Canon 40d and Sigma 10-22 or 50d only?

Culann · 02-11-2008 5:42pm #1

I know everyone is probably sick of this debate, but I need some other opinions. I have the money to get a 40d and sigma 10-22 or a 50d by itself. Does anyone have the 50d and is it worth the extra money? I am sold on the extra MP, low noise and better LCD. I have read reviews and am still undecided. With the 40d I just feel that I would be buying something 'inferior'. I really want the sigma 10-22, but cannot justify getting it with the 50d. I currently have a 350d with 17-85 IS. Any opinions much appreciated....

Ricky91t · 02-11-2008 5:54pm

If i were you i'd go for the 40D,there isn't much difference between the 2 camera's and i'd love to have a 10-20 instead of 3 MP extra and a few other function's which are are slightly better...

And the 50D is waaaaay over priced imo

0utpost31 · 02-11-2008 6:25pm

Definitely get the canon 40d and sigma 10-20mm. The 50d is not worth the extra few hundred. The 50d's image quality is actually slightly worse than the 40d!

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos50d/

"Just to make it clear, the 50D's image quality is (at identical viewing size) and by no means worse than the competition's but it's also not significantly better than the 40D's (Dynamic range and high ISO performance are even slightly worse)"

And please don't bother about the extra MP - they actually make the noise levels much worse than the 40d once you get up to around iso800.

You'll be left wondering where that extra 500 euro went. There are a few extra features on the 50d (nice shiny LCD) but they are not essesntial and definitely nooooot worth the $$$.

I have the 10-20mm for my 40d and they make a great team.

/my opinion.

PaulieC · 02-11-2008 7:23pm

I got the 50D yesterday (my dilemma was between the 5D MKII and the 50D) and I have to say te LCD is very impressive. It's a huge step up from the 30D that I had.

AnimalRights · 02-11-2008 7:31pm

50D I'd go for, you can get the lens at a later date.

Ricky91t · 02-11-2008 7:35pm

AnimalRights wrote: »

50D I'd go for, you can get the lens at a later date.

Give him a reason why though?
I'd like to know too

AnimalRights · 02-11-2008 7:40pm

For the LCD screen alone, I know the 50D is def overpriced at the moment but when I bought the 450D I was told on these boards I should have went for the 40D and as good as the 450D was it always gnawed away at me.
It's like anything I buy, I always believe you should stretch that bit further, money while important is only money, I'd rather have products than money.

Hope you liked that rambling sprawl Ricky.

challengemaster · 02-11-2008 7:51pm

IMO, the 40D is still far superior and cheaper. There's no logical reason to buy the 50D over the 40D. I know what my next camera will be. Here's a hint -

It won't be the 50D.

AnimalRights · 02-11-2008 7:53pm

challengemaster wrote: »

IMO, the 40D is still far superior

From the DP/CameraLabs reviews this was not the case.

0utpost31 · 02-11-2008 7:59pm

IMO, the 40D is still far superior

AnimalRights wrote: »

From the DP/CameraLabs reviews this was not the case.

You're right, the 40d is only slightly superior.

I got the 50D yesterday and I have to say the LCD is very impressive.

Was the LCD worth 500euro?

AnimalRights · 02-11-2008 8:09pm

0utpost31 wrote: »

You're right, the 40d is only slightly superior.

Was the LCD worth 500euro?

From the review I read it was just here the 40D had some kudos over the 50D
"Dynamic range and high ISO performance are even slightly worse"

and its not just the LCD screen

1. DIGIC 4 image processor provides faster processing speed compared to DIGIC 3 in the 40D

2. Peripheral illumination correction, which automatically evens brightness across the image field, making an image of a blue sky even toned throughout

3. Auto Lighting Optimizer analyzes the brightness of subjects and automatically adjusts dark images so that they appear brighter

4. A new 3.0-inch Clear View LCD screen which features 920,000 dot/VGA resolution, four times the pixel count of the EOS 40D camera’s screen, for better clarity and color

5. HDMI (High-Definition Multimedia Interface) output to display crisp, clear images on a High-Definition TV

6. support UDMA cards for faster writing of image files

7. AF Microadjustment feature, originally introduced last year with the Canon EOS-1D Mark III professional digital SLR camera, has also been added to the EOS 50D for maximum control over focusing precision

I still think the 50D is overpriced though but I would still buy it over the 40D just for the extras.

Fionn · 02-11-2008 8:15pm

i was tempted to sell my 30D and buy either a 40 or 50 D
but after much thought, i dont think there's enough difference between any of the three to justify the mullah
still congrats to those who've made their purchases!!!

Culann · 02-11-2008 8:53pm

Thanks for the responses. I am tending more towards the 40d and sigma now, especially after checking out some pics on flickr (Outpost31's included - nice). The latest review for the 50d just doesn't convince me to buy it...

kensutz · 02-11-2008 9:14pm

I would refuse to buy the 50D purely for the fact there isn't anything majorly different between that and the 40D. Slower fps on the 50D, nothing noteable. LCD won't make a difference because let's be honest how long are you going to stare at an LCD compared to a PC monitor? HDMI connection? Who cares tbh!!?

AnimalRights · 02-11-2008 9:21pm

Yeah but Ken sometimes I am convinced I've just taken a sharp picture from looking at my Camscreen and when I get home it is not always the case! That new screen you would def tell if a picture is sharp or not and if it isn't I'll know to take that picture again.

0utpost31 · 02-11-2008 9:24pm

Thanks for the responses. I am tending more towards the 40d and sigma now, especially after checking out some pics on flickr (Outpost31's included - nice). The latest review for the 50d just doesn't convince me to buy it...

Glad to hear it. I guarantee that if you got the 50d you woudn't use or take notice of most of the stuff listed in the previous post.

Glad you like my pics, I have a set of photos taken with the 10-20mm on the page there, not sure if you noticed it or not.

Yeah but Ken sometimes I am convinced I've just taken a sharp picture from looking at my Camscreen and when I get home it is not always the case! That new screen you would def tell if a picture is sharp or not and if it isn't I'll know to take that picture again.

If you want to know for sure if the pic is sharp just zoom in a tad. While a sharp lcd would be nice it's nowhere near essential.

challengemaster · 02-11-2008 9:32pm

As far as I'm concerned - You're not editing your pics on the fupping camera LCD, so why does it matter so much? And +1 to the above. Zoom > 500 quid.

kensutz · 02-11-2008 9:36pm

AnimalRights wrote: »

Yeah but Ken sometimes I am convinced I've just taken a sharp picture from looking at my Camscreen and when I get home it is not always the case! That new screen you would def tell if a picture is sharp or not and if it isn't I'll know to take that picture again.

Very much doubt the lcd's difference would make it much more noticeable. I know on the 40D instantly by exactly what Outpost said by zooming in.

0utpost31 · 02-11-2008 10:33pm

Canon said:

"Improved Image Quality
The EOS 50D Digital SLR camera's 15.1-megapixel CMOS APS-C size image sensor has been improved thanks to the use of newly designed gapless microlenses over each pixel to reduce noise and expand sensitivity up to ISO 12800."

Can't believe that they tried to sell the ISO12800 feature and claim reduced noise. Noise is worse than the 40d.

Anyway, here's somebody pushing the 40d to iso6400 and 12800 (using the same method as the 50d - boosting of underexposed shots). Results aren't too bad, considering the 40d isn't supposed to have this range.

http://www.neowin.net/forum/index.php?showtopic=629957

Canon 40d and Sigma 10-22 or 50d only?

Comments