500D vs 50D - any value?

I've been wanting to pick up a refurb 50D (what with the CLP prices dropping to under $600 with shipping). I like that the T1i has video and everything and I'll keep it around for that or as a walk-around camera, and to use the 50D for anything beyond 'walking around' (shoots for people/portraits/plann​ed landscapes, etc).

The price seems to make it worth it -- when I checked out the 50D I thought it handled low-light much better than my T1i. I guess the question (and, admittedly, this is a loaded question) is whether or not it would be worth it to invest the money into a second, potentially higher quality body.

Of course, the other option I have is to save that money and spend it on some higher quality glass (been thinking about selling the 17-85 and picking up a 70-200 F/4L as my first L glass). Decisions, decisions..

Oh hey there Mr. Familiar Face Love your flame logo-ed lens!

Anyways, I'm a bit surprised that you noticed a difference in IQ between the two. It was my understanding that the T1i and 50D both use the same image sensor, just as how the 7D, 60D, and T2i all use the same image sensor themselves.

That said, I'd much prefer the 50D. You'll get varied opinions, but after going with my 50D I found it's impossible for me to go back to a Rebel as my main body (despite really wanting to try out the high ISO + manual video of the T2i).

The pros of the 50D versus a Rebel for me are the dedicated aperture wheel in the back (absolute love for manual settings), easily accessible setting buttons on the top (each accessing two options, one controlled by the top dial and one controlled by the rear wheel), a larger + brighter pentaprism viewfinder, dedicated AF-ON button for back button AF, 8-directional joystick for easy manual AF point selection, and great ergonomics for my big hands are the biggest selling points for me. There's other things too that people will mention like AF microadjust, but everything I mentioned are my own personal reasons for loving the 50D.

So in short, I'd definitely jump to the 50D

On a side note, why not sell both the 28-135mm and the 17-85mm and pick up a 24-70 or 17-55?

Mistabernie wrote in post #11909213
when I checked out the 50D I thought it handled low-light much better than my T1i.

I don't think it has any difference at all.

I think none of the lenses you have are fast enough for low-light.

Personally if it was me, I'd sell all of your lenses get a 15-85mm and 55-250mm. Then maybe a 50mm f1.8 if you have the extra money.

Yeah, I realize now my mistake -- I was at Best Buy, Best Buy doesn't sell the 50D any more so it must have been a 60D. :/ Valid information is valid.

The issue therein becomes, yeah, the 60D would be an image quality improvement, but one of the reasons I wanted to move up to a 50D/60D or 7D was because I got that same feeling when I was messing around with the 60D vs. the Rebel r31ncarnat3d.. whereas the 60D felt different. Not quite like a Rebel obviously, but between a 50D and a 60D -- well, let's just say, if the 60D had the body of the 50D, I'd be on it.

In reality, switching glass makes more sense, but I dont think I could justify (i.e. escape with my life from the soon to be Mrs.) a 24-70, even though that would probably be the ideal upgrade at this point. In reality, it would be the kind of thing that I set aside a little bit of cash on the side at a time, and then try to sell these two lenses to raise the other half of the money (roughly).

The other deciding factor in that, though, is that whenever decent 24-70s go up for sale, they're gone usually before I even see them, and the price is somewhat of a stumbling block. With the 17-55 running in the same ballpark, if I was going to invest that kind of money I'd probably go 24-70

Some overall good advice though on all fronts, thanks!

First: if you compare canon DSLR from the same sensor generation (xxxD/Rebel vs. xxD), you will have a nearly identical image quality. The Difference exists in Size & Handling:

• better, bigger body with more grip for big hands
  
• dedicated controls/buttons
  
• a second LCD
  
• a thumb wheel
  
• weather sealing
  
• better (bigger/brighter) viewfinder
  
• better AF-System
  

If you want a 50D, why not go CLP? They're selling for $500-something now.

Your gear list pops up a question whether you should upgrade your lenses first. You camera is not a limiting factor for taking pictures.

r31ncarnat3d wrote in post #11910506
If you want a 50D, why not go CLP? They're selling for $500-something now.

I bought my 50D from CLP Sunday for $560...they had 18 left...they are now out of stock.
Mine looks like a overstock, no refurb sticker, everything in orig packaging,,,this thing is a beauty!!!!!

mark2009 wrote in post #11910991
I bought my 50D from CLP Sunday for $560...they had 18 left...they are now out of stock.
Mine looks like a overstock, no refurb sticker, everything in orig packaging,,,this thing is a beauty!!!!!

Of course they are. Well, that makes the decision a bit easier.

One suggestion was to go 15-85/55-250 and then nifty fifty/f1.8 -- I have thought about getting a nifty fifty but if I did, it wouldn't be the F/1.8. Most people sing the praises of the nifty fifty, but most people that have shot between the 1.8 and the 1.4 say they would never consider going back.

Heck, I've heard someone that has a 24-70 and a 50 F1.4 say that they primarily shoot everything with the 50. I'm prone to believe that, as it seems consistent with what I hear from most people about the 50 F/1.4.

It's funny because my initial idea was to add a 55-250 as my telephoto and just use that and the T1i kit lens(since then, I've traded my kit lens towards the 17-85 after I picked up the 28-135, both for good deals). Sounds like I would have saved a little money to have done that, but I really like both the 17-85 and the 28-135, to the point where I can't choose which one (if either) to ditch to make room for upgraded glass

That kind of brings me back to r31ncarnat3d's idea of selling all three and picking up a 24-70 or 17-55. I think my plan going forward will be something along those lines -- save up half the money for the 24-70, then sell all three lenses and pick up the 24-70, then pick up a 70-200. I think that will be a decent combination for the time being (maybe toss a 50 f/1.4 in there in between)....

I think it all comes down to what you shoot. I shoot mostly my son's High School, and now College Basketball, and my XSi was maxed out. I went from the 50mm, to the 85mm F/1.8 which I use all the time. I have the 17-50 non vc tamron, and I have the 55-250, which works great. I am debating about selling it, and getting the 70-200L f/4, kinda just to try it, but I don't think it is going to show me that much better IQ. I would have to get the Non IS, because my wife is ready to kill me on buying the stuff I have.

Canon does have the 50D with the 28-135 in stock for $813.....you could then sell the lens.
Get a broken P$S from ebay for $15, and you get another 20% off that price.

Mistabernie wrote in post #11911210
...One suggestion was to go 15-85/55-250 and then nifty fifty/f1.8 -- I have thought about getting a nifty fifty but if I did, it wouldn't be the F/1.8. Most people sing the praises of the nifty fifty, but most people that have shot between the 1.8 and the 1.4 say they would never consider going back...

Again, if you are interested in low light those two are slow.
You don't need to buy 24-70 to get 2.8, because 28-75 is also 2.8 and this lens is perfect for high IQ pictures.
It fits on 500D perfectly and it is 450 USD new with something like six years warranty.
If you need something fast at 200mm and higher, but close to reasonable budged -
200mm F2.8 F/2.8 L MK II USM Lens.
Cheap x2 teleconverter would make it 400 5.6 and AF still will be working on 500D.