40D Vs 50D ( again ?)

Its done, Im cashed up and ready to buy my digital SLR,- moving from Eos 5 35mm
Im down to the 40D or the 50D, and can afford both bodies as I have a good range of EF lenses, that wont be a huge issue.
As the 50 has been out for some time now I was hoping for some opinions from some of you who have maybe used both ?
Im into sports, and landscapes if that helps ?
any thoughts, advise comments would be appreciated.
Thanks

Personally I like my 50D more than I liked my 40D, but it's really just because of the culmination of a lot of little things: expanded ISO, the LCD, the Live View implementation is a little more refined, etc. The 50D's IQ might be a little better, but I don't think it's a staggering amount.

So my view on it is, the 50D is a nicer camera, but currently the 40D is a really a screaming bargain for what you're getting. If getting a 50D over a 40D means you have to skimp on other lenses or accessories, then just get the 40D.

Appears the 40D new is a bargain right now. I like the features of the 50D as a replacement for my 20D but may have to go with the 40D just for the savings.

I just received a new 40D today to replace my 20D and with the money I saved not getting the 50D I'm going to Tenerrife for a week.

I just upgraded from the 40D to the 50D as well specifically for one feature but I am finding that as Tim says, it’s really all the improvements together that make it a significant improvement over the 40D. The two things that really struck me straight off were the rear LCD and ISO noise.

The back LCD is so clear and sharp that I can easily check focus, something I never did with the 40D, and yesterday doing some side by side testing the 50D at ISO1600 really is better than the 40D at 800 and 3200 follows the same trend.

The funny thing is that the one feature I really wanted it turns out I really do not need as much as I thought I would. I upgraded for the micro-adjustment feature as I have been battling 40D focus problems from day one. Well, lenses that were front focusing on the 40D are spot on in the 50D, no adjustments are needed. I even went back and retested on the 40D and sure enough they are off, but not on the 50D.

So, if as you say $$$ are not an issue, go for the 50D. It is a better camera in many small ways that all add up to a very significant package. If your looking to save a few $$$ than the 40D is still an outstanding camera as well.

I have both and shoot mainly indoor sports. ISO 3200 on the 50D is as good as ISO1600 on the 40D. The AF on the 50D is superior when shooting action sequences at the 6 frames per second setting with servo focus mode. The LCD screen alone on the 50D is reason enough to get it IMHO. If you can live without those things though, the 40D is a great deal right now. More on the AF differences here:

https://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthre​ad.php?t=585886

gjl711 wrote in post #6540225
...and yesterday doing some side by side testing the 50D at ISO1600 really is better than the 40D at 800 and 3200 follows the same trend.

Does this apply to in-camera JPEG's or RAW files?

bsmotril wrote in post #6540254
ISO 3200 on the 50D is as good as ISO1600 on the 40D.

Does this apply to in-camera JPEG's or RAW files?

Daan37 wrote in post #6540316
Does this apply to in-camera JPEG's or RAW files?

Yesterday I screwed up and the 40D was shot raw and converted using DPP and the 50D was shot jpeg. I compared jpeg to jpeg but they were not processed the same way. I’m redoing the test tonight shooting raw in both cameras and jpeg in both.

Still, the 50D was significantly less noisy, but it was also significantly softer. The softness really surprised me. When I down-resed the 50D to match the 40D it was a lot closer.

I have a 30D and a 40D already and have just ordered a 50D. When the 50D was first announced I was unimpressed by the spec sheet and very very unimpressed with the price. Since then, two things have happened....

- The price has fallen massively (I've just paid £795 body only including VAT and delivery);
- End user reports of its performance are very encouraging and go beyond pure paper specs in terms of persuading me to buy.

I was really thinking very hard whether to upgrade at all, and if so, whether that should be to a 50D, 1D3, 1Ds3 or 5D2. In the end I figured the 50D was the right choice for me. From reports I've seen the AF is snappier than the 40D - good for wildlife and sports - and the extra resolution brings genuine benefits when it comes to fine detail in landscapes or extra cropability for wildlife shots, especially birds.

Check out this end user review thread....

http://www.ausphotogra​phy.net.au/forum/showt​hread.php?t=18890

gjl711 wrote in post #6540326
Yesterday I screwed up and the 40D was shot raw and converted using DPP and the 50D was shot jpeg. I compared jpeg to jpeg but they were not processed the same way. I’m redoing the test tonight shooting raw in both cameras and jpeg in both.

Still, the 50D was significantly less noisy, but it was also significantly softer. The softness really surprised me. When I down-resed the 50D to match the 40D it was a lot closer.

Ok, I understand...

The reason for asking is because when I do 40D and 50D RAW comparsions (in ACR, NR/sharpening off) I find the 50D has more noise when comparing them to 10MP 40D files. Only when I uprez the 40D files to 15MP (and thereby magnifying noise) the noise levels are comparable to that of the 50D, but the 50D files show more detail. In any case, IMO noise levels are much the same when comparing equalized 40D and 50D RAW files in ACR. I certainly don't see a stop difference...

Daan37 wrote in post #6540365
..when I do 40D and 50D RAW comparsions (in ACR, .....

Was that using the beta camera raw?

gjl711 wrote in post #6540381
Was that using the beta camera raw?

No, the official ACR 4.6 release.

timnosenzo wrote in post #6539670
So my view on it is, the 50D is a nicer camera, but currently the 40D is a really a screaming bargain for what you're getting.

yes, the 40d's price is really tempting over the 50d. but the 50d just has features that i want like the expanded ISO and the in-camera AF calibration system.

gjl711 wrote in post #6540225
The funny thing is that the one feature I really wanted it turns out I really do not need as much as I thought I would. I upgraded for the micro-adjustment feature as I have been battling 40D focus problems from day one. Well, lenses that were front focusing on the 40D are spot on in the 50D, no adjustments are needed. I even went back and retested on the 40D and sure enough they are off, but not on the 50D.

this is too funny

maybe you should have just tried another 40d.