50D and NOISE?

Well if finance is rather prohibitive then buy the 40D and with the cash left over buy the 580ex II. That would be a more sound and intelligent purchase since you already know how well the 40D performs and seem to be pretty satisfied with it.

I have the 50D after upgrading from the 30D and it was a nice upgrade. But you may not see much difference (Besides screen res and other minor bells and whistles) if shelling out extra dosh for the 50D.

Well, if you don't do low-light photography, then the higher/expanded ISO of the 50D won't give you any benefit. So you just need to ask yourself:

1. Was the 40D's LCD insufficient for you?
2. Did 40D's lack of lens microadjustment affect your ability to capture sharp photos consistently?
3. Did you feel limited by the 10mp image of your old 40D and wished they had been 15mp instead for cropability?

Hopefully that will help you decide.

jwcdds wrote in post #7127557
Well, if you don't do low-light photography, then the higher/expanded ISO of the 50D won't give you any benefit. So you just need to ask yourself:

1. Was the 40D's LCD insufficient for you?
2. Did 40D's lack of lens microadjustment affect your ability to capture sharp photos consistently?
3. Did you feel limited by the 10mp image of your old 40D and wished they had been 15mp instead for cropability?

Hopefully that will help you decide.

Yeah its a rare occasion that I shoot at even 1600.

I think after answering all your questions, I'll stick with my previous 40D. My photos were sharp, clear, I had no issues with grain or noise, and it did the job for me Thanks for your help everyone!!

int0xicatedxluv wrote in post #7127453
Well..to be honest I'm shooting a bit of everything.

I do mainly portraits for the time being, but I'm branching into engagements and weddings...I do some work with kids, and every now and then I'll shoot a local nightclub.
I had the 580 EX II, but now I'm downgrading (cost reasons) to the 480 EX II. I'd only had my 40D for 2 months before it was stolen but I loved it !!

I shoot indoors and outdoors based on weather. I'm kind of a do it all photographer. The only thing I rarely ever shoot is movement of any kind/ sports/ etc.

I've yet to have a need for large prints or anything like that either.

I do 90% of my work in nightclubs and the rest are model shoots under studio strobes. For nightclubs I use sRAW since they always end up on the web. The plus to this is the saved hard drive space and better noise control. When I shoot everything else I use the full resolution on the camera. One nice thing is the flexibility it has for cropping. You can be a little loose on comp and not ruin the image. Not a good habit but you have less chance of missing a shot if you are caught off guard. It would seem the body fits you well. The 20,30 or 40D would too. I will tell you that when your doing your nightclub work that the LCD on the 50D is a plus. Everyone always wants to see their pic which show up better and you can get a better idea of how to adjust your settings and kill the oof shots too.

Here is a sample of the 50D in the nightclub scene and then one of a model shoot. First on shot with a 70-200 2.8 and the other with Tamron 17-50 2.8.

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

hmmmmmmm

If you were happy with your 40D, then get another 40D. Put the savings towards better glass, flash, lighting, etc.

I've brought this up in another thread. I know I'm in the minority regarding noise between the 50D and 40D. I own both, and here are my observations:

Noise - the 50D is superior at ISO 1600 and 3200. I didn't see much difference in noise at ISO 800 and lower.

AF - the 50D is faster and more accurate

LCD - No comparison. The LCD on the 50D makes the one on the 40D look primative.

K6AZ wrote in post #7128321
I've brought this up in another thread. I know I'm in the minority regarding noise between the 50D and 40D. I own both, and here are my observations:

Noise - the 50D is superior at ISO 1600 and 3200. I didn't see much difference in noise at ISO 800 and lower.

AF - the 50D is faster and more accurate

LCD - No comparison. The LCD on the 50D makes the one on the 40D look primative.

I also own both and completely agree with K6AZ, plus I just had a chance to pick up a good lens off craig's. It was back focusing, since I could adjust and correct that became a none issue. Picking up lenses in the future just became much easier and affordable. Yes that does correct Canon's product but it also gives me more freedom from issues. Sounds like a winner to me.

It already appears that the OP does quite well w/ what equipment she had. Looking through her gallery, she's done very well with just the 28-135 lens, much better than some of us with thousands of dollars more in glass.

I don't see the OP becoming a gear head any time soon. She's not going to collect a whole lot of glass and albeit having the ability to microadjust is better than not having it, it might not be a feature she'll use much, if at all. Her 40D photos looked great and she did it all w/o microadjust.

She's got an eye for composition and capturing great photos. She can do just as well with a Rebel, or even a P&S (especially since she uses external flash).

I don't see how the LCD would be a selling point to the OP at all when she never once mentioned that she felt her 40D was deficient.

stellgar wrote in post #7128514
I also own both and completely agree with K6AZ, plus I just had a chance to pick up a good lens off craig's. It was back focusing, since I could adjust and correct that became a none issue. Picking up lenses in the future just became much easier and affordable. Yes that does correct Canon's product but it also gives me more freedom from issues. Sounds like a winner to me.

+2

Had owned 40D x2 and all iterations beginning with 10D, so I was somewhat familiar with what they could do. So far 50D has been the best performer for me. Not particularly interested in the LCD, though it is much improved, but the AF does seem more accurate, if not faster and the cropability (is that a word?) was important to me having been used to using a 5D.

If I still owned a 40, would I switch? Probably not, but absent an existing crop camera I think the extra money was well spent.

The 50D noise "issue" is completely over the top and borders on unreasonable, there are some people you will never be able to please no matter what you do.

I'm quite happy with my 40D and won't switch bodies every time Canon comes out with another one. However, in my opinion you'd be foolish not to get the most recent body Canon offers if money isn't an issue. I've not seen many bad pictures from the 50D and I don't expect there are a lot around.

Ignore the 50D noise wonks.....Most have nothing else to complain about so they look for problems and have nothing better to do than try to slam a perfectly fine product.

thegary wrote in post #7127212
the only thing nice on the 50D is the screen...the rest is just toys to fix problems canon can't fix themselves.


thegary

Well thats just not true at all.
Microadjustment is a HUGE feature that was added. Considering the fact, as far as I know, any lens from any manufacture can be saved in the camera (up to 40 I beleive). Not to mention peripheral illumination correction, which can easily be done in PP, but the fact that it automatically detects and applies the right amount is great.
The MUCH better LCD is definitely a plus when you have clients and they want to see what was shot. Also using it in live view at 10x magnification to get the focus absolutely perfect. This is extremely helpful when using a wide angle, and its too hard to tell if its spot on.
Plus the new Digic IV processor.
The list goes on and on...
There were a lot loss features going from the 20D to 30D.

Ivoryplum wrote in post #7128782
Well thats just not true at all.
Microadjustment is a HUGE feature that was added. Considering the fact, as far as I know, any lens from any manufacture can be saved in the camera (up to 40 I beleive). Not to mention peripheral illumination correction, which can easily be done in PP, but the fact that it automatically detects and applies the right amount is great.
The MUCH better LCD is definitely a plus when you have clients and they want to see what was shot. Also using it in live view at 10x magnification to get the focus absolutely perfect. This is extremely helpful when using a wide angle, and its too hard to tell if its spot on.
Plus the new Digic IV processor.
The list goes on and on...
There were a lot loss features going from the 20D to 30D.

The post you are responding to deserves to be ignored. He obviously knows nothing about the camera and posts a one liner just to be heard. You're obviously correct in your opinion and no-one could possibly argue differently.

HKGuns wrote in post #7128801
The post you are responding to deserves to be ignored. He obviously knows nothing about the camera and posts a one liner just to be heard. You're obviously correct in your opinion and no-one could possibly argue differently.

Agreed.
But newbies might read it, and I felt they deserve to hear from someone the actually loves the camera.

slightly offtopic, but does anyone have noise comparisons between the 30d, 40d and 50d?