Need recommendations for beginner camera and lens for bird photography

[keenanbare]

I'm totally new to photography and want to get a camera that I can use mostly for bird photography and for taking pictures during duck hunting of me, my dad, the birds we harvest, pictures of that sort. I may also dabble in some short video and casual pictures with friends, but would mostly be using the camera for bird photography and taking pictures during hunting.

I just recently purchased the Canon M50 Mark II, but am thinking about returning it. I have recently read some forums that it may not work well with telephoto lenses due to it's small/fragile size and build. Also, it seems that Canon is going away from the EF-M mount and towards the RF mount. I've read some forums that have recommended the R10 and R7, and that's currently what I have my eye on. I want something that I can grow into and with.

My price range is flexible, but would say that the upper limit is $2,000 (camera and lens included). Would be willing to go a bit higher if it's worth it.

[ebiggs1]

There is no doubt the M50 series works the reason you don't recommend it to a new buyer is the M series is a dead end. It is done as is the DSLR. It never was a serious contender It is/was a niche model.

[krahe]

Yet, the M50 offers benefits that might never be repeated with an RF mount camera. (Though those benefits aren't a big factor in the present case.)

[deebatman316]

EOS M/ EF-M is a dead lineup of cameras. In fact some EF-M lenses now have an RF-S (RF Mount lens with an APS-C image circle) equivalent. Which has signaled the end of EOS M/ EF-M. Why make 2 different incompatible mirrorless APS-C camera mounts. When they can use 1 mount for both APS-C & Full Frame. This is why the EOS M line up is dead.

[krahe]

I don't see much benefit to having a single mount for both APS-C and full frame. In fact, it might be a detriment. If Canon does develop a number of RF-S lenses (it's not clear that they will), the fact that they have a mount in common with a full frame camera line really won't help someone preserve their lens investment if they later move to a full frame camera (i.e. they won't be much better off than if they had invested in an M body and lenses instead). At the same time, having ready access to lenses designed for full frame cameras will relieve the pressure on Canon to develop very many RF-S lenses, potentially leaving APS-C R users without one of the biggest benefits appreciated by many M users, which is a compact system.

[deebatman316]

Using 1 mount makes more sense money wise. Why make 2 incompatible lens mounts. It makes it easy to convert to full frame. The RF Mount is the future. EF-M is dead and probably only has a few years left to sellout of remaining stock. No manufacturer announces that there killing off a product line. They discontinue the product line and expect consumers to move to the new product line. Unlike EF-M you will have to start from scratch with lenses when moving to full frame. EOS M was/ is a niche market for compact cameras. Only 8 lenses were released from Canon. The only remaining M series camera is the M50 Mark II. So it doesn't surprise me that Canon has released 3 APS-C RF Mount cameras to replace the EF-M Mount.

[krahe]

Using 1 mount for both APS-C and full frame only makes it easy to convert to full frame if you avoid purchasing any APS-C (i.e. RF-S) lenses. If you do purchase APS-C lenses, you'll pretty much have to start from scratch with lenses when/if you move to a full frame, whether your current lenses are EF-S, EF-M or RF-S.

I only got into ILCs a little less than a year ago. Knowing what I know now if I were to come into the market at the present time, I would buy the M50 Mark II all over again.

[deebatman316]

Financially it makes more sense for a company to use 1 mount. Why make 2 mounts when 1 works. They also save money. They don't have to produce 2 of the same lenses for different mounts. They don't have factor in the mounts having different electronic communication. Then having to figure what features works with that mount. It also cuts down on confusion. When a company uses 1 mount. The EOS M series doesn't have all of the features that everyone needs. Nor does it have the latest advancements in technology. Such as focus breathing compensation. Or using Intermittent Flash Firing for AF Assist from a speedlite. EOS M lacks those features due to having older hardware. Hence why APS-C RF Mount cameras and lenses are here.

[krahe]

I agree that a single mount makes more sense for Canon. I just don't think it's settled that it makes more sense for the consumer. Also, a lot of the more advanced features available with the RF mount that aren't available with EF-M are of more interest to professional/full frame users than people like me buying into the low end of the market.

[rs-eos]

An EOS M50 with 15-45mm lens is $699.   Size of 4.6 x 3.5 x 2.2 in.  And weighs 13.7 oz.

An EOS R50 with 18-45mm lens is $799.  Size of 4.6 x 3.4 x 2.7 in.  And weighs 13.2 oz.

Other specs average out to be pretty much the same; perhaps with an edge going to the R50.  Thus, these are effectively the same camera and there's no reason to have two different product lines for it.

[krahe]

Where is the RF-S 22mm, which in November was rumored to be announced along with the R50, but wasn't? Or the 2 or 3 other RF-S lenses rumored last May to be announced/released by the end of 2022, which weren't?