@ebiggs1 wrote:"The quality of a lens has a huge impact on the quality of an image."
The choice of camera can effect this more than the lens. The M50 would not be a top candidate for a person wanting big enlargements.
I would agree with Ernie to the extent I believe that BOTH sensor and lens have a major impact on the quality of an image (after the user's skill), but they impact in different ways. While the sensor will effect the dynamic range and noise in particular, the lens impacts in areas like distortion, chromatic aberration, speed of focus, sharpness and, of course, focal length. The lens also has an impact on the colour quality. Some lenses seem to just make beautiful tones and that can make an image.
To make my point, here are a selection of images taken with cameras using the same size sensor as the M50MkII, but considerably older, and thus not as technically advanced. They were taken with decent glass however, and I think the results speak for themselves.
The first image below was taken on a Canon EOS 400D (your Rebel XTi) a 15 year old APS-C camera - so the same size sensor as the OP's M50MkII, but obviously far more primitive. The lens was the Canon EF 28-300L IS USM, a wonderful (if heavy) lens, and the results stand up well for that reason. BTW, I deliberately chose the time of day as I wanted a dark background to provide contrast for the statue in particular - I could have done without the shadow on on the right, but I decided to live with that as later shots lit up the trees too much and I wanted the base of the shadow to line up with the statue's foot and the drama of the cross-lighting on the surfaces.
This one I have submitted before, taken in available light, with the venerable Canon EOS D30, an APS-C 3.3MP sensor from 2000 - so, 21 years old. Using the EF 17-40L lens. For all but large prints it will do the job just fine, but if I had put a kit lens on there it would almost certainly show chromatic aberration at the angle of the light.
The reason I asked the questions I did was to get facts about the parameters for his situation, as those were not obvious.
Given the OP's description of what was the purpose and the kind of camera he is interested in, the main variable after that is the lens - especially logical to me since he posted on the lens forum. For me, it was critical to know the output because pixel peepers and large print makers will have a much more demanding expectation that someone doing casual photography and outputting to digital media or smaller prints.
If the lens of choice is the EF-M 18-150mm IS STM, then the following may be of interest to the OP. These were taken with that lens on the Canon EOS M5 actually (I don't have either of the M50's) - still, they should give an idea of the abilities of the lens. All were taken hand-held, in available light on a hiking trip in the Tongariro National Park, NZ.
Close-up of a fungus, 100mm, f/9, 1/50sec, ISO-200
An early morning shot showing subtlety of colour transmission, 25mm, f/5.6, 1/60sec, ISO-200
Shooting into the sun can lead to many faults being shown. This did OK, I thought. 18mm, f/14, 1/800sec, ISO-400 
Finally, a night shot with the moon and Venus below, just before dawn. 20mm, f/5.6, 1/15sec, ISO-500
I hope these real-world examples will give the OP some idea of the performance of this lens and its suitability for his purposes.
@ebiggs1 wrote:"Its the M50 Mark II and not the M50."
Doesn't matter. The fact it is a M series is the factor. Besides that point consider the M series is not compatible with any other camera series. So even if, Canon sees it as a "Rebel" mirrorless camera it isn't actually. IMHO, the M series is a dead end. Again, IMHO, if I wanted a camera of this type I would buy a Powershot series.
I see your point Ernie, but getting a Powershot unit means that unless one buys the G1X series units, the only one which has an APS-C sensor, but a lens limited in FoV at 24-72mm, then at best one is looking at a 1" sensor, which is a lot smaller.
Again, it depends on what one is going to produce, but the value of those units is in jeopardy as cell phones edge further into that area, leveraging their advanced hardware and computational tools. The lens the OP is looking at: 18-150mm Equivalent, has no comparitive equal in the PS GX-series unless one goes to the even smaller sensor of the SX-series bodies. I've had some of them and disposed of them as the tiny sensor just didn't give me the performance or flexibilty.
For the OP's information I include an image showing the relative sizes of the sensors:
From the chart above, using the figures for crop factor, the 1" sensor of the majority of the PS GX series, compared to the EF-M series, is 1.7x smaller (2.9x reduction in area), while 1/2.3" sensor of the PS SX is reduced by a factor of 3.5, (1/12 the area). Those are big reductions in resolution and total light gathering.
Moreover, the PS series uses a fixed mount, so one is stuck with the lens built in. At least with the M series there is the chance to get further native Canon and 3rd party lenses as desired, and with the EF-M to EF adapter, one can mount any of the EF and EF-S lenses from Canon and 3rd parties (new or second-hand) - to me, that offers a lot more flexibility and value - but again, that is up to the OP.
As regards the future of the EF-M mount. In an interview with DPREVIEW, published June 28th this year, Go Tokura, Chief Executive, Image Communication Business Operations at Canon, was asked about that. See the full interview HERE.
Q: What market are you hoping to attract in the long-term with your EOS M range of cameras?
A: EOS M series cameras are popular with users who prefer compact and lightweight models. Many professional and enthusiast photographers use them as sub cameras. We will continue to promote the EOS M-series cameras as a means of meeting diverse needs.
I read that as: even if they don't produce new lenses or bodies, they will continue to produce and support the existing line-up - apparently they believe there is a viable market. Logic also suggests that, to keep the brand alive, they will produce at least modest upgrades to the series at some stage. While I realize that you are not a fan of the M-series cameras, they may well fulfil the needs of a solid market. From what I can see our OP falls exactly into the group Mr Tokura described: wanting a compact lightweight camera with flexibilty.
I have access to a huge range of camera gear: from R6's and EOS 5DsR to the Powershots G1X and G5X models. I have two M5's and pretty well all of the EF-M native Canon lenses, and I use those units when I want to have decent sensor size, plus flexibility of lens focal lengths without bulk, weight or being obvious. The M5 and M50 are essentially equivalent to the 80D in performance, and work fine within the context of those preferences. My M5's are the cameras I use when I go hiking or when I don't need a big, heavy DSLR - the images I posted show what they do.
The question is whether that combination of compact size, low weight, flexibility of lenses, and sensor size fulfil their needs.
