Okay - call me stupid. Christmas came early at my house and hubby got me the 50D which is an upgrade from the XTI. Between the weather and working, I haven't had much time to go out and shoot, but what I've discovered I love.
Here's the stupid part, I see all these posts about firmware and upgrades. I have been able to figure out for firmware I have 3-1.0.1. and in going through some of these posts, it appears there is an upgrade somewhere. I've gone through the posts and sure it's there someplace and can't find it, but how do you update the firmware? It appears this is the thing to do, but I have no clue as to how to do this. Does the camera have to go back to Canon or is it something that's downloaded and "installed"? Any help or insight is appreciated.
I believe you have to put the file itself in the root of the Card (as in the top above all the other folders within the card). Then fidgit with the settings on the camera to load the file up. Its probably different with the xxD cameras (I own an XT).
Just go to Canons site and there should be a tutorial on how to do it
just trying to get the general feeling of noise from the in cam jpgs with all NR turned off it appears as if viewed at 100% as is:
using the same manual exposure and WB K:
50D vs 40 vs 20D
all 3 deliver different colors, surprising about the 40D and 50D since they had the same picture style set. 50D def looked truest but since my 2800K choice was a bit random not sure it means that much.
20D images looked noticeably brighter and 50D somewhat brighter than the 40D ones taken at the same ISO1600 and using same f/stop and shutter speed so either tone curves or more likely sensor sensitivity differences per named ISO (in fact it has already been shown the older canons like the 20D-30D,5D,1dmkii had a good 1/3 more sensitivity per named ISO than the standard/nikons and that the 40D and markiiis were same as standard/nikon). 50D seems to have a curious new standard being about half between the old 20D/30D/5D/1dmkII/ etc. ratings and the less sensitive 40D,1dmkiii, nikon cams.
i did not control for the fact that the 20d seemed to be getting at least 1/3 stop more light and the 50D at least 1/6 stop more light than the 40D so keep that in mind!!
anyway at ISO1600 viewed at 100% 20D def looked cleanest, then 40D and then 50D worst BUT resizing the 50D down to 40D (or if you were to print them to the same size and stand the same distance from both and view) made it look similar (maybe 1/4 worse to 1/4 better prob same to 1/4better) to the 40D noise and dpwn to 20D size it looked maybe 0-1/4 worse but of course recall the labelled ISO let the 20D get a bit more light also not sure how the in cam sharpning of that engine works compared to the other ones.
50D image had tons more detail than the 20D one and somewhat more than the 40D on if much less dramatically so than compared to the 20D.
all the feautres of the 50D are same or better than the 40D and 20D
the lcd is way better, much higher res, much better conrast ratio and color accuracy; adds contrast AF, MF adjustment
the 50D/40D have bigger and brighter VF than the 20D/30D, much better UI, more fps, larger buffer, shorter shutter lag, less mirror blackout time, faster AF (tentatively it is more touchy and does anywhere from noticeably better to radically worse depending upon the type of light, that's mostly based on the 40D havent tested 50 for sports yet)
anyway assuming that without looking at raw yet that I can still manage to get the general gist of the actual sensor performance by looking at the jpgs and past experience with jpgs and raws from canon (and it is dangerous since jpg engines can do all sorts of things even though i had all NR off and settings neutral) it seems like since one can resample (or view as equivalent printed/projeted size) and then the noise performance becomes more or less equal while at the same time the detail is a little bit to radically greater and the features are the same to better. there is likely no reason to fear the 15MP sensor or anything about the 50D (although i do have to look at raw, check AF more and ai servo still and outdoor colors). There doesn't appear as if there would be any reason to pick a 20D or 40D over the 50D other than price.
if you only shoot jpg and refuse to use raw, then 50D is even more clearly the best
photonanax2 wrote:
Okay - call me stupid. Christmas came early at my house and hubby got me the 50D which is an upgrade from the XTI. Between the weather and working, I haven't had much time to go out and shoot, but what I've discovered I love.
Here's the stupid part, I see all these posts about firmware and upgrades. I have been able to figure out for firmware I have 3-1.0.1. and in going through some of these posts, it appears there is an upgrade somewhere. I've gone through the posts and sure it's there someplace and can't find it, but how do you update the firmware? It appears this is the thing to do, but I have no clue as to how to do this. Does the camera have to go back to Canon or is it something that's downloaded and "installed"? Any help or insight is appreciated. ...Show more →
I don't believe FW 1.0.2 is available for download yet. It is just installed on some cameras out there from the factory. But yes, it is user upgradeable.
apdieb wrote:
I don't believe FW 1.0.2 is available for download yet. It is just installed on some cameras out there from the factory. But yes, it is user upgradeable.
There is a FW 1.0.3 floating around as well... I think I heard through the grapevine that this update will be available at the end of the month. Still, two FW updates in one month and three different FW's floating around at the same time is a bit strange IMHO.
i think they were at ISO200
they were a little underexposed since i wasn't really caring about that for these and the sky tricked the cam a bit, at the least they certainlty were not exposed to the right
Please see my earlier post on this same topic - Page 41, #24.
I called Canon to check on the Firmware 1.0.2 that was supposed to improve the image quality. The person I spoke to said yes there was an update for Firmware 1.0.3 that would help with image quality. This included the updates in FW 1.0.2.
I want the update now! The problem is that this update is not available from the Canon website and the FW 1.0.3 can only be installed on the camera if it is shipped back to Canon – a 7-10 day process in addition to the shipping time. They say it will be posted on the Canon web-site but they will not say when. If it is available at the factory why not have it on the website now?
I did swab the contact points on the lens mount and in the battery compartment with alcohol to make sure they were clean without any factory oil residue. I don't know if this helped my focus issues yet. At this point I like a lot of the new features the 50D has but I was taking better images with my 40D. Maybe I got a lemon! Good luck. Steve W
alameda wrote:
Please see my earlier post on this same topic - Page 41, #24.
I called Canon to check on the Firmware 1.0.2 that was supposed to improve the image quality. The person I spoke to said yes there was an update for Firmware 1.0.3 that would help with image quality. This included the updates in FW 1.0.2.
I want the update now! The problem is that this update is not available from the Canon website and the FW 1.0.3 can only be installed on the camera if it is shipped back to Canon – a 7-10 day process in addition to the shipping time. They say it will be posted on the Canon web-site but they will not say when. If it is available at the factory why not have it on the website now?
I did swab the contact points on the lens mount and in the battery compartment with alcohol to make sure they were clean without any factory oil residue. I don't know if this helped my focus issues yet. At this point I like a lot of the new features the 50D has but I was taking better images with my 40D. Maybe I got a lemon! Good luck. Steve W...Show more →
When you say that you were getting better images from the 40D, are you only talking about a AF issue?
When you say that you were getting better images from the 40D, are you only talking about a AF issue?
I am not a pixel peeper nor do I test this and that to check everything on my equipment - if it works, it works and it should work well. I used a 400 L and a 100-400 L on both the 40D and the 50D and I got more keepers with the 40D. I don't have the time to test one against the other so I have to go by my end results. I used the 50D, 400 L at ISO 400, AV, f8 and I had AF issues on some of my shots. I switched to the 40D - same setup and light and did not have the same focus issues. I am impressed with the new features of the 50 and I did notice the noise appeared less of a problem but I am not happy with the AF on the 50. One of the posters indicated that he had better results with his unit the next day he used it. Another person said to clean the contact points - which I did and I have not had time to see if that helped. Others have indicated the updated firmware will make a difference. I am trying to decide about shipping the brand new camera back to Canon or waiting to see if they get their collective "act" together and get the firmware posted on the website. At this point I am not happy but hell, like the other guy - it might improve tomorrow but I doubt It.
Steve W
alameda wrote:
When you say that you were getting better images from the 40D, are you only talking about a AF issue?
I am not a pixel peeper nor do I test this and that to check everything on my equipment - if it works, it works and it should work well. I used a 400 L and a 100-400 L on both the 40D and the 50D and I got more keepers with the 40D. I don't have the time to test one against the other so I have to go by my end results. I used the 50D, 400 L at ISO 400, AV, f8 and I had AF issues on some of my shots. I switched to the 40D - same setup and light and did not have the same focus issues. I am impressed with the new features of the 50 and I did notice the noise appeared less of a problem but I am not happy with the AF on the 50. One of the posters indicated that he had better results with his unit the next day he used it. Another person said to clean the contact points - which I did and I have not had time to see if that helped. Others have indicated the updated firmware will make a difference. I am trying to decide about shipping the brand new camera back to Canon or waiting to see if they get their collective "act" together and get the firmware posted on the website. At this point I am not happy but hell, like the other guy - it might improve tomorrow but I doubt It.
Steve W...Show more →
i found my 40D to be tempermental one day the focus was not bad at all the next day terrible
my 20D seemed way more consistent in how it acted day to day or lighting type to lighting type (other than once it got pretty dim then it would start tailing off).
have to yet to figure out what is what, but im almost thinking the 40D and perhaps 50D too are very, very sensitive to lighting differences and can perform admirably to hideously depending.
anyway i can't say much about 50D yet, just those 2 days so far
next week i hope to shoot a couple night and one day soccer game and see what's up.
currently i am stunned by DPP showing relatively similar per image noise between the two at all ISOs while ACR shows a shocking 1 stop advantage at low ISO for the 40D and 1/2 stop advantage for the 40D at high ISO. why the discrepancy? who is bugged or cheating? Does acr maybe use their new algorithm only on the 50D and it sticks for noise performance (i noticed i could only use Adobe 4.6 on the 50D but a variety of choices for the 40D and i tired Adobe 4.4 and Adobe Standard Beta)? Did canon accidentally leave NR permanentaly on for the 50D? what's the deal?
the light collecting chart seems to show per image the 40D and 50D the same so unless the read noise is much worse with the 50D, and maybe it is, it seems ACR has some bug or the new system stinks.
considering gapless technology i'm surprised the photon light efficiency collecting was listed the same as for the MkIII's and not better and also surprised that it didn't appear to deliver a solid 1/4 stop better noise than the 40D. anyway, assuming the DPP story is the real deal then it's nothing to worry about, didnt get the improvement but nothing lost either and you do gain resolution.
Gochugogi wrote:
I guess you've never actually used a 10D. ISO 800 noise looks like grains of sand even at low screen rez such as 1024 x 768. Besides what idiot views normally images at pixel level? You can't even tell what the hell you took a picture of.
Well, the thing is, if someone is buying the 50D to use as a camera for stock photography, then the inspectors at the agencies are the "idiots" who view the images at pixel level.
Granted, hopefully anyone submitting to an agency already knows at least the basics of Photoshop and have cleaned up the images, but it's best to have the cleanest image possible to begin with, as over-photoshopping it will cause it to get rejected by the agencies as well.
There were good and bad copies of the 10D though - I still have mine, and it did an excellent job at iso 800, whereas other people I know who had one weren't able to crank out stuff quite as clean. I guess I lucked out on my copy.
alameda wrote:
Please see my earlier post on this same topic - Page 41, #24.
I called Canon to check on the Firmware 1.0.2 that was supposed to improve the image quality. The person I spoke to said yes there was an update for Firmware 1.0.3 that would help with image quality. This included the updates in FW 1.0.2.
Does FW 1.0.3 updates the JPEG engine (and therefore updates IQ with JPEG's) or the RAW data
skibum5 wrote:
currently i am stunned by DPP showing relatively similar per image noise between the two at all ISOs while ACR shows a shocking 1 stop advantage at low ISO for the 40D and 1/2 stop advantage for the 40D at high ISO. why the discrepancy? who is bugged or cheating? Does acr maybe use their new algorithm only on the 50D and it sticks for noise performance (i noticed i could only use Adobe 4.6 on the 50D but a variety of choices for the 40D and i tired Adobe 4.4 and Adobe Standard Beta)? Did canon accidentally leave NR permanentaly on for the 50D? what's the deal?...Show more →
Did you have NR disabled in DPP? At default import values DPP applies some NR to all 50D RAW files and not to 40D files. If NR is turned off, I think noise levels between DPP and ACR are similair.
Daan B wrote:
Does FW 1.0.3 updates the JPEG engine (and therefore updates IQ with JPEG's) or the RAW data
I would guess a call to Canon is in order. By the way I have found that the nice folks taking the calls need to be prompted to check on the facts they are giving out. Steve W
I too do not dwell on pixel level peeping but I have been looking at lots of 50D files @ 100% today doing an AF fine tuning run across all my glass.
I have DPP opening them @ 100% and I am comparing different AF fine tuning settings against each other.
I have both the in cam and DPP NR settings off. ALO off. Shooting RAW in neutral PS.
What I have been seeing different than what my 40D files used to do in previous versions of DPP is when a 40D file first opened @ 100% in earlier DPP versions it looked bad for a second then rendered or snapped into focus.
Today because I am paying close attention to details in pixel level images of the 50D in the latest DPP version it's the opposite.
And instead of two steps, soft then focused the 50D files first appear in a blocky formation, then focus, then the final stage is softer.
So when the image first appears it is better or sharper looking than after it renders. It looks like noise control is being applied. It had me go back into my camera and check all my noise settings. they were as I had set them up.
So I look at them in CS4. They just look better to me in CS4 ACR 5.1. I open it in Bridge and let ACR do it's thing with the default sharpness slider going to 25.
Something is up in Denmark at my house. My 50D images look better in CS4. Keep in mind I am not running a noise torture test on them either.
