50D Owners Tired Of Bad Pics, How To Make Them Better

TheHoff wrote in post #7440702
hah

my wife put my camera + 16-35 down on a table yesterday with at least an inch of the camera hanging off the edge of the table over concrete... she almost bought me a 1DS3 yesterday then you could've had the remains of the old one for $500

Well, if you can find a non-destructive way to get your wife to buy you that 1DsMk3 I would love to have that old 1D of yours.

TheHoff wrote in post #7440702
hah

my wife put my camera + 16-35 down on a table yesterday with at least an inch of the camera hanging off the edge of the table over concrete... she almost bought me a 1DS3 yesterday then you could've had the remains of the old one for $500

Was she wearing a purse..... would you have sued her?

tharmsen wrote in post #7440736
Well, if you can find a non-destructive way to get your wife to buy you that 1DsMk3 I would love to have that old 1D of yours.

I hear ya.. I'd never spend the cash on a current model these days. The previous generation is where the value is at.

Najo wrote in post #7440753
Was she wearing a purse..... would you have sued her?

I think willfully placing your husband's camera on the edge of a table where it then falls and is destroyed is grounds for a divorce here, but I'm no lawyer... maybe we can get another 20 page thread on that.

can anyone else confirm turning auto lighting optimizer off reduces noise? pics ?

TheHoff wrote in post #7440773
I think willfully placing your husband's camera on the edge of a table where it then falls and is destroyed is grounds for a divorce here, but I'm no lawyer... maybe we can get another 20 page thread on that.

Inclined to agree, and sorry I could not resist.

Turning auto lighting optimizer off reduces noise? I could not tell you I do the same as tharmsen and turn most of the gadgets off, as far as doing a comparison, no I take pictures and enjoy my 50D because it produces great ones.

tharmsen wrote in post #7438333
Another way to help control noise is to shoot in sRAW1. This causes pixel binning to take place which in turn has proven to reduce CA noise considerably. Any time I shoot at ISO 1600 to 3200, I switch over to sRAW1.

Is pixel binning a fact on the current models when using sRAW? I have not heard anything official from Canon on this.

I've not heard anything official from Canon either, but I read about it on some review site... they went into detail about how sRAW worked in the 50D. I can't recall the URL.

Aside from the evidence (pictures) I can't explain why else we would see the differences in the images we see.

People keep talking about the noise being the same or slighty more on the 50D. It has 15mb vs 10mb .Why would a person expect less? The idea was less noise at 15mb not less than a 10mb. Plus you get A LOT of Picture to work with. The same fps at 15mb, AF ,UMDA cards, some weather sealing, Raw1 and Raw2 even HD for TV, and faster downloads in the computer. I had a look at the 40D at Christmas...$820 with shipping from B+H ...The 50D was on sale $1069.95 free overnight. I love the new LCD. I have a 5D and like the 40D it has the old bad screen , no micro adjustment. $240 for all the great stuff. I went from a 30D to the 5D and lost my BIF capability...It is good to be back..50D and 5D I am happy...off to shoot Humpbacks in Maui...... this is a Gray Whale in Monterey.

PHOTOBUCKET EMBEDDING IS DISABLED BY THIS MEMBER. Photobucket sends ads instead of embedding photos from their free galleries. Click the link (if available) below to see the image in a gallery page. http://i212.photobucke​t.com …G_7829_edited-2copy-1.jpg

Nothing wrong with my 50D. Plenty wrong with the guy behind the viewfinder. That's where the improvement needs to happen.

michaelnel wrote in post #7441243
Nothing wrong with my 50D. Plenty wrong with the guy behind the viewfinder. That's where the improvement needs to happen.

So True Michael .....Sage Advice...H!! from Sacramento!!! ...Rich

tharmsen wrote in post #7441138
I've not heard anything official from Canon either, but I read about it on some review site... they went into detail about how sRAW worked in the 50D. I can't recall the URL.

Aside from the evidence (pictures) I can't explain why else we would see the differences in the images we see.

If the sensor is capturing the same image per pixel basis regardless if in RAW or sRAW, the algorithm to downsize the RAW file must be done. And only Canon knows what these algorithms really do and what the software architectural block diagram looks like for sRAW shots from the A/D conversion to CF card writes.

If there is no true pixel binning done off the sensor in terms of grouping then there is post processing done for sure. Without actual pixel binning, just to downsize the RAW files is post processing.

Well my 50D is almost, kind of, just sorta as good in low light as the 40D at higher ISO's, I do have all of the in-camera NR turned ( & peripheral illum thingy) and I just deal with the noise in post and get better detail in the images that way.

But Saturday I had an idea that allows me to not worry about it anymore...

the 1D3 will be here tomorrow

TheHoff wrote in post #7438440
* Stop worrying about noise. No one sees it except for you unless you're carrying around a 24" monitor to view 100% crops. Noise from most bodies up to 1600 and even 3200 looks fine once it is printed.

Larry Weinman wrote in post #7439520
I have a 40D and 50D. I think this noise thing is a bunch of people trying to convince themselves that the 40D was the right purchase. I don't have any more of a noise problem on my 50D then I do on my 40D

I agree with this 110%. I had a 40D, then replaced it with a 50D. I had a 5D and replaced that with a 5D MKII. The 50D is one fine camera. The prints I've had made thus far at ISO 1600 and 3200 look outstanding. Is it in the same league (noise wise) as my 5D MKII. Absolutely not. But guess what, neither was my 40D. The noise difference between the two (40D & 50D) is insignificant, overall, when compared to the differences in the complete camera package. I love the 50D and the features it provides. If I had to do it all over again, I most certainly would sell the 40D and buy the 50D.

At the end of the day, I think we (being members of this site) can't see the forest for the trees. Film cameras were measured by the prints they produced. Digital camera's aren't subjected to the same criteria. Instead they are subjected to super magnified 200% cropped views, and judged by pixel level performance. It doesn't matter if the image makes a beautiful 8x10, or 11x14 print, all the matters is what shows up on the screen. This is despite the fact that most images are either printed, or scaled down for viewing on photo sharing sites. So we subject our DSLR images to criteria that ultimately doesn't matter when the image is either printed or resized for web viewing.