Canon EOS 50D vs Canon EOS 500D

Winner
Canon EOS 50D

112

Canon EOS 500D

107

Runner-up

Reasons to buy the Canon EOS 50D

Weather sealed
Weather sealed
Shoot in extreme weather
Great viewfinder
Viewfinder
Pentaprism
Fast shutter speed
Fastest shutter speed
1/8000 of a second
Almost no delay when powering up
Startup delay
300 ms startup delay
 

Reasons to buy the Canon EOS 500D

Dynamic range
Wide dynamic range
11.5 EV
Thickness
Thin
2.4"
Startup delay
Almost no delay when powering up
300 ms startup delay
Shutter lag
Barely any delay taking photos
159 ms shutter lag

galleries

Explore our gallery of 50 sample photos taken by the Canon EOS 500D.
Explore our gallery of 50 sample photos taken by the Canon EOS 50D.

competitors

Canon EOS 50D Competitors

Canon EOS 40D

Canon EOS 40D

Pro DSLR

$331 body only

Battery life Longer battery life
Lowest price Slightly cheaper
Screen resolution Significantly lower resolution screen
Nikon D90

Nikon D90

Entry-level DSLR

$1,749 body only

Low light performance Much lower noise at high ISO
Overall image quality Much better image quality
Weather sealed No weather sealing
Canon EOS 7D

Canon EOS 7D

Pro DSLR

$1,099 body only

$1,800 with 18-135mm lens

Overall image quality Much better image quality
Movie format Shoots movies
Lowest price More expensive

Canon EOS 500D Competitors

Canon EOS Rebel T6

Canon EOS Rebel T6

Entry-level DSLR

$289 - $549 body only

$329 - $399 with 18-55mm lens

Supports 24p Supports 24p
True resolution Higher true resolution
Viewfinder size Smaller viewfinder
Canon EOS 1100D

Canon EOS 1100D

Entry-level DSLR

$331 body only

$649 with 18-55mm lens

Startup delay Much less startup delay
Shutter lag Much less shutter lag
Dynamic range Less dynamic range
Canon EOS 1200D

Canon EOS 1200D

Entry-level DSLR

$331 body only

$338 with 18-55mm lens

Supports 24p Supports 24p
True resolution Higher true resolution
Screen resolution Lower resolution screen

discussion

Canon EOS 50D
EOS 50D
Canon

Report a correction
Canon EOS 500D
EOS 500D
Canon

Report a correction

Showing 0 comments