Mistake purchasing the m200 over the g7x mIII?

[slinky]

I'm a bit concerned, having thought that getting the m200 and using other lenses I have, the kit lens 15mm-45mm f/3.5-6.3 IS STM and perhaps buying the EF-M 22mm f/2 STM Lens would make for a great street kit. Taking some photos, the quality was very sharp and very nice. But many of the photos seemed to come out dark or like there is a haze. And then I noticed there was noise, banding and distortion, especially in lower lighted areas. Hence I wonder it's the glass that is really creating some of the mediocre images and distortions.

The first photo is one of the better ones. It's unedited and the colors and overall look is crisp. But it's not like a got much detail from the ducks, which I'd usually get with the old RX100 M1 I used to shoot with before it died. 

Now look at the second photo. The house came out gorgeous, crisp and you can see the side of it in the photo I uploaded. But the tree next to it which had darker spots had noticeable blotches and distortions. Looks terrible. The third image with the duck is OK but there is a lot of noise in the background with fuzzy detail. 

The fourth photo is better although, it too, seems dark and the details are lost in the dark quality. So I'm wondering if the G7X M3 would have performed far better due to the 1.8-2.8 lens that it has. Both have stabilization (m200 in the lens) and I'm wondering if it's the shooter or it really is the glass that won't produce the similar results. Many of the 'pros' I saw liked the m200 because they can use it with other lenses. But I'm noticing also that there isn't any EF-M lens that is versatle like the G7X as well - a 24-100 going from 1.8-2.8. Not the deepest Zoom but far better than 45mm at 6.3. It's the 6.3 that is making me wonder whether I'm losing so much detail and all these photos are dark.

Thank you all for any thoughts, suggestions, opinions.

[Tronhard · Accepted solution]

I have 3 EOS M5 bodies that I consider to be the flagship bodies for the M series in terms of stills photography.  The M50's are more aligned to hybrid and vloggers.  Two benefits of the M5 are the EVF (better for longer lenses and stabilizing for hand-held shooting), and the EV dial on the top, something missing on the M50.  All other M-series do not have a built-in EVF, although some have a bulky and fragile add-on unit.

I have most of the lenses for the M-series and if you are looking for more range, then I would suggest either the EF-M 18-150, which pairs well with the excellent 11-22; or the 55-200 which would be a good addition for your 15-45, which I also have.  The M series gets a bit of flak, but personally I find it perfectly serviceable for what I consider its intended market slot - that is small, inconspicuous cameras good for street photography, travel, hiking etc.   I got mine because of an injury that meant I could not carry my normal heavy DSLRs and lenses.  After an operation I am fully functional again, however I still use these bodies today for the purposes I mentioned.

I always maintain that that the critical things are what you are going to shoot and what you are going to produce.  It takes a much higher budget to shoot specialist subjects like wildlife (especially macro predators) or create large, detailed Fine Art prints, compared to publishing on social media or display on digital devices.

Here are a few images from the M5's with a mix of lenses: all hand-held in available light.

1. View of Mt Ruapehu, EOS M5 EF-M 18-150 @ 24mm,  f/9, 1/1000sec, ISO-200

Sunrise over the Central Plateau: EOS M5 EF-M 11-22 @ 22mm, f/6.3, 1/40sec, ISO-200 

Close-up of lichen and mushroom in the forests EOS M5, 18-150 @ 100mm, f/9, 1/50sec, ISO-200 Canon EOS M5, EF-M 18-135mm@ 100mm, F/9, 1/50sec, ISO-200

Before the Dawn: The Moon and Venus: EOS M5, 15-45mm @ 31mm, f/9, 1/13sec, ISO500

Rather than post a myriad if images I shall give you a link to a blog I wrote on a trip to the Tongariro National Park, in NZ's central North Island - it is centred around a volcanic plateau with live volcanoes and is a great hike to do, although one must be careful as the weather can change at the drop of a hat.  This is a link to the blog on my MS OneDrive:
2019: Tongariro National Park Trip  when the link opens (give it time) click on OPEN on the top left of the screen to see it properly.  You can then zoom in to make the document more readable by clicking on the Zoom function on the bottom middle and selecting Page Width.

[slinky]

Stunning shots all at high f-stop. The darkness I'm seeing is more the IQ than probably the lens. All of these photos are not just beautiful to view but are very inspiring. Thank you for your suggestions - the 55-200 in particular sounds terrific. Hope you're feeling well. I'm getting on in the years and have wear and tear on the ankles and knees and the compact was another knowing compromise. Would love the viewfinder like was on the new Sony RX series but it's not even on their only affordable rival (the ZV-1) and hence the m200 is none the worse without one. Perhaps in time I'll get a second camera to replace the old xSi.  Thank you for your blog. This has really been a terrific conversation with all of you.

[Tronhard]

IQ is made up of many things: lens, sensor, stabilization and, of course, the photographer. 

If you can get a second-hand M5 in good condition, or even an M50 MkII, then they both have a built-in EVF and are reasonably priced. If you have joint issues, then the M5 or 50 are both good choices along with the appropriate lenses for your purposes. Since my shots were of landscapes or close-up they tend to be in the mid-aperture range to get the DoF, but also because the lenses seem to perform best a stop or so above their smallest f/value.

I have the Sony RX-10MkIV and with a 1" stacked CMOS sensor giving an equivalent FoV range of 24-600mm, I consider it to be the best bridge camera on the market at the moment, but it has gone up in price (at least in NZ) and while it is weather resistant and a fabulous Zeiss lens, the Sony menu is a nightmare!   I configured what buttons and dials I could so I don't have to go into it any more.  It is the camera I take when I want to have just one camera and may have a lot of different focal ranges to deal with.

[ebiggs1]

Again your jpg is pretty small but this is how I would have edited it. Processing the Raw file would be very much better. 

Your histogram was spot on.

[slinky]

@Tronhard - I much appreciate your recommendations for a step-up camera. PS - The Sony RX100 series suffered from a really poor menu (and still could be better.) 

@ebiggs1 - Thank you! That was another test photo using the 22mm lens, which can take some really fantastic photos. This was a tough shot for the camera to handle because of the sky. That shot I was able to isolate the squirrel in the tree from about 15 feet away. However, the video I tried to take was terrible. The camera compensated for the sky and turned the entire foreground very dark, rendering all practically silhouettes. I'll be able to handle that with some time getting familiar with the camera but I'm now thrilled to have it and extremely glad I didn't get the VZ-1. The pancake lens still doesn't render the camera small enough to truly put in a pants pocket but with phones getting so crazy good, my next phone will be my "pants pocket' camera and this can easily be my jacket pocket rifle to go to since no matter how good phones get, the physics is what it is. I just wish these cameras sometime had half the IQ that mobile phones have. It's all good and your work has me very inspired!

[Tronhard]

Mobile phones are physically at a huge disadvantage compared to dedicated cameras.  For a start, their sensors and optics are absolutely miniscule.  For example, a cell phone could fit into a FF Sensor about 30 times!  What makes them effective is computational photography, pioneered by Prof Marc LeVoy, late of Stanford University and spent time as a lead at Google Optics.  That said, some of that AI is appearing in modern cameras - for example, the Canon RF 24-240 lens, has pretty massive firmware corrections going on by the time you see the images in the viewfinder or see the JPG files.  If, however, one views the unprocessed and uncorrected RAW images, the wide angle images look pretty scary.  I suspect we will see a lot more of that in the future.

[ebiggs1]

" I just wish these cameras sometime had half the IQ that mobile phones have."

Try making an 8x10 from a iphone.

[slinky]

Epilogue. 

I ended up getting an EF-S to EF-M adapter - aftermarket because sadly it seems Canon has really gouge pricing on that piece. I completely respect the costs of technology but have no idea why this adapter should cost $200. Fortunately it seems to work with the 55-270mm zoom lens. I'm pleased to say that I now have a full range of capture with the 22mm f2, the 15-45 kit lens, the 50mm for the EF-S, and now this which extends far beyond the standard G7X zoom and far more useful.

That said, some items that were troubling and most I can ge over - although I'm thrilled to have bought this small mirrorless instead of th e G7X. Exposure indoor without flash was inconsistent based on lighting and video focusing is really not great. I had to use the manual focus often and am grateful to have it since th G7X Mark III has all sorts of reports and that's not correctible like it is here. When the video is in focus, it can look superb as the lens is sharp and some of the colors can be caught well.

Not so great is wondering why on earth Canon decided to limit this camera to 24p instead of the standard 30p. I had no problems with overheating. Even though there is real crop going on, sometimes it was nice having a zoomed in feeling of intimate scenes and it worked. But again the focus was finicky and I need to spend more time with the camera to figure out the best way to manage focus, which I think is possible. But still no reason for not enabling 30p in the software.

Many of the photos were soft indoors without a flash and I think my RX100 didn't struggle nearly as much without a flash. It seemed to capture most things without issue, almost always super sharp. Not always the case here. I do have the feeling that part of this is in knowing (or not fully appreciating) how to use better glass to its potential and am guessing the some settings would have been capable of producing better results. If someone can relay to Canon that it's absolutely moronic not to include a firmware update to enable 30p 4k video on this camera, it would be much appreciated.

On the bright side, while I despise having to work harder to get some better results, I think they are certainly capable with this camera. And most of all, having better manual focus is a godsend. I think you have that capability on the point and shoots, but it's not nearly as easy and accessible. What is not good is tht while the screen is good, it's often difficult to tell just how sharp you really are focused into the subject as the screen resolution is just OK (although that preserves batter life.) What I did not like was that it was very difficult to get everyone in focus naturally and sometimes only the people in the foreground were in focus with the background being fuzzier, almost like what people prefer for landscape photography. I expect I'll be gett much better at handing moving forward. But no matter what, I'm way more excited about using this camera in conjunction with the more versatile glass. The size factor was critically important as it's really about as large as you can go before it is really not comfortable for it to be a true jacket pocket companion for any occasion. With the pancake lense especially, this is roadworthy. All good, no regrets, just need to keep learning about my tools. Thanks again to everybody for your input.