Cannon Question

[Woobstr112G]

I am tinkering with the idea of upgrading my Cannon 30D to either the 40D or 50D. Is the 50D, other than the higher megapixels, worth spending the extra money or would the 40D be a good choice.

 

Thanks in advance for any replies.

 

Bob

[chipmaster]

I am tinkering with the idea of upgrading my Cannon 30D to either the 40D or 50D. Is the 50D, other than the higher megapixels, worth spending the extra money or would the 40D be a good choice.

 

Thanks in advance for any replies.

 

Bob

 

Ah camera lust, its hard not to desire the latest and greatest :D

 

I had orginally sold off all my Nikon DX equipment expecting Canon to unleash a D300 killer, but alas not.

 

Unless you crop and/or blow up your picture 8 Megs of your 30D is probably good enough.

 

I think the 50Ds biggest attraction is going to be that great high resolution screen, and much higher resolution. If either are things your shooting or ego lust after no question its Canon's best mid range DSLR to date.

 

Personally if I was in the Canon system I'd likely get the 40D is its a screaming great deal these days and the 50D only offers that fabulous new LCD screen and more megapix, neather a game changer for me at least. The high ISO on the 40D is not measurable beat by the 50D. You simply can't cheat physics, more megapixles costs you high ISO, always a delicate balance.

 

Not sure if you read the reviews, here are three sites that do what I think their best at unbiased reviews

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/E50D/E50DA.HTM

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos50d/

http://www.bobatkins.com/photography/digital/canon_eos_50D_review_1.html

[mnbruce]

I have owned a 30D since the day it was released and would not consider spending money to replace it with either a 40D or 50D. Maybe one of those cameras has something you deem valuable,but in 1 year Canon probably will release something else with more upgrades. For me, the 30D will only be replaced with a full frame body.

[TheRoff]

Ahhhhh, my current dilemma also. I currently have a 30D and have decided that a 40 or 50D is a must in the near future. Mostly, I want two bodies, and to me jumping to the 50D, at this point, makes more sense then going to the 40D. The alleged brighter LCD screen may be the decider for me. Then again, my opinion may change tomorrow.

 

Here is a link to a Canon site with excellent comparisons and information.

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/

 

Larry

[pierces]

 

I think the 50Ds biggest attraction is going to be that great high resolution screen...

 

 

I have to agree with that. My Sony A700 has the 3" VGA screen and it is a pleasure to use. I have gotten so many double-takes from people when I show them an image because it looks like a 300 ppi print, not an LCD review screen.

 

Now the only question is whether that big, beautiful screen is worth the $400 difference over the 40D....

 

Life is full of choices! :D

 

Dave

[jff50]

I am tinkering with the idea of upgrading my Cannon 30D to either the 40D or 50D. Is the 50D, other than the higher megapixels, worth spending the extra money or would the 40D be a good choice.

 

Thanks in advance for any replies.

 

Bob

If you want to consider another option, look at the 5D (original or Mark II). I have a 20D and a 5D. Love having the full frame camera.

[PopPop3]

If you want to consider another option, look at the 5D (original or Mark II). I have a 20D and a 5D. Love having the full frame camera.

 

I, too, have a 5D and the full-frame camera is great. However, for the difference in price between a 5D and 50D body (street price around $2600 vs $1300), unless you really need the ff feature I'd stick with the 50D.

You might also consider the 40D, it's a great camera and LOTS less expensive. There's also the option of purchasing a used 5D, which are going for as little as $1200 these days (since the 5D MkII came out).

[jff50]

I, too, have a 5D and the full-frame camera is great. However, for the difference in price between a 5D and 50D body (street price around $2600 vs $1300), unless you really need the ff feature I'd stick with the 50D.

You might also consider the 40D, it's a great camera and LOTS less expensive. There's also the option of purchasing a used 5D, which are going for as little as $1200 these days (since the 5D MkII came out).

 

 

 

 

I'd probably agree (with your comment on the price difference between a 5D and a 50D) if someone were starting from scratch. However, if you already have a 30D and are looking to upgrade, I'd be looking towards either:

• investing in L system lenses (if you don't already have them), or
  
• buying/saving towards a 5D
  

I'm a firm believer in investing in the better lenses, that can then be carried forward as you upgrade your camera body. I have a 20D and a 5D and have no regrets over spending the money on the 5D rather than on a 50D. The one regret that I have is that I didn't invest in L series lenses from the outset.

Just something else to consider.

[chipmaster]

If you want to consider another option, look at the 5D (original or Mark II). I have a 20D and a 5D. Love having the full frame camera.

 

As OPs have mentioned the premium for FF is huge, both the body as well as the lenses.

 

If going wide is your desire there are some pretty reasonable non-canon brands DX lenses now. Tamron and Sigma offer some resonably priced super wides 10-20mm that can get you pretty wide.

 

Even if you leap for the expensive Canon super wides you are better off buying 50D versus a FF unless it offers some unqiue feature you simply can't find in the 50D.

 

BTW I am a full-frame guy, driven by the passion to shoot low light sports. I'd never have believed I could have shot between 3200-6400 ISO with the quality I get now and even sometimes 12.8K to 25.6K :D

[Woobstr112G]

As OPs have mentioned the premium for FF is huge, both the body as well as the lenses.

 

If going wide is your desire there are some pretty reasonable non-canon brands DX lenses now. Tamron and Sigma offer some resonably priced super wides 10-20mm that can get you pretty wide.

 

Even if you leap for the expensive Canon super wides you are better off buying 50D versus a FF unless it offers some unqiue feature you simply can't find in the 50D.

 

BTW I am a full-frame guy, driven by the passion to shoot low light sports. I'd never have believed I could have shot between 3200-6400 ISO with the quality I get now and even sometimes 12.8K to 25.6K :D

 

Not to sound dumb, but what exactly is a full frame camera.....:confused:

 

Bob

[PopPop3]

I'd probably agree (with your comment on the price difference between a 5D and a 50D) if someone were starting from scratch. However, if you already have a 30D and are looking to upgrade, I'd be looking towards either:

• investing in L system lenses (if you don't already have them), or
  
• buying/saving towards a 5D
  

I'm a firm believer in investing in the better lenses, that can then be carried forward as you upgrade your camera body. I have a 20D and a 5D and have no regrets over spending the money on the 5D rather than on a 50D. The one regret that I have is that I didn't invest in L series lenses from the outset.

Just something else to consider.

 

I invested in "L" glass when I purchased my 5D. Have a 70-200L 2.8 IS, 17-40L, 24-105L (and three non-L lenses, all Canon). L lenses are particularly important with the full-frame 5D because of the greater size of the sensor, leading to the need for higher-resolution, better corrected lenses. But some of the non-L glass is very good to excellent, for a lot less $$$.

[chipmaster]

Not to sound dumb, but what exactly is a full frame camera.....:confused:

 

Bob

 

Bob,

 

Here is a good read: http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/digital-camera-sensor-size.htm

 

The bulk of DSLR and all P&S use much smaller sensors to capture the image.

 

Most P&S spec focal length in the equavalent 35mm/full-frame view. Makes sense as they all come with a single un-changeable lense attached. Since their sensor is tiny, the lenses can be tiny as well. But with those tiny pixels come degraded light sensitivity and thus their poorer high ISO performance.

 

For DSLR its more nebulous the differecen between full-frame and the cropped sensor cameras. It is re-enforced as almost all the lenses themselves spec their full frame / 35mm equavalent focal length, but the reality of their image circle on a crop sensor results in between a 1.4 to 1.6x multipier. Due to the more limited image circle a crop sensor optimized lens can be smaller and lighter then a lense designed to be able to projct the image circle out to the full 36mmx24mm frame.

 

If you start out with a cropped sensor camera and have only purchased cropped sensor lenses then you'll need to either buy new lenses or have to compromise and not get the benifit of the larger sensor area if you do every upgrade when using your cropped sensor lense on a FF camera as the image circle won't project over the full dimensions of the sensor.

 

Oh, and why did DSLR first start with smaller sensors. I haven't researched in detail but most likely the reason was the poor yield, high expense in producing a CCD/CMOS sensor that was 36x24mm^2. But Moore's law is a powerfuly trend and today results in incredible cheap small sensors, memory and now 36x24mm^2 sensors can now be affordably manufactured. Price and capability for them will continue for a few more years, I think ;)

[pierces]

Not to sound dumb, but what exactly is a full frame camera.....:confused:

 

Bob

 

chipmaster covered it well.

 

For additional info, here's an article I wrote on adding lenses to your system that covers sensor size and crop factor pretty well. Newbie-friendly!

 

http://www.pptphoto.com/ArticlePages/AddingLenses.htm

 

Dave

[chipmaster]

Dave,

 

Love your how to and articles. Great summary of all the basics!! Should be a must read for everyone, including me :D

 

Charles

[pierces]

Dave,

 

Love your how to and articles. Great summary of all the basics!! Should be a must read for everyone, including me :D

 

Charles

 

Thank you sir. Glad you enjoy and find value in them.

 

Dave

[fototaker]

I am tinkering with the idea of upgrading my Cannon 30D to either the 40D or 50D. Is the 50D, other than the higher megapixels, worth spending the extra money or would the 40D be a good choice.

 

Thanks in advance for any replies.

 

Bob

 

 

 

In most foto forums, this is a loaded highly debated subject. I generally feel more is always better, the only way i would consider the 30d or 40d over teh 50d is if i was so broke that i could not afford the 50! the 50d is the latest evolution sensor for canon prosumer cameras. Its low light capability and high iso performance is astonishing. @ 1600 iso on the 50d is like 200 iso on my 30d's. Where by making the 50d more versatile than the 40d or 30d. Which ever camera you decide on, know this, they are all three rugged as hell, have a high duty shutter, and they feel like real cameras.

[jff50]

I invested in "L" glass when I purchased my 5D. Have a 70-200L 2.8 IS, 17-40L, 24-105L (and three non-L lenses, all Canon). L lenses are particularly important with the full-frame 5D because of the greater size of the sensor, leading to the need for higher-resolution, better corrected lenses. But some of the non-L glass is very good to excellent, for a lot less $$$.

I agree. But I think it makes more sense to upgrade lenses before spending the money to go from a 30D to a 50D. The 50D will be out of date long before the upgraded lenses will. I just consider better lenses to be a better long term investment than a newer model camera. I also think that a 30D will better quality lenses will produce better pictures than a 50D with lesser lenses. That being said, we don't know what the OP has in the way of lenses.

[Woobstr112G]

I agree. But I think it makes more sense to upgrade lenses before spending the money to go from a 30D to a 50D. The 50D will be out of date long before the upgraded lenses will. I just consider better lenses to be a better long term investment than a newer model camera. I also think that a 30D will better quality lenses will produce better pictures than a 50D with lesser lenses. That being said, we don't know what the OP has in the way of lenses.

 

Only have 3....The standard 18x55. a 10x22 wide angle, and a 30mm telephoto.

 

Bob

[Woobstr112G]

Thanks for all the great information on my question......

 

Bob

[pilotdane]

Your 30D is a great camera so I would not be in a hurry to upgrade. If you do upgrade I'd skip the 40D. It's a great camera but not enough upgrade from your 30D. If you are going to upgrade I'd go for the 50D but adjust your high ISO and 1:1 viewing expectations.

 

I agree with pretty much everything that has been said so far but here is my two cents worth.

 

1. If you like to use telephoto lenses or find that you take pictures of things far away stick with a 1.6 body (30D, 40D, 50D). If you take a lot of portraits and often use wide angle lenses and still want to be wider than I would consider the full frame 5D. Personally I like the extra reach of the 1.6 and did not even consider the 5D or 5DII.

 

2. The screen on the 50D is one of the biggest reasons I picked it over the 40D. It is large enough, bright enough and accurate enough to actually check the focus of your shots and the RGB histogram is easily seen and used.

 

3. I would not buy the 50D for it's high ISO performance. As mentioned before there is a price to pay for the 15mp. The 50D does well and has higher ISO capability than your 30D but 1600 is my max normal ISO and I will rarely go to 3200 or 6400 in emergency situations (12800 is useless). I notice a jump in noise from 100 to 200 but the curve increases slowly and predictably from 200 up.

 

4. File size with the 50D can be an issue if you save in RAW format because of the high pixel count and added bit depth. The RAW files from the 50D are around 20+ meg each. The 50D will give you three file size options for RAW and of course you have many .jpg sizes/compression to choose from. When you are saving .jpg you can hold down the shutter button and blast away almost forever. The 50D can crunch and save quickly.

 

5. "L" or other professional grade lenses are almost manditory if you want to pixel peep at 1:1. The camera is not "soft" but it has such high resolution that it will show every error in your technique and every flaw in your lens if you zoom in.

 

6. The 50D has a hi-def output so you can display your photos in high resolution on the flat screen tv in your cabin on your next cruise. A great feature for reviewing the days shots and culling out the bad ones.

[Woobstr112G]

Your 30D is a great camera so I would not be in a hurry to upgrade. If you do upgrade I'd skip the 40D. It's a great camera but not enough upgrade from your 30D. If you are going to upgrade I'd go for the 50D but adjust your high ISO and 1:1 viewing expectations.

 

I agree with pretty much everything that has been said so far but here is my two cents worth.

 

1. If you like to use telephoto lenses or find that you take pictures of things far away stick with a 1.6 body (30D, 40D, 50D). If you take a lot of portraits and often use wide angle lenses and still want to be wider than I would consider the full frame 5D. Personally I like the extra reach of the 1.6 and did not even consider the 5D or 5DII.

 

2. The screen on the 50D is one of the biggest reasons I picked it over the 40D. It is large enough, bright enough and accurate enough to actually check the focus of your shots and the RGB histogram is easily seen and used.

 

3. I would not buy the 50D for it's high ISO performance. As mentioned before there is a price to pay for the 15mp. The 50D does well and has higher ISO capability than your 30D but 1600 is my max normal ISO and I will rarely go to 3200 or 6400 in emergency situations (12800 is useless). I notice a jump in noise from 100 to 200 but the curve increases slowly and predictably from 200 up.

 

4. File size with the 50D can be an issue if you save in RAW format because of the high pixel count and added bit depth. The RAW files from the 50D are around 20+ meg each. The 50D will give you three file size options for RAW and of course you have many .jpg sizes/compression to choose from. When you are saving .jpg you can hold down the shutter button and blast away almost forever. The 50D can crunch and save quickly.

 

5. "L" or other professional grade lenses are almost manditory if you want to pixel peep at 1:1. The camera is not "soft" but it has such high resolution that it will show every error in your technique and every flaw in your lens if you zoom in.

 

6. The 50D has a hi-def output so you can display your photos in high resolution on the flat screen tv in your cabin on your next cruise. A great feature for reviewing the days shots and culling out the bad ones.

 

Great info.......Thanks again....

 

Bob

[Marguerite-a-Ville]

For additional info, here's an article I wrote on adding lenses to your system that covers sensor size and crop factor pretty well. Newbie-friendly!

 

http://www.pptphoto.com/ArticlePages/AddingLenses.htm

 

 

Wow, Dave! I've read every word of your fact-filled article, and bookmarked it for future reference. Thank you for sharing your vast knowledge with us! This is truly a must-read.

[Woobstr112G]

Wow, Dave! I've read every word of your fact-filled article, and bookmarked it for future reference. Thank you for sharing your vast knowledge with us! This is truly a must-read.

 

 

Outstanding info.....Thanks

 

Bob