BirdForum is the net's largest birding community dedicated to wild birds and birding, and is absolutely FREE!

Register for an account to take part in lively discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="CAU" data-source="post: 1324760" data-attributes="member: 55324">The 50D has a pixel density of 4.5 MP/cm^2, compared to 1.5 MP/cm^2 for the 1D Mk II. I believe that the three times larger pixels of the Mk II should produce less noise than those of the 50D, despite the possible advances in sensor technology.Here are comparison shots at ISO3200:1D Mk II N:<a href="http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/E1DN/FULLRES/E1DNhSLI3200.HTM" target="_blank">http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/E1DN/FULLRES/E1DNhSLI3200.HTM</a>50D:<a href="http://75.126.132.154/PRODS/E50D/FULLRES/E50DhSLI03200.JPG" target="_blank">http://75.126.132.154/PRODS/E50D/FULLRES/E50DhSLI03200.JPG</a>The 50D image has less chroma noise, but I believe that it's due to stronger in-camera noise processing, as the image is overall much softer, and doesn't contain much more detail despite the much larger pixel count. In some parts of the image the Mk II actually seems to show more detail, for example at the tip of the brown brush (which the noise processing of 50D has smeared out). The Mk II shot also looks much crispier, although I don't know how much of it's due to in-camera processing.I don't own either of the cameras, but would definitely select the Mk II over the 50D, especially due to the better autofocus system. Ok, I don't (yet) even know anyone that would own the 50D, but people that own the 40D (which has the same autofocus system as the 50D) can't consistently get correctly focused pictures when shooting flying birds (even getting one might sometimes prove to be difficult when a bird flies by), whereas the success rate with a Mk II is much higher.</blockquote>

Verification