Canon 40D versus 50D

[rick55]

I sent the 40D back to KEH (see thread), and I've been checking KEH and the photo stores used gear for bodies.

There seems to be a little better selection of 50D than 40D bodies, which seems a little strange. Maybe because all the people who upgrade quickly have already sold their 40D's.

My question is whether the 50D is worth the extra money. I know the extra pixels will only be useful one time in 100. I think my eyes would like the better display on the back. As I commented before, one of the few complaints I had about the 40D was that it was a bit of a hassle to get the settings up on the big display, and I can barely make out the top display under many conditions. I also think I'd like the microfocus adjustment: I have the LensAlign gadget, and my 17-55, for example, is close enough that it isn't worth sending it in, but it would be nice to fine tune it.

I've checked the reviews, and most say, effectively, the 50D is better if you want to spend the money, but they're comparing new prices. They also like the controls on the 50D better.

It's about US$800 versus US$600 for used in excellent condition. Is the 50D worth $200 more?

Cheers,
Rick

[Wirefox]

Maybe because all the people who upgrade quickly have already sold their 40D's.

No, it is because nobody can bear to part with their 40Ds. Seriously though I have a 40D and there is no way I would upgrade to a 50D. My next upgrade would have to be a step change and that would be xD model. On the other hand if I was going up from my 450D now I would go for a 50D simply because the 60D will bring a few more units onto the used market at a sufferable price...if I had the cash to spare. The additional $200 dollars may be worth it to you. You will not see any IQ differences between these two units.

Steve

[rick55]

Thanks, Steve! The reviews definitely support your point about IQ: some give a tiny edge to the 50D in lower light, some say it's a dead heat, no one says there's an appreciable improvement w/ the 50D. It's really about features and display.

One thing I've noticed in the process is that this is one place where Canon actually has some commonality: 40D and 50D use the same battery, battery grip, remote connector, both use CF. So if you decide to get a second body, all your 40D gear would plug right in.

Cheers,
Rick

[Colin Southern]

I would say it's pretty much worth EXACTLY $200 more (no more, no less). Probably similar to looking at a 2003 model car -v- a 2000 model car; apples for apples the 2003 model car will be worth a little bit more (although it's old enough not to hit the "price curve").

[carregwen]

I went from a 30D to 50D. The 50D is a great camera for the money. It feels like a bigger, more robust camera than you expect. The image view screen is amazing, the picture quality is excellent. I also have a 5D Mk1 and although the image quality is slightly better on that I still prefer the 50D. At the end of the day (that's now, here) it's the lens that counts for more.

[rick55]

I would say it's pretty much worth EXACTLY $200 more (no more, no less).

Darn! But as they say, "A square deal is no bargain." This should make the market economists happy, that the price is closely matching the value.

Cheers,
Rick

[rick55]

I went from a 30D to 50D. The 50D is a great camera for the money. It feels like a bigger, more robust camera than you expect. The image view screen is amazing, the picture quality is excellent. I also have a 5D Mk1 and although the image quality is slightly better on that I still prefer the 50D. At the end of the day (that's now, here) it's the lens that counts for more.

I was very impressed with the 40D, and I'm going to get one or the other. It's probably a bigger jump for me (from the 500D). Just the sound of the shutter and the sound when the pop-up flash releases: it's like the different sound you get when you close the door on a Mercedes versus a Ford.

I don't know about the Ferraris you and Colin favor, I've never closed a Ferrari door.

I'm with you on the lenses, too: since I got the one L-series, I'm not even as happy with my EF-S 17-55 as I used to be, and I think the 17-55 is a pretty good lens.

Cheers,
Rick

[rpcrowe]

A refurbished 50D from Adorama is $879.95 (USD) with free shipping. You get a 90 day Canon warranty backed up by an Adorama warranty out to a year...
http://www.adorama.com/ICA50DR.html

[rick55]

Thanks, Richard, I hadn't seen that. I'm a true believer in refurbished gear. I couldn't care less if there's a scratch on the body: I'll add my own quickly enough. A great way to get something that meets specs 100% for a bit less money.

Cheers,
Rick

[Eric M]

My question is whether the 50D is worth the extra money.

I have a 40D and a 50D. The 50D is most certainly the better camera. The files are more detailed and offer some creative cropping opportunities that come in handy on occasion. The high res LCD is a huge improvement on the older units. Features like micro adjust, and auto lighting optimizer are nice but somewhat limited in usefulness. I prefer the 50D noise characteristics (Digic 4 chip) and Canon really worked some magic with the in camera NR settings and DPP for RAW files.

IMHO, the 50D is worth the extra coin. The 40D is still a fine camera.

[rick55]

Thanks, Eric! The display is one of the things that pushes me toward the 50D: unless I get bifocal contacts, I'll have problems with the top LCD. And I've posted some images here that are at 100%, so I know there are times when that extra 20% of pixels each way can help.

Cheers,
Rick

[Eric M]

Thanks, Eric! The display is one of the things that pushes me toward the 50D: unless I get bifocal contacts, I'll have problems with the top LCD. And I've posted some images here that are at 100%, so I know there are times when that extra 20% of pixels each way can help.

Cheers,
Rick

Hi Rick,

The 50D is actually a full 50% resolution jump. Megapixels certainly aren't everything, but more detailed files are never a bad thing... I do a fair amout of reproduction of old historical maps and photos where scanners aren't usually an option. The extra file size of the 50D (and 5D2) really help for computer viewing at 100%. Its like using a loupe to study a traditional print, but much better in practice.

One thing the 50D does require for best results is great glass. I am still shocked at what it can do with the 70-200F4L IS in front of it!

[rick55]

The 50D is actually a full 50% resolution jump. Megapixels certainly aren't everything, but more detailed files are never a bad thing... I do a fair amout of reproduction of old historical maps and photos where scanners aren't usually an option. The extra file size of the 50D (and 5D2) really help for computer viewing at 100%. Its like using a loupe to study a traditional print, but much better in practice.

One thing the 50D does require for best results is great glass. I am still shocked at what it can do with the 70-200F4L IS in front of it!

I said it badly: I know it's 15MP versus 10MP, but 22% more pixels on each dimension. So when I'm resizing the image or cropping, width and height will each have 22% more to play with.

I understand about the lenses: I have one L-series (100mm macro), and one very good EF-S (17-55mm IS USM). I've mostly given up on using my antediluvian EF 75-300, although if it's bright enough, it will give a decent image.

Cheers,
Rick

[Eric M]

I said it badly: I know it's 15MP versus 10MP, but 22% more pixels on each dimension. So when I'm resizing the image or cropping, width and height will each have 22% more to play with.

I understand about the lenses: I have one L-series (100mm macro), and one very good EF-S (17-55mm IS USM). I've mostly given up on using my antediluvian EF 75-300, although if it's bright enough, it will give a decent image.



Cheers,
Rick

You certainly have the glass...

[rpcrowe]

I have purchased 4 Canon DSLR cameras...

My first two (10D and 350D) were purchased new and each needed to be sent in for service within the first 90-days. After they went through service they had no more problems. However I purchased my 30D and 40D as refurbs and had absolutely no problems at all. I have more confidence in the quality control of the Canon service Centers than in the Canon Assembly Line.

[rick55]

My first two (10D and 350D) were purchased new and each needed to be sent in for service within the first 90-days. After they went through service they had no more problems. However I purchased my 30D and 40D as refurbs and had absolutely no problems at all. I have more confidence in the quality control of the Canon service Centers than in the Canon Assembly Line.

I can easily believe that: I expect that the assembly line does no tests of some things (it's brand new, odds are it's okay), or automated tests. Automated tests are great, but limited, unless there's lots of robotics. When a technician has the camera, the entire range of tests is available, plus they can actually use the camera like we do.

Cheers,
Rick

[rick55]

Thanks to all for the feedback. I ordered from KEH (who were so good with the 40D), and it should be here the middle of next week. I expect (as Steve said elsewhere) that the 50D will be primary and 500D will be secondary. And I'm really looking forward to it!

Cheers,
Rick

[Gazza]

Hi I was using a 450D for a couple of years and have been very happy with it, untill I recently upgraded to a 50D. The difference is quite marked, particularly in regard to being more user friendly, a lot faster when looking for adjustmengts etc. It is a lot heavier but still feels good to use.