Canon EOS 50D review

Ross,

I like the pose of the raven, it's like a portrait, I'd get rid of the upper dark stripe in the background. From a sharpness

point of view it looks oversharpened to me with halo artifacts, also looks like there is some CA in the form of purple

and cyan casts in the highlighs...any ways here is an ISO 400 shot taken with a 20D (100% crop) which on paper

only has half as many pixels<div></div>

like I said earlier, its a web sized photo 800 x 533 the crop is 800 x 533 from the center not sharpened, what i guess I'm trying to say here is, the 50D will make a good portrait camera, but I think it has a hard time resoving mass detail at a distance (think landscape) things like leafs and small rocks in a scree field, it tends to blow individual leafs and rocks ,smear the detail, I would like to hear from other lanscape photog's on thier experience with the 50D.

Ross

Has anyone noticed that DP Review's resolution numbers for the XSi/450D are actually a tiny bit higher than for the

50D? I wasn't expecting that! Everyone's saying the 50D is only barely better than the 40D, but DP Review says

the 450D is definitely a little better than the 40D (not talking about high ISO; just resolution). I'm not saying there's a

significant difference between the 450D and 50D; the numbers are practically tied. It just seems like the 50D could

have taken that 12.2 MP sensor from the 450D and improved on it to get the same resolution and better high ISO

performance than that 15 MP sensor. But really...this is all pointless technobable. :)

Pointless technobabble indeed! :) Ross, can you post an example of your 50D's smeariness? Did you see this on your 40D/30D/20D?

Gerry, not today as I'm at work, if I have some time will try this weekend.

Ross

<b>Nevermore!</b><p>Sorry, had to get in a plug for cousin Edgar, what with it being Halloween, and all!<p>Seriously, and with great irony, it seems as though the Canon APS sensor camera with the best IQ is now the Rebel XSi/450D. Sometimes, less <i>is</i> more.<p>Michael J Hoffman

Ah, this is all gilding on the lily, compared to my lowly 10D. If anyone finds their 50D or 5D mkII lacking, I'll happily swap you for my 10D... go on, you know you want to... :-)

 

Seriously, though, I found the 5D versus 20D comparison further up quite interesting - whilst there are differences they're hardly what I'd call significant, and it does make me pause before continuing down the 5D mkII route as planned...

So what is the consensus? Let say I have an XTI and am about to upgrade. Money is not a big problem.

 

Should I ho 40D or 50D? My favorite type of photo is Birds and wildlife.

Claude, I think the general gist of what's being said here is that the 40D may actually be the better purchase, taking into consideration price and such.

John

 

Check out the luminous landscape review, pitching Canon G10 vs Phase One back.

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/kidding.shtml

 

In good conditions of light and contrast most cameras will do just fine at small image size (at or less than 8x10). The difference begin to appear when you have difficult conditions (light, contrast, tonal range and gradation), would like to post-process, and/or print large sized output.

 

Calude

 

If money is no object, 50D is the way to go. Your images will be at least as good as 40D, sometimes better, and you will get the benefit of newer body features (AF microadjustment is worth the price difference alone) and an improved jpeg engine.

I have gone from a 20d to 50d. This is a no brainer. Resolution aside, I would have thought that the advantage

of the 50d's sensor (given the density of pixels) might have is the ability to push the file further. Could be

that the price you pay is slight increase in noise. I also think that the file is generally more neutral

straight from the camera.. I too shoot RAW, but my frame of reference is the normative noise change from the 20

vs 50d ,.....,so its better. Add to this greater speed, DIGIC 4, great screen,..., I'm happy What is the real

functional difference between the 40 and 50d? Really. More post processing? If you have a 40d then be happy

the upgrade wasn't significant since you probably have had it less than a year.

I usually find the DPreview test worthwhile but require some translation. When I looked at the initial dynamic range values for the 50D I was surprised at how low the range was for unprocessed RAW files. However the processed files in ACR seemed have a wide range so I then looked back at the ACR processed values from other cameras and was surprised to see there had been an increase from the 30D and 40D. Indeed the only camera better at the moment at a glance is the Nikon D3 with it's huge pixels. Assuming the test was performed properly on all the cameras this would suggest there is an improvement in Dynamic range which usually means some improvement in noise. I suspect that to get a high ISO reduction in noise compared to a 40D you must trade off some of this resolution gain by using noise reduction software. Below is a chart I derived from the ACR best processed data from DP review for various files.

 

Camera Dyn. range (stops)

30D 9.6

40D 9.9

50D 10.5

5D 9.3

D300 9.0

D3 11.3

 

 

My own tests with RAW converters suggest ACR is quite good at recovering over exposure and shadow detail but there are some which are slightly better (UFRaw, Raw Therapee), though I have not tested these with a 50D file yet.

 

Another anomaly in the DPreview tests is that side by side image crop comparisons do not appear to allow for the sensor form factor 1.6 vs 1.5. Nevertheless the posted crops of images appear to favor the D300 from a resolution point of view. But my look at the resolution test chart images as well as the testers evaluation of the test chart give higher resolution numbers to the 50D. This suggests something went wrong in the tests somewhere.

 

A close look at test charts published on the Imaging Resource website showed 50D resolution to be noticeably better than the 30D and close to the 1Ds MkIII.

 

The real downside I see to the 50D is the huge file size (I would like the choice of 12bit vs 14bit), need for better autofocus and flash X sync speed of 1\500 or better. In terms of noise and resolution for a given sensor size I suspect we are close to the maximum the technology will allow.

 

http://www.kennewcombe.com

Yeah, but just photoshop the shortcomings out. Problem solved!

<P>

;)

Daniel, do you think I could Photoshop the $1,400 off my credit card statement?

From all the pictures and crops of the Dpreview 50D article, the 50D pictures all seem to lack sharpness. That to me seems like the 15MP is not even resolving those images at all. Or could it be a focusing problem with the 50mm lens on their review? Maybe they need to micro adjust the focus for those images? Even the XSi review images are sharper than the 50D, whats up with that?

Gary, I can Photoshop that off your statement for you. Just send me your statement and your credit card (and I'll need a current 'credit available' status from you when I get them). hehe

I've owned the D30,10D,20D,30D,40D and now the 50D. I've only had it for a few days. I have done a few tests and I am

impressed with the results. I turned off all noise reduction and shot a series of shots using a 100 macro and took the

same shot of a watch face in dim indoor lighting. I shot in raw at 100, 200, 400, 800,1600,3200,6400, and 12800 iso.

Very low noise in all images until you got 6400 and 12800 though even these would be very usable for prints if necessary

to get an image.

 

Another factor that seems to be quite improved vs. the 40D is auto focus for moving subjects and low light subjects. For

birds in flight the AF is far superior to the 40D, with much quicker acquisition of AF and ability to track the subject. I also get a

much higher percentage of keepers. The low light AF is amazingly good with the ability to achieve AF in very, very dim

light.

 

Frankly the quality of the LCD and the ability to check sharpness by zooming in is night and day vs. the 40D. The LCD

alone is almost worth the price differential.

 

As far as sharpness I see excellent sharpness in the images and excellent image quality. I would have no reservations in recommending

an up grade to the 50D to anyone who needs or desires the added features. I bought the camera after reading the DPR review and am very

glad I didn't pay too much attention to the review. To me the proof is in the output and I am very happy with the results.

The 50D suffers for the same problem as all 1.6 crop cameras before it. The sensor is slightly less then 40% the size of full frame. It is almost the size of APS film. As a result, it is grainier and has a greater amount of noise then full frame.

 

Yes, you get a lens crop with the smaller 1.6 sensor, that appears to increase focal length. But I do not find image quality is better then full frame for the same subjects. Even for birding.

 

The 1.3 crop of the 1D mark III is a much better way to get more focal length through cropping. The 1.3 sensor size is not so small as to introduce grain & noise. But is much more expensive option.

 

Personally, I will stick with the 5D & purchase a 5D mark II next year.

To each their own, enjoy your 50D if it works for you.

Canon 50D advertisments all over this site.

"Canon 50D can take you there". Whre is there?

40D?, 50D? Go for 5D MkII? Keep my 20D...Nikon or Canon? Pentax, Hasselblad?... NOOOOOO

 

There is in you. The photographer, the mood, the composition, the lighting, the artist, and the passion.. ok, the glass

helps. All this will take you there. The Body is the least to worry. So, back to create pictures and less time in this

forums.

As I dropped my Nikon D300 off for it's third trip to Nikon service, I had a chance to shoot a few frames with a D40 and a D50. Inspecting the results on my screen at home they both undoubtedly produce very high quality results, but OH that interface! Would I ever be able to get used to the control layout? Everything just seems backwards to a long time Nikon user. Can I assume the camera can be set up to adjust shutter speed with the rear control dial?

I should have said "40D and 50D" instead of "D40 and D50". Gotta learn the Canon lingo. See, everything really is backwards. Just for the record I've owned Canons in the past: F1, FTB's (a few), AT1, A1, some early AF Canons including the RT, and a Sureshot.

In my original post I also asked about thoughts on dynamic range. I am surprised -- actually frustrated -- that things don't improve more here with each new model but maybe I shouldn't be. It doesn't sell to new buyers and it's probably a very complicated technical issue, so much so that it might need new sensor technology.

 

To Sanford: I have issues with Canon's layout too and would prefer more buttons in better places. As far as I understand it, the control wheel cannot be programmed to change shutter speed or aperture on any camera "below" the 1D range. Which makes it rather underused on the 10-50D and 5D models.

Anders, If you wnat more dynamic range you need a larger sensor then 1.6 crop cameras

full frame of at least a 1.3 crop 1D

Paul: I was asking about the differences between 40D and 50D. DR hasn't improved, it seems, and I wanted to know whether others could confirm that. We'll hopefully know for sure as more reviews are published.

As far as I understand, ISO 3200 images from 50D are usable with NR set to high. But ISO 6400 and 12800 are good for nothing.