40D vs 50D

Its been a long while since I've done any serious shooting but after selling my gear almost a year ago, I've decided to throw my hat into the ring once again. I've tried both Nikon and Canon but after testing both waters, though I like Nikon bodies, it is ultimately the Canon lenses that have won me upon my return. The big question is now, for those of you out there do you prefer the 40D (plus extra $$ to put towards another lens) or a 50D? I've never used the micro-adjustment feature, is it really necessary? Of course, being on this forum I'll be shooting mainly wildlife on hikes and do some landscape as well. Thank you.

Brian

Brian, have you looked at the 7D, it is a great prosumer camera and I favor it to both the others. Better features and new technology for AF and 18MP. It has an easy to use menu to change settings, leveling function and sports a C-sensor providing the same 1.6 crop factor. I owned the 40D and this is a significant upgrade.

Artie has made very positive comments on its quality and value in recent Birds as Art Bulletins.

Thanks Jeff, the 7D is too heavy and expensive for me though. It is an awesome camera though!

I have a 40D, 50D and 7D.

The features of the 7D kick it up a big botch from the 50D.

I am keeping the 40D for low noise images and selling the 50D. The 50D is a better flight shot camera than the 40D, but not as good as the 7D.

If I had to choose only one it would be the 7D.

jn

Another vote for the 7D, but you're looking for info regarding the 40D vs. the 50D. The 50D has much better AF but is noisier than the 40D. Both are good bodies. I've never had to microadjust any of my body-lens combos. I may be selling a lightly used 50D in the near future; PM me if you're interested.

Hi Brian, I work as a guide leading photo safaris in Botswana. I get to shoot wildlife almost every day. I have owned two 40ds, two 50Ds and now own two 7D Canons. Between the 40D and the 50D, as far as my experience and what I could research, AF is exactly the same apart from the processor change from Digic3 to Digic4. The 50 has a faster processor which may help the AF but with its bigger files, buffer size and speed end up similar to the 40D. The 50D has a better quality rear lcd screen. Both feel identical in the hand when shooting. However, when the light gets soft, like on an overcast day, there is no comparison between the two in terms of image quality. The 40D sensor is much cleaner, shows much less noise up to iso 800 (I never go over that with either of these bodies) and has more local contrast. Just go to the website called DXO Mark to compare sensor performance for confirmation of what you will see in real use. Get the 40D and use the extra money on good glass. The 7Ds that I own now have far superior autofocus, buffer quicker, and respond better, but are more similar to the 50D in image quality in low light. In bright light the three cameras give similar image quality but the 40D is still better than the other two. You can check out what results the cameras have given me at www.grantatkinson.com

Hope that helps

Brian, my vote is for the 40D. The price is right now for a used 40D and it produces clean images. I had a 50D but went back to the 40D and got cleaner images. For me the pixel pitch for the 40D seems to be a sweet spot for a APS-C imager. Low light is very good. I also liked that the 40D gave me 3 user memories while the 50D went to two. The LCD upgrade of the 50D was not that noticable.

Brian,

Let us know what you do, sounds the 40D IQ is still a good value. I found Matthew/Grant's comments to be great considering they owned both.

I will certainly let you all know my decision once I make it which is still teetering. It basically comes down to AF speed, some say its faster and some slower I'm not sure what to believe lol.

No comparison in terms of AF performance IMO. The 50D is much better.

I still own my 40D but sold my 50D shortly after buying it. Yes, the AF performance is better than the 40D but the noise is unacceptable in my opinion. Good luck.

Hi Brian, I checked Canons White Papers re info on the 40D vs 50D AF, and the centre AF point was improved in the later model. I must say that I never detected any difference in AF performance whilst I was shooting the two bodies side by side for more than a year which is an probably an indication of my fairly limited experience. So I am sure that Doug Brown is right, and the 50D may have better AF in some situations.
However, the poorer image quality anywhere beyond iso400 was really disappointing with the 50D. Even though much can be done to the images with post-processing, the 40D images started out cleaner, with more contrast and punchier. I use 16-35f2.8, 70-200f2.8IS, and a 300f2.8is, and using slower lenses would likely exacerbate the image quality difference in the two cameras. If you intend shooting in bright light the IQ difference is less noticeable. However, much of the wildlife that I shoot only starts moving just before sunset, hence my need for better hi-iso performance
good luck, both are good cameras though...
cheers
Grant

Interesting note, agree that noise can "creep" faster with a more concentrated pixel count (50d)/same size sensor(40d) in low light, however early on, i did find that an underexposed image was a going to exacerbate the noise for sure. Shooting the best exposed images, and then either dpp, or 3rd party noise reduction did the job just fine.. And the focus system, is awesome!
Don

Hi Don, the sensors are indeed the same size, but the individual pixels are much smaller on the 50D as there are many more of them. From what I have managed to read on the subject, larger pixels give better signal, and then on to a cleaner, stronger image. This is one of the reasons that Nikons full frame low pixel count (12) sensors in their D3 and D700 are such good low light cameras. I found the DXO Mark website most useful for seeing what the sensors were doing in terms of light gathering, sensitivity, signal strength etc and if you run their sensor comparison graph on the 40D, the 50D and the 7D you will see interesting results, that exactly matched what I was experiencing in the field. But I agree, all three are great cameras..and all can produce excellent images,..for me the 40D IQ has given me the best results. I now shoot a pair of 7Ds.
cheers
grant

Just to weigh in on noise, I found that the 50D delivered excellent image quality for the most part, including at higher ISOs. You just need to run a little NR; I do that on all of my images, regardless of the camera body. If you search the gear and avian image forums, you'll find a number of my 50D high ISO posts.

Hey guys, thanks for all of your help, I went with the 40D and will spend the extra $$ on glass. Once again thanks for all the help! :)

I have a 20D 50D and 7D, I was preoccupiied with image noise on the 50D but once I had it and ensured I exposed to the right I didn't really find it a problem.
I was initially sceptical about the 7D mainly because it was a different body design to the XX series but I knew people who bought it and they thought it was fantastic - so I bought one and yes it is! I love the AF and it does feel like a slightly better quality camera once it is in the hand. I have not bought the twin battery pack - not sure if I will ( I am sulking because the one on the other camera does not fit).