5D or 50D

[Stephen Probert]

So I have decided that I am probably going to sell my motorcycle (1995 Honda Magna) and use that cash for camera gear. I will probably get $2500-3000 and I am planning on long term getting a nice wide angle lens (I have the cheap kit lens and the 70-200 f/4 IS) and a new body (have the XTi). I am thinking I will get the lens first and maybe wait on the body as lenses don't depreciate as quickly as bodies (the longer I wait on the body, the cheaper it gets).


My general dillema is that I am considering the 50D (new) and the 5D Mark I (used). Which I end up getting determines which lens I would buy now considering the sensor size difference. So which would you get. This is for general all-around photography--I like to shoot people, animals, landscapes, mundane objects...you name it.


I like the smaller DLA of the 5D and the full frame sensor and I am not feeling very picky about number of pixels--12.8 and 15.1 are pretty even to me. I like the frame rate of the 50D better, but would only use it <1% of the time (I don't do a lot of sports and action). I know there are a lot of other features that the 50D has because it is newer (liveview?). Just wonder about people's thoughts. Anyone use both of these bodies? Thanks for the input.

[Mark Elberson]

<div>


3 months ago I was troubled with the same question. I ended up getting the 50D and I love it. I don't know if there is necessarily a right answer though. Two things really helped make my decision: 1) I wanted a new body and at the time the 50D was just over $1,000 and the 5D was $2,000. 2) Although I really wanted a full framer (and still do!) with the release of the 5D MarkII I didn't want to buy 3-4 year old technology. Right now I am focusing on building a nice stable of L lenses and will eventually upgrade to the 5D MarkII (or it's successor). In order to get those wide angles that I have been craving I purchased the EF-S 10-22 f/3.5-4.5. That is, and will continue to be the only EF-S lens that I will own though because my ultimate goal is to move on the a full frame camera. That being said, I will stilluse my 50D even when I do upgrade for when I need the higher fps and the longer reach.


Sorry if that was a little long winded. I think you could make an argument for either body. They are both great cameras!
</div>

[MVers]

I like the smaller DLA of the 5D and the full frame sensor and I am not feeling very picky about number of pixels--12.8 and 15.1 are pretty even to me. I like the frame rate of the 50D better, but would only use it &lt;1% of the time (I don't do a lot of sports and action).
<div style="clear: both;"]</div>

It's not the number of pixels that counts--its the quality of each pixel that does. The 50D has a much higher pixel density than the 5D, making it a great camera to shoot sports and wildlife with because of the additional cropability it offers. The 5D, however, beats the 50D in IQ across the board. Now if it's bells and whistles you're after, the 50D has got the 5D clearly beat in all aspects (Liveview, MA, hi res LCD, My Menu, etc etc) BUT if its IQ and ISO performance that you're after the 5D has it in the bag. For an older camera it performs just as well if not better, as in this case, than the latest offerings within the DSLR market when speaking of IQ. AF wise, the 5D falls a bit short IMO but only the outer AF points (center is very reliable and better in low light)...then again I have a couple 40D's that don't perform much better in this aspect and IIRC the 50D's AF is on par with the 40D. In the end, if you don't need the additional pixels or features and IQ is all you really care about go with the 5D. It's a phenominal camera. You may also want to seriously consider a 40D over the 50D as well...spend what you save on glass.


-Matt

[Ehcalum]

I'll parrot what Matt says. Take a good look at the 40D. The sensor is a little smaller and it doesn't have focus adjustment for lenses and a few other tweaks, that really not many people will use and/or care about.

[TheRoff]

I am going to be following this thread with interest as I have the same dilemma. I have a 30D now, and am looking at either a 50D or 5D. I want a full frame but with the 5D I am buying capability I would rarely use, like the video capability.


Reading with interest.


Larry

[Colin]

I've got a 5D, and I really like it. i'm sure I'd like Mk II better, but... well, I'd like to not spend more money too..


I've got a 30D, and I keep it around, aside from a plain backup, for acouple reasons.


First, pixel density. If I'm doing some telephoto stuff that isn't telephoto enough, i.e., I know I'm going to crop it a lot anyway, and the lens setup actually challenges the pixel resolution of the 5D, or I know in advance that the full frame just isn't necessary,my 'crop' camera is more appropriate.


Second, continous shooting frame rate. The difference is only 5 fps vs 3 fps, but 5 is 67% faster than 3. For trying to catch moments with a machine gun approach, faster is better.


The newer cameras exceed the 30D in both cases, but there are other feature sets that I'd also find appealing.


14 bit A/D converters. I don't know if it's really important in practical effects. I don't know how the voltage output of CMOS sensors relates to dynamic range, and further, if the noise floor limit in any situation trumps the A/D converter dynamic range, it's pretty sound digital theory that you're not getting any more accuracy. I've heard about finer color gradation, though I've actually never seen a real comparison. The color space doesn't change, and if the noise voltage is enough to be significant at the low end in terms of affecting the LSB, it's just as effective altering the difference level near black as it is in the mid tone or white. It's just harder to see, because it's a whole lotsignificant a difference in the total level when in 'black' as opposed to the higher levels (signal to noise ratio is key). Still,if you can't see noise in the colors, and you don't see posterization, and you're not actually getting more dynamic range, I'm not going to get upset about 12 bit A/D converters. But, if I could have them, I'd rather have 14 bit A/D converters, just because.


LIVE view...


This is a feature I'd LOVE to have when doing any pictures that require fine focus. macros, very telephoto manual focus setups. Last time I took a picture of the moon, I got the focus nailed some times, but I also took about 8 pictures after I got the histogram, aperture, and shutter speed dialed in with an ISO I felt comfortable with. Between tweaking the focus back and forth a little, and trying to minimize vibration between the mirror lockup and the actual shot while sitting on the tripod, I ended up with two that were really as clear as I think I could get with my hardware. Live View would have saved me a lot of time guessing whether it actually was sharpest, or whether I just thought it looked sharpest in the viewfinder.


Video would be kind of a neat thing to have available, just for the novelty, though i can also do that with my phone

[MVers]

I am going to be following this thread with interest as I have the same dilemma. I have a 30D now, and am looking at either a 50D or 5D. I want a full frame but with the 5D I am buying capability I would rarely use, like the video capability.


Reading with interest.


Larry
<div style="clear: both;"]</div>

Larry, I believe you may be referring to the 5DII which is the only current Canon DSLR with native video capture available. The 5D 'classic', which this thread is based upon, does not offer this feature. If anything you will be paying more for features you may not use buying the 50D (i.e. liveview, micro adjustment etc).


-Matt

[TheRoff]

Thanks Matt. I obviously didn't read the initial post that closely.


Larry

[Stephen Probert]

This is great stuff so far. Thanks everyone, keep it coming. From Bryan's review of the 50D, it seems he found he didn't like to shoot below f/8-f/11 whereas it seems that the 5D can push f/13- as far as diffraction is concerned. Anyone else have this experience with actual shooting?

[MVers]

From Bryan's review of the 50D, it seems he found he didn't like to shoot below f/8-f/11 whereas it seems that the 5D can push f/13- as far as diffraction is concerned. Anyone else have this experience with actual shooting?
<div style="clear: both;"]</div>

This outa help.