How rugged EOS 50D is... Impressions....

<p>This question is about strength of the body shell.<br>

First, let me name some bodies to compare: Nikon FM2, FM3a, Nikon F100, F5, F4.<br>

Yestrday I took EOS 50D and examined it. It does not feel like metal, when I slightly knock on the surface it sounded loudly - like plastic. (Exactly like F90, D90, etc...) Above mentioned Nikons feel cool of metal chunks, and sound more quiet and sometimes with a low metal chime (prism area of F100). I am an engineer and consider this magnesium alloy incoparable with above-mentioned bodies - more an advertising slogan. Command discs turn with bad fixations and feel cheap. Battery cover is flimsy. I have never took EOS-1N in my hands - what do you think?</p>

<p>Don't know specifically about 50D, but I have EOS 1n and 5D2, previously had a 5D. In my view 5D equal to EOS 1n. Of course mode dial inherently vulnerable compared to all button press on 1n (like my old T90), but never had mechanical problem with any Canon camera and I do not treat them with too much respect. (AT1, AE1, 2 x T90, EOS 1n, 5D, 5D2)</p>

<p>BTW, Leica S2 has mode/shutter speed dial!</p>

 

<p>I have the Canon 5D (same magnesium alloy) which I have inadvertently subjected to 'slightly knocking' it while slipping over on rocks. I kept hold of the camera while falling and as a result hit the bare rock with the camera then landed on it. Both myself and the camera had some scratches and bumps as a result but the body itself is fine and the camera works exactly as before.</p>

<p>I am an engineer too and reckon a magnesium alloy casting is an ideal use of material for this application being both light and strong. The battery / CF card doors are a bit flimsy but then so were some bis on the old FM2 etc.</p>

<p>So I suggest you don't worry about how strong it is but take some pictures instead.:-)</p>

<p>I've had a 50D for quite awhile. It seems quite solid to me. Mine is still like new despite the inevitable knocks. The battery cover is fine. I did worry about the rubber strips that cover the sockets on one side, but after a lot of use, they are still like new also.</p>

<p>I think it is probably lighter than my old FTb, but I consider that a real plus. That's what advances in materials science are for. It is nothing like a plastic-bodied Rebel, which I owned for awhile.</p>

<p>I don't recall seeing any complaints on this site about problems arising from the construction of the xxD bodies, so I don't think my experience is unusual.</p>

<p>It is a mid-range camera with a mid-range build. The 50D I use seems durable enough to me. They use very good plastic.<br>

As a side note, I wish Canon would build a 1 series body without the integrated vertical grip along the lines of the 1V. If they ever make a 3D, I hope it is this.</p>

<p>Ruslan, one of the topics that interests/amuses me on this list is dropped/banged cameras. I'm amazed just how sturdy modern cameras are. With some regularity, someone will post about how they dropped their camera 3 or 4 feet to the concrete. The camera almost always still works, and the poster will want to know what to look for when checking it out. I remember once reading where someone tried to break the fall with his foot and ended up punting his camera, which rolled several feet after it landed. Lots of scratches, but otherwise no damage. I've read of a fall from atop a 7 ft step ladder onto concrete. It still worked. These are mostly magnesium alloy bodies, mostly Canon (as I don't read on the Nikon forum). If anything, the polycarbonate bodies tend to fare better than the magnesium alloy, because they can deform more without fracturing. You can probably google an account of a Canon rebel series camera with 18-55 IS kit lens (VERY flimsy construction) that survived a 3000 ft freefall into a muddy field when it became detached from a skydiver's helmet.</p>

<p>Although I don't read much about Nikon cameras, as I said, I've crossed with a few stories. I thought Nikon bodies would hold up as well as Canon, but a small percentage of them seem to die when hitting concrete. Even so, most of them survive just fine.</p>

<p>The most interesting comparison I see is between polycarbonate and magnesium alloy construction. All (or almost all) of the damage seems to be suffered by magnesium alloy cameras, and the damage is to the case/shell. For instance one 1-series camera took a very hard bang to a rock, and the front body plate (with the lens mount) cracked open. The camera was easily repaired, though.</p>

<p>When cameras are dropped, it's usually the lens that takes the punishment. Lens mounts are often broken, and filter threads are often bent. I've read of one or two plastic lenses falling apart, but most seem to survive. Stories of metal-bodied lenses with bent/jammed focus/zoom rings, broken mounts, and bent filter threads are far more commonplace.</p>

<p>My personal experience with all of these cameras is good. I own a plastic-bodied Elan 7n, and metal-bodied 1n, 5D, and 40D cameras. I also used to own a metal-bodied 10D. All these cameras have held up very well for me (gentle/light pro use). I've never tried dropping any of my gear! ;-) However, the controls stand up well to heavy use. The shutter button on my 1n creaks very subtly, but that's all.</p>

<p>Of course let any of these cameras get wet, and you're asking for trouble (maybe apart from the 1n).</p>

>>> ... what do you think?

 

I still occasionally use my less expensive Canon XSi/450D; also with a plastic outer shell. Zero problems

with durability getting banged around. It's the right material and solution for its use. Even if I were shooting

in Kandahar I'd still prefer the ruggedness of today's cameras over those of the past that were heavier and

not as reliable. Speaking as an engineer; caring more about performance, and less about camera nostalgia.

<p>I'm an engineer also (mechanical) and have experience with designing Mg into products. Nothing beats its stiffnes/weight ratio. It is not intended to be a marketing gimmick, though it ends up being prominently mentioned since it sounds hi-tech. It's also used in hand-held industrial computers that are guaranteed to survive 6-foot drops to concrete. Magnesium dust is highly flammable and only specialized manufacturing facilities can produce it making it expensive, so to include it as purely a marketing ploy would make silly business sense.</p>

<p>The true rigid parts of any SLR camera should be the mirror box, shutter and film/sensor assamblies and the prism/focusing screen assambly. The fact that the outer shell (the body) feels "flimsy" may or may not be important at all. </p>

<p>And that "plastic" thing... I wonder how many years will it take for people to realize that modern composite materials are often light years ahead of metals, including exotics, in terms of durability, strength, etc. Not to mention that "plastic" is often way more expensive than the most exotic metals/alloys for a reason. Big chunks of everything, at least in civilized world, (think cars, planes!) are made out of composite materials and nobody in his right engineering mind wants the return of "metal."</p>

<p>High end camera bodies are indeed made of exotic alloys (that's why there are $500 DSLRs and $8000 DSLRs...) often for purely marketing purposes, but something tells me that high-end exotic composite materials, could be used as well, even in Canon 1D/1Ds bodies, but that probably would cost more than exotic alloys and - even thought such body would very likely be more durable and stronger than the one made of "metal" - customers/reviewers ignorance ("plastic...") would take its toll.</p>

<p>I used to own 50D and it was pretty ragged. It actually fell once pretty hard on a rug (not concrete) and there was no damages at all. But of course if you need something to hit the nails with then 50D would not work very well. In that case you will need 1D/Ds series LOL</p>

<p>My 50D gets some pretty (reasonable) rough treatment from use. Not abused, just used alot!<br>

The same went for my Elan 7e, EOS 3, and their predecessors the Canon AT-1, AE-1, and A-1. The A-1 probably got dropped more times, or at least in the hand that supported my falling while doing Wildlife photography trekking up rocky slopes and sliding down snow covered hills. My EOS 3 and 7e has gotten some of the same treatment, . . . And I can't wait till this Fall and Winter seasons where my 50D will also share in the punishment!</p>

<p>I don't think you will have anything to worry about with "reasonable" care.<br>

What I do worry about the most is taking the equipment outdoors into the humid, hot summer heat after it's set in the air conditioned house. Thats the biggest danger, regardless of what material the body is made of! And, I really haven't had any problems with that, . . . I leave my stuff in the camera bag until it comes up to temperature. I have fogged up the external LCD, Viewfinder or front element on the lens a couple of times which concerned me, but haven't had any problems!</p>

<blockquote>

<p>The true rigid parts of any SLR camera should be the mirror box, shutter and film/sensor assamblies and the prism/focusing screen assambly.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Add to that, a "d" SLR's unique components: PCB assembly with ball-grid-array IC chips that are very sensitive to shock and twisting--components not normally found in pre-autofocus film SLR's.</p>

<p>1. The fm2, fm3a, f100 are not rugged. The F2, F3, F4, F5 are rugged (wonder why?). The 50D is not rugged either. But why compare film cameras with digital cameras? why compare top level F4, F5 with low (not lowest) level 30D, 40D, 50D?</p>

<p>2. Rugged body is not always a good thing</p>

<p>3. I find the wheels on 50D are much easier, smoother, and nicer to use than the wheels of the F5 and D1. 50D also feels better in my hands than the F5</p>

<p>4. However, I prefer the body of 20D, 30D better than 40D, 50D</p>

<p>As with anything you have to get the proper tool for the job. Different requirements call for different tools.</p>

<p>http://www.hammersource.com/index.html?gclid=CP6Zqd3ow6MCFRBTagodkWFreg</p>

<p><em>Yestrday I took EOS 50D and examined it. It does not feel like metal, when I slightly knock on the surface it sounded loudly - like plastic.</em></p>

<p>You're not touching bare metal because it's covered in various materials for further protection and better grip/handling (at the minimum paint, but plenty of plastic and rubber). The shell is stainless steel and magnesium alloy. http://web.canon.jp/imaging/eosd/eos50d/03.html</p>

<p><em>I am an engineer and consider this magnesium alloy incoparable with above-mentioned bodies - more an advertising slogan. </em></p>

<p>Sorry, but you're unqualified to make any assessments in this area. You don't know what you're talking about in terms of materials (see Ed V.'s comment), nor can you discern anything of value from touching or tapping the body. You haven't seen a disassembled 50D to judge its internal structure. And you haven't subjected one to any real tests of durability. Your opinion here is similar to the naive opinions people form based merely on weight. ("This camera is heavier, it must be more durable.") If you didn't have a long posting history here I would have just called "troll".</p>

<p><em>Command discs turn with bad fixations and feel cheap. Battery cover is flimsy. I have never took EOS-1N in my hands - what do you think?</em></p>

<p>The battery cover on the xxD series always seemed flimsy, but I've never seen or heard of a broken one. The top left mode dial seemed to loosen up with each no model and was one of the things Canon addressed in the 7D. (I'm not sure why that happened as the xxD models progressed because the 10D dial, for example, was tight.)</p>

<p>I've given xxD bodies some pretty rough treatment and they handled it fine. Light rain, water spray, short drops, tens of thousands of frames shot, etc. They're not 1 series bodies or 7D's, but they are very reliable.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Yestrday I took EOS 50D and examined it. It does not feel like metal, when I slightly knock on the surface it sounded loudly - like plastic.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I guess you've never owned a magnesium camera! The idea behind using this material is to have the strength and rigidity of metal but the lightness of plastic. I loved my old FM but it's basically a brick. I'd take magnesium or titanium camera and day of the week over zinc coated brass and day of the weeK!.<br /><br /></p>

 

<p><em>The true rigid parts of any SLR camera should be the mirror box, shutter and film/sensor assamblies and the prism/focusing screen assambly.</em><br>

What about lens mount area rigidity to have heavy lenses attached?<br>

Ed, titanium alloys have higher tensile strenght. Period. (both FM2 and esp. FM2/T are <strong>very </strong>tough)<br>

"<em>The thickness of FM2 castings walls is never less than 1.4mm, the portion that attachess to the bayonet mount is 2mm thick" - taken from FM2 brochure (the perfectionist's Nikon, page 13) Tensile strength is 33.5 kg/mm.<em>(the perfectionist's Nikon, page 13)</em><br /></em><br>

<em>Sorry, but you're unqualified to make any assessments in this area. You don't know what you're talking about in terms of materials (see Ed V.'s comment), nor can you discern anything of value from touching or tapping the body. You haven't seen a disassembled 50D to judge its internal structure. And you haven't subjected one to any real tests of durability. </em><br>

Puppy Face, Daniel, I have not owned, but I do know metalurgy - don't teach me in this area. <br>

I tell you about thickness of external walls, I do know that Nikon F 100 gives just another feel, and another sound - like die-cast cap of a reductor gear-box, if you please. Neither does 50 D nor the old A1. If you know the thickness of the walls versus ones of FM2 - say that.</p>

 

 

<p>Get over it Ruslan, the Nikon F and it's old school construction is never coming back and I'm glad. Rant 'n rail all you want but composites and magnesium replaced the die cast folded and drilled metal build decades ago. The Nikon F was about as comfortable to shoot with as a brick.</p>

<p>Return to class and study the basics: cameras are for creating images, not for for fondling, stroking or tapping. Serious photographers prefer their camera to be light, strong and comfortable. Yes, we want a grip molded to the shape of our hands and with rubber padding for a comfortable and sure grip. We don't wanna tote no friggen gearbox or choke our fingers a square rectangle of zinc plated folded steel and brass. No thanks.</p>

<p>If you are refering to ruggedness meaning that you can shoot in all type of weather conditions (snow, dust, rain, humidity, heat) then the older Non-Digital cameras can be considered more rugged.</p>

<p>I see, understand you, P.F., and I respect Canon for its products, it was arisen by curiosity and desire to know. I just supposed that the thikness of the walls is too much thin (in regards of a prosumer camera, as it is often "classified"), and wondered if the some small deformations would not occure because of heavy, bulky lenses. That is all. Thank you. </p>

<p>"and wondered if the some small deformations would not occure because of heavy, bulky lenses. That is all. Thank you."<br>

That's too paranoid, I've never heard nor read anyone complaining their 50d flexing due to the thinness of the casing, Contributing to non rigidity of the body, Which then results in compromised durability and image quality due to variation of the distance between the lens and the sensor, Never. Even in my own experience with 350d, Which is made with plastic outer shell. The lens mount is directly and mechanically connected to the inner structure of the camera, And so are most components.</p>

<p>The Canon 50D use the same magnesium alloy in its body as the 5D, 7D and higher Canon models. Granted the design is older than some of the newer cameras (7D and 5D mkII). The 50D is considered a prosumer camera, designed with a professional photographers needs for durable build and abilities at a price and ease of use that avid amateurs can afford.<br>

This camera will last you a very long time, and definitely outlast such as the Rebel models</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>...titanium alloys have higher tensile strenght. Period.</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>Tensile strength is just one attribute of a material. You also need to consider weight, cost, availability and manufacturability. Right now, Mg is the best option for durable electronic products.</p>

<p>You'd have to be a lot stronger than an 800LB gorilla to flex the "thin" magnesium walls of the 50D! The main weak flexible part is the CF door as it is plastic with a metal hinge and backplate. Normally you squeeze the front grip area with your fingers and the back with your thumb. However, some photogs enjoy pressing on the CF door to see if they can get it to flex or squeak. I've been unsuccessful but some guys work out more than me.</p>

<p>Unless you are throwing a 50D around like a football I don't think there is any point in conflabberating about 50D toughness , I couple of my 50D's have fallen considerable distances and one was kicked by someone and went flying through the air to land about 15 feet away , the bodies worked fine afterwards and only suffered barely noticable scuffs , the lenses had to be repaired though . </p>