40d or 50d not another thread.

40d or 50d. From my research on POTN and other places the 40d has less noise at higher ISO’s then the 50d. The 5 extra mp really doesn’t excite me. Planning to shot in low ambient lighting conditions such as concerts using quick glass. Just don’t have the funds for a full frame 5d.

Open to suggestions on using the 50d in low lighting conditions.

If your not going to do any serious cropping of your shots or if you don't care about the nicer LCD screen then a 40D sounds like it would be a better fit for you.

However looking at your present lenses it doesn't look as if you have anything that's going to be really that good in low light conditions. Have you thought about keeping your 350D and getting yourself some fast primes like the 85mm f1.8 or the 135mm f2? Even a fast zoom like the 17-55 f2.8 or the Tamron 17-50 f2.8 would help more than a new camera body.

As you know, there are several threads on this topic already.

A lot of 50D owners are very happy with their purchase and some of them have taken some great shots with it. It is definitely not a bad camera. In terms of IQ, it seems in practice to be at least as good as the 40D.

However, is it worth buying a 50D now? The 50D remains significantly more expensive than the 40D and the 60D should be out in either in august 2009 or in February 2010. It will have all the bells and whistles of the 50D and more. The 50D will be cheaper by then.

On the other hand, the 40D has already lost most of its value so you will be able to resell it for about the same price in a few months. I believe it to be a better value for the money at this stage.

jm4ever is right. You can even spend the difference in some good lenses. It wil have a lot more impact on IQ than the camera.

Thanks for your suggestions guy's.

jm4ever yes I know my present lens are not very good at low light conditions. The 17-55 f2.8 is on my shopping list. I may take your advice and pick up the lens first and practice with the 350d.

If you can afford a 50D, why can't you afford a 5D? Full frame lenses?

foxesamu wrote in post #7865892
If you can afford a 50D, why can't you afford a 5D? Full frame lenses?

B&H body only

40D $889.95

50D $1166.95

5D II $2699.95

I like buying new equipment. Have concerns of getting burned with used equipment. Plus at this time photography is a hobby.

Go with the 40D and with the money you save, buy some L Glass

Joshh

Joshua Bowden wrote in post #7869571
Go with the 40D and with the money you save, buy some L Glass

Joshh

I don't know of much L glass you can get for $200.

I would get the 50D, it will stay relevant longer and have a higher resell value when the 60D hits the streets later this year.

I've owned both, and I would opt for the 50D without question. The ISO performance difference is nothing notable and certainly not as glaring as 40D owners might have you believe. In reality, if I shot a scene at ISO 3200 with a 50D and the same with the 40D, printed both 8x10 and asked you to tell me which camera shot which picture, you couldn't do it. You could take a lucky guess though.

Phillydigishooter wrote in post #7868570
B&H body only

40D $889.95

50D $1166.95

5D II $2699.95

I like buying new equipment. Have concerns of getting burned with used equipment. Plus at this time photography is a hobby.

If the difference between a new 40D and 50D is about $280, I'd suggest to go with the 50D for micro-adjustment, better LCD, DIGIC 4 (and so probably faster AF).

When I bought my 50D the difference was $220, so I chose the 50D.

Having said that, I would have bought a used but almost brand new 40D with 11-month warranty left for $800. I only need 6fps and higher ISO than ISO on my XSi. Too bad this 40D showed up on the local kijiji listing 2 weeks after I bought the 50D. Otherwise I would have got the 40D and saved $470

I really wish my 40D has micro adjust... that's the only thing I get 50D envy over.

Thanks everyone for your input! I am plan to buy a 17-50 2.8 Tamron and practice practice ...........practice.

jm4ever wrote in post #7862806
If your not going to do any serious cropping of your shots or if you don't care about the nicer LCD screen then a 40D sounds like it would be a better fit for you.

However looking at your present lenses it doesn't look as if you have anything that's going to be really that good in low light conditions. Have you thought about keeping your 350D and getting yourself some fast primes like the 85mm f1.8 or the 135mm f2? Even a fast zoom like the 17-55 f2.8 or the Tamron 17-50 f2.8 would help more than a new camera body.

I agree with Jim4ever. Get yourself some fast lenses first. You can upgrade to a 40 or 50D later with better success because you'll have the glass you need. See my sig for fast lenses I recommend.

I have a question:
Always people tend to go for better glass over a new body, makes sense , but
What good glass can you get with 280$ that you "save" by getting the 40D over the 50D?
The 50D will be replaced in a few months, or at least eventually..
This doesn't mean that in a few months it wont take great pics but,
I would want my new body to last longer in time, if I had the money today I would go for the 50D And then save for better glass
just a thought

Either way the 40D still a great camera

borism wrote in post #7882816
I have a question:
Always people tend to go for better glass over a new body, makes sense , but
What good glass can you get with 280$ that you "save" by getting the 40D over the 50D?
The 50D will be replaced in a few months, or at least eventually..
This doesn't mean that in a few months it wont take great pics but,
I would want my new body to last longer in time, if I had the money today I would go for the 50D And then save for better glass
just a thought

Either way the 40D still a great camera

$280 wouldn't quite do it, but 280+100 would get a Canon 85 mm f/1.8. Or in the case of Phillydigishooter, he could keep shooting with his 350D for now with better glass and get the 40 or 50D later.