PabloGomez
Member
Had the 30D and thought 40D could be one of those "downstep" upgrades, but it turned out to be a true (although moderate) upgrade.
Live-view with a tripod delivers better results than former model, 30D with a tripod.
It is true autofocus is somewhat innacurate ("outoffoces"), but i haven´t have a camera that is 100% accurate (extending my experience to film Slr autofocus from several brands, including Nikon). I suppose Us $ 3,000 cameras are expected to be 100% accurate.
I don´t dislike the soft look of some of the images; shoting raw leaves a whole world of options for postprocessing which I believe, any serious photographer should use to take the most advantage of the camera.
Having had Digital Rebel and 30D I can say this camera is able to produce better image quality than the Rebel, and at least the same or even better image quality than the 30D. People speak about the maximum megapixels a cropped sensor should be (it is said to be 8) but the real and only fact is the photo once printed, and the 40D, if carefully focused, gives very high quality printed images.
It is true the 40D seems to have more noise, but if properly used ( although it may seem it is not as "per pixel sharp" as the 30D) it ends up producing sharper images than the 30D. Nevertheless I never shared the ratings on the 30D image quality and always thought to be lesser than the 4.7 shown in it´s review.
Problems:
I think there´s good enough electronics out there to provide 100% accurate autofocus in this camera range, and I regret that for merchandise policies these electronics are not put into middle range equipment. It makes us, users, buy the equipment and invest our money with great effort to obtain just satisfactory results in this area. At the end, we kind of end up hating canon or any other brand, but -a paradox- not being able to hate them so much not tu buy their products (because, as they know, we love the act of taking and making photos).
Canon should take care to deliver "autofocus" cameras and not "outoffocus" cameras. One does not expect to spend 1,200 to get your brand new equipment calibrated. Sometimes, my case, in places other than the US, recalibration is imposible, or very hard and or expensive to archieve.
Trully unfortunately, archieving very good images seems only posible by manual focus means. First quality electronics has not yet gone down to this price level, which is, nevertheless, somewhat expensive.
Live-view with a tripod delivers better results than former model, 30D with a tripod.
It is true autofocus is somewhat innacurate ("outoffoces"), but i haven´t have a camera that is 100% accurate (extending my experience to film Slr autofocus from several brands, including Nikon). I suppose Us $ 3,000 cameras are expected to be 100% accurate.
I don´t dislike the soft look of some of the images; shoting raw leaves a whole world of options for postprocessing which I believe, any serious photographer should use to take the most advantage of the camera.
Having had Digital Rebel and 30D I can say this camera is able to produce better image quality than the Rebel, and at least the same or even better image quality than the 30D. People speak about the maximum megapixels a cropped sensor should be (it is said to be 8) but the real and only fact is the photo once printed, and the 40D, if carefully focused, gives very high quality printed images.
It is true the 40D seems to have more noise, but if properly used ( although it may seem it is not as "per pixel sharp" as the 30D) it ends up producing sharper images than the 30D. Nevertheless I never shared the ratings on the 30D image quality and always thought to be lesser than the 4.7 shown in it´s review.
Problems:
I think there´s good enough electronics out there to provide 100% accurate autofocus in this camera range, and I regret that for merchandise policies these electronics are not put into middle range equipment. It makes us, users, buy the equipment and invest our money with great effort to obtain just satisfactory results in this area. At the end, we kind of end up hating canon or any other brand, but -a paradox- not being able to hate them so much not tu buy their products (because, as they know, we love the act of taking and making photos).
Canon should take care to deliver "autofocus" cameras and not "outoffocus" cameras. One does not expect to spend 1,200 to get your brand new equipment calibrated. Sometimes, my case, in places other than the US, recalibration is imposible, or very hard and or expensive to archieve.
Trully unfortunately, archieving very good images seems only posible by manual focus means. First quality electronics has not yet gone down to this price level, which is, nevertheless, somewhat expensive.