some non-consumer-zoom lenses. I figured the release of the M5 signaled Canon was finally getting serious about EOS-M. Not.



The EOS M series is fundamentally a consumer line.


----------



## BillB (Apr 14, 2018)

bdbender4 said:


> Need EOS-M primes besides the 22mm! There is a chorus of this out there; has been for quite a while.
> 
> I used my M5 with the adapter and EF lenses for most of 2017 while waiting for some non-consumer-zoom lenses. I figured the release of the M5 signaled Canon was finally getting serious about EOS-M. Not.
> 
> ...



If by taking EF-M seriously you mean making EF-M lenses that duplicate EF and EF-S lenses, I don't think Canon is going to go down that road very far. It does seem like an EF-M 35mm is on the way, but I don't expect much more.


----------



## yungfat (Apr 15, 2018)

I had a M5 for 3 months, it is a good camera and very easy to use, but I end up sold to one of my best friend, just because I don't like EVF. Anyway, that just me. 
Never try M50 before, but I guess it is a good camera if you want a mirrorless...


----------



## Jack Jian (May 11, 2018)

ritholtz said:


> is there any improvement in IQ between 80d, SL2 and M50. There is a jump from digic 6 to 8 between them.



For IQ alone, SL2 is the best, the difference is subtle but it's there. A tad better DR and sharper. Like the old 5D with weak AA filter, this SL2 is sharpest among all Canon's APS-C. Also, the raw file is very different from 800D and 77D and from 80D as well, probably because of Adobe's engine, but the differences are there. SL2 is the best. 77D, 800D, and 6D II raw files are very very similar.


----------



## ritholtz (May 14, 2018)

Jack Jian said:


> ritholtz said:
> 
> 
> > is there any improvement in IQ between 80d, SL2 and M50. There is a jump from digic 6 to 8 between them.
> ...


I have problem with exposure metering with my Sl2. Not sure if something is wrong with my unit. It over exposes a lot with live view shooting. With view finder it is fine. It happened few times.


----------



## harris92 (Jun 5, 2018)

Canon EOS M50 really cool camera, who wants to buy now, it's time to take advantage of the discount on https://www.amazon.com/Canon-Mirrorless-Camera-EF-M15-45mm-Video/dp/B079YCW48M . I had a few friends take it for filming home video and were very pleased. In this camera are collected chips from previous models and there are many improvements. So this is Canon's most well-rounded mirrorless camera. I'm also very interested in portrait cameras, I would like one of the same EOS series https://www.bestadvisor.com/cameras-for-portraits . I like the price and characteristics, what do you think about it?


----------



## Cory (Jun 5, 2018)

Just got mine and the 22mm lens should arrive today.
Did some nice customization to the controls which I'll post about in the near future.
It with the small lens should make a nice travel combo. Won't do-it-all, but is tiny.


----------



## ahsanford (Jun 5, 2018)

BillB said:


> If by taking EF-M seriously you mean making EF-M lenses that duplicate EF and EF-S lenses, I don't think Canon is going to go down that road very far. It does seem like an EF-M 35mm is on the way, but I don't expect much more.



And Canon's not even updating it's faster/nicer EF-S glass anymore. If my read of Keith's great EFlens.com charts is correct, there hasn't been:

... an EF-S zoom faster than f/5.6 on the long end since 2006 (and only 2 ever, I believe)
... an EF-S ring USM lens since 2009
... an EF-S prime faster than f/2.8 *ever*

(Keith, there's a typo on the most recent 18-55, which you have listed as USM.)

But let's not make this out to mean that Canon is holding back EF-M. They are just holding EF-M to the same level of (very low) esteem as the EF-S mount.

- A


----------



## Talys (Jun 5, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> BillB said:
> 
> 
> > If by taking EF-M seriously you mean making EF-M lenses that duplicate EF and EF-S lenses, I don't think Canon is going to go down that road very far. It does seem like an EF-M 35mm is on the way, but I don't expect much more.
> ...



I don't know that "low esteem" is the way I'd put it.

We all have to live with compromises, right? It's you can only have two of price, size, and aperture, and the easiest one to knock out of the equation for consumer lenses is a wide aperture. 

I don't think anyone wants a big or expensive EFS lens, and even the beloved 17-55/2.8 is a physically large lens by most standards for its focal length.


----------



## ahsanford (Jun 5, 2018)

Talys said:


> I don't think anyone wants a big or expensive EFS lens, and even the beloved 17-55/2.8 is a physically large lens by most standards for its focal length.



Disagree. Better lenses in crop need to be a small part of the portfolio, even if physics insists they are large/unwieldy. Many people here would give vital anatomy for fast, first party AF crop glass, and Canon has not offered it since 2006 with the 17-55.

In particular is the standard zoom and UWA zoom need, where a crop user is SOL for fast zoom that doesn't '1.6x them' into having to change out lenses that often. Whenever I used my 24-70 f/2.8L I on my old crop camera, I was constantly changing it out for the EF-S 10-22 for that 25% of the time wider need -- and usually just for the 18-22 end of that lens. The problem was completely solved when I went to FF with that same L zoom.

I think EF-S and EF-M need to take one very small step towards Fuji here -- just throw us a bone with a modest but solidly built/sealed 15-45 f/4 IS USM and this 32 f/1.4 we've been hearing about.

I appreciate Canon wants us all in FF buying pricier glass, but some of (a) will never leave crop or (b) some of us will moonlight away from FF with our old crop rigs and there isn't much no-bigger-than-it-needs-to-be first party glass to put on them.

- A


----------



## BillB (Jun 6, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> Talys said:
> 
> 
> > I don't think anyone wants a big or expensive EFS lens, and even the beloved 17-55/2.8 is a physically large lens by most standards for its focal length.
> ...


----------



## ahsanford (Jun 6, 2018)

BillB said:


> Maybe the price/size/potential sales equation just doesn't work (or at least Canon hasn't been persuaded that it was worth trying). How much cheaper and lighter would an EF-S or EF-M 15-40 f4 be than the EF 16-35 f4?



1) Agree $999 crop only lenses probably aren’t selling well. :. I still think Canon needs 1-2 good ones for folks who want to keep things small. 

2) Take away the need to cover a FF image circle and I think you could have a 67-ish thread sized lens at 2/3 the weight and sell well around $599-699. Think of it like the non-L 24-105 STM lens, but for crop. And sealed. And constant max aperture. (Okay, a 24-105L for crop. You got me.)

- A


----------



## DSP121 (Jun 6, 2018)

Thank you so much for sharing the review!


----------



## DSP121 (Jun 6, 2018)

DSP121 said:


> Thank you so much for sharing the review!


----------



## fullstop (Jun 6, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> 1) Agree $999 crop only lenses probably aren’t selling well. :. I still think Canon needs 1-2 good ones for folks who want to keep things small.
> 
> 2) Take away the need to cover a FF image circle and I think you could have a 67-ish thread sized lens at 2/3 the weight and sell well around $599-699. Think of it like the non-L 24-105 STM lens, but for crop. And sealed. And constant max aperture. (Okay, a 24-105L for crop. You got me.)



Looking at various 16-50mm zoom lenses for APS-C mirrorless systems [@ crop 1.6 = 24-105 FOV eq.] and EF-M 18-55 / 3.5-5.6 specs [52mm filter thread, L x D 61 x 60.9 mm, 210 grams] my GUESSTIMATE is that innovative Canon should be able to make a compact, very decent IQ constant aperture Canon EF-M 16-50mm f/4 IS STM with 55mm filter thread [= max. used on EF-M lenses, eg 18-150 and 11-22], sized between 18-55 and 18-150, weight about 300 to max. 350 grams, priced at USD/€ 499. And yes, I would buy it. 

OTOH I will never buy EF-M or any other crop-only lens for more than 500 - unless it were a pancake 24-200/2.8. I am generally not interested in f/1.2 or f/1.4 crop lenses. I am also not interested in even more EF-M wide-angle lenses. I am very interested in a compact, decent IQ, moderately fast EF-M portrait tele prime and would definitely buy an EF-M 85mm / 2.4 IS STM (or similar) at USD/€ 399,- 

And I am convinced my preferences are shared by enough other existing and future EOS-M owners to make those 2 lenses "worthwhile". At least as worthwhile as a "minority program" EF-M 32/1.4 ... at what 599 / 799 / 999 ? Well for 999 Canon would probably have to paint a red ring on it. ;D


----------



## BillB (Jun 6, 2018)

fullstop said:


> ahsanford said:
> 
> 
> > 1) Agree $999 crop only lenses probably aren’t selling well. :. I still think Canon needs 1-2 good ones for folks who want to keep things small.
> ...



Benchmarking against the EF 16-35 f4, you want an EF-M 16-50 with a 50% increase in zoom range at half the weight and half the cost. I can understand why that would appeal to you.


----------



## john kriegsmann (Jun 6, 2018)

I really would like to buy the Canon M50, with the Digic 8 processor, improved autofocus and other improvements that make if much more feature rich than the M5 at a lower price point. What is hugely disappointing is the lack of native lenses. After reading all the reviews the only lenses that appear remotely worthwhile are the wide angle 11-22 and the pancake 22m. Compare Canon's meagre options with the full line of small but fast zooms and primes offered by upstart Fuji. Canon Rumors has been hinting at a new Canon M 50 mm lens for over a year with constantly "slipping" release dates It looks like Canon once again is ignoring its customers by producing new feature rich mirrorless bodies and figuring customers will have to make due by spending $200 dollars for a M to ef adapter to attach heavy ef lenses to tiny mirrorless bodies. I am planning a Fall cruise to the Canadian Maritime provinces looks like I will be bringing either a Sony or Fuji mirrorless system with me to compliment my Canon 5d4.


----------



## fullstop (Jun 6, 2018)

BillB said:


> fullstop said:
> 
> 
> > ahsanford said:
> ...



exactly. It COULD work in EF-M mount in my OPINION. I would even take it with a plastic lens mount, LOL. Provided it is compact, light and optically as decent as the EF-M 11-22, which should be doable, since 16-50/4 seems to be a less challenging design tasks on EF-M mount parameters. LOL


----------



## BillB (Jun 6, 2018)

fullstop said:


> BillB said:
> 
> 
> > fullstop said:
> ...



So, now that is sorted out, we can sit back and see what happens. Or doesn't happen.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 6, 2018)

fullstop said:


> I am very interested in a compact, decent IQ, moderately fast EF-M portrait tele prime and would definitely buy an EF-M 85mm / 2.4 IS STM (or similar) at USD/€ 399,-
> 
> And I am convinced my preferences are shared by enough other existing and future EOS-M owners to make those 2 lenses "worthwhile". At least as worthwhile as a "minority program" EF-M 32/1.4 ...



You are convinced. Lol. A 50mm-equivalent lens is minority, but a 135mm-equivalent lens is being clamored for by the masses.


----------



## ahsanford (Jun 6, 2018)

fullstop said:


> OTOH I will never buy EF-M or any other crop-only lens for more than 500 - unless it were *a pancake 24-200/2.8*. I am generally not interested in f/1.2 or f/1.4 crop lenses. I am also not interested in even more EF-M wide-angle lenses. I am very interested in a *compact, decent IQ, moderately fast EF-M portrait tele prime and would definitely buy an EF-M 85mm / 2.4 IS STM (or similar) at USD/€ 399,-
> 
> And I am convinced my preferences are shared by enough other existing and future EOS-M owners*...



Oh, wow, my desktop AvTvM detector just went _ba-nanas_. (I thought you guys were kidding before.)

- A


----------



## fullstop (Jun 6, 2018)

neuroanatomist said:


> You are convinced. Lol. A 50mm-equivalent lens is minority, but a 135mm-equivalent lens is being clamored for by the masses.



50 equivalent is not the issue. f/1.4 is, respectively the price i expect. Will make it a rather extreme "niche product". But, let's see. If it is compact, optically decent and USD/€ 299 I may re-consider. ;D


----------



## DSP121 (Jun 7, 2018)

I was looking for a genuine review about 'Canon EOS M50'. 
Thanks for sharing the review with us!


----------



## BillB (Jun 7, 2018)

fullstop said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > You are convinced. Lol. A 50mm-equivalent lens is minority, but a 135mm-equivalent lens is being clamored for by the masses.
> ...



All prime lenses are niche products and have been so for a while now. I can't see much point in second guessing Canon on their assessment of the size of various prime lens niches.


----------

