Canon 50D

Okay, explain the "MS Live deal" to me and how it saved you $200.

Microsoft's live.com was running a promotion where if you clicked through to eBay through their site, used Buy It Now, and paid with PayPal, you could claim a certain % cashback to your PayPal account after 60 days. It went as high as 30% at one point, but it has been gone since early December. :(
 
Okay, explain the "MS Live deal" to me and how it saved you $200.
That's over, now, but you got back up to 30% ($200 max) on purchases under certain conditions using Live Search.

I've used the 20D for nearly 4 years, now. Two days ago I got my new 50D. On so many levels it's a MUCH better camera than my 20D (shutter noise, focus, color, detail). Do I wish it had better noise performance--yes. Canon made a marketing decision to have more pixels. I wish they had made a 12mp sensor instead of a 15 and included better noise performance.

That being said, the 50D is a marvelous camera. Here'a a shot I did today. I used a Canon 70-200 f4L IS. I shot this at 200mm, 1/40 sec, 1600 iso. I shot in RAW used noise reduction in Adobe Camera Raw, but did nothing after that.

Here's the full image, but drastically reduced.
3181357752_c72275b644_o.jpg


Now, here's a 100% crop from this image.
3180528171_1ac5e28856_o.jpg


Again, this was a 200mm 1/40th sec., hand-held shot. While there is a touch of softness, I haven't applied sharpening yet. Also, I did use the Cashback deal to upgrade all my lenses. Unless you have a really awful camera good lenses will show themselves in the images you take.
 
That's over, now, but you got back up to 30% ($200 max) on purchases under certain conditions using Live Search.

I've used the 20D for nearly 4 years, now. Two days ago I got my new 50D. On so many levels it's a MUCH better camera than my 20D (shutter noise, focus, color, detail). Do I wish it had better noise performance--yes. Canon made a marketing decision to have more pixels. I wish they had made a 12mp sensor instead of a 15 and included better noise performance.

That being said, the 50D is a marvelous camera. Here'a a shot I did today. I used a Canon 70-200 f4L IS. I shot this at 200mm, 1/40 sec, 1600 iso. I shot in RAW used noise reduction in Adobe Camera Raw, but did nothing after that.

Here's the full image, but drastically reduced.
3181357752_c72275b644_o.jpg


Now, here's a 100% crop from this image.
3180528171_1ac5e28856_o.jpg


Again, this was a 200mm 1/40th sec., hand-held shot. While there is a touch of softness, I haven't applied sharpening yet. Also, I did use the Cashback deal to upgrade all my lenses. Unless you have a really awful camera good lenses will show themselves in the images you take.

do you have any taken above 1600? i read they ( 40 and 50) are basically the same for their common iso ( up to 3200)but the 50's 2 higher isos are bad...would like to see for myself if you have something .
 
do you have any taken above 1600? i read they ( 40 and 50) are basically the same for their common iso ( up to 3200)but the 50's 2 higher isos are bad...would like to see for myself if you have something .
3181518810_2d2b4fd44b_o.jpg

ISO 12800, 1/20, f/3.5

Here's my nephew (blurred his face because I don't know if he'd appreciate me splashing him on the internet) in a shot taken in a very dark room. It was only lit by the TV and a light filtered through another room. This photo was processed with the highest noise reduction in Adobe Camera Raw, and then run through Neat Image noise reduction. The 50D's highest two ISOs (6400 & 12800) are really not for general use. This photo is not too bad. I would only use these ISOs for very dark photos were a tripod or flash is not accepted or available. Saying that, though, I got a photo where I could have never taken one before. I haven't played with this much (the high ISOs), but I honestly don't see where I would use them anymore than maybe 1-2% percent of my photos. I am very satisfied with the noise levels up to 3200. Remember, a 15MP crop sensor has a LOT of image and it holds the noise levels impressively low. As far as detail--from a half block away with my 70-200mm, I took a shot at ISO 100 at 200mm, and I could read the month tab on a license plate very clearly. The month tab was just a blob with my 8MP 20D. If you crop (me) or big blow ups (me, me), this is nothing to sneeze at.

Remember, however, your mileage may very. I've read reviews from "meh" to "fabulous" about the 50D. Coming from a 20D, I'm closer to the "fabulous."

EDIT: Here's a 100% crop from the image above. It's hard to see the noise in the full image, so I thought I should give a bigger view. It's not just noise in the the higher ISOs--it's also "waves" of false color. You can see it (purpleish) in the chair fabric. There are a few more tricks to work on this (sampling down, for one) to get a better result. But for what it is, it's not bad.
3180724229_9a97bda338_o.jpg
 

That's over, now, but you got back up to 30% ($200 max) on purchases under certain conditions using Live Search.

I've used the 20D for nearly 4 years, now. Two days ago I got my new 50D. On so many levels it's a MUCH better camera than my 20D (shutter noise, focus, color, detail). Do I wish it had better noise performance--yes. Canon made a marketing decision to have more pixels. I wish they had made a 12mp sensor instead of a 15 and included better noise performance.

That being said, the 50D is a marvelous camera. Here'a a shot I did today. I used a Canon 70-200 f4L IS. I shot this at 200mm, 1/40 sec, 1600 iso. I shot in RAW used noise reduction in Adobe Camera Raw, but did nothing after that.

Here's the full image, but drastically reduced.
3181357752_c72275b644_o.jpg


Now, here's a 100% crop from this image.
3180528171_1ac5e28856_o.jpg


Again, this was a 200mm 1/40th sec., hand-held shot. While there is a touch of softness, I haven't applied sharpening yet. Also, I did use the Cashback deal to upgrade all my lenses. Unless you have a really awful camera good lenses will show themselves in the images you take.

Thanks! When you say "drastically reduced" are you stating that the posted image is not the original high res? If not, can you post it? I love to be able to zoom in on it on my monitor.
 
Thanks! When you say "drastically reduced" are you stating that the posted image is not the original high res? If not, can you post it? I love to be able to zoom in on it on my monitor.
Just the smaller image is reduced to give the full size cut-out a reference point. If you want the full size image, PM me your email, and I'll send it to you. It's kinda large. At a normal internet screen resolution of 72dpi, the photo would be about 66x44 inches (at 300dpi, it's still about 10.5x16). So, it's really too big to post here.
 
What everyone above said. Sorry, I should have stated that live deal seems to be over. People keep waiting, but it has been dead for 3 weeks now.

At B&H the 50d is $1070, the 40d is $800. So, a $270 price difference now after the instant rebates.
 
What everyone above said. Sorry, I should have stated that live deal seems to be over. People keep waiting, but it has been dead for 3 weeks now.

At B&H the 50d is $1070, the 40d is $800. So, a $270 price difference now after the instant rebates.
I bought my 50D from B&H--a great company to deal with on the internet. One thing, too. I heard the rebates will come off sometime this month, and that the yen is pretty strong against the dollar. There is a chance the price will go up.

Not a warning, I'm just sayin'....
 
If you want to pixel peep all day long or study the numbers all day long between the 40D and 50D....you'll always find differences. Having owned a 40D for the past 2 years and played my friend's 50D, there isn't really much difference. The ISO is pretty much the same. If you want to justify the $270+ difference....just assume the 50D is better. Canon tweaked the higher than 3200 ISO settings to better compete with Nikon. Personally, its a waste of time. Everyone knows the Nikon numbers are skewed with way too much softening at the upper end. Seriously, who would shoot ISO 16500 anyways? If you don't have a tripod, don't bother trying it. Anything above 3200 ISO is going to get noise.

Save yourself the grief and buy the newest technology. If its a mere $300 difference, I'd do it just to remain ahead on the curve. BTW, I like the 50D LCD better. The face detection is kinda neat. Too bad I've only used live view maybe 5 times in the past 2 years.
 
I've had the same dilemma before I purchased my 40D just before Christmas. I decided I would rather save more money for lenses then get the couple of features on the 50D. I also wasn't relishing trying to save the RAW files from the 50D on my computer and backup. I was tempted by the higher resolution LCD and micro lens adjustments. But I usually just zoom in on my photos to check for focus issues anyways and that usually seems sufficient for me.

I've been happy with my 40D so far other than the fact it seems I need new addons and could not use the ones I had for my Rebel XT, such as the remote shutter release and batteries. At least my 580EX flash works with it and pretty well to boot.
 
I also wasn't relishing trying to save the RAW files from the 50D on my computer and backup.

I've been happy with my 40D so far other than the fact it seems I need new addons and could not use the ones I had for my Rebel XT, such as the remote shutter release and batteries. At least my 580EX flash works with it and pretty well to boot.
Couple of comments. With a 15MP sensor, you'd better have as much RAM as possible. I use Vista x64 so I can use 8gigs of ram. When open on the computer, an image from a 50D is about 43mb. Then you start to "play" with it, and the ram usage goes up.

Next, many accessories for Canon DSLRs can be found very cheaply on Ebay. I bought a very good remote shutter release for $15, extra batteries for a $10 each, and a tripod ring for my 70-200 lens (the Canon ring was a whopping $150!--the one I found on Ebay was $6! and works great). The trick is to look at their sales numbers and feedback. If someone has 10,000 sales and 97% approval, I wouldn't worry about spending $20 with them. However, if they have 7 sales, then...
 
3181518810_2d2b4fd44b_o.jpg

ISO 12800, 1/20, f/3.5

Here's my nephew (blurred his face because I don't know if he'd appreciate me splashing him on the internet) in a shot taken in a very dark room. It was only lit by the TV and a light filtered through another room. This photo was processed with the highest noise reduction in Adobe Camera Raw, and then run through Neat Image noise reduction. The 50D's highest two ISOs (6400 & 12800) are really not for general use. This photo is not too bad. I would only use these ISOs for very dark photos were a tripod or flash is not accepted or available. Saying that, though, I got a photo where I could have never taken one before. I haven't played with this much (the high ISOs), but I honestly don't see where I would use them anymore than maybe 1-2% percent of my photos. I am very satisfied with the noise levels up to 3200. Remember, a 15MP crop sensor has a LOT of image and it holds the noise levels impressively low. As far as detail--from a half block away with my 70-200mm, I took a shot at ISO 100 at 200mm, and I could read the month tab on a license plate very clearly. The month tab was just a blob with my 8MP 20D. If you crop (me) or big blow ups (me, me), this is nothing to sneeze at.

Remember, however, your mileage may very. I've read reviews from "meh" to "fabulous" about the 50D. Coming from a 20D, I'm closer to the "fabulous."

EDIT: Here's a 100% crop from the image above. It's hard to see the noise in the full image, so I thought I should give a bigger view. It's not just noise in the the higher ISOs--it's also "waves" of false color. You can see it (purpleish) in the chair fabric. There are a few more tricks to work on this (sampling down, for one) to get a better result. But for what it is, it's not bad.
3180724229_9a97bda338_o.jpg

thanks for the high iso photo, i agree it is better than not getting a photo if it's a once in a lifetime type shot but not really "usable" in general which is pretty much the same as the reviews i read
 
Thanks again, just thought I would give everybody an update. I finally made my decision and placed an order today. Here's the list.

  • Canon 50D with 28-135 kit lens for $1,180. Kit lens will be sold hopefully for $250-300 thus reducing the body to about $930-980.
  • Canon 17-55 2.8 IS
  • Canon 580 EX II
  • Sandisk III 16gb

Thanks again for all the advice, now if I can just wait for it to all come in!
 
I am looking to upgrade my Canon XTi to the Canon 50d and looking to buy from B&H and can't decide which lens should I get with it?

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/con...&A=search&Q=*&bhs=t&Go.x=18&Go.y=16&Go=submit

I am trying to decide between the one with the 17-85mm lens, or the one with 28-135mm lens. There is also the one with the 18-200mm, but I am not planning on spending that much.

I have the Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 that I used all the time with the XTi, but I find that it is just not wide enough sometimes. If I buy the camera with 28-135 lens, I am thinking of buying the Tamron 17-50/f2.8 lens. Is that a good lens?

Any advice would be appreciated. Thanks!
 
If you buy the 28-135 kit and the Tamron 17-50, you're spending about $1725. If you get the 18-200 kit you're spending1790. That's only about $65 more and you won't be switching lenses. One other option I'll throw out is to get the Body by itself and then add the new Tamron 18-270. It's getting some pretty good reviews, especially with their new stabilization. I've got the 40D and am about to order this lens myself as my "all-around", "leave on the camera" lens. I may also order the 17-50 you mentioned (down the road a bit) as a faster lens for low light situations.
 
why would you buy the 28-135 when you have a similar lens, for the IS? if so i'd go with a newer lens. i have the 28-135 ( a good copy, some really stink) but you can't use the is in that lens to pan(it's one of if not the first IS lenses). so if you want IS i'd go with something newer. and having a f2.8 i don't know you could get much more leeway with the 28-135 since it's f5.6 over pretty much anything past 60mm. i would just get the body then the 17-50 or maybe even an ultra wide ie the 10-20 canon is supposed to be good, (haven't really looked at them lately so not sure about comparable prices), and then get something with more reach, ie 70-200 or 70-300.
 
So, I've gone from debating lenses to now a new camera body as well. I've decided on the 24--70 f/2.8 lens. I'm now thinking about a new body, the Canon 50D. Any opinons.
 
My DH bought me the 50D for Christmas :cloud9:. I had the Digital Rebel, so this was quite a leap in machinery for me. I have just started tinkering with it--the weather has been so gloomy that I was struggling to find things to photograph. I have been quite happy with the pictures that I have taken lately. They seem much sharper than the ones with my other camera (that is now gathering dust). The menus are pretty simple to work. I really like the larger LCD screen. With the Rebel, I would look at a photo and think it was focused, only to see it full size and realize that it was slightly off. I also like the gridlines for leveling help....you can only turn them on in live view, which I'm not crazy about. It is habit for me to put the camera up to my eye, rather than hold it out at arms length to see what I'm photographing.
 


Disney Vacation Planning. Free. Done for You.
Our Authorized Disney Vacation Planners are here to provide personalized, expert advice, answer every question, and uncover the best discounts. Let Dreams Unlimited Travel take care of all the details, so you can sit back, relax, and enjoy a stress-free vacation.
Start Your Disney Vacation
Disney EarMarked Producer






DIS Facebook DIS youtube DIS Instagram DIS Pinterest DIS Tiktok DIS Twitter

Add as a preferred source on Google

Back
Top Bottom