Need A Second Camera

[Ripley]

Has anyone upgraded their camera from a 30D to a 50D and could share their views?

I went into the store where I've bought my lenses from (I only have 3) and the guy basically talked me out of the 50D, saying it wasn't worth the upgrade for what I take photos of and that people who had 40Ds and upgraded were disappointed. However, I need a second camera as even though I only get my camera out if I go somewhere special, it was a real pain changing lenses and getting dust and crap in the sensor and missing a photo opportunity because I had the wrong lens on the camera at the time. I had to spend a while cloning out sensor dust in a few shots recently.

I usually only use one focus point and use the 'dial' on the 30D to change the focus point to where I want it, so all the new focus points on the newer cameras aren't that much use to me. I am not interested in the 7D.

Anyway, just wondering for now, I won't be buying anything for a few months.

For anyone interested, the 60D is coming out next month. Here are some musings on it.

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp...essage=30798841

Edited May 17, 2010 by Ripley

[kja]

yes, from the 30 to the 50 is a good upgrade. You ask if it's "worth it" - what is missing on your 30D or what could be done better? Those points will address the features YOU personally need as you move up the line.

But from the 40D to the 50D nope.

In fact, after having used a friend's 50D overall I still like my 40Ds better. Personally I'd find a good 2nd hand 40D and not pay the premium for the 50D. And I think the 40D is that much better than the 30D, too.

The 7D is a fantastic body and so very sorely tempting. I see you've discounted it but it is a significant upgrade whereas the 50D is only a moderate upgrade, imho. Of course, it's way more money, too!

[Ashanali]

what kja said

[Ripley]

Thanks guys. I was considering 50D, don't know why he talked me out of it except he probably wants me to lay some coin down for the upcoming 60D. I wasn't going in there to buy a camera that day anyway, he remembers me because I've bought my lenses off him because he gave me the best price I could find in Sydney CBD (they are an independent store in my building). I got my boss to pick up the 30D when he went to NY in 2008 and it hasn't taken a lot of photos.

I find if I'm taking a photo in a forest, photos are a bit noisy at ISO800 and although I don't use ISO800 that often, it would have been nice to up it a bit without the noise, especially as I take pics of birds and wildlife and they can move quickly. Also, is the image quality a little better with a 50D over a 30D? I mainly have a 300mm prime on my lens so very good lens. I just need a second camera. (should rephrase that to say that I 'want' a second camera, it's not really a need). It would be nice to hand my husband a DSLR so the poor bastard can move around and snap away and doesn't have to stand there bored while I take pics, he really hates that and has a whinge every time.

30D has 8.0 megapixels, 50D has 15.1 so can someone explain, image quality when cropping in surely has to be better, right, due to more pixels? Or do I have this all wrong. I know how to take the photos, I just don't know the technicalities of megapixels with cropping in as I'm a little 'challenged' on that area.

yes, from the 30 to the 50 is a good upgrade. You ask if it's "worth it" - what is missing on your 30D or what could be done better? Those points will address the features YOU personally need as you move up the line.

But from the 40D to the 50D nope.

In fact, after having used a friend's 50D overall I still like my 40Ds better. Personally I'd find a good 2nd hand 40D and not pay the premium for the 50D. And I think the 40D is that much better than the 30D, too.

The 7D is a fantastic body and so very sorely tempting. I see you've discounted it but it is a significant upgrade whereas the 50D is only a moderate upgrade, imho. Of course, it's way more money, too!

Noise issues is the main one. Not great at ISO 800. I've also considered a second hand 40D. 30D is pretty much the same as the 20D isn't it? With focusing, as I mainly use one point I haven't found the need for all the other focus points. The 30D has spot metering which I use a bit and it can also do 5 frames per second which I've often used. I don't want a very heavy camera as I often carry it on my back in a pack. Live view would also be helpful.

7D is out of my price range.

Edited May 17, 2010 by Ripley

[rubiton]

Thats weird it has issues with noise at iso 800 - none of mine 10D, 350D, 40D even teh lemon 50D had any noise issues on correctly exposed images (under exposed yes but was the same back in film days).

I did get good iamges that were fine at least to 8x12 inch from the 50D at iso 1600 and 2000 before it stopped working on nearly everything.

Live view is weird

It is a big heavy camera like all the prosumer and up DSLRs. Quite noisy when it takes photos too comapred to other models.

Edited May 17, 2010 by rubiton

[Ripley]

Thanks rubiton. On a smaller print, I see no loss of image quality at ISO800 but if I wanted a large print, I can see softness in the fine details such as feathers at that higher ISO level. I applied gaussian blur to the background so it wasn't noticeable there). Just had a browse of some photo forums then and very conflicting views. Some don't rate the 40D as much better image quality wise, but say the AF is better. I'd like a second camera so I might just wait a bit.

Edited May 17, 2010 by Ripley

[kja]

Short and sweet:

Yes, the noise in high ISO goes like this from best to not as good (though still very usable at 800 imho:

40D, 50D, 30D, 20D

There are some who say the noise of the 30D isn't as pleasing as that of the 20D. I don't have enough experience with the 30D to comment directly on that - from my experience they are quite similar and not a huge difference. I shoot my 20D at 1000 ISO happily.

Yes, there is slightly more detail in some images on the 50D over the 40D however it does fall down in the shadow detail and that's where it matters to me. It's a close one and not worth the premium for the 50D over a good 40D if you can find one. Though the "cost" of finding a 40D instead of just buying a 50D might be an issue, too.

MP is not necessarily a good indicator of image quality. It's more about the sensor. Fewer pixels on the same sized sensor is better - it's not good to ram them all on there The 50D does have a newer, different sensor than the 40D and it is said to handle highlights better. I couldn't really see it and I could see that it didn't handle the shadows as well, imo.

You can always wait. As soon as something comes out, something better will come out in three or six months. Buy when you need it and start using it is my theory.

And you'll never find a consensus on which camera is best - everyone has their own opinion and sometimes they have them for no reason at all But frankly, it would be very very hard to go wrong with either of these models.

[Ripley]

Thanks for that helpful info, kja. I won't be getting out the camera again until midl August. We are going to Lady Elliot Island for some diving and there are quite a few seabird species there, as well as the whales migrating through. So I'd like to take a second camera because changing lenses in the sand and wind isn't great. (Got my point and shoot underwater one too )

Your advice has really helped, thanks.