50D old hat?

Blasted

Blasted

Suspended / Banned
Messages
927
Edit My Images
Yes
Is the 50D now old hat?

I currently have a 450D and spent a little money getting some better glass. I now feel that the body isnt as comfy as the bigger versions (after playing in the shops) and the ISO is rather limiting. With the advent of the 60D and the popular 7D should the 50D be overlooked as a second hand choice? For arguments sake you are looking at £500 for a second hand 50D.

Thanks
 
The 50D is getting a bit old, but that doesn't make it any less of a good camera.
In some ways it has advantages over the 60D, it can shoot slight faster, has AF micro-adjustments and a metal body.

None of those bodies will give a significant increase in ISO performance over your 450D though.
 
I do appreciate a heavier chunkier feel to the body, but I have never had to lug one around for any amount of time.

ISO on the 450d is 100-1600 whislt the 50D is 100-12800.
 
I upgraded from a 350 to a 50 back in the summer and love it to bits. Naturally it feels like a much bigger step forward from my 350 than you might experience but it's a great body - I'm delighted with it and would recommend it to anyone looking to trade up from an older xxxD
 
The 50D only goes to 12800 in extended mode, best to think of it as 100 to 3200. Above that it's very noisy. I use a 50D and wouldn't bother upgrading to a 60D unless your interested in video. The 7D :thinking: now that might get me to change but better glass would be more of a worthwhile investment if only the funds were there in the first place.
 
Thanks guys,

Just looking around really. One thing i noticed is that a second hand 50D is approx £500, whilst a new 60d can be had for £730 and has built in wireless flash transmitter.

Video has never been a thing for me and if i were to shoot video i would use a video camera.
 
Last edited:
squishy said:
The 50D is getting a bit old, but that doesn't make it any less of a good camera.
In some ways it has advantages over the 60D, it can shoot slight faster, has AF micro-adjustments and a metal body.

None of those bodies will give a significant increase in ISO performance over your 450D though.
Click to expand...

The 50d (and 60d) has far superior high iso performance over the 450d at the higher end if the scale, which I why I got a 50d as I shoot a lot of indoor sport.
 
Last edited:
Last edited:
Well from experience the 450d was pretty much the same as my 400d iso wise and my 50d blows that out the water after 800iso! In fact, I could never push the 400d past 800iso due to the horrendous noise, but the 50d is happy shooting up to 3200iso.

Which us why I bought one!
 
Moski said:
I upgraded from a 350 to a 50 back in the summer and love it to bits. Naturally it feels like a much bigger step forward from my 350 than you might experience but it's a great body - I'm delighted with it and would recommend it to anyone looking to trade up from an older xxxD
Click to expand...

I did the same thing! i loved the 50D, until it and my 350D was stolen!

But in the 6 months i had the 50D, i loved it, nice quick fps, decent resolution, i also had the 24-105 L glass on the front, and this made a great combination!
 
I have a 50D and love it, have a battery grip on it and it feels sooo much better than my old 400D, ok alot heavier but alot sturdier.

Will not be upgrading for ages yet as this does everything I want it to.
Just been out today for best part of 5 hours and done everything from landscapes to birds and loved it.

spike
 
If you think a 50D is old hat then my 40D must be an antique :lol:

seriously though, I came from a 300D, it was my first DSLR and got me introduced to the world of "proper" photography. It served me well in the time that I had it and I learned a lot from it. When I "upgraded" and got back into taking shots seriously again I thought about a 550D and went to try it out. The feeling was very similar to the 300, lightweight, with similar controls and layout.

Then I came across a 40D and wow, they are like night and day in feeling. The 40D is heavier, well its not plastic like the 550 so you would expect that. It just feels like it will last for years, and the layout of the buttons and dials is where you would expect them to be. The 40D felt very comfortable to hold and to use, everything about it felt right and i was sold.

TBH, a 50D might have been better for a couple of reasons but I couldn't justify the price difference and I got my 40D for a song :thumbs:

I can see this cam lasting for a few years yet, if you can get your hands on a 50D and try it out then I think you will definitely appreciate the difference over a 450D. Thats my opinion but I'm by no means an expert, I'm just telling it the way I see it.
 
Blasted said:
I do appreciate a heavier chunkier feel to the body, but I have never had to lug one around for any amount of time.

ISO on the 450d is 100-1600 whislt the 50D is 100-12800.
Click to expand...

The 3200-12800 range is a complete marketing gimmick. Canon love doing that. 450D ISO 1600 is very close to 50D. http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/en...0/(brand)/Canon/(brand2)/Canon/(brand3)/Canon Good knowledge of noise reduction software is a necessity using high ISO with these cameras.

Personally I wasn't happy with 50D above ISO200, and felt 40D was much better.

Even so an old 5D classic would blow either out of the water at a similar price.
 
Blasted said:
Thanks guys,

Just looking around really. One thing i noticed is that a second hand 50D is approx £500, whilst a new 60d can be had for £730 and has built in wireless flash transmitter.

Video has never been a thing for me and if i were to shoot video i would use a video camera.
Click to expand...

You can get the 60D for £625 new on ebay. I was very tempted.
 
Iv'e got a 450d and 40d the 40 is easier to use and has more set up options,one thing I find annoying with the 40d is the control dial on the top left of the camera is easy to change without noticing it could do with a lock.
 
daugirdas said:
The 3200-12800 range is a complete marketing gimmick. Canon love doing that. 450D ISO 1600 is very close to 50D. http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/en/Camera-Sensor/Compare-sensors/%28appareil1%29/272|0/%28appareil2%29/176|0/%28appareil3%29/185|0/%28onglet%29/0/%28brand%29/Canon/%28brand2%29/Canon/%28brand3%29/Canon Good knowledge of noise reduction software is a necessity using high ISO with these cameras.

Personally I wasn't happy with 50D above ISO200, and felt 40D was much better.

Even so an old 5D classic would blow either out of the water at a similar price.
Click to expand...

daugirdas, seriously, where does your deep seated hatred if all things 50d come from?? Maybe you should have therapy :lol:?!! Not happy above 200 iso??? The more I read your posts about the 50d the more ridiculous they get!!! For one thing, the 450 at iso 1600 is far noisier than the 50d.

The 50d is brilliant between base iso and about 2500iso. Even 3200 iso is useable with a tiny bit of nr.

A couple of high iso examples, again... Both iso 3200 just convered in DPP;

This was with a Canon 18-135 @ f5.6 iso 3200
AndyFleming.jpg


This was (I think) a Sigma 17-70 EX at f3.2, iso 3200. This arena was VERY dark with only a few fluorescent strips lighting the whole place (note total lack of shadows).
Amy.jpg


Not perfect, but damn good for 3200!

As I said in a previous post, I was lucky enough to have my trial 50d alongside a 40d (and a 7d) and above 400 iso the 50d was better as the iso increased. We can all look at Internet iso lab tests (and that oft' quoted link is utterly meaningless!!) but they bare no resemblance to real world shooting.
 
Last edited:
For me instead of going for a 50D, which is still a prosumer body why not consider a 1D Mark II.

A pro spec body from a few years back. Then again I am biased. :lol:
 
odd jim said:
daugirdas, seriously, where does your deep seated hatred if all things 50d come from?? Maybe you should have therapy :lol:?!! Not happy above 200 iso??? The more I read your posts about the 50d the more ridiculous they get!!! For one thing, the 450 at iso 1600 is far noisier than the 50d.

The 50d is brilliant between base iso and about 2500iso. Even 3200 iso is useable with a tiny bit of nr.

A couple of high iso examples, again... Both iso 3200 just convered in DPP;

This was with a Canon 18-135 @ f5.6 iso 3200
AndyFleming.jpg


This was (I think) a Sigma 17-70 EX at f3.2, iso 3200. This arena was VERY dark with only a few fluorescent strips lighting the whole place (note total lack of shadows).
Amy.jpg


Not perfect, but damn good for 3200!

As I said in a previous post, I was lucky enough to have my trial 50d alongside a 40d (and a 7d) and above 400 iso the 50d was better as the iso increased. We can all look at Internet iso lab tests (and that oft' quoted link is utterly meaningless!!) but they bare no resemblance to real world shooting.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately, I did not get on with mine as well. I found it as good as 400D that I briefly used for a week a few years ago. I think I liked 30D a bit more back in the old days, when Nikon still didn't have any attractive offers [to me]. I appreciate you may be coming from a different background in terms of photography.

While it is usable, and clean web size images are easy to produce at any ISO with most if not any dSLRs, unless the shot is seriously cocked up by the person behind the camera. That is not the point I am trying to make. The point is 50D is well behind the competition at the pixel level, and its AF and ISO capabilities are nearly substandard if you look as close as D90 and even more so to D7000. My 1Ds II makes it look ridiculous at ISO 400, and so does my recent 1D mkIII. I don't shoot horses with slow wide angle lenses, emphasising notice boards in the background, while hiding the riders face. I shoot landscapes and people which requires clean and detailed files. I didn't intend to jump to 1-series but canon pretty much forced my there (the other choice being D700+D300) with their sub-par xxD and in a way 5D series.

At ISO 400 there is very obvious grain in 50D image, and some patchy chroma noise in the shadows that Lightroom struggles to remove. I haven't seen another camera with noise like that. It doesn't mean it won't clean up and give a decent print, but the point is why would I have to put up with it in the first place? ISO 400 is my 'default' setting, and it has to be 'clean' without any extra effort and subsequent loss of IQ. ISO 800 is even worse, unusable because I expect ISO 800 to be still fairly clean. ISO1600 is noisy but that's OK, as we are used to it being emergency setting, and being used for small prints or web, not A1 size fine prints. Having said that 1-series handle ISO1600 better, and 40D cleaned up in Lightroom 3 very nicely too.

Now I have a final remark about dpp. I tried most RAW converters except Aperture, and dpp was fairly poor in the comparison. It can clean up noise easily, but it loses very much details. The controls are limited compared to Lightroom 3. The output is very much like out of camera JPEG with minor tweaks. It is nowhere near what LR or other pro packages can deliver. It is OK for a holiday snapper but I wouldn't recommend it to a pro.
 
for me .. i used to have a 350D .. got rid because of money and then was lucky enough to be able to buy myself a 500D .. within about 3 weeks of owning it i was given the chance to buy a 50D and kit lens and sell my 500D identical kit lens and other bits and bobs all for a measly £10

in my eyes £10 to upgrade to a pro sumer body which had a higher fps first of all was enough for me forget the mag body, lcd display and all the other great features it had.

imo if you can afford to go from a XXX to a XX series and it isnt going to cost you a whole lot then do it!

i see people still using 20Ds without complaint and there years old!

all good photographers will work with whatever they have and the real quality is in the glass!

if you WANT/NEED a new body (im a man and i suffer from gadget phobia - so i must upgrade) then sure go for it .. if you dont need to or think it may be pointless .. then just dont :)

but i LOVE my 50D
 
I must say that i thought allot of my 50d until my recent upgrade. The high level iso was ok up until 1600 providing like always you expose properly to the right as with all digital cameras. I think there's far too much pixel peeping going on 90% of the time.

All at ISO800 which is my go to indoors with fill in flash.

IreneDavid-83a.jpg


IreneDavid-94.jpg


IreneDavid-100.jpg
 
manualfocus-g said:
TurboFan. that first shot looks out of focus or camera shaken to me.
Click to expand...


Possibly, but could also be atmospherics. I was just trying to highlite the differences in pic quality. A quick look through my pics and these are probably average of the quality difference i see.
A couple more that are probably a bit closer to one another
50D
065-7.jpg


450D
BA747.jpg
 
daugirdas said:
Unfortunately, I did not get on with mine as well. I found it as good as 400D that I briefly used for a week a few years ago. I think I liked 30D a bit more back in the old days, when Nikon still didn't have any attractive offers [to me]. I appreciate you may be coming from a different background in terms of photography.

While it is usable, and clean web size images are easy to produce at any ISO with most if not any dSLRs, unless the shot is seriously cocked up by the person behind the camera. That is not the point I am trying to make. The point is 50D is well behind the competition at the pixel level, and its AF and ISO capabilities are nearly substandard if you look as close as D90 and even more so to D7000. My 1Ds II makes it look ridiculous at ISO 400, and so does my recent 1D mkIII. I don't shoot horses with slow wide angle lenses, emphasising notice boards in the background, while hiding the riders face. I shoot landscapes and people which requires clean and detailed files. I didn't intend to jump to 1-series but canon pretty much forced my there (the other choice being D700+D300) with their sub-par xxD and in a way 5D series.

At ISO 400 there is very obvious grain in 50D image, and some patchy chroma noise in the shadows that Lightroom struggles to remove. I haven't seen another camera with noise like that. It doesn't mean it won't clean up and give a decent print, but the point is why would I have to put up with it in the first place? ISO 400 is my 'default' setting, and it has to be 'clean' without any extra effort and subsequent loss of IQ. ISO 800 is even worse, unusable because I expect ISO 800 to be still fairly clean. ISO1600 is noisy but that's OK, as we are used to it being emergency setting, and being used for small prints or web, not A1 size fine prints. Having said that 1-series handle ISO1600 better, and 40D cleaned up in Lightroom 3 very nicely too.

Now I have a final remark about dpp. I tried most RAW converters except Aperture, and dpp was fairly poor in the comparison. It can clean up noise easily, but it loses very much details. The controls are limited compared to Lightroom 3. The output is very much like out of camera JPEG with minor tweaks. It is nowhere near what LR or other pro packages can deliver. It is OK for a holiday snapper but I wouldn't recommend it to a pro.
Click to expand...

"I don't shoot horses with slow wide angle lenses, emphasising notice boards in the background, while hiding the riders face."

You have resorted to an attempt to criticise my skills in composition and timing, no need for that cheap snipe. I didn't select the images as examples of my skills, I simply selected the images as examples of 3200 iso images, which look as clean full res as they do on the web - these were the 1st 3200 images on my photobook. With regard to DPP, I only use that for high iso conversion as the results are cleaner at the top end of the iso scale, I use cs3 for the standard stuff, but DPP resolves high iso better without the need for extensive nr. Did you try DPP with any high iso 50d images? And why would a holiday snapper bother shooting raw??

To call the 50d "as good as a 400d" and with "sub standard AF and iso" is just silly in the extreme.

Oh and for the record I don't shoot equine with slow wide angles, I had actually borrowed the sigma 17-70 2.8 EX from the (very obliging!) official tog as I wanted to see what it was like. I've got a 70-200 2.8 and a set of fast primes for that business.

But enough of this and back to the op - the 50d is a superb piece of kit which it still will be in years to come, and unless you want video you can't go wrong!
 
Last edited:
odd jim said:
"I don't shoot horses with slow wide angle lenses, emphasising notice boards in the background, while hiding the riders face."

You have resorted to an attempt to criticise my skills in composition and timing, no need for that cheap snipe. I didn't select the images as examples of my skills, I simply selected the images as examples of 3200 iso images, which look as clean full res as they do on the web - these were the 1st 3200 images on my photobook. With regard to DPP, I only use that for high iso conversion as the results are cleaner at the top end of the iso scale, I use cs3 for the standard stuff, but DPP resolves high iso better without the need for extensive nr. Did you try DPP with any high iso 50d images? And why would a holiday snapper bother shooting raw??

To call the 50d "as good as a 400d" and with "sub standard AF and iso" is just silly in the extreme.

Oh and for the record I don't shoot equine with slow wide angles, I had actually borrowed the sigma 17-70 2.8 EX from the (very obliging!) official tog as I wanted to see what it was like. I've got a 70-200 2.8 and a set of fast primes for that business.

But enough of this and back to the op - the 50d is a superb piece of kit which it still will be in years to come, and unless you want video you can't go wrong!
Click to expand...

While this was not a personal remark (apologies if it appears to be) I'd try to only post the best work online. It can build a more positive impression about a business very quickly. Most of us including myself will take some snaps every now and then for whatever reason, I am just not happy posting it.
I would love to see some close action shots with your brand new Sigma wide open at 200mm, and have a good look at the details and shadows.

I firmly stand by my opinion regarding xxD line AF. It is sub-par when compared to Nikon D300, D7000 and very likely D90 and D200. 11 AF points with slow AI-servo response is really not on when nikons have 39 or more with better processor.

Finally, why would someone buy 50D and use it in JPEG mode? They bought 50D [or whatever more expensive dSLR] because they can afford and want to take better shots. So they may as well make some effort too.
 
daugirdas said:
While this was not a personal remark (apologies if it appears to be) I'd try to only post the best work online. It can build a more positive impression about a business very quickly. Most of us including myself will take some snaps every now and then for whatever reason, I am just not happy posting it.
I would love to see some close action shots with your brand new Sigma wide open at 200mm, and have a good look at the details and shadows.

I firmly stand by my opinion regarding xxD line AF. It is sub-par when compared to Nikon D300, D7000 and very likely D90 and D200. 11 AF points with slow AI-servo response is really not on when nikons have 39 or more with better processor.

Finally, why would someone buy 50D and use it in JPEG mode? They bought 50D [or whatever more expensive dSLR] because they can afford and want to take better shots. So they may as well make some effort too.
Click to expand...

You sir are a stupid man ( being polite now ) I shot with the 50D for a year or so shooting equine photography and I will say that the 50D AF equals my Nikon D700 and my Nikon D3s, and I would probably think that I am the best equine photographer on the Isle of Wight with over 130,000 images on my web site and 99 percent are shot JPEG so obviously no effort taken here, as for slow AI-servo response you obviously have no concept of how the 50D works it is lightning fast and when shooting X-Country events the horses are moving very fast and its a split second for locking on at some fences and the 50D never missed.
And the only reason that I changed to Nikon was the fact that I also shoot weddings and the skin hues and files are better with Nikon I would suggest sir that you stop being a 1d snob

Wilky
 
Wilky said:
You sir are a stupid man ( being polite now ) I shot with the 50D for a year or so shooting equine photography and I will say that the 50D AF equals my Nikon D700 and my Nikon D3s, and I would probably think that I am the best equine photographer on the Isle of Wight with over 130,000 images on my web site and 99 percent are shot JPEG so obviously no effort taken here, as for slow AI-servo response you obviously have no concept of how the 50D works it is lightning fast and when shooting X-Country events the horses are moving very fast and its a split second for locking on at some fences and the 50D never missed.
And the only reason that I changed to Nikon was the fact that I also shoot weddings and the skin hues and files are better with Nikon I would suggest sir that you stop being a 1d snob

Wilky
Click to expand...

Thank you. I will now update my signature for your pleasure.

I would also ask anybody to visit the best site in the Isle of Wight and comment on the shots as I am unfortunately too stupid for it.

Please tell me more about skin hues and the way Nikon eats them. I am again too stupid for that.

P.S. Locking on a fence or subject moving across the frame is hardly a challenge even for the most basic dSLR. The real hard ones are moving rapidly towards the camera with some busy background and possibly something in the foreground. Probably I was too stupid but I couldn't get 40D or 50D track a runner or dog sprinting to the camera. Being a 1D snob I will confirm they do the job well. But perhaps I am being stupid again :bang:
 
Last edited:
The 50D may be old but that doesn't mean its useless.
I upgraded over Xmas from a 1000D to a 50D and I wouldn't look back.
I prefer the bigger body and the higher fps which are the main reasons I upgraded.

That said the camera excels in other areas too like ISO usability.. and bigger screen.
It is a perfectly good body upgrade from the xxxD consumer bodies.

Ultimately irrespective of what others say good or bad, if you have done your research and are happy to move to any xxD then i say go for it.
All this "this camera is better than that camera" style chat is pointless.

The best camera for the op is the one they find comfortable and ticks all the boxes for shooting style.
 
...the 50d isn't really old really anyway. No different in feel, look and operation to the 7d or even 5d mk2!
 
Last edited:
daugirdas said:
Thank you. I will now update my signature for your pleasure.

I would also ask anybody to visit the best site in the Isle of Wight and comment on the shots as I am unfortunately too stupid for it.

Please tell me more about skin hues and the way Nikon eats them. I am again too stupid for that.

P.S. Locking on a fence or subject moving across the frame is hardly a challenge even for the most basic dSLR. The real hard ones are moving rapidly towards the camera with some busy background and possibly something in the foreground. Probably I was too stupid but I couldn't get 40D or 50D track a runner or dog sprinting to the camera. Being a 1D snob I will confirm they do the job well. But perhaps I am being stupid again :bang:
Click to expand...

Oh goody, good, more hits to www.wightphotography.com will do my google ranking the world of good and please when you do visit have a look at the wedding site as well as that will help keep it at number1 to 5 in google for the Isle of Wight, and I do feel sorry for your intellect as I am sure I said Probably the best equine photographer and not the best site on the Isle of Wight perhaps one is being a little catty with that comment, as for Nikon well I am not going there suffice to say that a good many folk have switched because the files are better.
Have a nice day...

Wilky
 
Thanks again chaps,

Whilst I refer to the 50d being old, its not OLD, its just that there are newer models available.

I'm interested in a bigger better performing body but with no interest in video, additionally I want to stay crop sensor as I should soon be getting a EF-S 17-55 F2.8, better glass first.

Turbofan, i see a similar thing when i compare my images, good example.
 
That was one of the reasons I chose the 50d, I didn't want to pay extra for video as I have no I interest in that area.

Really for canon crops the choice is 50d, 60d or 7d, unless you want to save a bit and go for a 40d which are still very good indeed. The 50d for different and varying reasons was my choice.
 
Wilky said:
...I would probably think that I am the best equine photographer on the Isle of Wight...

Oh goody, good, more hits to www.wightphotography.com will do my google ranking the world of good and please when you do visit have a look at the wedding site as well as that will help keep it at number1 to 5 in google for the Isle of Wight, and I do feel sorry for your intellect as I am sure I said Probably the best equine photographer and not the best site on the Isle of Wight perhaps one is being a little catty with that comment, as for Nikon well I am not going there suffice to say that a good many folk have switched because the files are better.
Have a nice day...

Wilky
Click to expand...

Oh dear, what a language! Even if it were so this is quite a statement. Prove it.

I am more than happy to increase your rankings, as they will see your 'trial' flash website, and all of that. People need to have a very good luck and shop around before booking. You wouldn't want many unhappy customers, right?

Now as for calling names this is a plain obvious libel and you should be very careful as a full time 'professional'. Perhaps you should link to this thread on your front page to show the world how you talk to people. Perhaps you should care to explain yourself further here...


Now old Jim

I have to say I am appalled how you attack me every time I say anything about a product that you don't agree with. It is my right to have my opinion and you have no right to stop me there. I am not attacking you for boasting about this and that, just stating my own separate opinion. Perhaps you should respect that if you want some respect back.
 
Come on guys it's out of hand now. Were all adults. Forgive and forget
 
daugirdas said:
Oh dear, what a language! Even if it were so this is quite a statement. Prove it.

I am more than happy to increase your rankings, as they will see your 'trial' flash website, and all of that. People need to have a very good luck and shop around before booking. You wouldn't want many unhappy customers, right?

Now as for calling names this is a plain obvious libel and you should be very careful as a full time 'professional'. Perhaps you should link to this thread on your front page to show the world how you talk to people. Perhaps you should care to explain yourself further here...

Now old Jim

I have to say I am appalled how you attack me every time I say anything about a product that you don't agree with. It is my right to have my opinion and you have no right to stop me there. I am not attacking you for boasting about this and that, just stating my own separate opinion. Perhaps you should respect that if you want some respect back.
Click to expand...

daugirdas - at no point have I "attacked" you and I'm sorry if you have interpreted my posts in that way. Everything I've said in response to your posts has been firmly Tongue in cheek and I carefully worded them in such a way. Perhaps they have been lost in translation as things sometimes are in the written word. I even added smilies on occasions to illustrate this! I do often think that some of your posts come across as arrogant hich im sure isnt intended but again maybe they have also been lost in translation?

I think this has probably gone on too long and too far now which is why I have tried in my last few posts to get this thread back on track.
 
Last edited:
Personally i hated my 50D and it was the worst camera i have ever had the misfortune to own - i went from a D300 to the 50D and i virtually stopped taking photos because i didn't like the images it produced. I found low ISO noise distracting and the metering inconsistent.
 
daugirdas said:
Oh dear, what a language! Even if it were so this is quite a statement. Prove it.

I am more than happy to increase your rankings, as they will see your 'trial' flash website, and all of that. People need to have a very good luck and shop around before booking. You wouldn't want many unhappy customers, right?

Now as for calling names this is a plain obvious libel and you should be very careful as a full time 'professional'. Perhaps you should link to this thread on your front page to show the world how you talk to people. Perhaps you should care to explain yourself further here...


Now old Jim

I have to say I am appalled how you attack me every time I say anything about a product that you don't agree with. It is my right to have my opinion and you have no right to stop me there. I am not attacking you for boasting about this and that, just stating my own separate opinion. Perhaps you should respect that if you want some respect back.
Click to expand...

Good god man what planet are you on? Libel .... I hardly think so, and I do not have to prove myself to you or anyone in this world, 27 weddings last year 72 percent recommendations speak for them selfs, trial web site...lol it says what it is but its not to my low standards so we are changing to Zenfolio ;) and fancy that slip of your key board calling Jim old.... ODD may be:lol:

Anyway we will forget you, and I still state that the 50D is a superb camera for its age but I suppose I should clarify that if you use a cheap lens you will get soft images and the AF may suffer, use the best and it will blow you away.

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