DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register) 
 

DPChallenge Forums >> Hardware and Software >> 50D now or 5D Mark II Later
Pages:  
Showing posts 1 - 14 of 14, (reverse)
AuthorThread
 10/23/2008 06:18:56 PM · #1
I'm in Africa (a congested West African city, not an East African game park) with no camera. My 30D broke and I sent it to Canon. They fixed it, but it is in Boston with my wife who won't be here until Thanksgiving. I've come into an unexpected windfall because an audit has shown that I have rated certain money at work that I did not know I rated and it has built up over the last 5 months or so. So, I can afford a 50D and even a 5D Mark II. I'm not one of the more talented photographers on the site, but I do enjoy this hobby and do really want to improve. I will be in Senegal for the next two years. In that time, I will also travel to some African game parks at least once or twice and would benefit from the added mm that the 1.6 crop gives me on my 70-200 for taking pictures of animals at a distance. On the other hand, I may see some nice panoramas that could benefit from a full frame.

I could order the 50D right now (and maybe a wide angle lens).

Or I could wait and get the 5D Mark II. And if I got a 1.4 or 2.0 extender, I would get back those lost millimeters on my 70-200.

What do I do?
 10/23/2008 06:27:09 PM · #2
I don't know much about the Canon line, but it seems like if you have a 30D already they next step would be a 5D. I would not think you would get a great return on your investment from a 50D, but I could be wrong.
 10/23/2008 06:36:39 PM · #3
Wait.

I have the 5D and love everything about it except the sensor is a pain in a** to keep clean. I've heard the current 5D will drop in price once the new one's available given the new 5D is priced lower than the current 5D. Either way you can't go wrong by waiting until the end of November.
 10/23/2008 06:55:04 PM · #4
5D MkII.
 10/23/2008 07:01:43 PM · #5
Tough choice; here are some things to consider:
- Does your current computer have enough horsepower and storage to handle 21Mpx files (>20MB for RAWS)?
- Do the benefits of FF for your shooting needs outweigh the additional cost?
- Will you have to replace any of your glass? (only your 18-55 will be unusable)
- Is your glass up to the task? (your 24-70 and 70-200 certainly are, the 50/1.8 might disappoint in some respects but still should provide acceptable performance)

10/23/2008 07:22:21 PM · #6
If yoiu go 5D2 you'll have to wait - so you'll have no camera till thanksgiving, and possibly longer for the 5D2 (i've heard it's been pushed back into december, and then you actually have to be able to find one to buy).
You're EF-s lens won't work (you have the 24-70 and still a 30D so it prolly don't matter)

The 50D is faster FPS and if it's true the 5D/5D2 focusing is the same then the 50 probably has the edge. It has built in flash which can be handy.

As for file size both cameras offer sRAW1 and 2 as well as full res RAW. On the 5D2 that's 11mp and 5 mp, where as on the 50 it's 7 or 3. 11-mp is perfect IMO so on the 50D i feel like Goldilocks - 15 is too much and 7 is too little, where as the 5D has 11 for every day use and 21 when you really need it. And better low light capability.

But then the 5D has that movie mode deal. Tempting.

Me? I'm going 5D and replacing my 30 with a used 40 I think (giving me 3 40ds).
 10/23/2008 07:24:49 PM · #7
Generally, image quality and noise is one thing that sets the two formats apart. A full-frame camera should produce less noise at higher ISO.
In terms of sensor size and lenses, the FF format would be ideally suited for wide-angle work, i.e. architecture, street shots, landscape and, possibly, portraits. They are particularly forgiving when shooting in available light.
A crop body, generally, lends itself better to wildlife and nature photography, sports and action, because of the added reach and fps.

I own both and find that I tend to use the FF for shots I compose carefully and the crop cam often for getting a shot I could otherwise miss altogether.
Then there is the price point. FF bodies are expensive, crop bodies less so.
FF sensors are more sensitive to optics (the quality of glass) than crop sensors.

If you already own a staple of good long lenses, you should, IMO, consider a crop body over its FF sibling.
The 50D is, supposedly, better at higher ISO than any of its non-pro predecessors.

I'd weigh the pros and cons carefully to suit your needs and inclinations.
 10/27/2008 04:33:56 PM · #8
I also am trying to decide between the 50D and 5d/2. I've been leaning towards the 50D until I read this detailed explanation at dpreview.com of the way the 50D's pixel density effects image quality... I understand the jist of it but it is way over my head. Would any of you who are more technically knowledgeable care to weigh in?
 10/27/2008 04:50:19 PM · #9
I have made my decision. I want the 50D. Now I just need to find some money to buy it with!
 10/27/2008 04:58:16 PM · #10
5D mark II sounds pretty amazing.
 10/28/2008 03:20:42 PM · #11
interesting article here //www.ayton.id.au/wp02/?p=237

The 50D has smaller photosites than the 5DII. Consider that the Circle of Confusion (CoC) will be the same size for a single EF lens, regardless of which body you use it on (Duh!). The CoC will cover more photosites on the 50D than on the 5DII. So a 50D's resolving power may be limited by the lens, while a 5DII will not be limited by the same lens.

In other words, using a lens that is equal to, or worse than the resolving power the 5DII can handle will give about as equally sharp a picture on either camera -- your system becomes lens limited.

Better lenses are usually available (but you probably have to buy "L" glass and may have to get prime lenses.) They just cost more. Length matters also -- telephoto costs more for the same angle of view on FF than on 1.6 crop (i.e. a 200mm is normally cheaper than a 300mm, etc). But the extreme WA you can use on FF is not available on the 1.6 crop.

The FF camera needs more out of the lens in the corners (which the 1.6x sensor doesn't see) and so the lens has to be better from corner to corner, not just in the middle. Looking at a few comparable lenses (Canon 70-200 f/2.8 vs Sigma equivalent, or 24-70 f/2.8, etc) it seems that Canon tries to get the entire lens to be good, where the other guys optimize the center (about the area covered by the 1.6x sensor). Sometimes the third party lens is sharper than the Canon lens in the middle, but the corners are much, much worse. This corner blurriness is kind of like vignetting, some people hate it, some don't care, and some like it.

Also, the larger photosite of the 5DII means less noise. IIRC, Its electronics are a generation ahead of the 50D, so that also contributes to the 5DII having less noise.

Message edited by author 2008-10-28 15:20:56.
 10/28/2008 03:22:21 PM · #12
Originally posted by skylercall:
I have made my decision. I want the 50D. Now I just need to find some money to buy it with!


Ditto.

The 5D MKII look awesome and I'd be on that like white on rice if I had the $$$.
 10/28/2008 05:00:56 PM · #13
Originally posted by goinskiing:

The 5D MKII look awesome and I'd be on that like white on rice if I had the $$$.


Yeah the cash outlay is a major consideration, not only for the camera body but in my case at least also for the computer to handle the 21mp files, not to mention the HD video. However if I go with the 50D I've about decided to finally spring for the EF-S 10-22 lens... I've put that purchase off for years, thinking that my next camera would be full frame.

Also, thanks hankk for helping me understand the dpreview article, much appreciated.
 10/28/2008 07:01:44 PM · #14
You're welcome.

BTW, either system will cost you $$$

You'll need better lenses with the 50D to get the most our of the sensor than you would with the 5DII.

So you can pay lots of money for a body that will be replaced in three or four years, or you can pay lots of money for a really good lens that will last until the next generation of denser sensors comes out, and more money if you want a second lens....
Either way, Canon wins :)

And all for a camera to take pictures that will be shown at 640x480 on the internet :)

Message edited by author 2008-10-28 19:03:12.
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 12/27/2025 02:59:45 AM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


Home - Challenges - Community - League - Photos - Cameras - Lenses - Learn - Help - Terms of Use - Privacy - Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 12/27/2025 02:59:45 AM EST.