Reading mode: Light Dark

Deal Killer for 40d...

Go to last post
K

KM Glassman

Senior Member
Messages
1,532
Reaction score
1
Location
Portland, OR, US
No body seals (hey, it's really wet where I live!), nor inbody IS for 40d (this would have stopped Sony in it's tracks). I was going to jump ship with the 40d if it even had one of these features, but no such luck! I thought Nikon was dead in the water a week ago, but they are looking good right now, wow! I will wait to see what Sony comes up with first on September 5th before I decide. Something better than the 40d, but less expensive, would keep me on-board the Alpha ship!
--
G. Lassman
 
KM Glassman said:
No body seals (hey, it's really wet where I live!),
Click to expand...
It's wet where I live too. In fact, with the UK having the wettest summer ever including flooding in many towns, I can't see why Canon (and other companies) don't add weather sealing to what are very expensive pieces of electrical kit ...



...Edinburgh fringe 2007, in the rain :-(

--
------
AdrianX - BSc. MSc.
http://www.AdrianJudd.co.uk
 
KM Glassman said:
No body seals (hey, it's really wet where I live!), nor inbody IS for
40d (this would have stopped Sony in it's tracks). I was going to
jump ship with the 40d if it even had one of these features, but no
such luck! I thought Nikon was dead in the water a week ago, but they
are looking good right now, wow! I will wait to see what Sony comes
up with first on September 5th before I decide. Something better than
the 40d, but less expensive, would keep me on-board the Alpha ship!
--
G. Lassman
Click to expand...
in body Is is only good for 2 stops and less effective on long zooms

poor mans IS.
 
KM Glassman said:
No body seals (hey, it's really wet where I live!), nor inbody IS for
40d (this would have stopped Sony in it's tracks). I was going to
jump ship with the 40d if it even had one of these features, but no
such luck!
Click to expand...
You're kidding. Are people still surprised that Canon doesn't have in-body IS?
 
in body IS is worse than lens IS.

Now, I suppose Canon could have added additional IS into its body that would create a little IS for its non-IS lenses, but that would have been silly.
 
Look at lenses, prices and availability new and used. When you have checked that, you´ll know that only Canon and Nikon are worth considdering. And Canon will be the better choice.

I have used Canon for about 15 years now, and before getting into the telephoto side of photography I regretted not buing Nikon. Now I´m glad I use Canon.

Mats
 
LOL! Holding out for the Sony. And I was expecting another envious of the new Nikons reason.

Given your investment in KM, I definitely don't think there's sufficient cause to jump off the Sony/KM ship just yet. Hopefully you can have a better Sony body in your hands within 6 to 12 months.
KM Glassman said:
No body seals (hey, it's really wet where I live!), nor inbody IS for
40d (this would have stopped Sony in it's tracks). I was going to
jump ship with the 40d if it even had one of these features, but no
such luck! I thought Nikon was dead in the water a week ago, but they
are looking good right now, wow! I will wait to see what Sony comes
up with first on September 5th before I decide. Something better than
the 40d, but less expensive, would keep me on-board the Alpha ship!
--
G. Lassman
Click to expand...
 
These is weather seals on the 40D. Read the specs. Of course they are not of 1dx quality but you are not paying for a 1Dx either.

Canon will never pit IS on body (at least for many years to come). It is not as good and would kill their IS lens sales of which I am sure they make a lot of money. What they are doing is coming out with a cheaper IS as they have on their new 18-55 IS lens. IMO you are foolish to not upgrade just because of this but to each his own.
--
Michael Kaplan
http://www.pbase.com/mkaplan
See my profile for equipment list
 
You do realize that not one single lens that you own (based on your profile) is weather sealed. Even if Sony comes out with a sealed camera, you'll have to replace all of your glass to utilize the feature. I'm not even sure if Sony/KM has ANY sealed lenses. Heck, they barely have any new lenses available at all, and when they do they're overpriced. You really need to analyze the whole system.
--
http://www.pbase.com/bernarrking
 
KM Glassman said:
No body seals (hey, it's really wet where I live!), nor inbody IS for
40d (this would have stopped Sony in it's tracks).
Click to expand...
I have an "unsealed" 20D and it doesn't just fall apart in damp conditions. Indeed, I've had it exposed to light drizzle and it survives just fine as long as I wipe it down occasionally so that nothing accumulates. Water tends to bead on the body and won't just run down into the body alongside the buttons until there's more water than just discrete droplets.

As for in-camera IS, I think Canon's recent innovations in reducing the size and cost of in-lens IS (leveraging the work done in miniaturizing IS for their P&S cameras) makes it even less likely that they'll consider CCD shift IS. They are achieving up to 4 stops of vibration reduction with the system ... results that speak for themselves (although, admittedly, in-camera IS is better than no IS).

David
 
To get weather sealed lenses, you need to buy an L, and even then not all are weather sealed. I've no idea how the naming convention works with Nikon, but I'm sure that only there more expensive lenses are weather sealed. So as you say, you buy a weather sealed body and the first time you use the camera in the rain, you ruin your lens.

I've had my 20D hit by splashes and rain drops, and so far absolutely no problem - you would have to be very unlucky, or get the camera soaked, for it to be a real risk with most cameras. And even with a weather sealed system, you wouldn't want to change lenses in the rain (unless under cover).
--
Jeff Peterman

Any insults, implied anger, bad grammar and bad spelling, are entirely unintentionalal. Sorry.
http://www.pbase.com/jeffp25
http://www.jeffp25.smugmug.com

 
I would much rather have a good in-body IS and lighter and faster lenses than IS in each lens. Canon made a comittment at the beginning and marketed it. Now being one of the leaders, can afford to steer the market. I am certain that Canon can produce an excellent in-body IS sytem, but then all In-lense IS will be for the cats..... There is no way you can satisfy everybody. Got to make do with what we have....Pay extra top $$$$ for the in-lens IS with each lens we purchase. some don't offer it either.
--
carpe diem, or just don't ..... but shoot, shoot, shoot
 
$1600 = EOS 1V. A pro level camera with top notch AF, weather sealing, 10 FPS. I know, film is dead, but it makes me mad that the $1300 digital model doesn't even have weather sealing. Come on, how much would it cost? If Canon though about this, they would see it might actually DRIVE the sales of the higher end L lens. I have been thinking about selling my 80-200L and getting a 70-200 L for the water proofing. I would need to go to the IS model, so Canon would sell me a $1600 lens. (everybody that has one loves it...)

As it is, I am now looking at a competitors system, because they DID just add weather sealing and a pro level AF to a camera that is less than $4000. LOTS less, like $2200 less. I can switch and get their weather sealed body and a weather sealed F2.8 70-200 for less than $4000.

TMCs.
 
harold1968 said:
in body Is is only good for 2 stops and less effective on long zooms
Click to expand...
harold1968 said:
poor mans IS.
Click to expand...
In-body IS more cost effective for sure, but the real question is whether or not it is inferior to in-lens IS. Do you have any tests to back up your assertion? I have heard this many times from Canon and Nikon users, but never any proof from them that I can look at and compare. I can't but wonder if it is just Canon marketing mantra or there is something to it. The only test using the same camera and lens that I have seen showed that the in-body sensor shift was superior to the in-lens IS (which surprised me actually!), but this was with a Leica lens not Canon. I know the in-body sensor shift works because I have used it extensively on a KM 7d and Sony a100. I have no doubt the Canon in-lens IS works also, but I haven't seen anything to convince me that the Canon in-lens IS is better!

The reason I was really hoping the Canon 40d would have in-body IS was so I could mount a 18-250mm HSM Tamron lens on it. I will be retiring in the not to distant future and plan to do extensive traveling and this would really be a sweet setup as a all in one travel kit! Unfortunately the Tamron is slow focusing and noisy on the a100. I am sure it is only a matter of time that Nikon and/or Canon will also offer in-body IS because until all lenses have IS, it will be a very desirable feature! Oh well, better luck in the next release maybe.
--
G. Lassman
 
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