My 40D vs 50D ISO comparison

I'm officially looking to upgrade my body now since I sold a guitar amp I don't use anymore, putting a large chunk of cash in my bank account that is going right to Canon of course : p

I've narrowed it down to the 40D or 50D, no 5D as I'd rather have the 9 cross-point sensors of the croppers. Of course the debate that follows these two is the ISO performance, so I headed down to Calumet today with a 4GB card and snapped some test shots.

All photos taken in RAW format with the 17-55mm f/2.8 wide open, and processed in LR2. Noise reduction set to 25% color 0% luminance because that's what I use realistically. I have the full ISO range for the 50D, and ISO 400 and up for the 40D. (40D metering set to spot, 50D metering set to partial, forgot to check that but my test still works)


50D

ISO 100

40D

ISO 400

I just ordered a 50D and am anxiously waiting for it to arrive. Your ISO comparisons were helpful and I agree ... almost an non issue. What sold me was the 920 K LCD and the extra MEG PIX. I'm moving up from the Rebel XT (350D) and it seemed to be a natural progression before I head into the FF Sensor in a couple of years.

postprocess your high iso 50d image through DPP and it gets even better

I absolutely love my 50d 100iso images with skies in them, the sky is so clean that it just blows me away everytime!

harroz wrote in post #7667955
I absolutely love my 50d 100iso images with skies in them, the sky is so clean that it just blows me away everytime!

You mean like this?

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

Ok-- it may be me but does the 40D have less noise than the 50D?
EDIT-- I missed the summary below your pics-- looks like you agree.

the difference isnt worth making an issue over as far as im concerned, im sick of the comparison threads.

most of the people who make an issue of the 50D's iso performance are the ones who own the 40D and are trying to convince themselves that they have a better camera.

the 50D is a better camera. its up for debate weather its worth the extra money, but it is a better camera.

I think that people with 40D's, like me, were hoping for less high ISO noise, and not more pixels. Hence the disappointment with the 50D.

Zoso23 wrote in post #7668081
most of the people who make an issue of the 50D's iso performance are the ones who own the 40D and are trying to convince themselves that they have a better camera.

Hmm. I usually gladly pay to have the latest & greatest.
The question is, what do you do if the latest is not the greatest.

I was a sceptic, but I nowhave a 50D for wildlife and I am blown away with the IQ....upto 800ISO is very good and with the extra MPs you get alot of zoom for your money! Added to this the AF adjust feature....great cam.

George.ML wrote in post #7668632
Hmm. I usually gladly pay to have the latest & greatest.
The question is, what do you do if the latest is not the greatest.

Add me to this list!

Yeah makes sense, looks like the 50D is 1 stop poorer than the 5D2 at high ISO's. I don't like how NR was used, but I understand and accept your reasoning and motives behind doing so