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

[bubbapuck]

Thank you all for your advice.

I have done more research and have kind of adjusted my thoughts. Here is the list I have in the current order of what I would want. I am not sure I can afford the first two but am going to see what Black Friday has to offer. I really like the 90d.

I too like the EF lens because there is more options and you can find cheaper refurbs. After my initial purchase, budget will be tight for lenses. I like having more options and more refurbs.

90D
RP
SL3
M50 Mark Ii
M50

[ebiggs1]

IMHO !  

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

[bubbapuck]

I am leaning towards the 90d because it seems like a better all around better camera.

The 90D has better resolution, better burst shooting, better shutter speed, better battery life and has a built in flash. I also like that I have many more inexpensive lens options.

The RP is full frame mirrorless camera which seems to be the direction they are trending towards.

Though you live the 90D, you say the RP is the best choice. Just curious for the reasoning.

Thanks. EB

[ebiggs1]

"Though you live love the 90D, you say the RP is the best choice. Just curious for the reasoning."

Canon may not like what I am going to say but the ef/ef-s line is over.  You are buying for today if you buy into the ef/ef-s line of cameras.  Canon has made it clear, to me at least, they are all in for mirrorless. However, the 90D, probably the end or last of the line, is a superb camera.  It is Canon's best effort in this line of xxD cameras.  The good part of that it, it will always be that good no matter what else Canon comes out with or direction they go.  Will there be a 100D to further the line?  I seriously doubt it but who knows except Canon and they ain't talkin.

 Although I have four 1 series cameras, the 90D has always called to me.  If I were to give in and buy one it would be with one of two lens choices. The EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM Lens or in my case leaning more towards the Sigma 18-35mm f/1.8 DC HSM Art Lens. I got to use the latter combo one day and was seriously blown away at the IQ of the photos. Things that should not tempt a person like me that already has GAS.  (Gear Acquirement Syndrome) No known cure just treatment of symptoms!

BTW, noting these suggestions blow your budget beyond the moon!  Sorry. But like I mentioned in the long run it may be the cheaper way to go as this gear is about as good as it gets. You could buy more expensive but you are not likely to buy better.

[bubbapuck]

Thank you so much for the great advice. Lots to think about. For now I plan to get a body and kit lens to learn on. As I learn how to use the camera and find the boundaries of the kit lens, I will have some money saved up to buy another lens. I am not sure the boss (aka my wife) will not allow me to go above my $1000 budget but I am crossing my fingers. I don’t want to bring it up until I see Black Friday deals and go from there.

[ebiggs1]

The 90D and the kit lens combo is about $1350. Some of the New York cameras stores have it in a combo with extra batteries and SD card right now. Perhaps others too.  I don't recommend Amazon unless you deal directly with Amazon. The problem is you can't always tell. Best Buy and Cosco, local camera shop are local choices you might have.  You get to "feel" it is you go there.

[MiltonVines]

Hello. 

I found this review in Youtube about SL3 and M50

[Far-Out-Dude]

In all honesty even though I have a M50 and like the camera I would never buy one now (I won mine about 3 or 4 years ago, it is a Mark I) The M series is pretty much dead and there are not many lenses native to the M series line though with an adapter you can use EF/EFS lenses with no problems that I have found. If I were to buy myself I would try to get one that takes the newer RF series of lenses.

[Tronhard]

I am late to this topic, so please forgive me is I cover ground already dealt with, even though I have read through the various replies.

I agree with my esteemed colleagues that the M-series cameras are obsolete and a dead end.  Canon has not developed them in a long time and it is clear that they are creating a platform in the R-series bodies that will woo M-series users away.

While I am absolutely not dismissing the idea of the 90D, (I used to have one) because it is a good DSLR camera, it faces much the same issue, but to a lesser degree as the M-series.  Canon has made no move to develop their DSLR line in a while, but they put on the market new R-series bodies.  The good news is that you can use EF and (with limitations) EF-S lenses on the new R-series bodies with an EF-RF adapter.

All that said, the R-series bodies are where the development is and where the future lies.  R-series bodies have features you will not find in DSLRs, like full eye tracking and focus, some have In-Body Image Stabilization (IBIS) - while neither the M-series nor DSLRS do and these would seem to be benefits to consider for the kinds of photography you want.

As far as video goes, I am not a videographer, but generally the R-series bodies benefit from the same features as for stills and offer better resolution and frame rates.

Given you are starting on your photographic journey, you have the benefit of not having any legacy gear, so my view would be to go straight for R-series bodies and lenses - if you can afford what you want.  It is important to consider optics with at least the same weight as the camera body, and while there are excellent legacy EF and EF-S lenses out there that may be cheap, you will have to consider the added cost of the EF-RF adapter. Also, some features of R-series bodies do not play well with EF lenses.  For example, using high speed electronic shutter is not available with legacy lenses, nor is integration of IBIS with lens IS if they are both available.

Given your range of subjects you seem to be looking for a moderate wide-angle to moderate telephoto lens for general touring and social imagery with stills and video, and a longer telephoto zoom for sport, wildlife etc.

BODIES: Likely then, you might consider two lenses plus a body.  All of the bodies you have considered so far have APS-C sensors, so if you move that across to the R-series bodies there are several within that group:  in descending order from most sophisticated and expensive, they are:
EOS R7, EOS R10, R50 and R100. The following link will allow you to compare the various features of these models.
Side by Side Comparison Canon EOS R7 vs. Canon EOS R10 vs. Canon EOS R50 vs. EOS R100: Digital Photo...

LENSES: for general shooting and videography, you might want to consider the RF-S 18-45 and couple that with the RF-S 55-200 for longer work.  Alternatively, if you want to save up for longer reach in the future, you could start with the RF-S 18-150 as a general walkabout lens, and eventually get the RF 100-400 when you can afford it.  Here is a comparison chart for those lenses:
Side by Side Comparison Canon RF-S 18-45mm vs. Canon RF-S 55-210mm F5.0-7.1 IS STM vs. Canon RF-S 18...

Budget:  I don't live in the US, so it is not so easy to have my ear to the ground for bargains over there, but here are some prices for combinations from the Canon site, as a guide.  You can look for cheaper prices, but again I would suggest considering the wisdom of my colleagues regarding purchasing from reputable camera stores rather than off the web.

R100+ RF-S 18-45 STM  ($480)
R50 + RF-S  18-45 STM  ($800)
R50 + RF-S  18-45 STM + RF-S 55-200 STM ($1,029) See the link to this HERE 
R10 + RF-S  18-34 STM  ($999)
R10 + RF-S   18-150 STM ($1,279)

I suggest you check out the relative specs that I supplied and see what most relates to what you want. You will likely not get everything you want within your $1,000 budget, but if you can get a deal then you could do very well. 

[stevet1]

Bubba,

For me, when I wanted to upgrade, it came down to a choice between the SL3 and the Canon T8i. I chose the T8i because it had a slightly faster  burst rate, and it had 45 focus points instead of the Sl3's 9 points.

The 90D is a great camera,  but one thing to consider is the weight. It comes in at 701 grams, or about 24 Oz. You said you want to do a lot of traveling, and it looks like some of your destinations will involve a lot of walking. That weight will come into play.

The SL3 weighs about 449 grams, or 15.8 oz.. The T8i comes in at 515 grams or 18.1 oz.

It's something to keep in mind.

As others have said, I also think that Canon's M line of cameras are kind of obsolete now.

Steve Thomas