Reading mode: Light Dark

Canon EOS 40D vs EOS 5D

Go to last post
M

mloh28

New member
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
I have an old Digital Rebel and am looking to upgrade the camera body. I've looked at all the discussion between the Nikon D300 vs Canon 40d. Seems like Nikon is ahead (slightly?) in terms of features. My investment in lenses will lock me into the Canon solution but I'm wondering whether I should get the EOS 5D rather than the 40d. Price is a factor but in terms of hardware, how much better is the 5D compared to the 40d to justify the extra money? Also, I am hesitating because I hear there is an imminent release of EOS 5D Mk II. Thanks.

Mike
 
The 5D is far less of a camera than the 40D in most areas of consideration (I'll be hung for this, but I owned both). Even in IQ, the 40D offers several upgrades over the current 5D, and is pretty much it's peer in enlargements at least to 13x19 inches (my in-house limit).

In areas of build, weather resistance, built in flash, speed, image buffer, AF, features, DIGIC III, yada, yada, yada, the 40D is just light years ahead of the 5D.

The 5D is FF, but the 40D has a better microlens structure, 14 bit data conversion, better conversion algorithms, more and better custom functionality, silent shutter, live view, a better LCD, and the list goes on. The next generation of the 5D will likely kick butt, but the current generation is too limited, too slow, and doesn't have enough IQ advantage to make up for the 1.6 crop factor advantage of the 40D. Besides that, it can't take advantage of the EF-S 10-22, and EF-S 17-55 lenses at all. Those are two of the finest lenses made by anyone today.

The 5D is old, and unless you already own one, and are so happy with it that nothing less than FF counts, no matter the drum beat of progress, let it ride.

Buy a 40D for just a bit over $1000, and be good to go for several more years. When the second gen of the 5D comes out, save for it. Don't sell your 40D though. Two fine camera bodies are always better than one.

--
Voyager
 
I'll let you know - I just ordered a 40D to complement my kit.

The 5D IQ is simply breathtaking, so if what the poster above me aludes to is ture - it should be great. Although where IQ is concerned, I'm a little skeptical in his determination that the IQ is better than the 5D.

I love busting myths - so stay tuned and watch this space....

--
Canon 5D
24-105L
Sigma 12-24EX
70-200f/2.8IS
24-70L
16-35L
50mmf/1.4
580EX II



'A picture is worth a thousand dollars'
http://www.flickr.com/photos/lenzflair/
 
I was considering a 5D upgrade, but realize I don't need it. Rather, the 20D used would benefit from an upgrade to a 40D - high ISO and shadow banding in extreme DR exposures is what I'm hoping to improve on.

I'd like to hear from a less emotional experience.

--
...Bob, NYC

Galleries: http://www.pbase.com/btullis

' Now, if you are asking instead why camera enthusiasts are more
emphatic than other enthusiasts, I have no answer. I've not seen
that movie yet. : ) ' - Joe Mama
 
I still own a 5D, and just purchased a 40D..... with the intention of replacing the 5D.

As nothing more than an extreme hobbiest, I find the 40D more capable of satisfying my personal needs. I prefer a faster fps rate over the 5D, and I also like having a built in flash for those "spur of the moment" snapshots, and flash fill.

As far as image quality is concerned, you'd be hard pressed to see any difference in everyday shooting. The 5D has a 1 stop edge at ISO's over 800. For me, that's not a concern.

The FF is nice for wide angle, but Canon covered their backs with the 10-22. OTOH, the 1.6x crop gives your lenses a nice boost at the long end.

Color on the 40D is perfect. AF works fast and accurate. The 14 Bit processor gives slightly better gradations.

If you have a preference for FF, get the 5D. If you get past the FF, get the 40D. You'll never know the difference.
 
Voyager13b said:
Besides that, it [5D] can't take advantage of the EF-S 10-22
Click to expand...
Your summary of the differences between these two cameras exactly mirrors my own thoughts. In fact, the availability of the 10-22mm was the turning point in my decision to buy a 40D last week. As a convert from high-quality Nikon film bodies, I wasn't about to give up ultrawide capability. And although Canon does make FF ultrawide lenses, they are hugely expensive and offer no advantage that I can discern over this excellent zoom. I think most people forget that when you buy a camera body, you're buying into a system. If the lenses for the work you do aren't available or are too costly, the body is next to useless, regardless of its quality or features. My 40D came with the 28-135mm, and I am growing to appreciate that lens, despite its lack of speed. Needless to say, I also ordered the 10-22mm from BH last night. I can hardly wait to put it into action. :-)

--

 
Great comments here. I have a 20D and am beginning to think about the next body. One question I have is that I've heard commercial shops are beginning to require 12mp for any photo submissions. Should this be a concern?
 
Voyager13b said:
Besides that, it can't take advantage of the EF-S 10-22, and EF-S
17-55 lenses at all. Those are two of the finest lenses made by
anyone today.
Click to expand...
Why would I want the slow 10-22 when I can get the 16-35 F2.8.

I'll take the 24-105 over 17-55 on a crop...

The following lenses on a FF camera have no crop option.
14L
24L
35L
50L
85L
200 F1.8 or F2L
300 F2.8L
400 F2.8L
16-35 F2.8
12-24 (sigma lens)

Others I'm sure.
--
http://www.pbase.com/ewhalen

 
The 5D is my main camera. The 40D is use exclusively as a specialist sports camera, typically with a 70-200 or 100-400 lens. In terms of image quality, the two cameras are roughly equal up to ISO 400. At ISO 800 and above, the 5D is superior, mostly due to lower noise, and the difference becomes more pronounced as the ISO increases.

I (almost) never use onboard flash, so that 40D capability isn't a factor. Also, I've never owned any EF-S-type lenses, so that isn't a factor either.

--
Bob
 
sorry, but you are really guilty of bad logic..

saying the availability of the 10-22mm for 40D was the reason behind the decision VS the 5D since there were only very expensive ultrawide zooms is completely disregarding the fact that the 5D, being full frame does not need ultrawide zooms.... the 17-40mm f4/L would offer similar WA coverage at $500.

Even if you DID want a real ultrawide you can get the Sigma 12-24mm, and there is no, zero, zilch zoom that starts at 7.5mm for the 1.6 crop factor. The 1.6x helps massively at telephoto ranges but at wideangle its a severe constraint.

regardless of your rationale, hope you enjoy the 40D

--
~ Being over-exposed can get you arrested ~
 
Ominous said:
The following lenses on a FF camera have no crop option.
14L
24L
35L
50L
85L
200 F1.8 or F2L
300 F2.8L
400 F2.8L
16-35 F2.8
12-24 (sigma lens)

Others I'm sure.
Click to expand...
Can you explain what you mean by the above statement?
I don't understand what you mean by "crop option".
 
Anthony said:
Ominous said:
The following lenses on a FF camera have no crop option.
14L
24L
35L
50L
85L
200 F1.8 or F2L
300 F2.8L
400 F2.8L
16-35 F2.8
12-24 (sigma lens)

Others I'm sure.
Click to expand...
Can you explain what you mean by the above statement?
I don't understand what you mean by "crop option".
Click to expand...
What lens would you use on a crop camera to get the same FOV, and DoF, as a 35 F1.4 lens would on a FF camera?

You would need a 22 MM lens that is less than F1, if my quick math is right.

--
http://www.pbase.com/ewhalen

 
Certainly to get EXACTLY the same field of view AND depth of field for a crop and full frame body is difficult, if one even wants to try. It works both ways of course.

For my use, with wide lenses I'm usually looking to maximise depth of field, not reduce it, so the crop camera works quite well. That really only leaves available light as the possible limiting factor at the widest end, for moving subjects or when a tripod is not available. If wide shots were the main use, however, I'd probably have thought more about getting a full frame.

In the mid-range, I have no difficulty finding a lens for the 40D to give me the field of view I desire with a nice shallow depth of field.

At the long end I'm looking for pleasing background blur with maximum quality, minimum weight and reasonable cost - here of course the crop camera comes into it's own. For sports, birds and wildlife I cannot carry the weight of the equivalent in a full frame, nor would it be economic to do so when by using a crop camera I can get a better image without throwing away pixels unnecessarily. (Even the 1DsMkIII does not have quite the pixel density of the 40D, though it's close and, for an extra $7k, it could be used with the same lens and cropped to produce a similar field of view of birds at a distance, if one didn't mind the extra body weight.)

One nice feature of a crop camera (eg 1DMkIII and 40D) is that it uses the 'sweet spot' of a lens and there is less vignetting and blurred corners.
Ominous said:
Anthony said:
Ominous said:
The following lenses on a FF camera have no crop option.
14L
24L
35L
50L
85L
200 F1.8 or F2L
300 F2.8L
400 F2.8L
16-35 F2.8
12-24 (sigma lens)

Others I'm sure.
Click to expand...
Can you explain what you mean by the above statement?
I don't understand what you mean by "crop option".
Click to expand...
What lens would you use on a crop camera to get the same FOV, and
DoF, as a 35 F1.4 lens would on a FF camera?

You would need a 22 MM lens that is less than F1, if my quick math is
right.

--
http://www.pbase.com/ewhalen

Click to expand...
 
Mike,

If you look at the prices and features of the Nikon and Canon mid to high end DSLRs you will find that the two companies do not complete directly which is good for the first time buyers that do not have a bag full of lenses.

You will see in the Sony A700 review that the $1800 D300 and the $1300 40D are not direct competitors. There is a very complete list of price/features/capabilities of four DSLRs.

--
Bob,

'A true photograph need not be explained, nor can it be contained in words.' - Ansel Adams
Sony R1
Canon Pro1

 
Well, as I said, many current 5D owners are so locked into the FF concept, that they will not let go. I own about 15 FD, and EOS lenses in total. The truth is, I don't get your point about the list of primes you posted at all. I use several primes as a matter of course, but I am very happy overall with f/2.8 zooms, and even with the f/3.5-4.5 EF-s 10-22, as it is an awesome chunk of glass. How often do you carry that assortment of primes in your field kit, and why would you? Even with a 5D?

As for your comment about taking the 24-105 over the EF-S 17-55 f/2.8 IS, go for it. I think the 17-55 puts the 24-105 to shame in most every way, and I prefer a shorter carry lens, that is backed up by a mid zoom anyway.

It's all good though, as differing opinions make the world go round...
Ominous said:
Voyager13b said:
Besides that, it can't take advantage of the EF-S 10-22, and EF-S
17-55 lenses at all. Those are two of the finest lenses made by
anyone today.
Click to expand...
Why would I want the slow 10-22 when I can get the 16-35 F2.8.

I'll take the 24-105 over 17-55 on a crop...

The following lenses on a FF camera have no crop option.
14L
24L
35L
50L
85L
200 F1.8 or F2L
300 F2.8L
400 F2.8L
16-35 F2.8
12-24 (sigma lens)

Others I'm sure.
--
http://www.pbase.com/ewhalen

Click to expand...
--
Voyager
 
I didn't say it was flat out better. I think it is better in several areas, and at peer level in most areas. That is a big difference from the older 10D, 20D, 30D sensors and support circuitry. I do think the camera itself if is far better than the 5D though.

I wish you the best with your new 40D when it arrives, and I hope it pleases you as much as mine pleases me. Here is a review of the 40D that includes a comparison with the IQ of the 20D, and 5D for giggles. It's worth a read, and it shows the same bump in IQ that I see with the 40D over my 30D's, and old 5D.

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/canon-40D-handson.shtml

The greatest myth of recent months was the D300, and it seems to have busted itself....
Lenzflair said:
I'll let you know - I just ordered a 40D to complement my kit.

The 5D IQ is simply breathtaking, so if what the poster above me
aludes to is ture - it should be great. Although where IQ is
concerned, I'm a little skeptical in his determination that the IQ is
better than the 5D.

I love busting myths - so stay tuned and watch this space....

--
Canon 5D
24-105L
Sigma 12-24EX
70-200f/2.8IS
24-70L
16-35L
50mmf/1.4
580EX II



'A picture is worth a thousand dollars'
http://www.flickr.com/photos/lenzflair/
Click to expand...
--
Voyager
 
Bob Howland said:
The 5D is my main camera. The 40D is use exclusively as a specialist
sports camera, typically with a 70-200 or 100-400 lens.
Click to expand...
I have been looking at getting both myself. I normally shoot candids (public and private events) and coastal landscapes, and in this realm I think that the 5D would do well (although some people like more fps when shooting candids).

Since my 14 year old is now on the high school JV basketball team, I'll be shooting sports for the first time in 26 years since I purchased my first SLR. I just need to convince myself that the 40D is sufficient for high school basketball. I won't be selling my photos, but the school has requested game photos for their web site, newspaper, and possibly yearbook. My wife also wants some photos.

Ideally, I would love to have the 1DmkIII, but for the cost, I can get the 5D and the 40D and still have funds leftover for a few lenses. I also think that the 1DmkIII is overkill for my needs (and a bit of a hit against the funds I have earmarked for my new kit).
 
mloh28 said:
Canon solution but I'm wondering whether I should get the EOS 5D rather than the 40d. Price is a factor but in terms of hardware, how much better is the 5D compared to the 40d to justify the extra money?
Click to expand...
You should really get understanding of FF vs crop and compare it to your current needs.

To me if you are asking this question on 40D forum means - I like 40D better, just need some sweet words about....

--

 
Michael,

Buy a 40D, and some nice glass first. Learn your way around the camera and it's features for a time, and then rent a current 5D with the highest expectations in mind for a week or two.

I'll be curious to read about your experience here. I'm betting that you might pass on buying a current 5D, and wait to see what replaces it in the near future...
Michael Mohrmann said:
Bob Howland said:
The 5D is my main camera. The 40D is use exclusively as a specialist
sports camera, typically with a 70-200 or 100-400 lens.
Click to expand...
I have been looking at getting both myself. I normally shoot candids
(public and private events) and coastal landscapes, and in this realm
I think that the 5D would do well (although some people like more fps
when shooting candids).

Since my 14 year old is now on the high school JV basketball team,
I'll be shooting sports for the first time in 26 years since I
purchased my first SLR. I just need to convince myself that the 40D
is sufficient for high school basketball. I won't be selling my
photos, but the school has requested game photos for their web site,
newspaper, and possibly yearbook. My wife also wants some photos.

Ideally, I would love to have the 1DmkIII, but for the cost, I can
get the 5D and the 40D and still have funds leftover for a few
lenses. I also think that the 1DmkIII is overkill for my needs (and
a bit of a hit against the funds I have earmarked for my new kit).
Click to expand...
--
Voyager
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top