Downgrade?

Well after the initial euphoria I have been getting some reviews that suggest that the 50D isn't quite what it is pitched to be.

Canon released this model soon after the 40D (a year) and it seems was brought out to compete with the Nikon D300. It does stack up quite nicely against the D300 by all accounts, but it seems that it doesn't stack up that well against the 40D.

Most features are the same but Canon crammed a 15megapixel sensor into the camera - and while the 6.3frames per second is impressive considering that the sensor is 50% more dense than the 40D, the speed is a little slower than the 40D's 6.5frames per second.

The camera also has a burst capacity that is lower than the 40D and the image quality is lower in some circumstances. The higher density can apparently hurt you in low light.

The 50D has some features that are very cool for photographers who are transitioning from a point and shoot. For example in live view mode the camera will lock onto faces like the point and shoots do.

The image processor is the same as the 5Dmark II and the Rebel T1L and offers several ISO settings and noise reduction settings. The LCD display on the back has a higher resolution and is brighter. The 40D today is around $130 cheaper than the 50D.

I have a few days to decide whether to return this camera. Still am not sure one way or the other. The 12800 ISO isn't really much to write home about, but at least it is there. The 40D goes to 3200.

Funny - most of the reviewers end up rating the two camera's more or less equal - but here is one reviewer (who owns a 50D) who came down on the side of the 50D.

I really like the LCD display brightness and resolution and the high ISO with built-in noise reduction looks quite promising to me. So the jury is still out for me.