Maybe you should now take a look at the new 50D. Indications from some quarters are that the ISO may be better than the 5D, the AF is better than the 40D, and it's got twice the pixels of the MKII which will help you out a little with the "reach", so to speak, with sports, insofar as allowing for closer crops. Check out this thread: https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/681040
hfillmore wrote:
Maybe you should now take a look at the new 50D. Indications from some quarters are that the ISO may be better than the 5D, the AF is better than the 40D, and it's got twice the pixels of the MKII which will help you out a little with the "reach", so to speak, with sports, insofar as allowing for closer crops. Check out this thread: https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/681040
Good point. Only reason I didn't say it was that I did not want to state the obvious. Or something like that... ARGH, why didn't I think of it?
Go check out that 50D bad boy and report back. Or look at the 40D, prices are sure to plummet on those now. Good thing I'm not selling mine
I'll tell ya what....... I usually use a MKIII with a 600 for surfing shots, but for the super long distance stuff I sometimes prefer the 40D for it's additional 1.6 crop factor "reach", although I still like the files better from the MKIII. I believe I'll trade the 40D for the 50 for the super long stuff, because that extra five meg will give me a lot better crop ability. And from what I'm reading, I wouldn't be surprised if the files from the 50 look as good as the MKIII. There have also been some indications that the focusing speed on the 50 is a lot faster than the 40, as per the link I noted above.
