Mizouse

AF in AI servo seems about the same, maybe a bit faster.

Mizouse

augh, i forgot to turn off noise reduction to compare with my 40D

anyways with it set to standard, ISO3200 looks amazing and 6400 is very clean as well.

i didnt need to bump up to 12800 so i didnt test it.

Mizouse

Camera Make: Canon
Camera Model: Canon EOS 50D
Image Date: 2008:10:10 19:14:06
Flash Used: No
Focal Length: 200.0mm
CCD Width: 11.35mm
Exposure Time: 0.0020 s (1/500)
Aperture: f/2.8
ISO equiv: 3200
White Balance: Auto
Metering Mode: Matrix
Exposure: Manual
Exposure Mode: Manual
Noise reduction at standard.
reduced 50% in CS3

http://www.pbase.com/mizouse/image/1...9/original.jpg

Mizouse

ugh, me borrowing this camera was not a good idea, i so dont want to return it tomorrow

stogie1020

Wow, great looking shot noise wise.

When I pixel peep at the skin of the players, particularly the players in blue, it looks like something weird is going on with the skin being splotchy or discolored. Look at the arms and the tops of the thighs, also the neck. I am on my laptop with a shitty monitor, so that may be the issue... Any thoughts?

Mizouse

maybe its the shadows?

stogie1020

Yeah, could be, I bet there is weird lighting indoors at a sports event.

Dan Martin

DPReview put their full review online for the 50D today: http://www.dpreview.com/news/0810/08...s50dreview.asp

They don't seem to like it very much, although there are quite a few issues with how they reviewed it. For example, they say the resolution increase isn't noticeable compared to the 40D, but they only tested with the 50mm 1.4 which isn't the sharpest lens in the lineup. It's not that the 50D doesn't have more resolution, it's just out-resolving that lens. Lens flaws are magnified with the increased resolution when viewed at 100%.

Buy good glass and you get good resolution. How is that a bad thing? They were expecting the camera to invent detail that the lens isn't resolving.

The dynamic range issue is a little more concerning and I have noticed it already in some images with lots of sky in the scene. If I could choose resolution or dynamic range, I would go with dynamic range any day. That's a part of my "better pixels, not more pixels" mantra.

Noise was reviewed at a 100% view as well, which isn't the way I would compare cameras with different resolutions. Really what they're saying here is if you were to take a photo of the same scene with a 40D and 50D, then print both images at their native size (11x16 @ 240ppi for the 40D, 13x20 @ 240ppi for the 50D) the larger 50D image will appear have a little more noise at higher ISOs. What they didn't say is if you printed them both the same size, the 50D will have noticeably less noise because the noise is smaller. It's just like using fine-grained film. I wasn't blown away by the noise performance of the 50D when I first compared it to my 30D, but when I made prints, the difference is very noticeable.

I have to agree with them that ISO 12800 is completely useless though. I'd say this is an ISO 3200 camera.

There are quite a few little details that make the 50D a good upgrade from the 30D, but it's probably a harder argument to say that it's a worthwhile upgrade from the 40D. It's the same reason why I didn't buy a 40D when it came out to upgrade my 30D because there just wasn't all that big of a difference. It probably makes the most sense to skip a generation when upgrading your bodies to get the most bang for your buck.

dom

And the firmware update came out yesterday.....

dom

Maybe its me but I've always sensed anti Canon bias at dpreview.

waTSX

I'm not sure what DPR would have to gain by being biased against Canon or what would motivate them to do so. If you look at the review, the list of pros is far longer than the list of cons, but at the end they say it barely earned the highly recommended rating. I'm going to read the whole thing, but the 50 or so images I took with a 50D at Best Buy, using my own CF card and at all ISO's, looked pretty damn good. Not conclusive, to be sure, but not anything like the reviews conclusion indicated.

Needless to say, all the pixel-peepers on the 50D forum at DPR are shitting themselves right about now.

I'd be interested to hear what Dan has to say about how the 50D performs. Frankly, after reading his posts here for some years now, I place more value with his opinion than with DPR's.

Billiam

I've all but given up on reading complete camera reviews. At least the "analytical" ones like DPR. I pretty much skip right to the pro/con or conclusions page and decide if any of the items there warrant further reading. After that, I download some sample images and make my own judgements.

That's for the analytical type of reviews. Overall I'm much more interested now days in the comments and opinions of what it's like to actually live and work with a camera. Michael Reichmann is obviously one of the founding fathers of this type of review so I'll generally read what he has to say in its entirety. In the same vein, I'll also look at what actual users of a camera have to say in Flickr groups.

jupitersolo

The ones that pixel peep like crazy, I don't pay attention to.

Dan Martin

All I can say is prints from my 50D look better than prints from my 30D at every ISO. To me, that's the bottom line.

Throw in the bonus of a larger screen that's easy to read in bright sun, faster AF, live view, HDMI output, and a few other goodies and it makes for a very nice camera to shoot with.

Sure it would be nice if it had an ISO 12800 that actually worked, or the 1D-series AF, or the 5D2's movie mode, but this camera stands on its own and is very competitive with any other prosumer camera in this price range.

dom

Nothing to gain. I just think the reviewers prefer Nikon on a personal level Nothing wrong with that either. And maybe it is me, although I've seen it mentioned by others in their forums from time to time.

Dan Martin

There's very little information at the pixel level that affects what an image looks like.

I've found that making prints is the only way to go.

If you're comparing cameras that have different resolutions, make a print from the smallest resolution camera at 240ppi then increase the ppi of the largest resolution camera so you reduce the final print size to the same dimensions. In other words, you don't want to resample the image, send both files to the printer in their native resolutions but tell the printer to print the bigger file at a higher ppi so the prints will be the same size.

The difference is the printer's ink droplets are much smaller than the pixels on your monitor. If you tell the printer to put more pixels in the same amount of space, that image will inevitably look sharper and have less noise. The pixels will actually be smaller in the print. You just can't simulate that effect on your monitor.

waTSX

It wouldn't surprise me at all if Phil Askey and the boys are long time Nikon shooters.

Mizouse

hmm.. after using the 50D i still want it.

cmschmie

I'm seriously thinking of getting a 40D or 50D early next year. I read the DP Review as well, and that had me leaning towards saving money and getting the 40D, but I'm going to wait to see what the guy at The Digital Picture Review has to say about it.

Hopefully my bonus will be enough to get the camera with the 28-135 kit lens and add the Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8.

jupitersolo

It's a good camera, no reason not to.

lcrazyaznl

iTrader: (1)

I played with a friends 50d, and 40d.

I actually loved both cameras. I used to have an xti, and i wished i opt for one those before it was stolen.

The 40d was fun when i had my d80, i was jealous of my friends 40d / shutter/ quality and build.

When the d300 came out I felt it was a better buy and waited on it.
Since my friend got a 50d it does really well, apparently he's been using 2500 iso in the football game last night for 1/1000 shutter speed. (were both using 70-200 2.8)

i'm guessing if the reviews were right his pictures would be a bit softer at the higher range and mine would be a tad more grainier.

I was using iso 1000 and pushing 1/400. I read the dp reviews after comparing his pictures, but i don't find it falling too short of the d300.

I dunno how canons af works but is their 9 af point a pain in the ass as dpreview says it is? cuz i went frm an xti to a d80 then jump to a d300 i think im spoiled by the 51 points, but i'm sure alot canon users are used to that af system.

ChodTheWacko

I have never felt restrained by 9 point AF,
and the vast majority of people use center point focus anyway.

51, to be honest, seems like overkill, (outside of servo focus), especially on
the D3 where they are clustered in the center anyway. It makes selecting an individual focus point more of a pain.

- Frank

jupitersolo

It's the same for the D700 and the D300, but your statement can be said about Canon's AF points on the 1d3's as well.

jupitersolo

They/we should be it's four years old.

hrj

iTrader: (1)

You can actually select the AF point selection to 11 points.
That's what I like from cropped sensor cameras, the AF points are more spread out. But I rarely use AF, so they are pretty much useless most of the time

Dan Martin

The sensors are probably the same, but the 50D is noticeably faster than the 30D for AI Servo, and it also appears to acquire focus faster in dim light. I think the Digic4 is to thank for that...

waTSX

After messing with a 50D for about an hour at the store, I think the 50D is quicker to focus than the 40D also, although not hugely so. It was snapping pretty good with the 28-135 lens that was mounted on it. This is purely anecdotal experience, but it did seem better.

Dan Martin

Ya, it's not 1-series fast, but it's a noticeable improvement, especially when you have both cameras in your hands at the same time to compare. The 50D just feels a little snappier.

1D4 with dual digic4 should be a monster...

cmschmie

For anyone interested, Bryan at The Digital Picture Review plans to have his 50D review up next week.

jupitersolo

I'd really like to hear what he has to say.

Mizouse

yea when i rented the 50D and used my 40D as a 2nd body, it did seem a tad faster than teh 40D and with teh 300 F4 it would just snap into focus.

ohh yea, the 50D definately focused faster in low light, back in the beginning of septermber i shot a volleyball game with my 40D and was frustrated with how long it took to get focus, when i used the 50D back in the beg of october it didnt seem to have that issue as much.

as much as i would like a 50D and/or 5DmkII, my next body is going to be a 1 series, or maybe a nikon.

cmschmie

It's up
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/R...ra-Review.aspx

jupitersolo

He said what I thought he would without being a wanker about it.

Thanks for letting us know it was up.

cmschmie

Just got done reading it, he didn't gush over this one like he did the 40D.

I'm still at a loss as to what I'd like to upgrade to the 40D or 50D. (currently Rebel XT)
*sigh* more research

dom

The LCD alone IMO is enough to go for the 50D.

Dan Martin

Maybe he wasn't gushing over it, but he did upgrade his own 40D to the 50D. He also talked about why the 50D would be a very nice upgrade if you're moving from a Rebel for about 4 paragraphs at the end of the review.

I guess you just need to decide if the $300 difference between the two bodies would be better spent on the body or put towards new glass. What do you currently have in your kit?

jupitersolo

From XT to 50D, yes a good idea, unless as said you don't have the extra $$$.

waTSX

I think your decision is easier since you're coming from the Rebel and not the 40D. Like Dan said, it really just comes down to the dollars. If it was me in this situation, I would go for the newest model. Upgrading from a 40D is a tougher decision.

And while the LCD on the 50D is much improved, I don't think it's a good enough reason to upgrade by itself. But the 50D has enough other improvements to make it look very attractive. Just keep in mind that the 40D is a really good value right now.

Good luck!

cmschmie

Current kit is only the Xt w/ 18-55 kit lens and 50/1.8

Goal was to get the 40D/50D w/ 28-135 kit lens and hopefully 17-55 with yearly bonus (February-ish)

I did see that he recommended it as an upgrade for a current Rebel owner. I guess I should just bite the bullet, it's only $300 on top of $1100 (+other glass)

dom

No, but IMO its worthwhile in choosing it over a 40D.