FYI, the 50D I received from Calumetphoto.com has the 1.0.2 firmware.
Still testing for IQ but will say I like the new user interface. Don't miss any or the 40D's.
So far no gripes and lots of praise for the LCD resolution.
Ok, tried a few test shots here at work while on lunch break. I used the sharpest and best lens I have, the EF 135mm F2 USM. Seems less "noise" at ISO200 with all the new features off, but, my 40D is way "sharper" when using the same lens. The 50D images seem "soft" and not as detailed. All images shot RAW (CR2). Has anyone else noticed this? (At the full size, not cropped or down-sized). I figured it was just the lens I was using (24-105mm F4 IS), but the 135mm F2 is ultra sharp normally.
surfnron wrote:
Jim, did you have you MA the lens used in this shot?
Ron
Actually I didn't have to adjust it because my performance without was so good.
Here is a cropped version of the shot I pulled the 100% crop from. The original FF shot isn't on my site so I can't link to it. The shot below was cropped from it.
Hornblower wrote:
Thanks for the answers. The more I thought about it, soccer is usually okay. I think my biggest frustrations w/ the 20d has been the non-center focus points.
I can tell you that the 40D's outer focus points are very good, at least compared with my 5D where they are almost useless.
David Tognazzi wrote:
Ok, tried a few test shots here at work while on lunch break. I used the sharpest and best lens I have, the EF 135mm F2 USM. Seems less "noise" at ISO200 with all the new features off, but, my 40D is way "sharper" when using the same lens. The 50D images seem "soft" and not as detailed. All images shot RAW (CR2). Has anyone else noticed this? (At the full size, not cropped or down-sized). I figured it was just the lens I was using (24-105mm F4 IS), but the 135mm F2 is ultra sharp normally.
Nope, not at all. How are you judging and comparing sharpness between the 50D and 40D? To my eyes a 12 x 18 landscape I just printed from my 50D is notch sharper and more detailed than my 40D. Not a night & day diff but obvious at close viewing.
If you're trying to judge sharpness by comparing pixel level views of the same thing the higher rez 50D file will always look softer. Why? you're viewing a much smaller portion of the frame than the 40D file. Zoom out and it looks sharper. Print a 12x18 or 13x19 from each camera and view from 8-12 inches and the 50D image will look s little more sharper and more detailed.
Of course, maybe your lens needs calibration.
I can tell you that the 40D's outer focus points are very good, at least compared with my 5D where they are almost useless.
I agree, the 50D and 40D have excellent outer AF points. However maybe you got a bum 5D as my 5D outer points work very well most of the time. I don't hesitate to manually select outer points in all but the worse light.
If using DPP 3.5.0.0 make sure you slide the NR settings back in the preferences menu. Un check "use camera settings and set your own defaults to zero.
Have you done this?
I just took delivery of a 50d and it has been cloudy out but from what I have been doing with my L-killing 17-55 2.8 IS the 40D has no advantage on this baby but for hard drive space.
Beta... When you go down to the calibration tab with 50D files, it just says Beta (no other profile choices available). With my other files, the beta works VERY well (MKIII and 5D)...Much better than the included LR2 profiles and allows you to choose which profile you want to use.
Picked up the 50D yesterday (retail kit with 28-135 and firmware 1.0.2.). Shot 3 games so far (about 600 shots) with no error 99. Used a Sigma 70-200 and no grip.
apdieb wrote:
Yep.. But they can't write a software front-end UI worth a crap...
Actually I like DPP's interface. Makes perfect sense and is logical and easy to use. Wish it was faster. I guess you like what you're used to but I find Lightroom counterintuitive and chunky. I do like Aperture but DPP's RAW output is much better with fewer clicks.
jcbenner wrote:
Has anybody used a 50D with (what I consider) some of the sharpest Canon lenses such as a 300mm 2.8L IS or a 400mm 2.8L IS or 135mm 2.0L ?
Would love to see what the 50D pixel density does with some of the super telephotos.
Yes. I've used it for several hundred football pics with the 300 f2.8L mounted on it. I'm not where I can upload any images now but I like what I see so far. I've not spent much time digging into the pixels yet. Too busy...
I have gone from 40D to 50D and use 24 105L and 70 200 f4L IS and I see a great improvement in image quality, faster focusing, better for cropping, really nice screen + more.
I have been out with my mate who has a 1D MK 111 and belive it or not, the 50D won hands down shooting aircraft at our local airfield, I would put thr IQ at at least 15 percent better, the same has been done against a 40D, the 50D won easily, My friend is now selling his 1D MK 111 to get a 50D until he can get the new 1D MK 1V due next year.
I honestly did not expect the 50D to be as good as it is, I have also found that I needed to turn of all the NR etc etc, and change some settings in DPP, CS3 works fine also.
jcbenner wrote:
Has anybody used a 50D with (what I consider) some of the sharpest Canon lenses such as a 300mm 2.8L IS or a 400mm 2.8L IS or 135mm 2.0L ?
Would love to see what the 50D pixel density does with some of the super telephotos.
i can show you end of next week when i get a try with one
The FrizzBee Dog world championships are being held here this weekend and I'll be there with a 300 F4L IS and a 70-200 2.8L IS.
I also shoot an Anheuser-Busch Brewery party that will go from 5:00 to 10:00 PM with three live Blues Bands so some outdoor night shots will be done there. Other than the 70-200 2.8 I'll have the EFS 17-55 2.8 and a 50 1.4.
So I should have some 50D samples next week. I hope.......
SOME of you are very funny...I can post a bunch of ISO 3200 from a Canon 10D and they'll look super sharp and with no noise at 700x500pix or at similar size. Unless you are posting 100% crops, you are wasting everyone's time.
