-=50D Owners Unite! Share Tips and Post Pics

gotta say this is my first time posting in this thread, I am recently thinking about upgrading to a 50D from my rebel T1i.

main reasons for the upgrade are for better AF, View Finder, and the ergonomics.

my main concernes, how bad is the banding at iso 3200? I usually dont go that high but if needed I would like to be able to use a 3200 iso pic. 6400 if absolutely necessary but usually not.

I plan on going FF in the future but I won't have the money for that for a while and the upgrade difference from T1i gripped to 50D would only be 200 dollars or so... so i am thinking of this for better ergonomics etc.

what are thoughts here? a worthy upgrade or should I just wait another year and get that 5D?

paradiddleluke wrote in post #11093978
my main concernes, how bad is the banding at iso 3200? I usually dont go that high but if needed I would like to be able to use a 3200 iso pic. 6400 if absolutely necessary but usually not.

Ever since ACR6.1 came out - I had no concern really what ISO I shot at...

the ACR NR is that good...

It's not a problem. Get the camera, you'll love it.

I'll second Immaculens' opinion for ACR6.1 and Lightroom 3... raw image quality improved immensely and banding is pretty much gone higher ISOs. Recently I've shot a party with-in a dark restaurant with black ceilings ..so ceiling bounce lighting was very hindered. To make a long story short I shot at ISO 800 and pushed exposure in Lightroom 2-1/2 stops with fill light slider at 30 or so for most shots. I was amazed at the quality of the image.

thanks for the answers guys! I'm gunna keep thinking about it!

I doubt anyone will want to trade gripped T1i + cash for 50D so it may be a longish process to sell and buy but if the ergonomics are that much better which I think they are it will be worth it

need to sell/trade my 50d for a 24-105mm. may be one of my last post..... going to use my t2i. is it a good idea?

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

41 minutes with the Sigma 10-20, ISO 100, f/4.5
41 minutes for the exposure, then another 41 minutes for in-camera noise reduction. No noise reduction applied during post processing. The white streak in the middle of the sky is the Milky Way.

Just trying things out with the kids. Any CC more then welcomed. Alot sharper then what is being uploaded, frustrating.

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

I really like that 41 minute exposure. My 50d seems awfully noisy for some reason. I know the higher the ISO the more noise but I've even noticed it on 100 and 400.

41 Minute exposure..... what remote are you using? Trying to find a decent one that is wireless and inexpensive since it wont be used to much

I picked up a Pixel TW-282. It's a little misrepresented it says you can program up to 9999 exposures or -- Unlimited. But in reality its 1-99 or unlimited, but thats really my only complaint. I haven't used it a whole lot because I bought it last week and a whole ton of craziness went down and has kept me from having much fun time lately. But in general it does what it should. No noticeable shutter lag either.

seesaw wrote in post #11096954
41 Minute exposure..... what remote are you using? Trying to find a decent one that is wireless and inexpensive since it wont be used to much

It's a wired shutter release similar to the Canon RS-80N3. Just some $8 Ebay junk I've been using for years.

hella 325 wrote in post #11096903
I really like that 41 minute exposure. My 50d seems awfully noisy for some reason. I know the higher the ISO the more noise but I've even noticed it on 100 and 400.

even with good lighting? think the low iso noise is worse than that of the T1i up to iso 800?

Thanx for the quick response on the remote guys.

paradiddleluke wrote in post #11097068
even with good lighting? think the low iso noise is worse than that of the T1i up to iso 800?

It's mainly in lower lighting situations, but most of my images generally seem grainy and you get up past iso800 and its really bad. This is my first DSLR so I may just not have a basis for comparison. I've been meaning to make a thread on it.