Calling Canon 50D/40D users. Condidering buying 50D. Looking for opinions of users

achtungbarry

Hello all,

I've been using my Olympus E500 for a good few years now and it has served me well. I am however, on a more and more regular basis now, beginning to see and be frustrated by its limitations and the time has come to change.

I have decided that I need to change brand for a number of reasons. Firstly the Olympus cameras just do not cut it when it comes to noise performance at anything over 100 iso (even their top of the line E3). Secondly Canon offers me a greater choice of lenses and possibility to buy second hand lenses.

I am strongly considering the 50D and then gradually building a collection of the L full frame capable lenses and Sigma EX full frame lenses ready for the day I upgrade to the 5D or its successor in a few years.

I was just looking for opinions of 50D owners and their experiences with the camera especially with regard to noise performance. Some tests seem to suggest the 40D outperforms the 50D noisewise. Have you found this to be true.

Any other comments, experiences and advice much appreciated.

Cheers.

Barry

Ballyman

Howdy

I use a 40D and think it's a great camera for the price. The high fps is ideal for sports and wildlife also. Regarding it's ISO capabilities, anything up to 800 ISO is 100% perfectly useable for most conditions. It can get a bit sketchy above that though. I have used 1600 and 3200 plenty of times with varying results.

The 1600 is useable most of the time unless you have lots and lots of dark colours in the pic, then it can become a little noticeable. A run through noise reduction software can improve this though so to be honest it has never really been an issue for me so far. I wouldn't shoot a wedding at 1600 ISO though, just in case

3200 is a different kettle of fish though. The two pics below were both at 3200 and there is a noticeable difference between them. There is a lot of noise on the body of the horse whereas there is very little noticeable noise in the floodlit shot? The lenses were different as well, the horse one was with a consumer €200 f5.6 lens and the floodlit one was with a €1K f2.8 professional lens so that may have made a difference also but it's the same light coming into the camera regardless of lens so maybe it didn't!!

Obviously it's no 5D or 1D but I would definitely recommend the 40D if you want useable pics up to 1600 ISO. I wouldn't like to have to rely on being able to use 3200 though. I have no experience with the 50D so can't comment on it except for the fact that you get very little for the upgrade so imo it's not worth the extra money.

Trojan911

Hi,

I use the 50D. Only recently picked it up having upgraded from a 400D. I have no issues so far.

As for the ISO settings I have mine set on auto for the moment only using manual settings on the odd occasion. The two same images below were set at 1250 (auto mode) flash not fired.

There is noticable noise in the "Original" however in the "Modified" image I have reduced the noise using CS3 and applied the Unsharp Mask to sharpen up parts of the image.

Hope that helps...


Original:



Modified:

achtungbarry

Thanks for the replies.

I found this interesting comparison between the noise levels between 50d and 40d and it seems the 40d comes out (by quite a some distance) on top.

50d 800 iso

[URL="[IMG]http://a.img-dpreview.com/reviews/CanonEOS50D/Samples/ISO/raw/50D_ISO800_acr_crop2.jpg[/IMG]"][/URL]

40d 800 iso

[URL="[IMG]http://a.img-dpreview.com/reviews/CanonEOS50D/Samples/ISO/raw/40d_iso800_crop.jpg[/IMG]"][/URL]

50d 1600 iso

[URL="[IMG]http://a.img-dpreview.com/reviews/CanonEOS50D/Samples/ISO/raw/50D_ISO1600_acr_crop2.jpg[/IMG]"][/URL]

40d 1600 iso

[URL="[IMG]http://a.img-dpreview.com/reviews/CanonEOS50D/Samples/ISO/raw/40d_iso1600_crop.jpg[/IMG]"][/URL]

I am leaning strongly to the 40d and this means I can spend the money saved on lenses.

Mycroft H

Yes the higher megapixels on the 50d really makes the noise worse. 40d all the way, its a savage camera.

Calina

40D. I did the same process and decided the 50D was not worth the extra money. So I bought a macro lens with the difference.

Ricky91t

Saw this thread recently on TP,Iso 2000 on the 50D is impressive
http://www.talkphotography.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=141054&highlight=boxing+50D

Paulw

I know someone with both 40D and 50D, and he says that the 50D is superior, mainly due to the extra clarity in the LCD and the megapixels. This gives more scope (when shooting raw) to process the image better.

Skittle

The current rumour is that the 60D will be launched towards the end of this year.
Canon 60D Spec

PaulieC

Yes the higher megapixels on the 50d really makes the noise worse. 40d all the way, its a savage camera.

you'll see a lot of opinions stating that the 40D is *much* better than the 50D, like the above. These are mostly from 40D owners, which is natural enough. I have the 50D and have had no problems with it at all. I spent a lot of time looking at both when I was buying and I don't ever recall any objective test saying that the 40D performed better when it came to moise. I do remember things like the 50D was just about better, but even just about better is still better :pac:. There were some people complaining that it wasn't a bigger bit better, but some people seem to have confused this with being worse...

Even ISO 3200 is useable-ish, depending on your needs i.e. you won't be able to see it as stock, but it's OK when printed.

achtungbarry

Sincere thanks to everyone who chipped in,

After a few days of research, comparing quality/noise test etc, it seems clear that the D40 outperforms the D50 where noise is concerned. The test above confirms this. I think the extra 5mp only serves to add noise and is simply a marketing tool in the megapixel race.

The 50D has some lovely new features but the bottom line is image quality so I decided to go with the D40.

Got it for 639 euro from Simply Electronics which means the money saved can go on some decent glass

Excited now

Thanks everyone for the help.

Barry

Sean@boards.ie

achtungbarry wrote: »

Sincere thanks to everyone who chipped in,

After a few days of research, comparing quality/noise test etc, it seems clear that the D40 outperforms the D50 where noise is concerned. The test above confirms this. I think the extra 5mp only serves to add noise and is simply a marketing tool in the megapixel race.

The 50D has some lovely new features but the bottom line is image quality so I decided to go with the D40.

Got it for 639 euro from Simply Electronics which means the money saved can go on some decent glass

Excited now

Thanks everyone for the help.

Barry

Nice one. I have the 40D and love it.After reading about mega pixels/sensors I chose it over the 50D. Being a "person who likes taking photos" i didn't see any value in spending the extra cash

mrboswell

Paulw wrote: »

I know someone with both 40D and 50D, and he says that the 50D is superior, mainly due to the extra clarity in the LCD and the megapixels. This gives more scope (when shooting raw) to process the image better.

As Paul was saying I use both and have done so in very varied conditions and pound for pound the 50D is better - that being said its not a massive difference except when cropping heavily. I haven't notice a problem with noise compared to the 40D.

If you were to go by the high zoom comparisons there may be something in it but if I was that worried I'd have already got a much bigger lens and the 5D MKII...