Jump to content

50D


john_g10

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 142
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I'm really surprised. If the image stabilized sensor is not true then not much has changed. Expanded ISO is a good

thing to have but we'll see what it really looks like after tests. Right now, if the IS in body is not true I see no reason

to upgrade from 40D.<br><br>

Micro AF adjustment - I don't have any problems with any of the lens.

<br>

920,000 pixel VGA LCD monitor - nice, but I wouldn't upgrade only because of LCD.

<br>

ISO 100-3200 [H=6400/12800] - first really important thing, but we'll see if it will be useful (image quality).

<br>

Face Detection - ...

<br>

9 cross type AF zones - nice but EOS 40D's AF is really good and enough for me<br><br>

EOS 40D has almost everything I need. I would think about upgrading if EOS 50D had: spot metering with active AF

point, bigger and less grainy viewfinder, useable ISO 3200, in-body IS, not visible AF points in the corners of the

focusing screen (not exaclty in the corners, just a little bit off center - it would help focusing a lot).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Still only 9 focus points? Is there any technical reason why focus points can't be added at the "rule of thirds" locations? It's impossible to use the autofocus points to make a nicely composed vertical (other than a tight headshot, maybe) of a person with the current layout of focusing points. They're too close to the center of the frame, or right on the centerline.

 

Higher iso (assuming it's good quality) is reason enough for me to upgrade. The better LCD is a step forward too: being able to judge focus on the lcd is helpful when you need to know if you nailed the shot. The current lcd screens are just too fuzzy for that.

 

But this camera better sell for a lot less than the Nikon D300, because Canon is still holding back on the autofocus capability compared to the more expensive cameras in the lineup. Any chance Canon will supply a better-designed vertical grip with this new body? One that puts the AF-ON button on the grip, to match what's on the camera body?

 

And is it too much to hope for a mirror lockup button in place of the stupid direct-print button?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I came so close to getting a 40D during the rebate period. Bob might remember my thread asking for 5D vs. 40D

sample images. An unexpected expense came up so I decided to wait. (Though the price at Amazon didn't change much

after the rebate period was over.) I guess now I'm glad I waited. Hopefully I will be able to choose between the

50D or a clearance 40D.

 

Assuming any of these rumors are true, I'm really curious about the new sensor's performance. Canon must have

made a breakthrough in S/N to be confident enough to pack 15 MP onto a cropped sensor AND boost the high ISO two

stops. I just can't imagine S/N being the same or worse yet Canon adding the higher ISO options. Maybe they're

just smoothing things over with heavy NR, but I'm hoping to see them reclaim a clear edge in sensor technology.

 

No rumor about weather sealing is a bummer. I actually care more about that than I do about having a 1D AF

module. (Though I have to confess my non-weather sealed bodies have been thoroughly abused without failure. I'm

careful to avoid condensation when moving between hot/cold environments, but rain, mist, water splashes...they've

seen it all and the worst that has happened was I had to have a shutter button replaced that was wearing out.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Unless a substabtial improvement has occured in design or fabrication process of the new sensor, the marriage between 15 million pixels and an APS-C size chip is not going to be a happy one. small pixels and small micro-lenses means worse color aberration and lack of per-pixel crispness unless the very best lenses are used. I would take the same 10 mpixel sensor with 1 stop noise improvement over a noisier 15 mpixel one.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Next to in body IS,

 

I like the new canon dslr to have a live view system like Sony's . Where the mirror dont go up during live view and not use the main sensor as focusing sensor , which tend to be slow to very slow. Instead , Sony uses another sensor placed on the prism area to allow live view and uses the usual phase detect focusing sensor . which is fast, like what we're used to.

 

I hope canon hear our cries.

 

Can someone here with authority and credibility with canon , send this thread to someone big at canon?

 

Thank you. I guess :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mars C,

 

Sounds like you want an EVIL camera that focuses quickly. Same here...

 

Live view is OK, but I see it as a steppng stone to the eventual demise of the traditional SLR. There's no need to have a clunku mirror mechanism, prism, or even a mechanical shutter if an EVF-based camera can operate with the same speed as an SLR, and I believe they will, eventually. Simpler designs, fewer moving parts, no restrictions on lens design. Yes, I know, this is the basis for the m4/3 design, but getting SLR speed might take a while.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How about a miniature LCD in place of the pentaprism that not only displays the image from the sensor at 100% coverage, but includes camera settings and live histogram info? Only thing is that there will have to be a custom setting for selecting a sound like a traditional shutter...
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ed V, thats referred to as an EVF (<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electronic_viewfinder">Wikipedia:

Electronic View

Finder</a>).

 

Generally they don't have high enough resolution to judge focusing/dof. That plus the power usage is a big

downside over optical.

 

Not to mention you don't get phase-detect AF if the light only hits the digital sensor. You're stuck with slower

contrast af instead.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"That was a joke, well sorta. what would happen?"

 

Having 2 types of IS at once will not extend the advantage to 6 stops (3+3 = 6) Assuming each have 3 stops advantage. It might make it worst. It is more desirable to use 1 type of IS in a given time in this situation.

 

Why people like myself and others here want in body IS , Is that we could use our prime lens with the advantage of having IS , because as of now , It seems impossible or impractical for canon to incorporate IS in their short to normal prime, making in body IS much easier thing to do, But due to corporate politics, Canon has not yet done so. Which is why , We here are begging canon to implement in body IS Asap.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<P><i>Having 2 types of IS at once will not extend the advantage to 6 stops (3+3 = 6) Assuming each have 3 stops advantage. It might make it worst. It is more desirable to use 1 type of IS in a given time in this situation.</i></P>

<P></P>

<P>Are you sure? I would think that being able to move both a lens group and the sensor would increase the total ability of the system to compensate for movement. Synchronizing the two might be difficult to engineer, so I'm not sure I expect to ever see it.</P>

<P></P>

<P>Still, it would be nice to at least have in body IS that simply turns off when an IS lens is attached. But it's not something I would ever leave the Canon system over.</P>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Almost double my 20D pixels. Faster FPS. I'll wait to see what the people say about the viewfinder. It can't be worse than the 20D.

More pixels = more noise on this tiny sensor, I doubt that. I would think that Canon knows better than that, their technology wizards will defeat the noise problem.

Looks like I might pick one up next spring, when the price is better and more reviews are in.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...