EOS-50D Preview at DPreview.com

[GTaudiophile]

Hands-On Preview

Damn you, Canon!!!

How can a company be so aggravating? They have more or less continued with their "small, incremental upgrade" policy but they may have been just a tiny bit more aggressive this time than usual.

The good:
Digic IV
ISO 12800
AF Adjustment
Class-Leading LCD

The bad:
News on new weather-sealing on the 50D is still iffy but does not sound as good as D300
No Pro-level AF
Viewfinder probably still not up to par with D300
No built-in wireless flash support
Auto ISO only to ISO 1600? Still not as good as Nikon's?
15 MPX sensor overkill? Too much noise? Why not improve 12 MPX sensor and give us real, complete weather-sealing and pro-level AF?

Now, still no word on pricing, but if it's not at least $500 less than D300, the camera will bomb IMO. Canon has a real target with the D300 and they only met the challenge by half way I would say. Close but no cigar. But possibly finally a worthy upgrade to my 20D. I will want to see what the 5D-MkII offers. If the 5D-MkII is nothing but a FF version of the 50D, then I will be disappointed...unless it costs at least $1000 less than the D700.

 

[jpeyton]

If you look at the comparisons between the 40D and 50D, you'll see that Canon has kept their costs low on this relatively expedient upgrade.

They took the 40D body, gutted the sensor and electronics, wrote new software, installed an upgraded screen of the same size, and presto.

My guess is that the factories producing 40D bodies didn't skip a beat transitioning to the 50D.

Also, in "the bad", don't forget a lack of on-demand grid lines and a dedicated AF assist lamp. I remember having both on my 4 year old Nikon.

But I will reserve complete judgment on the 50D until I see one thing: some high ISO (3200+) samples. Canon still rules the kingdom of sensor design.

 

[ElFenix]

i wonder why it weighs less?


canon says 1 to 1.5 stop noise advantage at high ISO over the 40D. they usually haven't made claims just to see them fall flat. if it's true it's got lower noise than a 5D.

 

[Deinonych]

The 50D has some cool "nice to have" features that make it tempting. However, like the 40D, there's not really anything that compels me to upgrade from my 30D.

 

[Deadtrees]

Being used to Nikon's big upgrades, I'm, too, disappointed but it's not like I expected 50D to be the EF-S format flagship.
D300 being the flagship camera and 50D being the mid-range camera, I believe 'pricing' is the key. 50D fails in this critical area.
Currently, 50D is priced $1399 when D300 is priced $1625. Considering how D300 has been out for some time and 50D is just announced, it's no wonder that the price of 50D will go down once it hits the market.
However, how many new buyers would wait for the price of 50D to go down when D300 offers much more for only $226?

It sucks that Canon still intends to play thier game when Nikon started a new game.
I hope 50D fails so that Canon would learn a lesson and play the new game.


BTW, the new sensor design really is something (as Samsung's). Imagine what it would do on a FF sensor.

 

[soydios]

I just realized: Canon's software package that are included with their cameras are so much better and so much more capable than the Nikon software packages which you need to BUY SEPARATELY. But other than that, the cameras themselves are more or less at parity when adjusted for price.
I am curious, however, how ISO12800 is going to look on a 15MP 1.6x sensor.

 

[randomlinh]

again, this is like the 20D->30D jump... it's a 45D.

 

[foghorn67]

Originally posted by: randomlinh
again, this is like the 20D->30D jump... it's a 45D.

It's a different sensor with a different Digic chip. Not the same at all.

 

[jpeyton]

Canon 10D (6MP, Digic I, 7-point AF, 1.8" LCD)
+ 2MP
+ Digic II
+ 9-point AF
= Canon 20D
+ 2.5" LCD
= Canon 30D
+ 2MP
+ Digic III
+ 3" LCD
+ Live View
= Canon 40D
+ 5MP
+ Digic IV
+ VGA LCD
= Canon 50D

 

[randomlinh]

Originally posted by: foghorn67

Originally posted by: randomlinh
again, this is like the 20D->30D jump... it's a 45D.

It's a different sensor with a different Digic chip. Not the same at all.

I guess I should reserve that statement until I see how well digic 4 actually performs over 3. but at first glance, it doesn't seem like a major update. though, it never really does to me, even w/ a new chip and sensor.

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: jpeyton
Canon 10D (6MP, Digic I, 7-point AF, 1.8" LCD)
+ 2MP
+ Digic II
+ 9-point AF
= Canon 20D
+ 2.5" LCD
= Canon 30D
+ 2MP
+ Digic III
+ 3" LCD
+ Live View
= Canon 40D
+ 5MP
+ Digic IV
+ VGA LCD
= Canon 50D

the AF has been updated to more cross type and more sensitivity for the 40D and later.

regardless, this is a much bigger change than 20D to 30D. it's a bigger change than 30D to 40D.

 

[GTaudiophile]

DPreview forum members are saying the 50D will beat the 5D on noise. If so, that is quite an accomplishment.

 

[jpeyton]

Originally posted by: GTaudiophile
DPreview forum members are saying the 50D will beat the 5D on noise. If so, that is quite an accomplishment.

Canon's noise-reduction algorithms have gotten noticeably better in the 3 years since the 5D launched, so I wouldn't be surprised if it came close or tied it. The 5DMk2 should blow the 50D out of the water, however, if those same advances in noise-reduction are applied.

 

[foghorn67]

Originally posted by: jpeyton

Originally posted by: GTaudiophile
DPreview forum members are saying the 50D will beat the 5D on noise. If so, that is quite an accomplishment.

Canon's noise-reduction algorithms have gotten noticeably better in the 3 years since the 5D launched, so I wouldn't be surprised if it came close or tied it. The 5DMk2 should blow the 50D out of the water, however, if those same advances in noise-reduction are applied.

Also, keep in mind, the microlenses are now gap free.

 

[randomlinh]

Originally posted by: ElFenix
regardless, this is a much bigger change than 20D to 30D. it's a bigger change than 30D to 40D.

you think so? they all seem very incremental. Though, I missed the AF adjustments... that is a nice little addition to the xxD line. HR screen is nice, but I make do w/ the 20D. I guess this just goes back to digic 4 again.

 

[ElFenix]

first review

the only change to the AF system is that the digic iv is doing the processing now. but this claim is pretty staggering:

I tested the camera with zoom 70-200/2, 8 and left it then set the focus continuously with two lenses, while I very quickly pan down from the beach 200 feet away on the other side of the water to the surface of the water a few metres in front of me. Fokus följde med hela tiden. The focus came with all the time.

När jag tog fram min EOS 1 D Mark III och gjorde samma sak var resultatet inte lika övertygande, jag har ju upplevt Mark III-orna som snabba, men EOS 50 D var uppenbart snabbare. When I took up my EOS 1 D Mark III and did the same thing was the result is less convincing, I have seen Mark III-s as fast, but EOS 50 D was clearly faster. Jag upprepade manövern ett tiotal gånger med båda kamerorna. I repeated the manoeuvre a dozen times with two cameras.
När det i alla fall gäller stillastående motiv är min bedömning att EOS 50D har världens troligen hittills snabbaste autofokus. As in all cases, the motive still is my assessment that the EOS 50D has probably the world's fastest auto focus.

he also tested BIFs using AF point auto selection:

To my surprise, succeeded in the new EOS 50D with 70-200/2, 8 - and 300 / 2.8-hole quite well follow kisser even when I had all the AF-points plugged. Jag tror inte det fungerar alltid, men detta var klart bättre än på någon tidigare kamera jag prövat. I do not think it works always, but this was clearly better than in any previous camera, I tried.

 

[randomlinh]

did they just say the AF was faster than the 1D mkIII... that is quite a claim.

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: randomlinh
did they just say the AF was faster than the 1D mkIII... that is quite a claim.

for non moving targets and with a really nice lens, yes. he did make that claim. he also only used the center AF point for that test, i think, so less work for the camera to do.

 

[soydios]

Originally posted by: randomlinh
did they just say the AF was faster than the 1D mkIII... that is quite a claim.

The 1DmkIII might have some issues tracking moving targets, but the impression I got from reading Rob Galbraith's analysis was that it is second to none at acquiring initial focus.

There seems to be a LOT of hyperbole surround the launch of this camera. Best-ever ISO performance in a cropped-frame camera, now faster autofocus than a 1D body? I can't wait to see these images.

 

[ivan2]

Originally posted by: Deinonych
The 50D has some cool "nice to have" features that make it tempting. However, like the 40D, there's not really anything that compels me to upgrade from my 30D.

as a 30D owner these are what ticks me to upgrade:

better and faster AF servo AF micro adjustment.

OK with one shot but 30D does fall flat on servo. and micro adjustment can save a lot of trips to canon for calibration.

isn't hot about ISO but if the native 3200 is usable then that's a small plus.

however with something this sensitive I will be looking out for hot pixel problems when it launch.

 

[FP]

I am looking to get into the digital SLR market... I have been waiting for the 50D to show its face before purchasing. Does anyone think I should still consider the 40D over the 50D?

 

[randomlinh]

Originally posted by: binister
I am looking to get into the digital SLR market... I have been waiting for the 50D to show its face before purchasing. Does anyone think I should still consider the 40D over the 50D?

is cost an issue? that's the only reason I can say you'd go for the 40D over the 50D. well, assuming the initial reviews on production hardware don't turn out to have some ef'd up AF issues..

If you need money for some glass too, then I'd say grab the 40D. Body only will be a good deal no doubt when this gets released. And by no means is it a bad camera.

 

[FP]

Originally posted by: randomlinh

Originally posted by: binister
I am looking to get into the digital SLR market... I have been waiting for the 50D to show its face before purchasing. Does anyone think I should still consider the 40D over the 50D?

is cost an issue? that's the only reason I can say you'd go for the 40D over the 50D. well, assuming the initial reviews on production hardware don't turn out to have some ef'd up AF issues..

If you need money for some glass too, then I'd say grab the 40D. Body only will be a good deal no doubt when this gets released. And by no means is it a bad camera.

Right, I am hoping the price difference will be around $300 which I am willing to pay.

If the 50D retails for $1399 and the 40D is $750 that is a different story

 

[randomlinh]

well, given I bought a new one for about $900... sold it for a bit of a loss (decided to only keep one+my 20D instead)...