How about the AF being (according to the swedish tester) faster and more accurate than his 1d and 1ds (mark II and III)? Is that not worth anything? How the AF works must surely be more important than whining about the number of points...? Or is it most important to make insubstantial claims about a product you have never used beacause you're an asshat that never will get to preview cameras?
I have said it before: features or image quality that's the question? What's giving you more EOSfun?
Haha, well right now more EOSfun would be a 300 or a 400mm lens for my Mk IIn
My 30D still seems to make do as well. Features surely are gimicks to me, i need raw power and if the camera can deliver then i'm sold, if not then i work with what i already have!
I can't wait for the end of September it will be my first Photokina in the 8 years i've been living near Koln.
The last time (40D) I had to the temerity to bring this up on FM, they jumped all over me for not being a purist or something (or maybe just for using the N word) but... does anyone know if Canon did anything with AEB for this version? Can't tell from the web site. I really like the way you can bracket lots with the Nikon bodies, great for HDR.
I got my 40D just before the rebates ended. Seeing the price of the 50D, I think that Canon has done a great job with the camera, but I don't regret my purchase either.
I would love the new LCD and the higher ISO, but 15mp is more than my needs. Upgrading to 10mp, I find myself filling my CF cards way faster than before at full resolution raw. 15mp would not only fill my CF cards, but also my hard drive before I could even blink.
It's nice to know that this cam is available and that Canon is accelerating their development time to try and match Nikon's releases, but until my clients say they need more resolution, the 40D will still suit me more than adequately.
This camera is the perfect upgrade for bird photography. I have been using the 1Ds3 for small songbirds, but being full frame, I need to be at close to MFD in a blind to fill the frame @ 840mm. The large mega pixels do however, allow for great cropping lattitude.
With this camera, I will still have a ton a pixels for cropping but can back up from the subject considerably farther, allowing the birds to be less timid when taking my perches. Yeah, it's still the same 9 pt AF array, but to me I only use the center point or one of the immediate one's surrounding the center point for composition needs. I am hoping the DIGIC 4 can help the servo predictive AF perform better than that on the 40D. The high iso perfromance from the test shots I have seen blows the 40D away badly...another great thing for bird photography. That said, I put my pre-order into Canoga Camera and have thrown my hardly used 40D up on the 4-sale block for cheap.
terhorst wrote:
The last time (40D) I had to the temerity to bring this up on FM, they jumped all over me for not being a purist or something (or maybe just for using the N word) but... does anyone know if Canon did anything with AEB for this version? Can't tell from the web site. I really like the way you can bracket lots with the Nikon bodies, great for HDR.
I think it is the same as the 40D, still only +/-2EV for exposure or flash. It is like custom auto-ISO, these seem to be only softawre issue, so why not include them (instead of the new CA mode which seems useless)?
Fred Relaix wrote:
I think it is the same as the 40D, still only +/-2EV for exposure or flash. It is like custom auto-ISO, these seem to be only softawre issue, so why not include them (instead of the new CA mode which seems useless)?
Canon is always conservative. +/-2EV is definitely not enough, and lots of the new functions are just firmware based. Nikon, on the other hand, is much more innovative. Maybe Canon should fire some of their offciers, just like Nikon did before.
I honestly think one of the best features about the 50D is the 7.1MP sRAW. Being able to shoot in a still very high quality RAW format at a still high resolution, but not the space hogging files of a 15MB image will be wonderful when you are running low on card space, or if you are shooting events that don't need extreme resolution. It should also make the high ISO noise even less apparent out of camera. (Though honestly, for me, my 30D's high ISO is brilliant...I've got 10x15" prints at ISO 1600 that you can't see the noise at all, and ISO 3200 even looks fine. I've got an 8x10 at ISO3200 pushed a stop (to 6400), and still looks fine (yes, you can see the grain, but it's not even that noticeable in a print.)
rockitman wrote:
This camera is the perfect upgrade for bird photography.
That was my first thought when I saw the list of features.
I did think it so bad that I almost wonder whether I should buy one for wildlife photography, if it turns out as good as it looks (even though, I have become a die-hard 5D user for all other kinds of photography --in fact, even for wildlife, I use my 5D; it is better than my 10D for that too).
A 50D + a 300/2.8 + a 1.4x or a 2x could be a wonderful wildlife kit!
A 50D + a 300/2.8 + a 1.4x or a 2x could be a wonderful wildlife kit!
Exactly what I was thinking. The 50D has the pixel density to make the 300/2.8 a true long lens. This kit is much lighter and inexpensive than the big alternative.
Andy Wilson wrote:
Well time will tell if there is a significant improvement in IQ of in focus images with this camera.
My disappointment (as much from what it likely means for the 5D successor as for this camera) is that Canon still hasn't got it about the AF. Nikon can put its top of the line AF module in a sub US$2000 camera and a US$3000 full frame camera. But so far canon hasn't caught on...
Let me spell it out for any Canon marketers who are reading. Serious hobbiests and I would expect all pros want consistent, accurate, Auto focus (unless their are MF only guys). Listen carefully guys and gals...
There is ZERO Image Quality in a misfocused image
I'm not saying that all my images (with a 20D) are misfocused, far from it (and some misfocus is user error, I readily admit) but I would say that consistently accurate AF is top of the list for me (and I suspect a number of others) to upgrade. (Followed by 1.5 to 2 stop improvement over my 20D's high ISO noise performance in lighting conditions way south of 5000K and a more distant third a few more MP's for group photos and landscapes)
Now maybe I will be pleasantly suprised at Photokina or whenever Canon tries to catch up with Nikon in this area but I am not holding my breath.
BTW that's four 1.6X crop models in a year. So I don't think Canon is giving up on this segment yet for those who have disdained EF-s lenses....Show more →
My guess is that the rate OOF images between the D50 and the D700 will be about the same.
Q: At the back of the camera, we see that the LCD is new? Still 3" but with a far higher resolution. A: Yes, far higher with 920,000 px. This was challenging as with a higher resolution, brightness and contrast is hard to maintain in bright sunlight. This new Clear View LCD contains several coatings which uses reflected light to the advantage of the viewer. A higher resolution also meant that we could use different fonts for the menus which increases viewing pleasure. FOr the first time, this is a screen from which you can establish focus accuracy, good colour reproduction in direct sunlight. ..........................
And why are we not more excited about this? Most people here had a fit (including me) when Nikon had a better screen than Canon. Now it seems the tables are turned.
How the AF works must surely be more important than whining about the number of points...? Or is it most important to make insubstantial claims about a product you have never used beacause you're an asshat that never will get to preview cameras? 
