Canon EOS 50D vs Canon EOS 650D

Winner
Canon EOS 50D

86

Canon EOS 650D

84

Runner-up

Reasons to buy the Canon EOS 50D

Large viewfinder
Viewfinder size
0.59x
Weather sealed
Weather sealed
Shoot in extreme weather
Almost no delay when powering up
Startup delay
300 ms startup delay
Great viewfinder
Viewfinder
Pentaprism
 

Reasons to buy the Canon EOS 650D

Touch screen
Touch screen
Fewer buttons
Screen flips out
Flip-out screen
Great for movies
HDR
In-camera HDR
Combines multiple exposures
Movie continuous focus
Movie continuous focus
Makes it easy to get in-focus movies

galleries

Explore our gallery of 50 sample photos taken by the Canon EOS 650D.
Explore our gallery of 50 sample photos taken by the Canon EOS 50D.

competitors

Canon EOS 50D Competitors

Canon EOS 60D

Canon EOS 60D

Pro DSLR

$850 body only

$1,253 with 18-55mm lens

Color depth Better color depth
Movie format Shoots movies
Shutter lag Much more shutter lag
Canon EOS 550D

Canon EOS 550D

Entry-level DSLR

$390 body only

$585 with 18-55mm, 55-250mm lenses

Color depth Better color depth
Movie format Shoots movies
Shutter lag Much more shutter lag
Canon EOS Rebel T6

Canon EOS Rebel T6

Entry-level DSLR

$318 - $649 body only

$367 - $449 with 18-55mm lens

Movie format Shoots movies
True resolution Higher true resolution
Weather sealed No weather sealing

Canon EOS 650D Competitors

Canon EOS 700D

Canon EOS 700D

Entry-level DSLR

$460 with 18-55mm lens

Autofocus Faster video autofocus
Battery life Slightly longer battery life
Overall image quality Slightly worse image quality
Canon EOS 600D

Canon EOS 600D

Entry-level DSLR

$455 body only

$520 with 18-55mm lens

Color depth Better color depth
Dynamic range More dynamic range
HDR Lacks in-camera HDR
Canon EOS 750D

Canon EOS 750D

Entry-level DSLR

$540 body only

$619 with 18-55mm lens

Color depth Better color depth
Dynamic range More dynamic range
Viewfinder size Slightly smaller viewfinder

discussion

Canon EOS 50D
EOS 50D
Canon

Report a correction
Canon EOS 650D
EOS 650D
Canon

Report a correction

Showing 0 comments