50d over the 60d

[anthony_alarcon]

<p>I use to shoot a lot of film about twenty years ago.....decided to get into dslr started with a used 300d it was fun....bought a new t3i and it has worked out just fine.....I made a mistake of using a 50d and the look and feel of the camera was a different world. I shoot a lot outside, the lack of seals on the t3 concerns me as well as the plastic case. I am going to purchase another camera looked at the 60d and was not impressed over the 50 These are in my price range no interest in full frame If I want to do video I will have my t3i .....so as a pure shooter I feel like the 50d is better would love to get some opinions with more time behind the eye piece than I.</p>

[mark_pierlot]

<p>I got a 50D to augment my full frame 5DII, and found it to be very capable. The 7D I have replaced it with is a little better with respect to resolution, AF capability, metering, and low light performance, but I would have been perfectly happy keeping the 50D.</p>

[JDMvW]

<p>Actually, there is a Magic Lantern hack to do RAW video on the 50D <a href="http://www.dpreview.com/articles/1973322431/canon-magic-lantern-raw-video-canon-eos-50d">link</a> ; I downloaded a version, but haven't actually tried it.</p>

<p>For what it's worth, when faced with your sort of choice a year or so ago, I finally decided to save the money and get a 50D for my APS-C shooting, just exactly as Mark did. I haven't regretted it, though I may upgrade to whatever the successor to the 7D is when it actually appears. The 50D is just swell, and it was cheap when I bought it.</p>

[phule]

<p>[[i shoot a lot outside, the lack of seals on the t3 concerns me as well as the plastic case.]]<br>

<br>

Always a good time for some fun: <br>

<a href="

<a href="

 

[eric_altherr]

<p>I've owned every xxD line camera: you can't go wrong here, but after testing them side by side for about 6 months, I went 60D and sold the 50D. If you are a studio shooter or subject to extreme conditions, the 50D is the way to go. Want superior images, low noise in a reliable, sturdy body, get the 60D. The 50D is very capable and has a few features for studio shooters that the 60D doesn't, however, I found the 60D focus and image quality just a tad better. At 400ISO and up there was a noticeable noise difference.<br>

The 60D does not have the magnesium alloy body, but still feels solid and reliable. I used 70-200mm 2.8s on both and felt confident. <br>

If you were using the dual wheel/joystick interface now (as on Canon 50D), the transition could be difficult to go to the 60D, however, the 60D has an interface that is superior but more similar to the t3i - might make the transition easier if you are jumping back and forth.<br>

I don't really shoot video, but the articulated screen has come in handy more than expected.<br>

If you can get your hands on both, its worth trying them out - the difference is more than just a few megapixels and an alloy body.</p>

 

[PuppyDigs]

<p>I went from a 50D to 60D some years back and the 60D has much better noise control. The 50D was really noisy at ISO800 and suffered extreme banding patterns in low midrange and shadows, e.g., gray clouds were horrid. With the 60D ISO 800 or 1600 are no problem. Sure there's noise but it's smoother and more grain-like, so NR plug-ins can tweak it without smearing the life out of the image. Both cameras basically have the same AF system but the 60D seemed a little more surefooted. I came to prefer the smaller and lighter form of the 60D. The only thing I missed at first was a dedicated FEC button but you can assign FEC to the set button. </p>

[Marcus Ian]

<p>As a pure shooter, the ergonomics are critical (IMO) - but only if you are shooting rapidly, or doing candid work, where you don't have time to fiddle w/ poor controls to modify your settings rapidly. In practical terms, the 60D is going to be usable for most things, and most of the time you will be able to compensate for it's shortcomings without a huge impact on your imagery.</p>

<p>Of course if you shoot a lot at higher ISOs (which you imply that you do not), the 60D has a decided advantage. While the 50D is a fine camera, by far it's weakest aspect is it's high ISO noise performance... </p>

<p>...There is one other caveat about the 50D. It's buttons, as opposed to being arranged beside the LCD, are set below it. This has a very real impact in RL. If you hang the camera by it's strap off your shoulder, or in front of you, your stomach/side is constantly hitting them - they aren't recessed enough to prevent my body from pressing my buttons ;) . Once I gripped the camera, it wasn't an issue, but, without a grip, it was a source of constant annoyance.</p>

<p>Frankly though, if I needed another camera, I'd happily shoot w/ a 50D again. I can't see myself happily shooting with the 60D.</p>

[anthony_alarcon]

<p>Thanks for the input....... I really like the feel of the 50 and the cost works out to my advantage as well. I think as a pure shooter it will be a good choice. Then I can save my money skip the 60 and 70 and get the next step whatever it will be. By then I may just go full frame. I played with a 60 did not like the lock on the dial and the dial inside the dial just seemed awkward. They are using the same software and,I think the 50 is the last mid level tank... The 60 feels just like my 600 like plastic.. other than the high ISO it seems all good.<br>

Thanks again</p>

[neill_farmer2]

<p>An additional difference is that the 50D has AFMA, the 60D does not. If you're shooting telephoto or at wide apertures the 50D allows lenses to be tuned.</p>