Reading mode: Light Dark

First photoshoot w/ my 50D

Go to last post
W

webgeek

Forum Enthusiast
Messages
323
Reaction score
96
Location
Ho Chi Minh City (Saigon), VN
Here's an album of my very first day shoot with the new 50D. I traded my 40D in to get the 50D, having to pay the $500 difference. I got a lot of usage out of my 40D so the $500 I have to pay to upgrade was a no-brainer for me. On top of that, I get (in my opinion) more bells-and-whistle that I noticed is lacking from the 40D. For those that are thinking about upgrading from the 40D to the 50D, don't even think about it. I am so much happy with my decision. When I have the 40D, I always wanted to use my 5D instead, now after one trip with the 50D I find it a joy and I use it 50/50 along with my 5D. I will have more albums from Angkor Wat up after I process the image, but just glancing the 50D files, I am amazed. The IQ and high pixel counts are noticeable. The AF is much faster and better. Oh, something I noticed right away, the shutter button is much better and softer. On the 40D, I have to press much harder to get the camera to shoot. The 50D shutter is even better than my 5D, I hope the new 5D Mark II have the same shutter as the 50D. The screen, what can I say, is totally a joy. Shooting the same pictures at the same moment and looking at the 50D and 5D screen is night-and-day. Thanks Canon for finally a real LCD that match up with the Nikons. The pictures quality with the prime lens is incredibly sharp right out of the camera. The metering is spot on, I noticed this in my post-processing and I have processed about 3000+ images. There is not much needed to be done from the RAW file. Overall, I love the handling of the 50D, everything seems to work a bit better than my 40D. The 50D is now much closer to my 3 years-old 5D and am happy and confident to use it as a second body to the 5D.

http://www.peterphamphotography.com/gallery/6534727_ZRiXa#415523640_HWovR

--
http://www.peterphamphotography.com
 
very happy about the result and bought a second unit a week later.....
--
No hesitation when capturing moments.

Helping other is doing good for yourself, and treating the earth a little better will help the next generation.
http://moments.zenfolio.com

 
The thing that amazes me is that the 40d owners that actually upgrade to the 50d rave on and on about how much better the 50d is. The 40d owners who do not upgrade rant and rave here that the 50d is a ripoff with poorer image quality and lousy ISO performance at 1600. I suspect they either can't afford the 50d or they are too cheap to upgrade so they are trying to justify their decision. They are only fooling themselves, not the people who actually own a 50d. My new 50d sure beats the stuffings out of my 20d.
 
Condor99 said:
The thing that amazes me is that the 40d owners that actually upgrade
to the 50d rave on and on about how much better the 50d is. The 40d
owners who do not upgrade rant and rave here that the 50d is a ripoff
with poorer image quality and lousy ISO performance at 1600. I
suspect they either can't afford the 50d or they are too cheap to
upgrade so they are trying to justify their decision. They are only
fooling themselves, not the people who actually own a 50d. My new 50d
sure beats the stuffings out of my 20d.
Click to expand...
Both raving and rating the pros and cons of upgrading to a newer model of ANY product may be expressions to justify ones decision. That doesn't matter as long as you take that into consideration when you read user forums like DP.

But who am I, I still have my loyal 10D. :)
 
Condor99 said:
The thing that amazes me is that the 40d owners that actually upgrade
to the 50d rave on and on about how much better the 50d is. The 40d
owners who do not upgrade rant and rave here that the 50d is a ripoff
with poorer image quality and lousy ISO performance at 1600. I
suspect they either can't afford the 50d or they are too cheap to
upgrade so they are trying to justify their decision. They are only
fooling themselves, not the people who actually own a 50d. My new 50d
sure beats the stuffings out of my 20d.
Click to expand...
The 50D is a better camera than the 40D by a margin that makes the purchase of a 40D somewhat silly at this point. As time goes on this will become accepted fact.

--
Thomas (Lord Nikon!)

 
ThomasMiller said:
The 50D is a better camera than the 40D by a margin that makes the
purchase of a 40D somewhat silly at this point. As time goes on this
will become accepted fact.
Click to expand...
Really!?!?

I purchased a used 20D soon after the 30D was released. Why? 'cause it was used and cheaper and met my needs. Months after the 40D came out and after I had my used 20D for 2 years, is when I upgraded.

The purchase of a 40D at this point is not a silly decision. Like buying last year's car model is not a silly decision. If it's cheaper and gets the job done, how is it silly???

My 40D is an excellent camera. And given the prices of the 40D today, I would buy it again w/o hesitation.
 
In all my years of using Canon Digital equipment; from the 3.3 megapixel D30, upgrade to D60, upgrade to 20D, upgrade to 40D and now 50D. I was never so much happy with the upgrade, I just thought I share it somewhere. I have never done any rave for any product on any website ever. So something about this 50D that just tickle me, I guess because I can feel good and confidnet about it when I shoot side-by-side with my trusty 5D.

For those that justify, there could be many reason. For me, the equipment that does what I need is what matter most, and this time 50D deliver. This is a keeper for me for at least 2 years and that is good especially at the rate digital camera is moving.

--
http://www.peterphamphotography.com
 
Out of the hundreds of posts that have negative comments of 50D I only remember one that was from a owner of both cameras. He did not say 50D is bad just 40D is good enough for him. Some of the 50D haters (maybe a little too strong wording but some do show that emotion) eventually decide they want a 50D too.
Condor99 said:
The thing that amazes me is that the 40d owners that actually upgrade
to the 50d rave on and on about how much better the 50d is. The 40d
owners who do not upgrade rant and rave here that the 50d is a ripoff
with poorer image quality and lousy ISO performance at 1600. I
suspect they either can't afford the 50d or they are too cheap to
upgrade so they are trying to justify their decision. They are only
fooling themselves, not the people who actually own a 50d. My new 50d
sure beats the stuffings out of my 20d.
Click to expand...
 
Silverwind said:
Silverwind said:
The 50D is a better camera than the 40D by a margin that makes the
purchase of a 40D somewhat silly at this point. As time goes on this
will become accepted fact.
Click to expand...
Really!?!?

I purchased a used 20D soon after the 30D was released. Why? 'cause
it was used and cheaper and met my needs. Months after the 40D came
out and after I had my used 20D for 2 years, is when I upgraded.

The purchase of a 40D at this point is not a silly decision. Like
buying last year's car model is not a silly decision. If it's
cheaper and gets the job done, how is it silly???
Click to expand...
For a few hundred dollars more you get:

1) Higher resolution at lower ISOs

2) FAR better LCD, which has a real impact on work since you can see shots properly.
3) AF fine tune for lenses. This is a terrific feature worth the premium alone.
4) Better weather sealing.
5) More advanced focus in live view.

The savings with the 40D just don't equal the losses. I won't buy last year's car if this year's model gets better MPG or has better brakes.
As I like to say, it rarely pays not to pay.

--
Thomas (Lord Nikon!)

 
--But I remember as a young lad here in the States some 50 years ago we had a dump a few miles from where I lived. It was not an uncommon sight to see families going through the garbage looking for items they could use. Nice shots by the way
Tanglefoot47
Tulalip Wa.
 
ThomasMiller said:
Silverwind said:
ThomasMiller said:
The 50D is a better camera than the 40D by a margin that makes the
purchase of a 40D somewhat silly at this point. As time goes on this
will become accepted fact.
Click to expand...
Really!?!?

I purchased a used 20D soon after the 30D was released. Why? 'cause
it was used and cheaper and met my needs. Months after the 40D came
out and after I had my used 20D for 2 years, is when I upgraded.

The purchase of a 40D at this point is not a silly decision. Like
buying last year's car model is not a silly decision. If it's
cheaper and gets the job done, how is it silly???
Click to expand...
For a few hundred dollars more you get:

1) Higher resolution at lower ISOs
2) FAR better LCD, which has a real impact on work since you can see
shots properly.
3) AF fine tune for lenses. This is a terrific feature worth the
premium alone.
4) Better weather sealing.
5) More advanced focus in live view.

The savings with the 40D just don't equal the losses. I won't buy
last year's car if this year's model gets better MPG or has better
brakes.
As I like to say, it rarely pays not to pay.
\
Click to expand...
I'm not doubting the features they gave it or what type of camera it is. I am saying the 40D purchase is not a silly purchase. For some, it's a better purchase. For others it's not.
 
What makes me laugh about the IQ statements made is that in real world shots the difference will be largely irrelevent unless you are printing super huge A2 sizes and above at high ISO's.

I still regularly use my 350D, and sell many A3 size photographs. The IQ difference is lost By the time you have framed and mounted the photos on a wall and viewed them at the appropriate distance.
 
I'm not doubting the features they gave it or what type of camera it is. I am saying the 40D purchase is not a silly purchase. For some, it's a better purchase. For others it's not.> > >

Beyond the financial savings, the 40D offers no advantages over the 50D. That's the long and short of it. I may have been silly in calling the purchase of a 40D SILLY, but the 50D is certainly a worthy value.

--
Thomas (Lord Nikon!)

 
ThomasMiller said:
For a few hundred dollars more you get:

1) Higher resolution at lower ISOs
Click to expand...
Well, I guess only at lower ISO, because it's clearly worse at higher ISO.

It seems to me that there are a of 50d fanboys here touting how great this camera supposedly is, in spite of the fact that Phil's tests clearly show that it's a step backwards in image quality from the 40d. Until someone posts some legitimate tests to show otherwise, I'm taking Phil at his word. He has no reason to skew the tests to make the camera look bad. And you people who basically are posting here that Phil Askey is a liar, are making fools of yourselves.

I saw the review on another site that pretty much assumed the 50d image quality was better, but the samples that were shown seemed to show the opposite.

At DPReview, you get reviews with legitimate tests that are done under controled situations where results can be accurately measured. I don't see that at many other sites.

The people posting soft (if not blurry), overcontrasted images of bald eagles with visible sharpening halos around them (an another thread here) in an attempt to prove the 50d has better IQ than the 40d, really make me laugh. I think it further demonstrates the opposite. When someone else wrote about people posting and touting the camera and attempt to justify their purchase, this is exactly what came to mind. Now, I'm sure the 50d can do better than those examples, but you get my point. Anyone who thinks those are good quality images, would not convince many people.
ThomasMiller said:
2) FAR better LCD, which has a real impact on work since you can see
shots properly.
Click to expand...
TRUE, The new LCD is long overdue, and a welcome improvement.
ThomasMiller said:
3) AF fine tune for lenses. This is a terrific feature worth the
premium alone.
Click to expand...
Another great feature to have.
ThomasMiller said:
4) Better weather sealing.
Click to expand...
I question this one. A camera is either weather sealed, or it's not, and the 50d is NOT. Phil says in the review that he has been told vebally that "the 50D's body offers better environmental sealing than the EOS 40D thanks to a slightly different construction and tighter seals." This is very vague, and it should not lead anyone to believe that the 50d is actually 'weather sealed' like the 1-Series bodies are. If this were a weather sealed body, the specs would say so, and they don't.
ThomasMiller said:
5) More advanced focus in live view.
Click to expand...
Maybe so, but I'll wait to hear from some folks who have actually used both cameras.

Probably like many other readers here, I was disappointed to see the poor image quality of the 50d in Phil's review. I only use the 40d for a backup camera because my primary body is a Mk2N, which has better IQ and far more features than any of hte xxD series cameras. But I thought about the possibility of replacing the 40d with a 50d. But that said, there's no way I'd touch it after reading the review. Having the nice new LCD would be nice, but it's picture quality that we buy cameras for. I'll be passing on the 50d.
--

Gallery at: http://www.pbase.com/tim32225

 
Well, I guess only at lower ISO, because it's clearly worse at higher ISO.

It seems to me that there are a of 50d fanboys here touting how great this camera supposedly is, in spite of the fact that Phil's tests clearly show that it's a step backwards in image quality from the 40d. Until someone posts some legitimate tests to show otherwise, I'm taking Phil at his word. He has no reason to skew the tests to make the camera look bad. And you people who basically are posting here that Phil Askey is a liar, are making fools of yourselves.> > >

Phil is not a liar, but his test is flawed. That has been pointed out intelligently by others.

I will say this though. Your comments amount to trolling. There have been PLENTY of sharp shots posted from the 50D and according to Phil's own test the difference in sharpness is slight. So your comments about soft shots is utterly ridiculous.

I have used the 40D, 50D and 5D. I also own a D700 and D90 and some of the best glass around. I know what sharp is and the 50D is very sharp when coupled with top tier glass and used correctly.

The 50D is a superior camera. I have no agenda for saying so since I shoot Nikon gear. I couldn't be more objective. If the 40D could out-resolve the 50D I'd say as much. It can't. In addition to that the 50D will rise above one badly conducted review and that will be that. Most of the 40D owners will slowly come around to wanting one given time to understand how important it's pro feature set is.

--
Thomas (Lord Nikon!)

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top