Was the Canon 50D really that bad ?

Jwar1976

Jwar1976

Messages
530
Name
John
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi all,

I was chatting to my Dad earlier & he was saying to me that when he told his local Camera Club that he had a 50D for a camera, some of them were quite horrified & one member even said that he would be better off selling and getting another model. Now I have only used his camera for a very small amount of time, which was to show him around the camera, so can't really say about quality of shots etc. Can anyone here tell me what was so bad about the 50D & should my Dad really get rid of it & put the money towards a better model ?

Many Thanks

John
 
Lol, I still have my old one, shot over 80k images with it, mostly Sunday morning football or rugby in grotty weather. Great camera, not as good as newer cameras at high ISPs as noisy but fine to 1600.
Or could be a repeat of the old 50d not as good as 40d argument (which was wrong).

A lot of Photographers seem to be obsessed with equipment rather than the final image.
 
To be fair though some bloggers/reviewers did give the 50D a pretty hard time.

OP. If you Google "Canon 50D review" I'm sure you'll find some reviews and no doubt people here will give their opinions too.
 
I once owned the 40D & 50D at the same time, I got the 50 as an upgrade to the 40.

At the time everyone's, including mine was the the 50 produced inferior results to the 40 from an IQ point of view.

The general opinion at the time was the Canon used an inferior quality sensor and that the pixel count exceeded what could be accurately made at the time.

All I will say is the the 50D was the last Canon digital camera I bought and even though I will soon be investing in a new system I will possiblely not even considers canons current range, my dissaointment was that great.

Paul
 
Paul-H said:
At the time everyone's, including mine was the the 50 produced inferior results to the 40 from an IQ point of view.
Click to expand...

Nope, mine didn't and I went from a 40D as well. I know plenty of people who were very happy also. There were people who jumped on the poor iq bandwagon but these were probably those who didn't set up the camera or read the manual.
What really improved it was setting the highlight tone priority and ALO settings.

MENU/then scroll along to copper coloured CAMERA setting that lists the custom functions select C.Fn II : IMAGE, scroll along to No. 3 and set HIGHLIGHT TONE PRIORITY to DISABLE, then go to No. 4 and then set AUTO LIGHTING OPTIMIZER to DISABLE.
 
I used to have a 50D - I loved it and only upgraded to a 7D to get better AF. I sold it to a friend who is still getting great photos with it. It sounds a rather snobbish camera club; I dread to think what they would say to anyone who turned up with a bridge camera or, heaven forfend, a compact!
 
Thanks for the replies everyone, having checked some reviews the 50D does seem like a Marmite type of Camera, I will tell my Dad to carry on using it & ignore the snobbish lot. :)
 
Had a 40d,50d 60d and now 70d the 50 stands out as the one I would re.purchase good I.q if used properly ,fast and accurate a/f I only sold to move to Nikon ,now back on canon ,says it all the magic roundabout has nothing on GAS
 
I have a 50D and its a great camera.

Currently tossing up whether to upgrade as I want lower noise at higher ISO and as I have a 24-105mm, I am considering going to a 6D.

Granted the 50D doesn't do video natively but go buy a video camera if that is what you want.
I would be tempted to keep mine as a backup but as funds are tight (new house purchase), I may have to sell it to put money towards replacing the Sigma 10-20mm I will need to replace.

Sounds like they were being snobs to be honest, plenty of people on here have used (and still use) a 50D with great results.

Saying a camera is rubbish without coming up with compelling reasons as to why is pointless.
 
I think that the 50D was not the major upgrade to the 40D that photographers expected when first announced so it got a bit of a bad rep at the time. I think though, in isolation, it is a very decent camera. What is there NOT to like about it ?
 
There have been some great points here about the camera, especially about video functionality, it is annoying when Camera makers include video technology for better video in what is originally meant to be a still shoot device. But then having said that, there was a time when mobile phones were purely used for making calls, now they are multifunction devices. I have been a 450D user for almost 2yrs & currently have my heart set on getting a used 7D as an upgrade, as it seems a great camera & even tho the 60D looks great as well, I am not that keen on having all the extra video capabilities, as if I want to shoot video, I would use my mobile.

Getting back to topic, when I see my Dad in a couple weeks I will have a good try of his 50D as he cannot remember some things in the menu, also it will allow me to have a good feel of a more bulkier camera. :)
 
One of my friends has just clocked up 500,000 shots on his 50D. He's used it to cover marathons, cross country races and triathlons in all sorts of weathers and it's never let him down.
 
StewartR said:
One of my friends has just clocked up 500,000 shots on his 50D. He's used it to cover marathons, cross country races and triathlons in all sorts of weathers and it's never let him down.
Click to expand...

Wow that is brilliant, I had no idea that it could have that kind of shutter life.
 
I have the 20D, 50D, 60D and the 5D3. (getting quite a collection going). As people have said, the 50D is not as good as some of the newer versions. But I would have said don;t bother to buy it if you were on the hunt for a new camera, but if you already have the camera, then it will do fine for most scenarios. It's not match for the 5D3, but then it's £200 vs £2000. :confused:
 
twhite87 said:
I have the 20D, 50D, 60D and the 5D3. (getting quite a collection going). As people have said, the 50D is not as good as some of the newer versions. But I would have said don;t bother to buy it if you were on the hunt for a new camera, but if you already have the camera, then it will do fine for most scenarios. It's not match for the 5D3, but then it's £200 vs £2000. :confused:
Click to expand...

Wow that is some collection, my Dad seems to like the 50D but was having second thoughts after the meeting at the camera club. For me personally I would need a balaclava for a full frame, but seeing as a 7D will only cost me under the £300 once I have sold my 450D, that will do me until such a time when I can afford to go FF, which will probably take a couple of years to save for one with a decent lens.
 
Paul-H said:
At the time everyone's, including mine was the the 50 produced inferior results to the 40 from an IQ point of view.
Click to expand...

Mine didn't either.

Nor did my friends.

I had both at 40D and 50D at the same time. What happened was the 50D produced more noise at 100% crops than the 40d. But that was no suprise, it had 50% more pixels, however when images were resized to similar dimensions my 50D retained more detail. It was true that for a while it really needed the canon DPP software to get the best out of the files as the adobe convertors didn't get it right first time..

There were some bloggers and reviews that did the early comparisons who shouted very loudly about the 50D being a downgrade, but they were proved wrong by people who got out and used the cameras over time.

There was nothing wrong with it.
 
Jwar1976 said:
Wow that is some collection, my Dad seems to like the 50D but was having second thoughts after the meeting at the camera club. For me personally I would need a balaclava for a full frame, but seeing as a 7D will only cost me under the £300 once I have sold my 450D, that will do me until such a time when I can afford to go FF, which will probably take a couple of years to save for one with a decent lens.
Click to expand...

If your dad likes the 50D then that is absolutely all that matters. Tell him to ignore the opinionated oaf offering 'advice' and enjoy taking photos with what is a very good camera.
 
RichardtheSane said:
If your dad likes the 50D then that is absolutely all that matters. Tell him to ignore the opinionated oaf offering 'advice' and enjoy taking photos with what is a very good camera.
Click to expand...


Thanks for the advice, I am due to speak to my Dad over the weekend I will pass it on to him then :)
 
I loved my 50D, upgraded from my 300D so it was quite a big jump. Could never understand those who claimed it had poor IQ i personal thought it was brilliant in fact I had that camera probably longer than any other since, before I part ex'd for a 5D classic.
 
I've been using a 50D for a while now and think it's a very good camera. Have managed some decent images with it over the years.
 
jakeblu said:
I loved my 50D, upgraded from my 300D so it was quite a big jump. Could never understand those who claimed it had poor IQ i personal thought it was brilliant in fact I had that camera probably longer than any other since, before I part ex'd for a 5D classic.
Click to expand...

Having looked at some images, I see what you mean it looks as tho the 50D is a gem of a camera to some.

GeeJay57 said:
I've been using a 50D for a while now and think it's a very good camera. Have managed some decent images with it over the years.
Click to expand...

Love this shot, may I ask what lens you had attached ?
 
I had a Sigma EX 300mm f/2.8 + Sigma EX 2.0x on for that shot.

BTW, though I haven't done this myself, I understand that Magic Lantern gives the 50D video capability.
 
Last edited:
Magic Lantern does indeed give the 50D video capability. I used it myself, then we bought a 600D just for that purpose (smaller, lighter on the shoulder rig etc) as it's my sons camera.

My 300D is still with next door, gave it to them when their daughter went to uni on a photography course (she then upgraded to a 5dmk3).
I have recently sold the 40D and 400D, kept the 50D, 600D and 5D mk3.

noneforit said:
I have a 50D and its a great camera.
Currently tossing up whether to upgrade as I want lower noise at higher ISO and as I have a 24-105mm, I am considering going to a 6D.
Click to expand...

I went to the 5D mk3 from mine. 50D is great upto about ISO1600 then starts to get noisy, so the 5D mk3 offers so much better low light and I wanted to go full frame. Still use the 50D for some long reach shots, time lapse or bolting onto a car rig.

RichardtheSane said:
I had both at 40D and 50D at the same time. What happened was the 50D produced more noise at 100% crops than the 40d. But that was no suprise, it had 50% more pixels, however when images were resized to similar dimensions my 50D retained more detail. It was true that for a while it really needed the canon DPP software to get the best out of the files as the adobe convertors didn't get it right first time..

There were some bloggers and reviews that did the early comparisons who shouted very loudly about the 50D being a downgrade, but they were proved wrong by people who got out and used the cameras over time.

There was nothing wrong with it.
Click to expand...

ALO and highlight tone priority settings had a lot to do with this. It was publicised quite quickly and along with decent raw convertors proved the 50D was the better camera, but it still doesn't stop people bringing up those early reviews. It's almost a folk law myth now, probably why it was brought up at the camera club.



Still imagine the fun when the 50D user has the best image at the local club competitions, over those 'better' camera owners. :D
 
I'd hate to take my cameras to a club. I can only imagine the sh!t i'd receive from people not using the cameras and opinionating from a few reviews, biased by their own personal requirements! I'm glad your dad likes using his camera! Im sure it has 1000's of great shots ahead of it
 
GeeJay57 said:
I had a Sigma EX 300mm f/2.8 + Sigma EX 2.0x on for that shot.
Click to expand...

That is one of the best bike shots that I have ever seen, it just shows the kind of power that the 50D has.

Byker28i said:
My 300D is still with next door, gave it to them when their daughter went to uni on a photography course (she then upgraded to a 5dmk3).
I have recently sold the 40D and 400D, kept the 50D, 600D and 5D mk3.



I went to the 5D mk3 from mine. 50D is great upto about ISO1600 then starts to get noisy, so the 5D mk3 offers so much better low light and I wanted to go full frame. Still use the 50D for some long reach shots, time lapse or bolting onto a car rig.



ALO and highlight tone priority settings had a lot to do with this. It was publicised quite quickly and along with decent raw convertors proved the 50D was the better camera, but it still doesn't stop people bringing up those early reviews. It's almost a folk law myth now, probably why it was brought up at the camera club.



Still imagine the fun when the 50D user has the best image at the local club competitions, over those 'better' camera owners. :D
Click to expand...

I would personally love to go full frame but is unfortunately way out of my budget for the time being. I would love to be a fly on the wall at the Camera Clubs where 50D bodies give some great results and flip the finger up at the haters. :D

rich_ said:
I'd hate to take my cameras to a club. I can only imagine the sh!t i'd receive from people not using the cameras and opinionating from a few reviews, biased by their own personal requirements! I'm glad your dad likes using his camera! Im sure it has 1000's of great shots ahead of it
Click to expand...

My Dad has kind of lost his way with photography over the years, as he was a film professional, but is finding it difficult to convert to digital, but also as he is getting on a bit now & suffers from Camera shake from time to time, he has become quite disheartened with photography, which is a tragic sight as he has some great equipment like a 100m 2.8 Macro, that has never been taken our of it's box :(. I do what I can by doing the 5hr train ride and giving him the odd visit to try and get his love for photography back.
 
Perhaps the "Camera Club" is more about gear than what you can use it for? ;) One of my friends has the Canon 50D and he produces some excellent work with it and when I've used it I've never had any complaint other than it's layout is different to mine as I shoot Nikon.
 
Its the usual crap you hear at (some) camera clubs - if you don't have the latest /best gear you aren't doing it right- there's nothing wrong with using a 50D ( I have a 20, 40 50 and 70D)

frankly anyone who tells you stuff like that should be ignored - end of the day within reasonable limits its not the gear that determines how good the photograph is, its the ability of the person holding it, and a good photographer with a 50D can potentially out perform a bad photographer with a 1DX
 
I've always steered away from camera clubs. Got put off them years ago by conversations I had with people I knew that were in such clubs. Of course I'm quite happy to receive and give critique on images in terms of creativity or technical issues, but I really don't see photography as a competitive sport/activity. I certainly don't need someone to critique my images based on the camera equipment I used to create it.
 
Last edited:
I should have said that my avatar photo was taken with a 50D, and a larger version is attached.

View attachment 40461

Not all camera clubs are the same - this photo is currently in an exhibition organised by my local club, and photos taken on bridge cameras are included too. We have an active Beginners and Improvers group with all sorts of cameras - no-one cares what equipment you have.
 
I think that the problem is / was that perhaps the 50D was the first camera that out of the box produced pictures that didn't look stunning at 100% on screen?

A 50D used well may well produce ultimately better images than (for example because I had one...) a 20D but I bet straight out of the box and straight out of the camera it's a little less straight forward at 100% on screen. These days we are perhaps a little more open to the idea that you have to set the thing up and learn how to get the best from it and work at it to get the best final image at the print / viewing size you want to produce and we know that focusing is critical if you are going to use relatively high resolution cameras and view pictures at 100% and we know that noise on screen at 100% may look worse than it does in a final screen image or print.
 
Some brilliant points made here about Camera Clubs, my Dad originally went to increase his social life a bit, he wasn't expecting such negative criticism on his gear which he is still trying to get to grips with. And yes I agree with you 100% @big soft moose, on the varying result per photographer / gear. That is a beautifully taken shot @MadWoman, you must be very proud to have not only taken it but to also have it in an exhibition. In all honesty @woof woof , I hadn't even thought about that, brilliant point.
 
Indeed the 20D (my backup DSLR), is I think still a very capable camera and produces some excellent images. Though it does feel slow compared to later bodies and struggles in low light with ISO above 400.

This one is from my 20D not long after I got it. I think I used a borrowed 35-350L...


The 50D files do need a bit more work, but apart from the images, the 50D is a nicer camera to use, much better screen, higher frame rate, MFA, more tweakable menu options and 85% more resolution. Viewing the 50D files at 100% on screen is kind of magnifying them compared to 20D (and 40D) files at 100%. Pixel peeping is always going to lead to dissatisfaction IMHO. More pixels leads to closer examination of the same image and is more revealing of the limitations of lenses and sensor technologies.

I'm currently considering a 7DII, keeping my 50D as a backup and retiring my 20D.
 
GeeJay57 said:
Indeed the 20D (my backup DSLR)Viewing the 50D files at 100% on screen is kind of magnifying them compared to 20D (and 40D) files at 100%. Pixel peeping is always going to lead to dissatisfaction IMHO. More pixels leads to closer examination of the same image and is more revealing of the limitations of lenses and sensor technologies.
Click to expand...

IMVHO people don't think about the final image size and viewing enough nor do they think about camera settings enough.

In the case of the 50D this could very well lead to the equivalent of people viewing what should be a really nice A3 print (when viewed anything like normally) with a magnifying glass when all they wanted was a whole image on a screen to be viewed from 3ft away or even to be posted 800 pixels wide on the net. Add pixel peeping to the effect that less than optimum camera settings can have and it's hardly surprising that a few people grumble.

PS. I used to use my 20D at all ISO settings up to and including 3200 and IMVHO at ISO 400 the pictures stood up to close examination quite well. I used to routinely set my ISO to 400 to get a fast shutter speed when shooting flowers and the like.
 
Last edited:
GeeJay57 said:
Indeed the 20D (my backup DSLR), is I think still a very capable camera and produces some excellent images. Though it does feel slow compared to later bodies and struggles in low light with ISO above 400.

This one is from my 20D not long after I got it. I think I used a borrowed 35-350L...


The 50D files do need a bit more work, but apart from the images, the 50D is a nicer camera to use, much better screen, higher frame rate, MFA, more tweakable menu options and 85% more resolution. Viewing the 50D files at 100% on screen is kind of magnifying them compared to 20D (and 40D) files at 100%. Pixel peeping is always going to lead to dissatisfaction IMHO. More pixels leads to closer examination of the same image and is more revealing of the limitations of lenses and sensor technologies.

I'm currently considering a 7DII, keeping my 50D as a backup and retiring my 20D.
Click to expand...

That is a brilliant shot from the 20D and L Glass, having looked at some images that people have taken, the 50D does come up with some brilliant shots after PP.

woof woof said:
IMVHO people don't think about the final image size and viewing enough nor do they think about camera settings enough.

In the case of the 50D this could very well lead to the equivalent of people viewing what should be a really nice A3 print (when viewed anything like normally) with a magnifying glass when all they wanted was a whole image on a screen to be viewed from 3ft away or even to be posted 800 pixels wide on the net. Add pixel peeping to the effect that less than optimum camera settings can have and it's hardly surprising that a few people grumble.

PS. I used to use my 20D at all ISO settings up to and including 3200 and IMVHO at ISO 400 the pictures stood up to close examination quite well. I used to routinely set my ISO to 400 to get a fast shutter speed when shooting flowers and the like.
Click to expand...

It is strange you mention about A3 as that is the original reason my Dad bought the 50D, but that is interesting that you used the settings at max on your 20D.
 
I meant above ISO 400, so on the 20D IIRC that's 800 up... I do use ISO400 on the 20D and have used higher too when needs be.
 
MadWoman said:
I should have said that my avatar photo was taken with a 50D, and a larger version is attached.

View attachment 40461

Not all camera clubs are the same - this photo is currently in an exhibition organised by my local club, and photos taken on bridge cameras are included too. We have an active Beginners and Improvers group with all sorts of cameras - no-one cares what equipment you have.
Click to expand...

50D bird photos you say

132775807.jpg

132776881.jpg

133048041.jpg

114827021.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top