Canon's EOS 50D gets October 6th release date, up for pre-order
By Darren Murph 
posted Sep 15th 2008 2:33PM
posted Sep 15th 2008 2:33PM
[Thanks, sds24]
posted Sep 15th 2008 2:33PM
Now that we've thrown 'em off the trail, use the form below to get in touch with the people at Engadget. Please fill in all of the required fields because they're required.
Dammit, right on the day I leave the Albuquerque Balloon Festival.
So much for waiting
sweet!! looking forward to it.
I was gonna bite on this one...until Canon announced the other mystery moon camera silhouette. Now I have to wait to see what that one is. If it's the 5D successor, then 50D takes a backseat. Once you go full frame...you just can't go back.
exactly :D
Damnit, i just got the 40D.
Ditto.
I was hoping this would push the price of the older models down, but it looks like it is just taking a new higher line. I'll still be shopping for a 40D this christmas by the looks of things.
So can we expect the 40D to have a price drop?
The 40D is already dirt-cheap compared to the $1,400 for this new 50D (body-only). The 40D is selling for around $900-1,000 (body-only), which is incidentally also the price of Nikon's D90 (body-only).
Just a year ago when the 40D came out, it was $1300 for the body only - I know, I got one within days of it's release, so it's already had a huge "price drop". It got stolen Sept. 4th this year - so now I'm waiting on the 50D.
Ya, mmk. Again, props for Nikon for keeping the price of the camera in the "middle" of road under $1,000. I know that the 50D is awesome, but is it $500-$600 more awesome than a D90?
Let the lamb-bast begin ...
why yes, yes it is.
Why on earth is this camera being packaged with the 28-135 lens in some places (as was the 30D and 40D)? That gives you the equivalent of 45mm on the wide end, which is terrible if this is your only lens. It seems the a mass market kit (CC, BB, etc.) with the 17-85mm would make more sense, and then have the 55-200mm or 75-300mm available for people who want telephoto. I use the 17-40 f/4L on my 30D and it is not one MM too wide for me.
I think it's because of the size of the pickup. Check the pic link and read.
D90 isn't $600 cheaper than a 50D.
If you compare the body only, then it's a $400 difference.
If you compare the kits, then it's a $300 difference.
I think most people learn once they have 2 bodies that upgrading to a new camera is not what all is cracked up to be.
I got a 40D in June and I have an gripped XTi (400D).
Before I got the 40D I had a 10D + the XTi.
I consider myself knowledgeable when it comes to DSLRs and SLRs (still have an EOS 650) and yet when a new camera comes out you read how much better it is than the camera that came before (which everyone praised as the best camera ever). Reading forums (POTN, DPREVIEW, etc) can have impact your perception.
When I got the 40D in June of this year it was mainly because I had some money laying around.
I cannot deny that the other big reason was just reading so much about it and eventually you can only stay unbiased for so long when you read comments that praise the 40D.
Once I got the 40D I can say that I was a bit disappointed.
Don't get me wrong I was not foolish to expect I would see a 1000% increase in the quality of my shots.
It was just the hype, and reading about it had subconsciously made me expect a huge leap.
The only really thing that bugged me about the 10D was how slow it was to write RAW (or JPGs although I seldom use those) to the card.
The 40D is a great camera and if you just got one I say hold on to it and use it for 3-4 years.
If you are about to get a new camera you are looking at $260 ($1140 for 40D kit - $1399 for 50D kit) difference.
If you have the extra $260 and don't need anything else (if you don't already have and 85 1.8 I'd add another $60 to the $260 to make it $320 and grab one along with the 40D for the price of a 50D) then get the 50D.
Buying the 50D kit and selling the 28-135IS for $300 on e-bay would ultimately result in the 50D costing you $1,100.
Buying the 40D kit with the 28-135IS and selling the 28-135 will result in the 40D costing you $840
I guess for now you have to get the 50D as a kit but I'm sure that will change.
Canon Nikon Sony are all falling into this hype where they think that everyone needs new cameras every year now (look at Canon 40D last year and 50D now).
The 28-135 just won't go away. It needs to but for some reason it won't.
Don't know why they won't bury it.
Canon now has the 18-200IS which is perfect for the crop bodies and is available for pre-order.
The 18-200 is the lens they need to go with.
I remember every time I show somebody a pic they say: "Wow you must have a great camera"....this always bugged me....I've seen pics taken with a cellphone camera that impressed me more that some taken with a DSLR.
The funny thing is when you cook a good meal, they never say: "Wow, this recipe is great! What cooking gear did you use? Pan type? Oven type? Was it open fire or electric?"
Nope....they ask you what's in your food and what sauce/secret ingredient you used. If this were to translate to photography properly, they'd ask something more like: How did you light this scene? What time of day was it? Where was the location?"
I ask that question because I can manage to take some pretty nice pictures with a pretty low end camera and I like to find people who do the same. It's not the size of your megapixels, its how you click the shutter.
To Alex and all you experts:
I have held on to my film cameras for 34 years, although I hav ebeen using Canon SD500 for about three years now. Got my elan 7NE, F1 and Maxxum 7000 stolen all together in Vegas last year. I have been looking at the 5D, 40D and then XSi but now here comes the 50D and the 5DMark improved. Now the resale 5D (less than 1yr old) are about 1400.00 but still would need a lens.
Just on the body alone can you help me decide on which of the above models should I seriously consider? Wife will help me up to $2800.00 total.
I appreciate anyone's suggestion.
Biggest problem for folks in the UK is that Canon want us to pay 50% more for the camera than anyone else. It is attractive at US prices, not at UK prices.
This camera is also shipping as a kit with the new Canon EF-S 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6 IS. I personall think this lens is much better than the 28-135mm based on range perspective.
Amazon has it on pre-order for $2,099.99
The 40D and now the 50D mystify me. Why would you spend that much on a body and not get a full frame?
This camera is a pretty weak showing. Nikon is kinda kicking Canon's ass right now, and I say this as someone with thousands of dollars worth of Canon gear. Even Panasonic with the new micro 4/3 sensor is looking damn good. Canon had better kick it up a notch, because while I do have lots of gear, my L series lenses have great resale value and I'm not too much of a fanboi to dump them.
> "Why would you spend that much on a body and not get a full frame?"
Because the 50D is $1000 less than the current 5D. The 10D, 20D, 30D and 40D have all been crop sensor cameras. Did they sell OK?
Even Nikon's first full frame camera was only introduced last year. There has been, and will be, a need for cheaper "crop" sensor cameras. Are you suggesting that all SLRs should start at the $3000 price of the full-frame D700?
Is this a full frame DSLR? Though for that price, I doubt it.
Pay attention. This is the 50D, most recent upgrade of the APS-C (1.6x crop) sized sensor prosumer line, like the 20D, 30D, 40D. There's only been a teaser on the update to the 5D (the 5D Mk II? the 3D? the 7D? we don't even know the name yet, but it's coming), odds are it will be announced in two weeks at Photokina. That will be another full-frame.
At some point we're going to see the image quality go down as Canon crams more pixels into the same area. We've seen it happen before: You can't buy a decent small digital camera anymore; every one of these things produces pictures that are so bad that they strain the definition of "photograph." Is the end of high quality looming for the APS-sized-sensor SLRs too?
Canon should add an interval timer (essentially free to add; it's just software functionality) as Nikon has, and enable mirror lockup for an unlimited number of exposures. It botched the multi-exposure mirror lockup in the 40D. Do those things, then develop some innovative remote capabilities, or work to reduce noise even further.
I don't think anyone that seriously owns a full frame Canon (5D, 1DsMKIII) would seriously be looking at switching to the 50D since you'd have to change most if not all of your lenses (except for a 50 1.4, & 85 1.8 and maybe a few others)...It's not that they could not do it (good glass holds it's value) it is just that the crop and full frame people shoot different things.
With a 40D, 50D, (and 1DMKIII with it's 1.3 crop) you get a nice boost in distance. This is really good for sports shooters.
If you are a sports shooter you can get a 300L 2.8IS for $4,100 brand new. Put it on your 40D, 50D and you have a 480mm equivalent.
If you had a full frame body like a 5D or 1Ds MKIII the closes thing that would get you 480mm would be the 500L f4IS @ $5,900.
So you are spending an extra $1,800 (which could get you another 50D with lots of $$$ change left in your pocket) and the lens is 1 stop slower (f4 vs 2.8).
For other photography such as portraits photogs if you were to switch from full frame to a 1.6 crop you'd have to adjust to the difference in DOF.
In order to get the same DOF you get on a 40D/50D @ 2.8 on a full frame 5D at the same focal length you'd have to be at f4.
Doesn't sound like a big issue until you start to realize that you have to get used to this and it will take a while.
I have to agree that the megapixel race is getting crazy and I think that more cameras need to be about pixel density. Pixel density is one great reason which made the 5D great.
As far as Nikon goes they made nice cameras but seriously look at any major sporting event and you will notice a sea of white lenses, Canon L glass. There is no doubt that Nikon has been on the move for at least 2 generation (starting with the D3, D300 and the new D700, D90) but it will take a bit more than 2 good generations in a row to move the majority of pro users away from Canon.
We also have to keep in mind that Canon is not sleeping either. They are releasing new gear (50D, new mysterious 5D replacement).
Everyone loved the D3 because among other things it's low noise at super crazy HIGH ISO (12,800 and beyond)....Now Canon is doing similar things with 6400 H1 and ISO 12,800 H2 on the 50D. Yes the Nikons can go a bit higher but realistically speaking if you can get ISO6400 at reasonable levels from the 50D (and most likley you have fast glass) you are set.
good thing i didn't wait and got my 40D with the EF-S 17-85mm for $1100 back in June/July (to replace my Rebel XT that was stolen)
I highly doubt that this will have anything that will make me wish I waited (the 40D gets .2 more fps than the 50D bwahaha.)
Mega pixels are nice, but not everything. If I really want to make a large print that's beyond the limits of a 10.1MP sensor I'll turn to my Hasselblad 500CM (which btw is a medium format film camera not the ungodly expensive digital version)
I could've sworn the kit lens wasn't USM.
Anyways. It's a nice camera, but I'm happy with the XT I've got. The only thing that I think would really make that big of a difference for me is the buffer and FPS. Besides that, the XT (and the Rebel line in general)'s size and performance is great for me.
I'd buy the 50D over the 5DMkII *because* it isn't full frame! After using a 5D for a few years, light falloff is a serious issue with full frame cameras even when stopped down. After fighting with the light falloff issue, I really don't want to see full frame again and will not consider it in future cameras. In addition, the 5DMkII still has no pop-up flash so that's a deal killer for me as well. Sure, I like to use the external flash but I do need the pop-up flash in a pinch sometimes.
Thanks for your input. The pop-up flash is a plus to me since I am more into instant and unposed photography. I still use larger flash even after I have lost a couple of hot shoes in the process. Maybe someone out there can help me decide on which to get among the Canon xSi, 40D and the newer 50D (is this worth the wait and money involve?).
The 50D has a few excellent new features that make it worth while. And selling my 40D for $700 made it an outlay of $700. The ability to shoot at 3200 ISO and even 6400 with Neat Image post processing. And the ability to customize the autofocus to the lens are a big plus. Also the much brighter live view with histogram is a help as well.
haha, too funny... ive got mine already, picked it up about 2 weeks ago.. only catch is though i have to wait for the manual to arrive :) sick camera none the less and you wont be let down ;)