Help a newbie choose please... SL3 vs M50

[bubbapuck]

Hello All!

I have always wanted to take on photography as a hobby but have never been able to afford it. My kids are grown and grandbabies are here so I thought now would be a great time to splurge a little and start a hobby I have always dreamed about. I am not a rich man but have given myself around a $1000 (give or take) to find a good starter camera. If I love the hobby like I think I will, I can grow in the future but for now this is a good starting point.

The main reason I am starting this hobby now is in the next 2 years I will be crusing to Alaska and Mexico, going to Hawaii and Disney World. I want to have a nice camera to capture these events as well as grandkids sporting events (13 yo, 10 yo, and 6 yo). I plan to use my camera equally for photographs and for video.

I have been researching via youtube and online courses so I know some of the basics and have a VERY general undertsanding of the terminology. At this time I am planning on either the SL3 or the M50 (leaning towards SL3 for cost reasons... want to keep them low if possible). I want to list the positive and negatives, as this newbie understands, so I know how important the pros and cons are for my situation so I can make a well educated choice.

• SL3 is a DSLR and M50 is mirrorless. I understand the differences as far as what they are and size wise but does one take better pictures than the other?
• M50 records HD at 24 FPS while SL3 does not (NTSC). This seems to be a point of controversy. They say 24 FPS is for cinematic video. I plan to do basic youtube and family videos. Is this that big an issue in my situtaion.
• I heard that SL3 records 25 FPS in PAL. The difference between 24 and 25 doesnt seem that big a deal to a newb. If I switch to PAL, is there a difference in quality or anything why I wouldnt just switch if wanting the 25 FPS? I live in California if that matters.
• SL3 seems to have a better array of lenses that are more affordable. The M50 you have to add an adapter to get all SL3 lenses or use the more expensive EF-M lenses. If I use the adapter, does the picture quality suffer at all with this adapter. Cost wise is like the SL3 but if the adapter doesnt make a difference, the M50 may be more manageable.
• SL3 seems to have a much better battery. Again, for cost and sanity purposes, I like the fact that the battery life is better.
• M50 seems to have better image stabilization (in-body). This seems like an important difference but not sure how big of a difference. With the SL3 lens syabilization, will that be good enough for my generic use. I dont like when I get hand shake in my videos but not sure how big a difference between the two really is.
• The burst shooting on the M50 is twice as good. For my Alaska and grands soccer shots, I may want a better burst. Is this something that is an important thing or will 5 FPS be suffice?
• SL3 has eye detection while M50 does not. I am not sure if eye detection in general is that much
  better. I plan to get better and learn more but I dont think eye focus should sway my decision.
• SL3 hot shoe is missing a pin meaning you have to use Canon only flash. This can cause more cost to the SL3. The SL3 has a built in flash. Is this a good enough flash or will I need to get a better flash and this is something I need to worry about when it comes to cost. I alsi have to think that 3rd party companies will eventually develop for this hot shoe.
• Neither are weather resistant. I am fearful with going to so many different environments over the next few year I may have an issue and my camera be ruined. How easy is it to have a weather related issue with the cameras? Should I put some sort of cover over the camera if I get the rain of Alasake or the sand of the Hawaian beaches?
• I like these two cameras because of their capabilities and the cost. For $1000 I cam get the camera in a bindle to provide more lenses and gear. Would it be better to go up to a better camera and have fewer lenses/gear or for my purposes, stick with the lower level cameras?

I apolgize for this being so long but I am hoping to get myself better educated before the Black Friday sales come!

Thanks... Bubba

[krahe]

I'm not defending any technology, merely the rationale I used and I believe many newbies use (or at least should use) to make these decisions. If you think you might want to use prime lenses, the R50 is not yet where the M50 is, and there's no telling when - or even if - it will be.

[ebiggs1]

OK, that gives the OP differing opinions on how to proceed.

The Canon R50 has a Canon RF lens mount and currently there are 39 native lenses available for this mount. Should be enough for the OP to satisfy his needs. The just announced RF 28mm f/2.8 STM Lens is a prime. Certainly there are more to follow.

A person that, " I will be crusing to Alaska and Mexico..." is not concerned on how many primes lenses are available. Most folks in that situation want one lens and it is a zoom.

I believe the M series has fewer than a dozen lenses!

[krahe]

My initial reason for buying an M50 was to use it for a big road trip I was planning to the western U.S., for which the two kit zooms were indeed adequate for the vast majority of what I needed. I was interested in trying something brighter, however, having had an Olympus C-3040Zoom with an f/1.8 lens years ago, and right away bought a Meike 25mm f/1.8 manual lens because it was cheap and I wanted to see how a brighter prime compares to a darker zoom. That grew my appreciation of primes, of which I acquired two more over the next six months - one EF-M and one EF.

I don't know that the availability of full frame RF primes really addresses the issue I have with the R50, though. Not only do they take up more room in a camera bag than an equivalent EF-M/EF-S/RF-S lens would, but I'm thinking that such a big-diameter lens on such a small camera is going to be an issue as far as gripping the camera. RF-S lenses narrow rather quickly past the mount. Even my EF lenses aren't an issue on my M50 because the adapter gives my fingers almost as much room as an EF-M lens does. But I'm thinking it would be an issue if my EF 50mm mounted directly to my M50. I would like to hear from someone with at least average sized hands who has actually tried FF RF lenses on the newer compact APS-C bodies.

As for EF-M lenses, yes, there were only a little more than a handful from Canon. But there are no glaring omissions, either, when you consider what most people buying a body that costs well under $1,000 would be interested in.

[Tronhard]

When I look at giving advice to others, I believe the focus should be less on what we have or prefer and what is best for that person at the time when we make our posts.  You are turning this into a stout defence of your own choice, but there is no point in arguing that because we are not trying to get you to change what you use.  When I contribute to these discussions I am looking at what one would responsibly recommend, as objectively as possible, to someone starting from scratch without bias and based on the situation at time of post.  Canon have announced that they will release 32 new lenses for the R platform over the next four years.  Here is the Canon lens roadmap:
Canon RF lens roadmap (canonrumors.com).

It makes little sense to recommend a camera SYSTM that is clearly going to be discontinued, especially when there are clear indications of much the same capability being available on a new platform that is expanding rapidly to give a wider range of options for the future. 

Given that in the circumstances of the OP (or someone like them), they are likely to want to add to the initial units with compatible capability - lenses and/or bodies, it makes little sense to direct them to a dying platform.  The fact that is disappearing is clear: as of April 17th 2023 Canon announced that the EF-M 55-200 f/4.5-6.3 IS and the EF-M 18-150mm f/3.5-6.3 IS STM are to stop manufacture, but Canon will continue to offer existing stock for sale.  Remaining “current” Canon EF-M lenses are:

• Canon EF-M 11-22mm f/4-5.6 IS STM
• Canon EF-M 15-45mm f/3.5-6.3 IS STM
• Canon EF-M 22mm f/2 STM
• Canon EF-M 28mm f/3.5 IS STM
• Canon EF-M 32mm f/1.4 STM

The only EOS M camera currently available is the Canon EOS M50 Mark II.  That does not constitute a system that is viable in the future.

Canon currently offers the following RF lenses:
RF-S 18-45 and the 18-150 and 55-210,
RF 16mm f/2.8, 28mm f/2.8  and 50mm f/1.8 STM
These are covering pretty much the range of the EF-M lenses, and along with the release of the R100 and 50 bodies, it seems clear that Canon is paving the way to move the market to the R-series cameras and lenses.

[krahe]

I am amused that anyone still thinks I am defending my own choice, because in fact no one has suggested that given my needs, my budget and the options available at the time I needed a camera, that I didn't actually make the best choice.

The RF lens roadmap essentially confirms what I have suspected for some time, which is that despite occasional rumors to the contrary and likely a strong desire from many R series APS-C body users, we're not going to see RF-S primes from Canon. That, in turn, would cement the M series as a unique offering that will not be repeated, at least by Canon, which is something I suggested earlier.

As for longer EF-M zooms, I do consider the availability of at least one of those to be essential. If there's not a good chance of someone being able to obtain at least a refurbished copy of one of those lenses, I couldn't recommend they get a new M50, regardless of its other merits, unless they could convince me that they will be just fine with, say, the EF-S 55-250mm on an adapter. Pretty much everyone has already run out of their stock of new copies of the EF-M 55-200mm, but rather than removing the lens from their catalog completely, they are indicating that the lens is backordered, which gives me hope that Canon is perhaps considering at least one more production run.

[Tronhard]

So far your approach has been all about your use of the gear, so it would appear you are defending your choice and it still looks like that.  But whatever.  It is presumptive to assume that Canon will not produce RF-S primes, given that they have determined to deliver 32 new lenses.   I am more inclined to wait and see what comes next, but the primes that Canon have introduced will work fine on the RF-S lenses  if someone needs them sooner, of course there are the EF and EF-S lenses via an adapter that work fine.  That is not true of EF-M lenses on R-series bodies.
Funnily enough I have a EF-M 55-200 in brand-new condition, in its box, because I got it with a kit but use other, longer FL lenses.  But I am in NZ.

[krahe]

I don't think my needs are all that unique among first-time ILC buyers. But whatever. We shall have to see what Canon does in the way of RF-S lenses. They surprised me once by likely cannibalizing future R10 sales with the R50. They may well surprise me again.

[Tronhard]

They may well do that! 🙂

[Waddizzle]

@ebiggs1 wrote:

IMHO !  

"90D         love
RP            probably best choice
SL3          too small
M50 Mark Ii         No
M50"                   No

---

I have not been following this thread, but I endorse the above message.

The DSLR market is nearly a dead end.  The M series bodies are great pocket cameras to take to Disneyland.   I recommend only using EF-M series lenses on them because the EF mount lenses are much larger and will drain the battery VERY quickly.

I strongly recommend an R Series body like the R50 or even the forthcoming R100, which is to be priced similarly to the SL3.

[ebiggs1]

"I am amused that anyone still thinks I am defending my own choice,  ..."

If you're not I would hate see you when you are!

"I don't think my needs are all that unique among first-time ILC buyers."

But they are "your" needs. You need to focus in the needs of the OP.