 |
| M50 with 15-45mm kit lens |
I have a long history with Canon cameras. My first was an EOS 630 in 1990. That was followed by several EOS SLR film models then several EOS DSLR digital models. Along the way I owned some Powershot G series compacts and a few bridge models.
I have a Powershot G1X3 and recently acquired an EOS-M50 with the kit 15-45mm lens.
Several years ago I became disenchanted with the unreliable autofocus on Canon’s DSLRs and the relentless mediocrity of their Powershot offerings.
I branched out to try ILCs and fixed lens models from several other makers.
Then in 2013 Canon introduced their proprietary dual pixel (on sensor) phase detect autofocus (DPAF), first seen on the EOS 70D.
This promised to solve all Canon’s AF requirements with one clever technology. It would work well with single shot, Servo AF and video. Better still it would work with millions of Canon’s existing EF lenses.
Initially DPAF did not appear to be a huge leap forward but Canon has been refining the technology to the point that it appears to be very effective on the latest models.
I first encountered DPAF in the Powershot G1X3 and found it to work very reliably for both still and video photography.
I was not attracted to any of Canon’s early offerings in the EOS-M line but the M50 has the latest Digic8 processor and the latest version of DPAF together with a built in EVF and a fully articulated monitor so I decided to buy one (nobody gives me cameras) and try it out.
Spoiler alert: In the event I found the M50 a bit disappointing. Not bad, just not as capable as it could have been.
Who is it for ?
Canon tends to target each camera model to a very thin slice of the market.
The M50 appears to be aimed at snapshooters who want to move up from a smartphone in the expectation of making better pictures. The layout of the menu system and user manual, the limited control set and the high level of wireless connectivity could all appeal to this user group.
But here is the thing: I keep wondering why the camera is there at all. All that wireless connectivity would be easier to implement just with a smartphone, the latest versions of which make pretty good pictures.
Maybe vlogging is the answer to my question. The M50 is well specified for this.
Nevertheless the photographer who advances beyond the snapshooter/beginner level will I suspect, soon feel frustrated by the inherent limitations of the M50 and start looking for something with more appeal to an enthusiast camera user.
But in the little world of EOS-M the only current model likely to appeal to an enthusiast is the M5 which is already starting to show its age with a slow processor and many performance limitations.
Specifications
You can read all the details elsewhere but on paper it looks pretty good.
Good autofocus, built in EVF, fully articulated monitor, well implemented touch screen, extensive wireless connectivity, 27mm diagonal (APS-C) sensor, 24 Mpx, 4K video, interchangeable lenses, the latest Canon processor and much more.
But there are many items missing from the M50 which can be found on competitors models in the same price range.
There are no zebras, no blinkies, no in camera panorama, no custom modes on the Mode Dial, no lens hood supplied in the box, no USB charging, no silent operation in P, Av, Tv or M Modes, the EVF and monitor are adjustable only for brightness not contrast, saturation or color balance, if Eco mode is ON, the AF area can only be moved via the touch screen so you must have the monitor facing outwards, there is no separate back button AF, only one control dial, no drive mode or focus mode dials and no DPAF with 4K video.
Image quality
The M50 is said to use the same APS-C (27mm diagonal) sensor as numerous current Canon models. As such it should be a well known entity. My only previous experience with this sensor is in the Powershot G1X3.
There are several positive reviews about this sensor but I have been somewhat underwhelmed by it. When testing the M50 I compared it side by side with a Panasonic Lumix G85 fitted with the kit 14-42mm lens.
At low ISO sensitivity settings I was unable to get any more detail or dynamic range out of RAW files from the 24Mpx M50 with the 15-45mm lens than I could get with the 16Mpx G85 and 14-42mm lens. That is still a lot of detail but the larger (27mm diagonal) sensor in the M50 should be better than the smaller (21.5mm diagonal) sensor in the G85 but at least with the 15-45mm lens I did not find that to be the case.
At high ISO settings in the 3200-6400 range my tests showed the M50 to have about 0.7 EV steps moreluminance noise than the G85 when I compared the RAW files at the same output size after conversion in Adobe Camera Raw. I used the full sized CR3 Canon RAW not the compressed C-RAW.
I found that JPGs from the M50 were not quite as sharp as the RAW files even with Picture Style set to [Fine Detail].
I also noticed that the M50 JPGs sometimes appeared to lack local contrast (clarity in Adobe speak) and vibrance (an Adobe term for rendition of subtle colors) compared to those from the G85.
Lens
My copy of the 15-45mm f3.5-6.3 lens appears to be of decent but not outstanding quality.
Resolution in the center at the wide end is excellent but the corners are a bit soft. The long end is not as sharp and my copy is a bit decentered making it a little bit soft on one side.
I noticed considerable corner shading in RAW files particularly at the wide end of the zoom. This is correctable in a RAW converter of course however other camera makers adopt the practice of correcting corner shading in camera post capture with both RAW and JPG files.
Overall the lens does a good job. I suspect most M50 users will not be aware of any problems.
Performance
Before I get to timings I just want to mention two things which I do not recall having seen reported by any other reviewer. Maybe I missed them.
First, there is no EVF or monitor blackout after each shot either with single shot or continuous drive.
This is actually a really big deal and is presumably enabled by the new Digic8 processor.
Absence of EVF blackout is one of the holy grails of camera performance, available in very few models and yet:
a) Here it is in the humble little M50 and
b) Most reviewers appear not to have noticed.
I am surprised by both those things.
Second, the M50 (and I believe all EOS-M models) has a focal plane shutter which always operates in electronic first curtain (EFCS) mode. This is presumably Canon’s answer to the shutter shock problem which bedevilled the Micro Four thirds system until recently. If so it appears to work because I saw no evidence of shutter shock in any of my test photos.
Anyway moving right along,
Overall the camera feels responsive to user inputs and operates briskly in most circumstances. The only exception to this is that buffer clearing is slow and many settings cannot be changed while the camera is writing to the card.
Shot to shot time with single shot drive, one shot AF and AF+AE on each frame is 0.4 seconds which is about average for this type of camera.
Autofocus is generally fast and accurate with one shot, servo or video. I did however notice on several occasions that the camera focussed on the background when I thought I had positioned the AF area over a foreground subject element. Maybe I should have used the smaller of the two available AF area sizes and been more careful to keep the edges of the AF box away from background features.
The M50 had no difficulty holding focus on a person walking towards and cars driving towards or away from the camera with a high percentage of frames in sharp focus. With JPG output (no RAW) the frame rate in [High Speed Continuous] was 7 frames per second which is quite brisk with the added benefit of no blackout between frames.
So we have a bit of a mixed bag in the performance department. Some things like the absence of EVF blackout suggest a fast processor. Others like the slow buffer clearing suggest a slower processor.
Odd that…….
Ergonomics
I will post the ergonomic score separately but for now I just note that the M50 is decently serviceable provided one has modest expectations of the user interface.
The experience of holding, viewing and operating this camera is not bad but not wonderful either.
Some competitors models in this price range achieve a considerably higher ergonomic score.
Video
My knowledge of video is rudimentary. However those who understand video have reported that the M50 delivers good 1080p video. It has the fully articulated rear screen and a microphone jack so it would be quite suitable for vlogging.
All the reviews which I have seen indicate that although the camera has 4K video it is poorly implemented, making it difficult to use.
Summary
Desirable features
* Reliable AF which works well for single shot, servo AF and video.
* Well implemented touch screen.
* Comprehensive wireless connectivity.
Neutral features (could be good or bad depending on your priorities)
* Small size of body and kit lens. This is good if smallness is important to you but the penalty for that smallness is substantial.
There is insufficient real estate on the body for a comprehensive set of controls and IBIS is not available.
The lens has to utilise a collapsing design to get the size down and unlocking the mechanism every time the camera comes out of its bag can become a bit tedious.
The widest aperture ranges from f3.5 to f6.3 which limits low light capability.
Less appealing features
* Limited specifications and capabilities.
* Limited control set.
* Sensor noise at high ISO settings.
* High EVF contrast, not adjustable.
* 4K video not really useful.
* Very limited EOS-M series lens selection.
Conclusion
The EOS-M50 is an interesting addition to Canon’s growing stable of M class mirrorless interchangeable lens cameras. It has some features and capabilities which set it above the more expensive M5. But it is also missing several features which have become commonplace on other maker’s models in this price range.
The controls and menus are a curious mix of some Canon DSLR features and some Powershot features. The result is serviceable but as I use the camera the interface does not feel altogether coherent.
It seems to me that there could be considerable potential in Canon’s technology which is not being fully expressed in the M50.
I have no doubt that Canon’s product development people know a lot more about marketing than me (which is not saying much) but from the perspective of an enthusiast amateur photographer I find the M50 limited in features and limiting to the user.
Maybe the M50 is more interesting for what it suggests about Canon’s next move in the mirrorless ILC space than for the camera itself.
Recommendation
If you want a slightly-above-entry-level mirrorless interchangeable lens camera and for some reason it absolutely must have the Canon brand then the M50 might be worth considering.
You might want to wait though to see what Canon does with their follow up to the M5. That will be more expensive but have a more comprehensive feature and control set which could be a better choice in the long run.