Cool to see some test shots........I wonder if anyone can post some comparisons between the 40D and 50D re. noise at the lower ISO's. I am interested to see what adding 5 MP did to the ISO's that I actually use - i.e. 400, 200.
If someone could do some test shots of a detailed subject and post 100% crops that would be awesome!
This is for birders:
Good news is 50D+ bare 800/5.6 IS L has about the same pixel per duck with that of 1Ds mark III+ 800/5.6 ISL+1.4 TC combo. So, basically 50D gains one stop of light in the focal length limited situation with same size of Duck. IQ: jury is still out.
With a non-reporting 1.4TC, the reach is going to be very good.
ruhikant wrote:
This is for birders:
Good news is 50D+ bare 800/5.6 IS L has about the same pixel per duck with that of 1Ds mark III+ 800/5.6 ISL+1.4 TC combo. So, basically 50D gains one stop of light in the focal legth limited situation with same size of Duck. IQ: jury is still out.
With a non-reporting 1.4TC, the reach is going to be very good.
i was looking to buy a backup for my 1dmarkII and this seems to be
the one. I'll be waiting for a mark IV to come and sit in my bag.
Until then, i just need a cheap camera capable of shooting good
3200 iso shots for web usage. The 50d seems to do that at a good price.
I dont understand pixel peepers crapping out the 50d. If you're not happy about a "prosumer" camera performance, spend more money on a 1 series pro body.
I own the 1D Mark III and I will say that the 50D cannot come close to High ISO / low noise performance of the 1D Mark III nor should it be expected to at $1400, but it's still does very well.
Thanks for posting the ISO 800 images.....Would it be possible to post a similar shot at ISO 400 if you have? I just want to see a sharp, well exposed image of a detailed subject (head shot of a duck is perfect) at ISO 400. I am just really trying to evaluate the IQ of the 40D compared to the 50D.
wilrobking wrote:
I own the 1D Mark III and I will say that the 50D cannot come close to High ISO / low noise performance of the 1D Mark III nor should it be expected to at $1400, but it's still does very well.
of course someone will say this...cant have a 1400 camera out do ego driven over priced 1 series...pretty sure this will stack up fine IQ wise to the 1dmk3...
digitalbug30d wrote:
of course someone will say this...cant have a 1400 camera out do ego driven over priced 1 series...pretty sure this will stack up fine IQ wise to the 1dmk3...
Whatever dude. My statement comes from results I see from the tests I ran from both cameras.
It's not from my ego or your guesses. You might want to run some tests yourself or view images from both bodies before you start making baseless guesses.
wilrobking wrote:
Whatever dude. My statement comes from results I see from the tests I ran from both cameras.
It's not from my ego or your guesses. You might want to run some tests yourself or view images from both bodies before you start making baseless guesses.
The high ISO noise performance of the MKIII is definitely better than the 50D. So far my experience with the 50D shows the noise control to be about the same as the 40D, if you want to maintain fine detail.
The factory NR setting in the 50D results in some detail loss. It does provide a cleaner pic than the 40D but with a loss of detail (only observable at a 100% crop). If you turn off NR the noise is about the same as the 40D from 1600 up. It may, however, be better than the 40D from 100-800. Were not talking demonstrative differences but rather those which can be seen only in a 100% crop.
The resolution of the 50D is definitely better than the 40D and possibly the MKIII. I'll have to run some files side by side to see but having shot with two MKIIIs, since they were introduced, I have a good idea of what it is capable of resolution wise.
I notice the AF to lock focus quicker than the 40D and comparable to the MKIII. A 100-400 that is somewhat sluggish on the 40D, compared to the MKIII, responds as though it is on a 1 series. This is focus acquisition not AI Servo performance I'm talking about. The focus also appears to be accurate even without MA. I will test AI Servo tomorrow to see if it performs any better than the 40D. I don't expect it to compare to the 1 series though.
I was happy with the Auto ISO range from 100-1600 which seems to work very well. Only when you need to go over 1600 or action photography, where you need higher shutter speeds, will you need not to use it.
The exposure seems to be improved over the 40D and is just as good as any 1 series I have ever used. I only had a chance to check Eval. but it meter the exposure properly, in varying lighting conditions, on every shot I took.
Thanks for the reports from those of you who have received a camera! The 50D is looking great IMO.
I wonder if anyone out there could do me a favor though. One thing a lot of the professional review sites neglect is very long exposure noise levels. If someone could do an approx. 5 minute exposure with a lens/body cap on at ISO 100 with no NR, I'd greatly appreciate it, as that will give me a lot of info about how this camera handles noise over a relatively long period against a dark background (like the night sky).
Even the 450D does pretty well in this regard, so I expect the 50D to do fine, but I want to be sure.
