Upgrade from Eos 40D

Started 4 months ago | Discussions thread
OP Anil_Sharma New Member • Posts: 4
Re: Upgrade from Eos 40D

Andy01 wrote:

anil25triveni wrote:

Welcome to the forums.

Around 12 years ago I bought a Canon 40D with the EF-S 18-55 Kit Lens, the EF-S 60 mm macro and an EF 24-105 f/4 L Mk I. I also bought a 580EX Speedlight and some Elinchrom FX200 studio strobes. I used this gear primarily for product photography of the transparent blister packaging I manufacture and for snapshots of family for about 6 years and then discontinued photography.

During the lockdown, with a lot of time to kill, I took out my camera and lenses and started shooting macros and close ups of flowers and photographing small birds perched on the trees and shrubs around our front lawn. I was pleased with some of the results and was hooked and have now started to take a keener interest in photography as a hobby. I always shoot raw + jpg and use DPP + Photoshop for post processing.

I now want to upgrade since the 40D has a lot of noise at ISO levels above 320.

Since I am over 65 years of age and am not very agile, I do not know how long I will be able to sustain my interest in photography and this upgrade will, in likely hood, be my last for a few more years. Going mirror less or full frame in my opinion would be an over kill with my level of understanding and limited skills of photography, and would also be too expensive.

If you did want something light and portable you could consider the M series cameras - M5 (a bit old now but still takes good photos), M50 (better AF than M5, but basic functionality and ergonomics or M6 ii (the latest & greatest, but no optical viewfinder, which is not ideal for many). A M body + EF-M 18-150mm is a very portable walk around kit and there are some excellent lenses available - 11-22mm, 22mm f2, 32mm f1.4 etc. An adapter can be used to mount EF and EF-S lenses.

Check out this link - I have just included a few options, but you can add more. If you hover over the images you will see dimensions and weights of each. You can see how much smaller and lighter the M system is.


I can spare just about $2200 for my hobby.

I am leaning towards the 90D and a few lenses ($1200 for the body and $1000 for lenses). The 40D with the 18-55 will pass on to my staff for the product photography. I use the 60 mm macro for my product photography and for macros of flowers, and the 24-105 L for close ups of flowers, birds sitting on trees around my front lawn and as a general purpose zoom. I have noted that the focal lengths of most of my pictures outdoors are 24 to 105 mm and 18 to 80 mm indoors for family photos.

In the next few months I will be shifting to a high rise apartment complex on the outskirts of the city with lush green lawns, trees, open spaces and fields nearby with opportunities for taking pictures of nature and semi-rural landscape. I would also like to shoot family videos at times with the 90D. I want advice about the lenses I should buy. I would like to move around light with usually one or two lens.

With a 90D you might get a EF-S 10-18mm (or 10-22mm) to cover the wide end better than the 24-105L, and a EF-S 55-250mm which will give you a LOT more reach (than 105mm) for birds etc, and keep the 24-105L for in-between. Also, note that the 32Mp on 90D will provide a LOT more room for cropping than your current 40D sensor.

I am thinking more on these lines.  Keep the 24-105 L and get the EF-S 55-250 and EF-S 10-18.

The 32Mp sensor and my propensity to crop (I am very bad at composition) is the reason I am thinking of the 90D and not the M50 even though it is lighter.  Also I liked the joy-stick on the 40D and would miss it on the M50.

I am thinking of buying the 50 mm f/1.8 STM for low light and family portraits.

A good budget friendly choice.

Should I buy the 18-135 f/3.5-5.6 IS USM as an everyday walk around one lens solution, and the EF-S 55-250 f/4-5.6 IS STM (I have to crop a lot with the pictures of birds with the 24-105 as it lacks the reach) for birds. I might not even need a wider lens with this setup.

An option and one might argue that there is no real need to keep the 24-105L if you got a 18-135mm.

Or should I keep using the 24-105 as a general purpose lens (I like this lens a lot and do not intend to sell it even though sometimes I find it is not wide enough) and buy just the EF-S 55-250 and later buy the EF-S 10-18mm f4.5-5.6 IS STM lens if and when I get some opportunities for landscapes? But I don’t know if would use or have the skill to shoot ultra wide.

An UWA zoom can be very useful (especially on APS-C bodies) for more than just landscapes - buildings, family gatherings, parties, streetscapes etc.


Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow