50D Review @ DPReview

[Teddy Regpala]

It's out!

You can read them here:
www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos50d/

Conclusion - Pros

• Detailed and clean image output (but not as detailed as we would have expected from a 15 megapixels sensor)
  
• Chroma and luminance noise well controlled at higher sensitivities
  
• Wide range of image parameter adjustment (-4 to +4 for most)
  Effective Highlight tone priority option delivers smooth highlight roll-off
  
• Four levels of high ISO noise reduction (including Off)
  
• Effective vignetting control feature
  
• No noticeable hot pixels with long exposures and NR off
  
• Nine point auto focus system accurate, even in low light
  
• Large, clear and bright high-res screen
  
• Well-built magnesium body, weather-sealed
  
• Good viewfinder, optional focusing screens
  
• Excellent ergonomics and refined user-interface
  
• Quick control menu allows direct access to many important settings
  
• Attractive refreshed menu design
  
• Fully customizable MyMenu
  
• Programmable FUNC button
  
• Two user memories via 'C1/C2' on mode dial
  
• 10x magnification in live view allows reliable manual focusing
  
• Instant power on, camera feels snappy and responsive at all times
  
• Fast continuous shooting (6.3 fps)
  
• Excellent data throughput and processing speeds (with fast CF cards)
  
• Very fast PTP transfer speed
  
• AF-Micro-Adjustment
  
• Comprehensive Software package
  
• Very quiet mirror mechanism (plus 2 silent shooting options in live view)
  
• Any combination between RAW and JPEG image sizes possible
  
• Dust reduction from Canon's 'Integrated Cleaning'
  
• Good battery life
  
• Optional WFT-E3 wireless transmitter (802.11 b/g) / vertical grip
  
• HDMI output
  

Conclusion - Cons

• High ISO performance worse than 40D
  
• Reduced dynamic range in the shadow areas compared to EOS 40D
  
• Per-pixel detail not as good as on good 10 or 12 megapixel cameras
  
• High-end lenses required to get the most out of the camera
  
• Poor white balance performance under artificial light
  
• Flash must be up for AF assist lamp (although AF is good even in low light)
  
• Live view not as accurate as on 40D (framing very slightly off-center, not possible to magnify right out to the extreme corners)
  

[Romy Ocon]

There's a tempest going on at DPR about Phil's not-so-nice review on the 50D.

[Retzel Orquiza]

I just read their review and I was blown away by the cons. Could it be true or did they tested a bad copy?

Oct 30, 2008 21:59:09 GMT Teddy Regpala said:

Conclusion - Cons

• High ISO performance worse than 40D
  
• Reduced dynamic range in the shadow areas compared to EOS 40D
  
• Per-pixel detail not as good as on good 10 or 12 megapixel cameras
  
• High-end lenses required to get the most out of the camera
• Live view not as accurate as on 40D (framing very slightly off-center, not possible to magnify right out to the extreme corners)
  

[Teddy Regpala]

50D is a very good camera, Rey can confirm that to us.

It's the pixel density and the consequences of it that made it look bad (noise, diffraction, softness, etc).
Current lenses are not up to it's standard yet, but paired with a very sharp lens, it should be very good. It demands a lot from a lens.

Put a 12mp sensor instead of 15, you'll be reading a totally different conclusion.

That's how I read what the review is saying.

[Romy Ocon]

I posted this at DPR on October 3, 2008, way before Phil's test:

forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1019&message=29563812


I'm a high pixel density guy, but...... to me, it looks like Canon overdid it with the 50D's pixels, at least as far as my bird photography is concerned.

Even the mighty 500 f4 IS has a finite resolving power - 1DM2 + 500 + 1.4x is super-terrific, 20D + 500 + 1.4x is great, and 40D + 500 + 1.4x is very decent. A 2x TC on the 40D + 500 is just past my personal "ideal IQ" threshold, and I only use this combo at astros, or for record-type bird shots not intended to be printed big.

In my experience, up to the 40D + 500 + 1.4x, I can get away with a native pixel density as sparse as 120 ppi (upressed to 300 ppi in PP) and my large prints will still have decent feather detail even when viewed from 10 inches away.

The 50D + 500 + 1.4x has similar "angular pixel density" (pixels/degree of view) as a 40D + 500 + 1.7x TC, perhaps useable when all shooting conditions are ideal (i.e. - enough light to stop down), but already near the limits of the 500's resolving power.

For the 50D, I wish that Canon stayed with 10 MP, and converted the gains of gapless micro-lenses and newer hardware/software tech to improving the per pixel IQ. The additional benefit is the fps can be pushed to 8 fps (ok, 9.++ fps at 10 MP is doable with the current 50D buffer, but I'd rather have the excess CPU resources be rechanneled to improving the AF).

I'll probably stick with my 40D (I see the 50D as a sideways move in IQ), and just get a 5D2 or used 1Ds2 if I need more quality pixels (I've to use a longer lens or get nearer the bird though).

The 50D is no doubt a better camera than the 40D (not with a significant IQ edge though), and for people with 30D/20D/10D or the xxxD bodies, it presents a significant upgrade IMHO.

[Ding Carpio]

Yes!

At least, I won't have any upgrade-cravings yet.

[dru888]

argh i was looking forward get this, oh well..

[Bobby Kintanar]

Whew, thanks Mastah. Almost got a 50D - glad I called you up first. Hehehe. :-)