Canon 50D vs 650D/T4i image quality

[nj4ck]

Hey guys, I'm shopping around for an inexpensive second-hand DSLR right now and I'm stuck on either the 600/650D or the 50D. Both have features I find equally appealing (weather sealing and magnesium body on the 50D, flippy screen and 1080p video on the 650D), but I can't figure out which one I want more. It all comes down to image quality in the end, so here's my question: How does the older 15MP sensor in the 50D compare to the 650D's 18MP sensor? I couldn't care less about the megapixels, but I'm interested in low light & noise performance, colors, detail, etc. Does anyone have any experiences or further knowledge on these two cameras? Which one would you get?

[.spider.]

They are both equally weak

[ALwin]

1 hour ago, nj4ck said:

snip

How important to you if the camera can record video or not?  If having the ability to record video is important than between just these two models, the 650D is your only option.

 

Aside from that, in terms of image quality:

• RAW photos, you can post process and edit color in post.  I wouldn't worry about this at all.
• Video color?  Only one of them can record video, and Canon's color science for video is pretty good.  I suggest you look at some sample 650D videos online.
• High ISO, Noise handling.  Both are pretty much comparable to each other, though the 650D might have a slight edge.  Neither camera can be considered low light workhorses.  Then again, that's why wide aperture lenses, flash units and other lighting systems exist on the market.

How much can you afford to spend?  What do you want to do with a camera?

[bob345]

The newer sensor int the t4i is going to have better low light and noise performance than the 50d. I used to have a t5i which realistically is identical to the t4i and it was a good performer for sure. In the end though, image quality is going to be determined most by the lens you use.

To give you an idea of the quality that you can get with a t4i/t5i, here is a shot i took when i had mine.

 

p1 by Tauss ., on Flickr

[porina]

I used to have a 50D, and currently still have a 600D (amongst others). The 600D sensor is better, particularly in the shadow area. The 50D was more prone to visible banding if you try to bring up very dark areas. Expose well and don't try to do silly things and they're both more than decent for a skilled photographer.

 

Having said that, it depends on your use if that is the major factor. The handling of the 50D is better than the 600D. Note I only don't have the 50D any more since I got a 7D and later the mk2. If you want a technically better sensor you might look instead to recent Sony or Nikon models for example. If this were a dedicated photography site, this is about the time massive wars break out over every minor difference that in reality isn't so significant.

[nj4ck]

7 hours ago, .spider. said:

They are both equally weak

That's not a helpful reply. You could instead tell me what you'd recommend, but keep in mind that my budget is only around €350 and I have EF lenses, which means I'm stuck with Canon.

[nj4ck]

7 hours ago, porina said:

I used to have a 50D, and currently still have a 600D (amongst others). The 600D sensor is better, particularly in the shadow area. The 50D was more prone to visible banding if you try to bring up very dark areas. Expose well and don't try to do silly things and they're both more than decent for a skilled photographer.

 

Having said that, it depends on your use if that is the major factor. The handling of the 50D is better than the 600D. Note I only don't have the 50D any more since I got a 7D and later the mk2. If you want a technically better sensor you might look instead to recent Sony or Nikon models for example. If this were a dedicated photography site, this is about the time massive wars break out over every minor difference that in reality isn't so significant.

Awesome, I've been trying hard to find someone who has owned both. If the low light performance on the 600D is indeed better, I may try to get my hands on a 60D to get the best of both worlds (same sensor as 600D). Sadly I own a bunch of EF lenses already, so it looks like I'll be sticking to Canon. Out of pure curiosity though, are there any specific Nikon/Sony models that you'd recommend in the same price range?

[ALwin]

9 minutes ago, nj4ck said:

my budget is only around €350

Well if you can afford a Nikon D3x00 or D5x00 camera (which you probably can on the second hand market) or see if you can find something like an old Nikon D7000.  But know that for the price to be low, second hand models tend to be older and most likely have less features than the current models on the market.

 

For Sony, you can look for A5000 series or A6000 series cameras on the second hand market.

 

It's harder to say what you should buy on the second hand market, as prices differ more widely based on region/country and condition of the camera and of course how willing the previous owner is willing to give you a deal.  Not to mention availability.  Buying new is easier, but of course you might not have enough money to buy the model you want.

[nj4ck]

7 hours ago, ALwin said:

How important to you if the camera can record video or not?  If having the ability to record video is important than between just these two models, the 650D is your only option.

 

Aside from that, in terms of image quality:

• RAW photos, you can post process and edit color in post.  I wouldn't worry about this at all.
• Video color?  Only one of them can record video, and Canon's color science for video is pretty good.  I suggest you look at some sample 650D videos online.
• High ISO, Noise handling.  Both are pretty much comparable to each other, though the 650D might have a slight edge.  Neither camera can be considered low light workhorses.  Then again, that's why wide aperture lenses, flash units and other lighting systems exist on the market.

How much can you afford to spend?  What do you want to do with a camera?

I hardly ever record video, but if I do it's going to be RAW video via magic lantern, which would be possible with both cameras. Video capabilities are just a luxury as far as I'm concerned though, I'm mainly looking for the best sensor and the best low-light performance I can possibly get for the price. Speaking of which, my budget is €350 used. I already own EF lenses, so unless I sell them and start over completely, I'd have to stick to Canon. The camera is going to be used for pretty much all types of photography, landscape, portrait, macro, you name it. 

[ALwin]

11 minutes ago, nj4ck said:

I already own EF lenses

OK so video is not a big priority for you at the moment.  That's fine with me, I was just highlighting some of the differences you might encounter between those two cameras.

 

Though, EF lenses (depending on which ones you own) might be better for you (relatively speaking) if one day you decide you want to film.  There are tried smart lens adapters for EF lenses, none for Nikon.  If you prefer to go manual for filming, this doesn't matter of course.

 

Between the 50D and the 650D, the 650D will have a slight edge in terms of high ISO and Noise handling capability.

 

And as always, know that the photographer matters more than the camera.  There's really nothing wrong with Canon cameras besides the fact that recently they seem to lag slightly behind Nikon and Sony in terms of the tech they put into the camera bodies.

 

Examples photos taken with a 50D:

https://www.flickr.com/cameras/canon/eos_50d/

 

Examples of photos taken with a 650D:

https://www.flickr.com/cameras/canon/eos_rebel_t4i/

 

You see good and bad examples for both cameras, but that's not due to the cameras.  The camera is to a photographer like a pen is to a writer.

 

Don't be like an amateur who believes tech is more important than skill.  You might be able to buy the more technologically advanced camera on the market, but if your skills are lackluster it will never compare to someone who might own a crappy camera but knows how to use it really well.

[nj4ck]

11 minutes ago, ALwin said:

Well if you can afford a Nikon D3x00 or D5x00 camera (which you probably can on the second hand market) or see if you can find something like an old Nikon D7000.  But know that for the price to be low, second hand models tend to be older and most likely have less features than the current models on the market.

 

For Sony, you can look for A5000 series or A6000 series cameras on the second hand market.

 

It's harder to say what you should buy on the second hand market, as prices differ more widely based on region/country and condition of the camera and of course how willing the previous owner is willing to give you a deal.  Not to mention availability.  Buying new is easier, but of course you might not have enough money to buy the model you want.

Yeah, buying new is sadly not an option. I'm a student on a tight budget and the stuff I can get new for <€400 just won't cut it. I'm not looking for a beginner-friendly entry DSLR, I need a camera that can take a beating, perform about as good as my budget allows and be a reliable companion for the next few years. 

 

I do have the option of getting a Nikon D5x00, the 5200 is just within my budget in good condition. How would you say the sensor compares to Canon's 650/600/60D sensor? It would be a hassle to sell my EF stuff and switch to Nikon, but I wouldn't rule it out if the performance of the Nikon is good enough.

 

Quote

 

And as always, know that the photographer matters more than the camera.  There's really nothing wrong with Canon cameras besides the fact that recently they seem to lag slightly behind Nikon and Sony in terms of the tech they put into the camera bodies.

That's obviously true, but I can't help wanting the best for my money  

[ALwin]

9 minutes ago, nj4ck said:

That's obviously true, but I can't help wanting the best for my money  

This I can understand.  And the best for your money might be a Nikon body, but you already own some EF lenses so buying a Nikon doesn't make sense.

 

If you buy a Nikon, even second hand, you're going to be stuck with the lens that came with it.  You can sell your EF lenses and buy some additional Nikon lenses cheaply or second hand.  But if you don't want to sell your EF lenses, they cannot be mounted on a Nikon body without an adapter that has a corrective element inside because Canon's flange distance is shorter than Nikon's.  Many cheap lens adapters with such corrective elements actually worsen the image quality.

 

I don't know what sort of EF lenses you already own, so I say how much you can get by selling them and whether or not they will be worth the trade for whatever Nikon lenses you can get in return.

[nj4ck]

2 minutes ago, ALwin said:

This I can understand.  And the best for your money might be a Nikon body, but you already own some EF lenses so buying a Nikon doesn't make sense.  If you buy a Nikon, even second hand, you're going to be stuck with the lens that came with it.  You might be able to sell your EF lenses and buy some additional Nikon lenses cheaply or second hand.  But if you don't want to sell your EF lenses, they cannot be mounted on a Nikon body without an adapter that has a corrective element inside because Canon's flange distance is shorter than Nikon's.  Many cheap lens adapters with such corrective elements actually worsen the image quality.

Yeah, I'm aware of this issue, I'd definitely be selling my Canon stuff if that were the case. It's not like it's that much anyways, I've got a 50mm f/1.8, an old 28-70mm f/3.5 (which I dearly love though) and an 18-55mm kit lens, nothing fancy or expensive. I'm increasingly liking the idea of switching to Nikon though, I certainly do like what I'm reading about the D5200. How are the Nikon kit lenses, do you have any experience with them? I really, really dislike my 18-55mm Canon kit lense...

[ALwin]

On 26 June 2016 at 1:38 AM, nj4ck said:

snip

The only 18-55ish kit lens I like is from Fuji.  Nikon, Canon and even Sony basic 18-55 kit lenses... I dislike all of them.

 

The lowest end Nikon kit lens I would ever recommend would probably be the 16-85 which came with my old D90 (now in the hands of my brother).  The reason I like it is mainly because it was one of the few Nikon lenses that worked really well after I converted a second D90 body I had to infrared.

 

I am very reluctant to recommend lenses like the 70-300, 55-200, and somewhat divided on the 18-200 and 18-300.  They make sense for people who want the most versatile lens possible while carrying the least amount of gear, accepting the sacrifices they might have to make in terms of quality.

 

While lenses like the 18-105, 24-85, 24-105, and perhaps the 18-140 are OKish to pretty decent, if not stellar.

 

But frankly, all of the lenses I mentioned, even the ones I am reluctant to recommend, they can be used to capture good photos.  Don't share a full resolution version on the web, and especially don't share straight out of the camera images.  Always go over your photos at least in a software like Lightroom first, and everything will be fine.  I've a friend who's a fantastic photographer using a Nikon D40 until a couple of years ago when he upgraded to a D600.  The photos he took with his D40 are pretty good, and he helped me out quite a bit when I transitioned from film to digital.

[nj4ck]

22 minutes ago, ALwin said:

The only 18-55ish kit lens I like is from Fuji.  Nikon, Canon and even Sony basic 18-55 kit lenses... I dislike all of them.

 

The lowest end Nikon kit lens I would ever recommend would probably be the 16-85 which came with my old D90 (now in the hands of my brother).  The reason I like it is mainly because it was one of the few Nikon lenses that worked really well after I converted a second D90 body I had to infrared.

 

I am very reluctant to recommend lenses like the 70-300, 55-200, and somewhat divided on the 18-200 and 18-300.  They makes sense for people who want the most versatile lens possible while carrying the least amount of gear, accepting the sacrifices they might have to make in terms of quality.

 

While lenses like the 18-105, 24-85, 24-105, and perhaps the 18-140 are sort of OKish.

Alright, I think I'll get a D5200 body, sell my EF lenses and see what kind of F-mount lens I can get for my money. If I can get something similar in performance to my canon 28-70mm, I'd be happy as hell.

[ALwin]

2 minutes ago, nj4ck said:

Alright, I think I'll get a D5200 body, sell my EF lenses and see what kind of F-mount lens I can get for my money. If I can get something similar in performance to my canon 28-70mm, I'd be happy as hell.

Look at what you can get before you sell and buy.  Make sure the items are available.

 

And I will assume you already know how to check the conditions of second hand camera and lenses before you fork over the money.  Though just in case I will share a guide on this:

 

https://photographylife.com/how-to-buy-used-dslr-cameras

[nj4ck]

3 minutes ago, ALwin said:

Look at what you can get before you sell and buy.  Make sure the items are available.

 

And I will assume you already know how to check the conditions of second hand camera and lenses before you fork over the money.  Though just in case I will share a guide on this:

 

https://photographylife.com/how-to-buy-used-dslr-cameras

I'll give that a read before I start shopping. I think I know the basics, but one can never be too careful, right? Also thanks for your input, you've been extremely helpful!

[.spider.]

9 hours ago, nj4ck said:

That's not a helpful reply. You could instead tell me what you'd recommend, but keep in mind that my budget is only around €350 and I have EF lenses, which means I'm stuck with Canon.

You specifically asked about two cameras not about other options.

 

9 hours ago, nj4ck said:

I hardly ever record video, but if I do it's going to be RAW video via magic lantern, which would be possible with both cameras

You should do a bit more research ML RAW is hardly possible with a 650D

[nj4ck]

4 hours ago, .spider. said:

You specifically asked about two cameras not about other options.

Exactly, I asked about two specific cameras, you replied that they were both "equally weak". How exactly is that supposed to help me decide between the two?

 

Quote

You should do a bit more research ML RAW is hardly possible with a 650D

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe 1280x560 24p is possible. As previously mentioned though, I consider video a luxury that I wouldn't be using for anything more that having fun with it.

[.spider.]

36 minutes ago, nj4ck said:

Exactly, I asked about two specific cameras, you replied that they were both "equally weak". How exactly is that supposed to help me decide between the two?

 

Headdesk! Are you kidding? It is helpful, because it tells you that you have to make make your decision based on other parameters than image quality. 

 

36 minutes ago, nj4ck said:

 

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe 1280x560 24p is possible. As previously mentioned though, I consider video a luxury that I wouldn't be using for anything more that having fun with it.

1728x972@24p is possible for 64frames

1280x720@24p continuous recording

1152x622@30p continuous recording

And have fun fiddling around with http://www.magiclantern.fm/forum/index.php?topic=6658 or chroma smoothing

 

50D offers 

1584x1058@24p continuous recording

1440x810@30p continuous recording

 

 

[nj4ck]

2 minutes ago, .spider. said:

Headdesk! Are you kidding? It is helpful, because it tells you that you have to make make your decision based on other parameters than image quality. 

Do elaborate.