Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EOS Digital Cameras 
Thread started 10 Aug 2013 (Saturday) 22:19
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Upgrade 450D to 40D or 50D??

 
Ralph ­ III
Goldmember
1,342 posts
Likes: 16
Joined Mar 2009
Location: Alabama
     
Aug 11, 2013 20:18 as a reply to  @ post 16198044 |  #16

quote by Mavgirl; "There is not a huge difference between 4 FPS and 6.5 FPS in practice..."

I respectfully disagree.

I used to shoot a lot of tennis tournaments and went from a 30d that shoots 5 frames per second (even faster than OP's) to a 40d that shoots 6.5 frames per second. The difference was quite large.

It may not seem that great on paper but the extra shot or two gained, often meant the difference between having a ball on the racquet and not having the ball on racquet or otherwise a nice depiction of strokes, etc.

If I'm shooting a burst of 1.5 seconds the difference between the two camera's is 10 images -vs- basically 7 images. The extra 2 or 3 images gained is quite large. It allows me to better display a player as they hustle after a ball, or if on clay, the long sequence of sliding into a shot and then making it.

The difference between the OP's camera at 4 shots (actually 3.5) per second and the 40d's 6.5 shots per second would prove quite significant.

Take care,
Ralph


P.S. He could go even faster with the 7d but I don't think the slight burst rate gain (1.5 frame/sec) over the 40d alone would be worth it, IMHO, because 6.5 frames/sec is already pretty zippy..


"SOUTHERN and SAVED!"
POTN FEEDBACK...............ITEMS FOR SALE

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
georgebowman
Goldmember
Avatar
1,510 posts
Likes: 2
Joined May 2009
Location: Verona, WI
     
Aug 11, 2013 23:48 |  #17

I had 2- 50d's when I when still shooting weddings. They were okay for weddings but terrible at tracking action when shooting my granddaughter's soccer games. I sold both of them and bought a 7d this spring. What a huge improvement. The focus is fast, accurate and the burst rate more than adequate for my needs. I also found it appears to have less noise at the higher ISO settings. I'd go for the 7d. I personally think you will be disappointed with the 50d.


My Gear: 7d, XTi, 17-55f2.8 EF-S, 70-200f4L, 28-135 Kit lens, 2-580EXii
_______________
My Flickr http://www.flickr.com/​photos/gtbowman (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Mavgirl
Senior Member
647 posts
Joined Mar 2013
Location: Dallas area
     
Aug 12, 2013 00:04 |  #18

Ralph III wrote in post #16199657 (external link)
I respectfully disagree.

I used to shoot a lot of tennis tournaments and went from a 30d that shoots 5 frames per second (even faster than OP's) to a 40d that shoots 6.5 frames per second. The difference was quite large.

It may not seem that great on paper but the extra shot or two gained, often meant the difference between having a ball on the racquet and not having the ball on racquet or otherwise a nice depiction of strokes, etc.

If I'm shooting a burst of 1.5 seconds the difference between the two camera's is 10 images -vs- basically 7 images. The extra 2 or 3 images gained is quite large. It allows me to better display a player as they hustle after a ball, or if on clay, the long sequence of sliding into a shot and then making it.

The difference between the OP's camera at 4 shots per second and the 40d's 6.5 shots per second would prove quite significant.

Take care,
Ralph


P.S. He could go even faster with the 7d but I don't think the slight burst rate gain (1.5 frame/sec) over the 40d alone would be worth it, IMHO, because 6.5 frames/sec is already pretty zippy..


Having made a jump FPS wise myself, the 350D to the 50D, I found the faster burst rate didn't make a huge difference in my experience. The slightly faster burst rate still didn't get me the shots any more frequently. I'm not saying it won't make a slight difference. But it's not an "upgrade worthy" difference IMO. Where as the jump from 4 to 8 with the 7D would be significant. That's IF the burst rate is the OP's bottom line.

But it all comes back to what it's worth to the individual.


6D/50D/350D with too many lenses
Calumet 4x5, Pentax SV 35mm, Canon A-1, Rebel G and many more toys...

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Ralph ­ III
Goldmember
1,342 posts
Likes: 16
Joined Mar 2009
Location: Alabama
     
Aug 12, 2013 03:34 |  #19

Mavgirl wrote in post #16200143 (external link)
Having made a jump FPS wise myself, the 350D to the 50D, I found the faster burst rate didn't make a huge difference in my experience. The slightly faster burst rate still didn't get me the shots any more frequently. I'm not saying it won't make a slight difference. But it's not an "upgrade worthy" difference IMO. Where as the jump from 4 to 8 with the 7D would be significant...


Again, I respectfully disagree and you should consider your statements.


Let’s clarify. You went from the Rebel XT (which shoots at 3.0 frames/sec, btw) to the Canon 50d which shoots at 6.3 frames per second.

You doubled (plus some) your burst rate speed yet you state such “…didn’t make a huge difference…” and that your upgraded burst speed was only a “…slightly faster burst rate…”!

You must have forgotten the burst rate speed of your Rebel XT because you then immediately turn around and say if the OP doubles his (similar) burst rate speed that it will then be “significant”. :confused:


---------------


It’s to late for me to reply directly to the OP at the moment, but let me put things in perspective. In regards to Canon digital burst speeds it can be said they built quite a number of slow camera’s, some medium speed camera’s and a few fast camera’s.

The Canon 40d is one of the fastest DSLR camera’s Canon has ever built, since 1995. In fact, no other APS-C camera is faster with the exception of the 7d. In addition, they only have a handful (6) of professional full frame Canon DSLR’s that are faster (1d series).

The difference in burst speed the OP will experience from his 4.0 frames/sec to the 40d’s 6.5 frames/sec will be significant to him.

Yes it does however come down to what is most important to him and as he considers the price range of everything. But I think it is a dis-service to him to suggest the upgrade from 4.0 frames/sec to 6.5 frames/sec will only be a slight difference.


God Bless,
Ralph


"SOUTHERN and SAVED!"
POTN FEEDBACK...............ITEMS FOR SALE

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Heycoop ­ Photography
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
507 posts
Likes: 1
Joined May 2012
Location: New Zealand
     
Aug 12, 2013 04:50 |  #20

Ralph III wrote in post #16200383 (external link)
Again, I respectfully disagree and you should consider your statements.


Let’s clarify. You went from the Rebel XT (which shoots at 3.0 frames/sec, btw) to the Canon 50d which shoots at 6.3 frames per second.

You doubled (plus some) your burst rate speed yet you state such “…didn’t make a huge difference…” and that your upgraded burst speed was only a “…slightly faster burst rate…”!

You must have forgotten the burst rate speed of your Rebel XT because you then immediately turn around and say if the OP doubles his (similar) burst rate speed that it will then be “significant”. :confused:


---------------


It’s to late for me to reply directly to the OP at the moment, but let me put things in perspective. In regards to Canon digital burst speeds it can be said they built quite a number of slow camera’s, some medium speed camera’s and a few fast camera’s.

The Canon 40d is one of the fastest DSLR camera’s Canon has ever built, since 1995. In fact, no other APS-C camera is faster with the exception of the 7d. In addition, they only have a handful (6) of professional full frame Canon DSLR’s that are faster (1d series).

The difference in burst speed the OP will experience from his 4.0 frames/sec to the 40d’s 6.5 frames/sec will be significant to him.

Yes it does however come down to what is most important to him and as he considers the price range of everything. But I think it is a dis-service to him to suggest the upgrade from 4.0 frames/sec to 6.5 frames/sec will only be a slight difference.


God Bless,
Ralph

Thanks Ralph,

I've been following (and keepimng quiet) on this debate about fps. To me it seems simple; if I am doubling the rate going to a 7D (my 450D has 4fps) how can that be anything other than significant. Especially as I shoot motorsport, where cars are traveling at 150-200km/h, and you sometimes want to get them within a 10m spot (ie, where there is a nice background, important part of a corner etc), that doubled fps would make a big difference to my chance of getting multiple shots within this 10 or 20m area, would it not.

I would like to add one more thing. I AM NOT LOOKING TO UPGRADE JUST TO HAVE MORE FPS!!!!!;) I am looking for an all round better camera, better focusing, better image quality/colour etc. FPS is a good reason to upgrade, but far from being the only reason.

Please continue with your suggestions, I have been doing more research, and with the help from you guys have definitely ruled out the 40D, and am pretty much tossing up between a 60D and a 7D. I've heard rumours that a 7DII is due for release early next year, but then canon said the same thing 12 months ago, so I'm not going to wait for that.

Anyway, please continue........


Body: Canon 450D Gripped
Lenses: Canon 70-200 F4 L, Sigma 10-20mm f/4-5.6, 1.4x Tele Converter
Check out my Facebook Page (external link) (dedicated to my racing, not photographing), and give it a like!!

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
llareggub
Senior Member
Avatar
631 posts
Gallery: 10 photos
Likes: 15
Joined Nov 2009
Location: Hungary, Jasz Kun Szolnok
     
Aug 12, 2013 05:03 |  #21

I've not used it but the 7D has a much spoke about AF system, there is apparently a learning curve but once you are up on that it is superior to anything else in any Canon crop camera at the moment, if I were after an AF and FPS upgrade I don't think there is any where else I would look on a crop.

The 70D seems to have imported a large portion of the AF system of the 7D (with a couple of exceptions) but there are no real hands on reviews out there at the minute, may be worth hanging on 6 weeks and see what is said?


My Website :D (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
watt100
Cream of the Crop
14,021 posts
Likes: 29
Joined Jun 2008
     
Aug 12, 2013 06:23 |  #22

Heycoop Photography wrote in post #16200444 (external link)
To me it seems simple; if I am doubling the rate going to a 7D (my 450D has 4fps) how can that be anything other than significant. Especially as I shoot motorsport, where cars are traveling at 150-200km/h, and you sometimes want to get them within a 10m spot (ie, where there is a nice background, important part of a corner etc), that doubled fps would make a big difference to my chance of getting multiple shots within this 10 or 20m area, would it not.

I would like to add one more thing. I AM NOT LOOKING TO UPGRADE JUST TO HAVE MORE FPS!!!!!;) I am looking for an all round better camera, better focusing, better image quality/colour etc. FPS is a good reason to upgrade, but far from being the only reason.

Please continue with your suggestions, I have been doing more research, and with the help from you guys have definitely ruled out the 40D, and am pretty much tossing up between a 60D and a 7D. I've heard rumours that a 7DII is due for release early next year, but then canon said the same thing 12 months ago, so I'm not going to wait for that.

Anyway, please continue........

the 60D is a good option especially since the 70D was announced, the price has dropped significantly (at least in the US)




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Left ­ Handed ­ Brisket
That's my line!
Avatar
9,413 posts
Gallery: 12 photos
Likes: 2106
Joined Jun 2011
Location: The Uwharrie Mts, NC
     
Aug 12, 2013 08:15 as a reply to  @ watt100's post |  #23

The 40D or 50D would be a decent upgrade. After months of looking, thinking and researching, I ended up with a new 6D about a month ago. Buying used electronics is a tough thing for me to do.

I do a lot of low light shooting, so better ISO performance was the main thing that was holding me back with my 450D/XSi. For your needs i think the 7D is by far your best option. However, the 70D is due on the streets in in 2-6 weeks. It might be worth your time to wait and see what the initial reports are on this new camera.


PSA: The above post may contain sarcasm, reply at your own risk | Not in gear database: Auto Sears 50mm 2.0 / 3x CL-360, Nikon SB-28, SunPak auto 322 D, Minolta 20

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Ralph ­ III
Goldmember
1,342 posts
Likes: 16
Joined Mar 2009
Location: Alabama
     
Aug 12, 2013 14:23 |  #24

Heycoop Photography wrote in post #16200444 (external link)
Thanks Ralph,

I've been following (and keepimng quiet) on this debate about fps. To me it seems simple; if I am doubling the rate going to a 7D (my 450D has 4fps) how can that be anything other than significant. Especially as I shoot motorsport....

I would like to add one more thing. I AM NOT LOOKING TO UPGRADE JUST TO HAVE MORE FPS!!!!!;) I am looking for an all round better camera, better focusing, better image quality/colour etc. FPS is a good reason to upgrade, but far from being the only reason.

Please continue with your suggestions, I have been doing more research, and with the help from you guys have definitely ruled out the 40D, and am pretty much tossing up between a 60D and a 7D...

Anyway, please continue........

Hey Heycoop,

Your thread has taken a turn and as you may be on the wrong track now.

Your initial inquiry asked whether it would be worth upgrading to the 40d or 50d (from your Rebel XSi) in looking for something with a better burst rate and better autofocus.

I'm here to tell you that the 40d as well as the 50d will both be a significant upgrade over your Rebel XSi in those regards. Both offer a much higher burst rate as well as better cross-point focusing. Do not rule out the 40d given the price!

Then it was suggested the 6.5 frames per second burst rate of the 40d wouldn't really be much of an upgrade over your Rebel XSi. That is a false notion. BTW, your Rebel XSi shoots at 3.5 frames/sec. You can visit the Canon Museum for all details HERE (external link).

So you ARE almost doubling your burst rate with the 40d. It's a 90% increase in performance. The 40d also has a significantly higher buffer rate than your Rebel XSi. Your Rebel XSi can only get 6 Raw images in a row before lagging, whereas the Canon 40d can get 17 RAW images in a row before lagging.

The buffer and burst rate speed would prove to be a HUGE upgrade over what you have now, especially if you use RAW to shoot Sports. There is no comparison there and that doesn't even include the better build and a few other improvements! You can visit HERE (external link) for a brief comparison of the XSi and the 40d.

---------------


Now you're considering the 7d and 60d?

It's now hard to make a suggestion for you because you've never said exactly what your budget is?

I will say this. I would not recommend the 60d over any of the other camera's mentioned! It's burst rate speed is really to slow for sports as you desire. It's the same as your Rebel XSi, btw.

Because--the IQ improvement you'll experience with any of those camera's will not be significant over what you have already, IMHO. The real improvement is in build quality and better features suited for sports. The only exception where IQ would be noticeably better is at the higher ISO's.

---------------


Lastly. This would be my suggestion albeit based upon some unknowns.

A) If budget is a consideration then I'd suggest getting the 40d. The difference for your Sports shooting is going to be significant over what you have now and the money you'd save over the other camera's could allow you to get additional equipment or more/better glass.

B) If you're set on equipment and budget allows, then the 7d would be the best option obviously. You're going to pay quite a bit more though! Coming from an inferior camera for sports, as you have, I don't know if it makes sense for you to take such a great leap, when the 40d or 50d is already going to be a big leap. Only you can factor that but do remember, you can always upgrade again down the road! ;)


God Bless,
Ralph


"SOUTHERN and SAVED!"
POTN FEEDBACK...............ITEMS FOR SALE

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Mavgirl
Senior Member
647 posts
Joined Mar 2013
Location: Dallas area
     
Aug 12, 2013 14:38 |  #25

Ralph III wrote in post #16200383 (external link)
Again, I respectfully disagree and you should consider your statements.


Let’s clarify. You went from the Rebel XT (which shoots at 3.0 frames/sec, btw) to the Canon 50d which shoots at 6.3 frames per second.

You doubled (plus some) your burst rate speed yet you state such “…didn’t make a huge difference…” and that your upgraded burst speed was only a “…slightly faster burst rate…”!

You must have forgotten the burst rate speed of your Rebel XT because you then immediately turn around and say if the OP doubles his (similar) burst rate speed that it will then be “significant”. :confused:


---------------


It’s to late for me to reply directly to the OP at the moment, but let me put things in perspective. In regards to Canon digital burst speeds it can be said they built quite a number of slow camera’s, some medium speed camera’s and a few fast camera’s.

The Canon 40d is one of the fastest DSLR camera’s Canon has ever built, since 1995. In fact, no other APS-C camera is faster with the exception of the 7d. In addition, they only have a handful (6) of professional full frame Canon DSLR’s that are faster (1d series).

The difference in burst speed the OP will experience from his 4.0 frames/sec to the 40d’s 6.5 frames/sec will be significant to him.

Yes it does however come down to what is most important to him and as he considers the price range of everything. But I think it is a dis-service to him to suggest the upgrade from 4.0 frames/sec to 6.5 frames/sec will only be a slight difference.


God Bless,
Ralph


You're making assessments here based on YOUR experience. As am I. It's all about opinion. and the fact is that the OP's experience may be completely different than either of ours. You cannot say with any certainty that it will be significant to someone else because it's subjective. It's a disservice to assume you would know any better than I would what will and will not be significant to someone.


6D/50D/350D with too many lenses
Calumet 4x5, Pentax SV 35mm, Canon A-1, Rebel G and many more toys...

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
h14nha
Goldmember
Avatar
2,019 posts
Gallery: 10 photos
Likes: 104
Joined Nov 2008
Location: South Wales, UK
     
Aug 12, 2013 15:25 |  #26

I upgraded from a 450d to a 7d. It was an upgrade in every way. When birding the extra FPS made a huge difference to getting the shot. The AF made a huge difference to getting the shot. The ISO improvement made a huge difference to getting the shot.
I normally hate it when people ask for specific advice and get coerced into spending more money, but, if you can swing the extra then you will be impressed with the 7d.


Ian
There's no fool like an old skool fool :D
myflickr (external link)
My Gear - 7d, / 16-35mm F4 / 70-200 2.8 II / 100-400 / 300mm 2.8 / :D Fuji X Pro1 / XT-1 Graphite 18/35/56

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Ralph ­ III
Goldmember
1,342 posts
Likes: 16
Joined Mar 2009
Location: Alabama
     
Aug 12, 2013 16:03 |  #27

Mavgirl wrote in post #16201869 (external link)
You're making assessments here based on YOUR experience. As am I. It's all about opinion. and the fact is that the OP's experience may be completely different than either of ours. You cannot say with any certainty that it will be significant to someone else because it's subjective. It's a disservice to assume you would know any better than I would what will and will not be significant to someone.

Well, I'm not the one who stated in one sentence that doubling your buffer speed was a "slight" improvement, and then in the next sentence say that doubling your buffer speed would be a "significant" improvement!

You seem to have more opinions than I do. :rolleyes: :D



Ha, Ha. I couldn't resist that.


---------------


The fact is I read what the OP said and then inferred Mavgirl.

The OP inquired about upgrading his camera because it was "starting" to become inadequate for what he does. He also gave a limited budget ($320-$500.00). He didn't state he wanted to make a drastic course change, due to the disgust of the inadequacy of his camera!!!

quote by Heycoop; "I am definately starting to reach the limits of my 450D"

As it stands, the OP would in effect be doubling his burst rate with the 40d which also has a significantly faster buffer. That's a fact. You can't double something and not see a real difference. BTW, the OP confirms this.

He would find such increased speed to be quite significant in comparison to what he has now Mavgirl. I'll bet you a coke on that.

Take care,
Ralph


"SOUTHERN and SAVED!"
POTN FEEDBACK...............ITEMS FOR SALE

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Mavgirl
Senior Member
647 posts
Joined Mar 2013
Location: Dallas area
     
Aug 12, 2013 16:26 |  #28

Ralph III wrote in post #16202090 (external link)
Well, I'm not the one who stated in one sentence that doubling your buffer speed was a "slight" improvement, and then in the next sentence say that doubling your buffer speed would be a "significant" improvement!

You seem to have more opinions than I do. :rolleyes: :D



Ha, Ha. I couldn't resist that.


---------------


The fact is I read what the OP said and then inferred Mavgirl.

The OP inquired about upgrading his camera because it was "starting" to become inadequate for what he does. He also gave a limited budget ($320-$500.00). He didn't state he wanted to make a drastic course change, due to the disgust of the inadequacy of his camera!!!

As it stands, the OP would in effect be doubling his burst rate with the 40d which also has a significantly faster buffer. That's a fact. You can't double something and not see a real difference. BTW, the OP confirms this.

He would find such increased speed to be quite significant in comparison to what he has now Mavgirl. I'll bet you a coke on that.

Take care,
Ralph

Yep. I have a lot of opinions. I think the difference here, and what you're not getting, is that I know my opinions are just that. My opinions based on my experiences. And others have different opinions. You're talking like you're in the OP's head and can know how things would affect him. And you don't. But hey, I also believe that people should take opinions on message boards (and blogs for that matter) with a grain of salt. Or silver as the case may be. Because you don't really know that person on the other end of the text.

My personal experience, and I've always tried to be very clear that it's my experience and others may vary, I didn't find the 50D a significant gain over my 350D as far as burst rate goes. And by that I don't just mean which is faster. Yes, the 50D gets a couple more shots each time you spray and pray. I mean did it help me nail the shot more often. And no, it did not. What did help me nail that decisive moment shot more often was slowing down and anticipating more. But that's a whole other discussion about technique and not specs. Bottom line... in this case I think that if the primary motivation is a faster burst rate than money is better spent on a 7D if the budget can swing it. But the OP has said that's not what it's all about for them so it really doesn't matter anyway.

I would never bet on someone else's experience. I'm not in their head so I don't know how they'll feel about things.


6D/50D/350D with too many lenses
Calumet 4x5, Pentax SV 35mm, Canon A-1, Rebel G and many more toys...

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Ralph ­ III
Goldmember
1,342 posts
Likes: 16
Joined Mar 2009
Location: Alabama
     
Aug 12, 2013 16:46 |  #29

h14nha wrote in post #16201986 (external link)
...I normally hate it when people ask for specific advice and get coerced into spending more money, but, if you can swing the extra then you will be impressed with the 7d.

BINGO! That's the point I'm trying to make.

It's not like the OP is going from a very solid 40d or 50d in wanting something that offers greater burst speed and a superior focus system and/or improved ISO. In that case, it would make sense for a person to upgrade to a 7d or even a very expensive EOS 1d.

The OP however, is going to experience a significant improvement no matter which of those camera's he chooses! Because his camera isn't suited for sports in comparison to any of those.

He may end up getting the 7d but I don't think it proper to encourage him to leapfrog over other superior camera's and paying more, because he was convinced the others were somehow not a good enough upgrade.


---------------


It's kinda like the old movie Stallone and Winkler played in before they were famous (Lords of Flatbush) in which the Jewelry Store salesman took one of the guys girlfriends and immediately showed her the most expensive ring in the store, when they came in to look for engagement rings. Well of course she fell in love with that one and there was no hope for the poor lad in getting her to look at a less expensive one after that. He coud have punched the salesman...:)

See ya,
Ralph


"SOUTHERN and SAVED!"
POTN FEEDBACK...............ITEMS FOR SALE

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Mavgirl
Senior Member
647 posts
Joined Mar 2013
Location: Dallas area
     
Aug 12, 2013 16:56 |  #30

Ralph III wrote in post #16202203 (external link)
BINGO! That's the point I'm trying to make.

It's not like the OP is going from a very solid 40d or 50d in wanting something that offers greater burst speed and a superior focus system and/or improved ISO. In that case, it would make sense for a person to upgrade to a 7d or even a very expensive EOS 1d.

The OP however, is going to experience a significant improvement no matter which of those camera's he chooses! Because his camera isn't suited for sports in comparison to any of those.

He may end up getting the 7d but I don't think it proper to encourage him to leapfrog over other superior camera's and paying more, because he was convinced the others were somehow not a good enough upgrade.


---------------


It's kinda like the old movie Stallone and Winkler played in before they were famous (Lords of Flatbush) in which the Jewelry Store salesman took one of the guys girlfriends and immediately showed her the most expensive ring in the store, when they came in to look for engagement rings. Well of course she fell in love with that one and there was no hope for the poor lad in getting her to look at a less expensive one after that. He coud have punched the salesman...:)

See ya,
Ralph

I get what you're saying here. And it might have been more helpful if you'd said it that plainly earlier on and several long posts could have been avoided. And I would have suggested you re-read my original post. LOL


6D/50D/350D with too many lenses
Calumet 4x5, Pentax SV 35mm, Canon A-1, Rebel G and many more toys...

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

4,559 views & 0 likes for this thread
Upgrade 450D to 40D or 50D??
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EOS Digital Cameras 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is KenJerrard
1143 guests, 371 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.