Nice shots, but was the test really a fair comparison? the 1DIII gets the 400DO hand held and the 50D gets the 600 mounted on a tripod? I know it was just a real world 'test', but I'd love to see them side by side using the same lens, both tripod mounted.
M Vers wrote:
Nice shots, but was the test really a fair comparison? the 1DIII gets the 400DO hand held and the 50D gets the 600 mounted on a tripod? I know it was just a real world 'test', but I'd love to see them side by side using the same lens, both tripod mounted.
Thanks for the look, and yes it is an unfair comparison, there is no doubt that MK3 is much better in any respect except the sheer number of pixels. But, for a $1090 camera with such a negative comments, you'll agree it has done a remarkable job.
Garen, what is your take on the 50D's shadow noise and overall IQ in less than ideal lighting conditions?
The lighting conditions in which you shot your excellent BIF pics were very good. I think the negative comments on the 50D's performance aren't related to low ISO and good lighting conditions, but rather to high ISO and performance in less than ideal lighting conditions.
BTW It still amazes me how much detail one can capture with "only" 10MP's
M Vers wrote:
Nice shots, but was the test really a fair comparison? the 1DIII gets the 400DO hand held and the 50D gets the 600 mounted on a tripod? I know it was just a real world 'test', but I'd love to see them side by side using the same lens, both tripod mounted.
Also, the ID Mark III is at ISO 400 and the 50D is at ISO 200. But considering how good the 1D Mark III shots are, even "crippled", tells you the 1D Mark III is a far better camera over-all.
I'm fully aware what the OP said--the term "crude" is an overstatement and using 'test' directly after it doesn't actually make it one. In fact its testing each body, but not against one another since they share not even one variable aside for subject matter. Now a "crude test" would be using the same lens in the same manner in real world situations...that's what a "crude test" used as a comparison is IMO. Hope that clarifies things.
Garen, nice updated shots with the 1DIII+600 Can't wait to get mine (1DIII+500/4)
Garen, I gotta say, in the right hands, one can really get some serious use out of that resolution on the 50D. Nicely done. This is one of the areas where the crop cameras really shine- when it comes to things that are just so tiny and you need to do some heavy cropping.
M Vers wrote:
I'm fully aware what the OP said--the term "crude" is an overstatement and using 'test' directly after it doesn't actually make it one. In fact its testing each body, but not against one another since they share not even one variable aside for subject matter. Now a "crude test" would be using the same lens in the same manner in real world situations...that's what a "crude test" used as a comparison is IMO. Hope that clarifies things.
Wow, excuse my crude misinterpretation. You certainly have clarified things
Daan B wrote:
Garen, what is your take on the 50D's shadow noise and overall IQ in less than ideal lighting conditions?
The lighting conditions in which you shot your excellent BIF pics were very good. I think the negative comments on the 50D's performance aren't related to low ISO and good lighting conditions, but rather to high ISO and performance in less than ideal lighting conditions.
BTW It still amazes me how much detail one can capture with "only" 10MP's
Thanks Daan for viewing and commenting, overall I would say it is very similar to 1DMKII up to 1600 ISO and better at 3200. I was also concern about per pixel sharpness issue that was brought up in DPR review and in my case it turns out to be a blessing. 50D has very good per pixel sharpness. Bear in mind I'm using my 50D mainly on 600 IS or 500 IS lenses on a tripod with wimberly head. I also tried it with 300 2.8 IS, 400DO IS and 135L and it had an excellent per pixel sharpness.
David Tognazzi wrote:
Also, the ID Mark III is at ISO 400 and the 50D is at ISO 200. But considering how good the 1D Mark III shots are, even "crippled", tells you the 1D Mark III is a far better camera over-all.
Hi David, thanks for the look, and I concur MK3 is in a different league, my intention was not to say 50D is similar or better than MK3, it was just to show that 50D is a capable camera and for under 1100 dollars and very good lens no one can top it today.
orangefirefish wrote:
Garen, I gotta say, in the right hands, one can really get some serious use out of that resolution on the 50D. Nicely done. This is one of the areas where the crop cameras really shine- when it comes to things that are just so tiny and you need to do some heavy cropping.
I am very glad to hear some "good news" on the 50D Garen. Your posts are outstanding! I bought a 50D for backup to my sMKIII and am anxious to try it on my 300f2.8.
Dan
GAREN wrote:
The 300 2.8 makes any camera looks like a champ , but seriously you see some serious detail with that lens and on 50D it is awesome.
Garen
I agree. I have played around with my 50D with 300F2.8 IS + 1.4x and 2x extenders...sometimes even stacked. I have been pleasantly surprised by the results.
I have not tried stacking or anything with my 1D3 or 5D2 yet. Would be interested to see how those handle it too.
Wish I owned a 500 or 600.. Someday when I can justify it I guess.
apdieb wrote:
I agree. I have played around with my 50D with 300F2.8 IS + 1.4x and 2x extenders...sometimes even stacked. I have been pleasantly surprised by the results.
I have not tried stacking or anything with my 1D3 or 5D2 yet. Would be interested to see how those handle it too.
Wish I owned a 500 or 600.. Someday when I can justify it I guess.
I agree and that some day will be soon you'll find a way to justify it.
Can't wait to get mine (1DIII+500/4) 
, but seriously you see some serious detail with that lens and on 50D it is awesome.