Real life 50d performance

divamum · December 12, 2009

I've pixel peeped. I've checked out the comparometer against xsi, 7d, 50d, and 5dII. I've read and looked till my head is exploding. But I would still really like to see some real-life 50d lowlight shots from togs I trust so I can get a better sense of reality. Good, bad, adjusted, unadjusted - I just want to see what it delivers in the field. (Nik? Scott? Dan P? Mishka? Bueller? ETA: and anybody else who cares to chime in - I only listed those guys by name because I know they used a 50d at some point!!!

)

Here's the story: I had really hoped to raise the funds for a 7d by March-April, but continued uncertainy in the performing arts and the falling prices on 50d's both new and used are making me wonder if I'd do better to rethink that plan. I'm also realising I really need to get a body with a thumbwheel sooner rather than later as I'm starting to find the xsi tiring now I'm shooting 100% manual (Rebel handling is perfect when you're in av or tv, btw, it's just when you need to adjust BOTH shutter and ap quickly that the button layout is less physically comfortable). Since I don't actually "need" the 7d's AF and frame speed and I already have an STE2, I'm wondering if I should take the less-spendy option in the short term.

Sooooooo...... I've been playing around with a 50d every time I'm in a store which has one, trying to see if I can get more used to the balance on it (seems to depend a lot on the lens attached) and am researching it a little harder than I have previously. I would LOVE to hear users comment and see samples of REAL LIFE high iso usage (3200/6400) and perhaps see some good and bad examples. Weddings, concerts, natural (low) light shots. That kinda thing.

Thanks in advance!

Richard · December 12, 2009

I upgraded from a 20D to the 50D in July. I would say I got about a one stop improvement in noise performance (totally seat of the pants, unscientific estimate

). With the 20D, I had to worry about noise above ISO 400, whereas with the 50D, it's generally very clean till you get above 800. Of course, the more you push it, the more important it is to get the exposure correct. Still, I have gotten some pretty good frames at 3200 and 6400.

1. ISO 3200. Noise reduction in ACR only. Shot at sunset

2. ISO 6400. Noise reduction ACR only. Shot after sunset

3. ISO 3200. Noise reduction in ACR/CS3. Shot at sunset (natural light)

4. ISO 6400. Noise reduction ACR only. Shot well after sunset, natural light

5. ISO 12,800. Noise reduction in Noiseware. Shot in a dark tunnel--not great but to me miraculous that it could be done at all.

All in all, I find the 50D a more capable camera than the 20D, but TBH, for me the main improvements have not been in noise reduction. The focus micro-adjustment feature is great and the highlight priority mode has also been a big plus for me. I also love having a custom quick menu and a couple of shooting mode presets.

If noise is really a top priority, you might be better off looking for a used 5D or 5DII, if you can find one. Also, if you don't already use a separate noise-reduction program, that can be a big help. I just started using Noiseware recently and am quite impressed. It is far better at smoothing noise while preserving detail than the tools in ACR/Photoshop. Noise Ninja and Neat Image are also very good.

The 7D was released after I made my purchase and I thought long and hard about selling the 50D. But in the end, I decided that the 50D was a far more capable camera than I am a photographer, so I'm staying put for now. One nice thing for you is that many people who only want the latest and greatest are selling 50Ds at very good prices.

EDIT: One thing I should have added is that I only posted pics that I liked for one reason or another. The losers get deleted immediately, though I rarely delete only because of noise.

divamum · December 12, 2009

EXCELLENT Richard, just the kind of shots I need to see - thank you very much for taking the time!

The sunset and tunnel shots are really impressive - at this size they're certainly acceptable on noise. Much though I'd love to invest in pro gear (since the requests and enquiries I'm getting for shoots are pushing me down a pro-am route whether it was something I intended or not!) I have to be realistic about all this, and if I can eke some useable extra speed out of a 50d compared to my xsi, then it will do the job I need. Seems like well-exposed 3200 is useable, if not what you'd get from a 5d2

The only shot which bothers me is the accordian player at 6400 -is that the infamous "banding" showing up?

Thanks again!

ETA: I'm a HUGE fan of noiseware. That said, I noticed that it had a much more powerful impact on the XT's lower pixel count than the xsi, so I've seen firsthand the truth of more-pixels-on-small-sensor=more noise. Again, why I want to see real world shots rather than "just the numbers"

angevin1 · December 12, 2009

divamum wrote:

EXCELLENT Richard, just the kind of shots I need to see - thank you very much for taking the time!
The only shot which bothers me is the accordian player at 6400 -is that the infamous "banding" showing up?

Diva, I'd like to make a beneficial suggestion. Ask Richard if he'll allow you to purchase those two prints, in say 5x7. I think you'd be surprised how they look on paper compared to monitors: Much better!

Nikolai · December 12, 2009

I haven't shot with 50D for a while (since I got 5D2 in the beginning of the year and recently 7D). I agree with Richard, that NR, while better, is not the only/primary reason I upgraded my 40D to it.
Having said that, given the capabilities of 7D, I see no reason to get new 50D. I think price difference is more than justified by the new/improved features, which are too numerous to list them again...

Richard · December 12, 2009

Nikolai wrote:

Having said that, given the capabilities of 7D, I see no reason to get new 50D. I think price difference is more than justified by the new/improved features, which are too numerous to list them again...

I agree with this regarding buying new, but as I mentioned before, there are some pretty sweet deals out there now on lightly used 50Ds.

Nikolai · December 12, 2009

Richard wrote:

I agree with this regarding buying new, but as I mentioned before, there are some pretty sweet deals out there now on lightly used 50Ds.

OK, I wasn't going to tempt anybody, but :-)

18mp vs 15mp
8 fps
Dual DIGIC-IV processor
no silly modes (finally)
3 user settings instead of 2 (40D had 3 + silly modes)
various video modes, inculding HD, with clearly labeled dedicated button for LiveView/Video
two dual axis levels (both LCD and VF)
much improved AF
enhanced set of Custom Functions
5D2 type of (much improved) batteries
Button layout mimics 5D2 (helps you have both)
I like single digits models:-)

:hide

Richard · December 12, 2009

divamum wrote:

The only shot which bothers me is the accordian player at 6400 -is that the infamous "banding" showing up?

I don't see any banding and I haven't had banding issues at all with the 50D. Where are you seeing it?

Dan7312 · December 12, 2009

I see some band like stuff here, but I think that is just wrinkles in the material the shirt is made of.

Richard wrote:

I don't see any banding and I haven't had banding issues at all with the 50D. Where are you seeing it?

divamum · December 12, 2009

Nikolai wrote:

I haven't shot with 50D for a while (since I got 5D2 in the beginning of the year and recently 7D). I agree with Richard, that NR, while better, is not the only/primary reason I upgraded my 40D to it.
Having said that, given the capabilities of 7D, I see no reason to get new 50D. I think price difference is more than justified by the new/improved features, which are too numerous to list them again...

Nik, there's no questino of my WANTING the 7d - it's the crop camera I've been waiting for - but given the falling prices of the 50d (new, refurb'd and gently used) the price difference can be as much as a $1000 between the two models (when you consider some good condition 50d's are being sold with multiple batteries and other accessories that would add up to some serious extra bank if you bought new for a 7d). So yeah, I agree that the price difference is justifiable for the 7d's features, but if the $ aren't there to spend, justifying them doesn't put the camera in hand

I played around with them both again in Best Buy today and was struck once again by just how much more I like the feel of the 7d, but now that I'm considering a 50d a serious contender and I can imagine using an XXd comfortably which, a year ago when I bought the xsi, I couldn't. As always, needs change along with the growth/learning curve!

Richard, the seeming banding noise is in his shirt, running vertically as Dan7312 drew, and to either side of a straight line down from the corner of the accordian to his belt. Perhaps it is just the shirt itself?

dlplumer · December 12, 2009

I am flattered that I am a "trusted tog"

These were all taken with the 50D. If you click on these you can see the EXIF info in the gallery. They are the closest images I have to low light conditions. HTH

I think you will be very happy with the 50D Diva. Obviously, if you could swing the extra cash for the 7D, you would even be happier, but the 50D will not disappoint, and when the prices come down on the 7D, you will be able to move up.

http://dlplumer.smugmug.com/photos/swfpopup.mg?AlbumID=9637627&AlbumKey=9p646

Toshido · December 13, 2009

Sorry i may not be one of your trusted shooters but I still like showing my stuff

ISO 2500, run through noiseware

ISO 12,800 (will need to double check this) Noiseware again (if I remember right) Will need to check on the desktop for all the real details, but this was nasty. Dark basement apartment. Only light from TV and oven vent hood on the far side of the apartment.
Basically night vision at this point with the 50mm f/1.4 on the camera.

divamum · December 13, 2009

Thanks Dan - that's very helpful. And your "upgrade path" is kind of how my thinking is going right now

Toshido, thanks for those! And heavens - I never listed those specific folks as the ONLY people I wanted to hear from, they're simply regular posters with whose work I've become familiar, and who I also know use(d) a 50d at some point!!!! Thanks for chiming in... and now I shall go and update my original post in case anybody feels excluded!!!!! :hide

Tango · December 13, 2009

hey, its me "anybody else"....:D

Diva, your going to be very happy with the preformance of a 50d unless you have used something twice or three times the price.... your glass is wicked sweet, the 50d will match perfectly!

I dont suggest buying used...

(last year B&H had some wild sales on the 50d about a week before Christmas...watch for something like that... with the 7d out it can only get better in price.)

Richard · December 13, 2009

Dan7312 wrote:

I see some band like stuff here, but I think that is just wrinkles in the material the shirt is made of.

Thanks, Dan. I'll have to go back and look more closely. I do remember seeing something about banding issues on the net, but never paid much attention, frankly.

divamum · December 13, 2009

Thanks, Aaron!

divamum · December 13, 2009

Richard wrote:

Thanks, Dan. I'll have to go back and look more closely. I do remember seeing something about banding issues on the net, but never paid much attention, frankly.

I vaguely remember reading that firmware may have improved it? Not sure - wasn't paying attention at the time, and can't remember now where I saw that.....

Richard · December 13, 2009

divamum wrote:

I vaguely remember reading that firmware may have improved it? Not sure - wasn't paying attention at the time, and can't remember now where I saw that.....

Canon says that they addressed that issue in version 1.0.6 of the 50D firmware, which is what my camera was delivered with. I later updated it to 1.0.7, but I don't recall when.

Toshido · December 13, 2009

I still some slight banding at times, even as low as ISO 800 (example coming).

BUT...

If exposed nicely ISO 1600 shots are very nice, as you can see from the gymnast ISO 2500 was still nice after some noise reduction.

As promied the ISO 800 shot with banding. VERY hard to see on the monitor but I can see a slight bit of banding when printed at 8x10.
This shot was also underexposed in the shadows, shot at dusk, and no flash was used.... Oh and no noise reduction.

jeffreaux2 · December 14, 2009

Diva...

In my latest post in weddings.... "Carriage House"

-All of those were shot with 50D. The outdoor shots at ISO1600. The indoor shots at ISO800. I used Lightroom's sharpening and noise reduction...but not much....on the outdoor shots. No NR used on the indoor shots.

I don't regret the purchase....and am one of the folks who took advantage of BH Photo's wicked hot deals on it last year this time.

...and about seeing noise in print....uhm......

I will now and then use up to ISO800 under special purposes for portraits and have NEVER seen noise show up in prints....5x7 or smaller. I havent printed larger from that ISO.

Scott_Quier · December 14, 2009

I try very hard to shoot at ISO greater than 800 (it's just a phobia of mine) so that's pretty much all I have. These were processed in Bridge/CS3 with very little (if any) noise reduction.

1. ISO 800, f/2.8, 1/15s

2. 800, f/2.8, 1/50

3. 800, f/2.8, 1/60

divamum · December 14, 2009

Thanks Toshi, Jeff and Scott for adding your shots - this is just the stuff I need to see! While I'm interested in learning about gear, bottom line is that I'm not going to be producting 100% crop pictures of black-line targets, and it's much easier for me to judge whether something can suit my needs by seeing these real examples. I really appreciate y'all taking the time to post images.

I nearly pulled the trigger yesterday, but have decided to keep waiting and watching across the next couple of weeks for deep discounts, which I'm hoping may turn up just before and after the Christmas holiday. There are plenty of gently used ones turning up at FM and POTN for around $750-800 and retail refurbs are currently ~$900, so between coupons, bing cashback and, one hopes, further sales over the holiday, it may be possible to get a really good deal. I unquestionably still feel the 7d is a better camera and the one I really want, but the price difference is just so steep right now that it would be kind of silly to let gearlust drive me towards spending more than I realistically can when the 50d is an entirely capable machine .......

D

pyry · December 14, 2009

I've seen the banding effect shown in Richards picture several times, usually while doing long exposure stuff. It's just read-out noise I think. The signal path from the pixels to the A/D converter also has it's own noises and this is why adjacent rows have slightly different values. Every camera shows that when pushed far enough - 6400 ISO is pushing pretty hard.

pathfinder · December 14, 2009

If you need ISO 6400, noise is not your only problem.

Unless you have real fast glass, you may not have much autofocus working for you either....

ISO 6400 is when it is really dark out. But...... at ISO 1600, a tiny bit of flash goes a very long way. Well exposed ISO 1600 images can look superb with a 40D or a 50D.

insanefred · December 14, 2009

I shot my friends 50D just yesterday, I can tell you that I was surprised how awful it really is at anything at above 400.

I shot raw and viewed them in DPP.

divamum · December 15, 2009

pathfinder wrote:

If you need ISO 6400, noise is not your only problem.

Unless you have real fast glass, you may not have much autofocus working for you either....

ISO 6400 is when it is really dark out. But...... at ISO 1600, a tiny bit of flash goes a very long way. Well exposed ISO 1600 images can look superb with a 40D or a 50D.

Thanks for the input, Jim. However, shooting in the theater, flash isn't an option and sometimes it comes down to needing every bit of extra I can eke out of the camera to keep the ss high enough to handhold - that's usually the main reason I need high iso's. I try to keep it at 800 or lower, but if the lighting is bad, sometimes as high as 1600 just doesn't cut it, even when you have fast lenses. (Which I do, btw - 1.4, 2.0 and 2.8). Even something like 2000 would probably help a lot... as long as the resulting shots are good enough to be cleaned up with Noiseware.

insanefred wrote:

I shot my friends 50D just yesterday, I can tell you that I was surprised how awful it really is at anything at above 400.
I shot raw and viewed them in DPP.

Were they properly exposed? No doubt about it (and I find this with my xsi, too) if it's underexposed, the chroma noise is REALLY bad. Also, an iffy white balance seems to make noise worse (often when I tweak the wb, the exposure magically seems to improve too). I would expect it to be similar in the 50d given the pixel density.

And yes, in a perfect world I'd get a 5d2, but that is right out of the running, sadly - just not enough $.

insanefred · December 15, 2009

This was the best looking one I took, (in terms of a good example of detail and noise). Can you guess what ISO this is?
Processed in DPP, no brightness was added and no + ev added in post. Used the 17-85 IS

Full view:

100% view:

IMO, for what ISO it is at, it doesn't seem to retain very much detail.

Dan7312 · December 15, 2009

Have you been following ScottBourne on twitter? He has given away a couple of 7D's recently and says he will soon be giving away another Canon but not what model. The chances of winning are pretty small but not zero.

divamum wrote:

I nearly pulled the trigger yesterday, but have decided to keep waiting and watching across the next couple of weeks for deep discounts, which I'm hoping may turn up just before and after the Christmas holiday.

divamum · December 15, 2009

insanefred wrote:

This was the best looking one I took, (in terms of a good example of detail and noise). Can you guess what ISO this is?
Processed in DPP, no brightness was added and no + ev added in post. Used the 17-85 IS

IMO, for what ISO it is at, it doesn't seem to retain very much detail.

Thanks for those examples - very interesting. I'll assume it was 400 or 800 given the comment in your previous post. What's interesting is that I can't decide if the softening of detail is from the small amount of visible noise, or that the lens is a touch soft

Did you reduce noise at all in post, or is this essentially SOOC? (since you didn't add brightness or ev)

divamum · December 15, 2009

Dan7312 wrote:

Have you been following ScottBourne on twitter? He has given away a couple of 7D's recently and says he will soon be giving away another Canon but not what model. The chances of winning are pretty small but not zero.

Wow, that's almost enough to make me break my anti-Twitter vow.....

(I have a thing about Twitter - I can live with Facebook statuses, but something at Twitter just irritates me, and I've managed to avoid it so far!!!!

) Tx for the tip!

Dan7312 · December 16, 2009

BTW this is the latest giveaway...

Win a new Canon 5DMKII or $2700 of photo printing/product from @WHCCPro & Scott Bourne. Pls RT. Info: http://bit.ly/6Mtx9I

I'm sure your tweets will be twitter high note

divamum wrote:

Wow, that's almost enough to make me break my anti-Twitter vow..... (I have a thing about Twitter - I can live with Facebook statuses, but something at Twitter just irritates me, and I've managed to avoid it so far!!!! ) Tx for the tip!

Real life 50d performance

Comments