40D Review on CNET

[pdasgupta]

Oh.. I am so sorry to hear that. Do they have a medicine for "Fanboy Syndrome"?

All that unwarrented sympathy 'subdoodle' was getting from a couple
posters was starting to make me sick!

 

[pdasgupta]

You may be right for this particular member. However, my complaint is more general towards some rabid fanboy'ism that we often see in these forums (and not just Canon forum), and so was the post I was replying to (I think).

you would know why I said what I did. He is a total troll, and has
been doing this for many years under different names (and I am not
just guessing about that). He pretends to own Canon gear, but all he
has is a D70. I have no issue at all with Nikon gear - I use Canon
mostly because I have an investment in lenses and accessories - but
subdoodle constantly posts garbage and incorrect statements about
Canon stuff. 90% of his posts are in the Canon forums, despite the
fact that he is so obviously pro-Nikon that he is willing to make
stuff up. In the past, he has even stolen someone else's picture
(taken on a Canon 300D), blurred it and posted it as a sample of how
unsharp Canon pictures are. He still insists he shoots both brands,
but has nothing but D70 shots on his pBase site.

He has several other names he has posted under (and has admitted that).

 

[photogbil56]

Whether your quick to throw out the 'troll' name or the 'fanboy' name, It's a good idea to wait and make sure your correct with your accusations!

But if it makes you fell better to call me or anyone else a 'fanboy' ...knock yourself out!
I've actually mockingly called myself a 'fanboy' ...whatever that is!

I have a question though. If someone is in their mid 50s can they still be considered a fanboy? Just curious to your opinion, since you seem to think your an expert on them.

 

[nikoncanonleicapentax]

I hardly think you can assign a unique behavior to one forum. How many here owned Nikon film before moving to digital (me)?

Show me the free thinker ;-) and show me the sheep... Now who is flying the flag?

is my point of view, people.

The Canon forums seem to need to fly the flag and dismiss any other
option, even the possibility of some other cameras existing.

It's truly amazing to see this occur again and again.

 

[nikoncanonleicapentax]

Is "fanboy" even a term that an adult uses? One over 25?

you would know why I said what I did. He is a total troll, and has
been doing this for many years under different names (and I am not
just guessing about that). He pretends to own Canon gear, but all he
has is a D70. I have no issue at all with Nikon gear - I use Canon
mostly because I have an investment in lenses and accessories - but
subdoodle constantly posts garbage and incorrect statements about
Canon stuff. 90% of his posts are in the Canon forums, despite the
fact that he is so obviously pro-Nikon that he is willing to make
stuff up. In the past, he has even stolen someone else's picture
(taken on a Canon 300D), blurred it and posted it as a sample of how
unsharp Canon pictures are. He still insists he shoots both brands,
but has nothing but D70 shots on his pBase site.

He has several other names he has posted under (and has admitted that).

 

[piep]

went to the wrong site by mistake and found the "other" cnet review which seems to be a little at odds with the linked review. go figure.

 

[Greg Pavlov]

Very well said. I agree completely.

I agree, tho not completely: the particular poster who prompted this exchange
is constantly trolling.

 

[Greg Pavlov]

The 40D should compared with the D200, where it does very nicely.

The D200 came out 20 months ago.

 

[Sosua]

Sure, as a current Nikon (crop) user, the D300 appeals more on the immediate horizon, but what really interests me is the 'Phantom' 5D Mk2... If I can justify the cost...

I think the 40D is an excellent cam at a great price though - its just a little similarly specced as my D80 (I don't need FPS)

I've used both sytems and the past, and i'd never rule out a change...
--

http://www.creativeinclined.com/index.gallery.php?gid=3

 

[tknterry]

For the love of God, why are we having such a controversy over a CNET review??
--
---Terry



http://photostuff.org/galapagos.html

 

[subdoodle]

Tend to find the same thing for all dslrs, Less light, longer to find a lock. Maybe 400D slows down more than some others below some EV?

 

[delsol67]

How else could you explain the fact that he spends so much time in this forum waiting anxiously for news on Canon cameras ... instead of spending that time with his Nikon, out there photographing.

 

[tigger183234]

My arguement was that the reviewer was 'reaching'...to try and make a
point! So...what? ...in your opinion would be considered a useless
spot meter? Is it your contention that anything short of a '1 degree'
spot meter is useless? ....or is the approx. 1.5% like in the
forthcoming D3 enough? ...nothing larger?

The smaller the spot is that the Spotmeter covers, the better. There is just no argueing about that.

The reviewer is just stating that the 40D covers a bigger spot than the 30D, and that others are still better.

The image he provides is just to give a sample where the bigger spot can be limiting.

The previous poster just states that 1 degree would be ideal. Nowhere did he say that a bigger spot would be useless.

 

[photo nuts]

no text

 

[tigger183234]

The composition is sheer
amateuristic! Even slightly zooming in on the birds in the
bird-bath, to change the composition, would allow the 3.8% spot meter
to do it's job and to easily expose the shot correctly!

What if the lens he used didn't allow to zoom in more? Should he not have taken the shot?
In that case, only a smaller Spotmeter will do the job.
He still could have intended to crop the shot later in pp.

 

[matt2010]

Subdoodle......Well owning a d70 does not make you a better person either...

I've just checked your thread history, do you ever actually bother writing in NIkon forums?

I've just bought a 40D regardless of whether the D300 has better features (subjective...), more AF points (I only use centre...big deal), weatherproof..(er 1 series quality?? yeah right..) its a great camera a BIG step from 350D. I'm sure the D300 will be a very good camera but its £500 more than 40D in UK!!!

PLus if you have a good selection of lenses you'd have to have a trust fund to change system. Have you seen pics taken with 20D/30D's??? Fanatastic. A good photographer will take great pictures no matter what he/she is using! Why do you continually berate Canon? Get a life.

 

[richard plumb]

well ISO might not be an issue to some, but it is to me. And i'm no pixel peeper. I took some indoor shots on my 350d and was forced to use ISO 1600 due to the lack of light. and even printing out 6x4, the noise was VERY apparant.

I upgraded to the 40D last week mainly for better ISO performance so as not to be in the same situation again. Of course the other features were also useful (Live view is very nice for macros, sensor cleaning can only help, better AF sensitivity)

any idea when Phil is likely to post his review? retail units have been out for a while now.

 

[Tacksharp]

The 40D should compared with the D200, where it does very nicely.

The D200 came out 20 months ago.

If the D200 is that old and out of date, then why does it still cost $200 more than a 40D? The comparison point, again, is on price. Nikon has nothing else within 20% of the cost of a 40D, so the comparison has to be with the D200. Perhaps the D200 should be dropped $500 to compare with the 30D. :-D

-Tacksharp

 

[Slideshow Bob]

Yep, high ISO noise performance is important. But it's only one aspect of the overall performance. Personally, right now, ISO noise comes a distant second to dynamic range, because noise is pretty well controlled (and MUCH better than it was in the film days), but aside from the Fuji S3 / S5, DR is still something of a problem, and has been mostly ignored by Canon and Nikon for too long.

Stop acting like Canon is the be all and end all of IQ brilliance. EVERY manufacturer has a long way to go yet.

SB

 

[photogbil56]

The composition is sheer
amateuristic! Even slightly zooming in on the birds in the
bird-bath, to change the composition, would allow the 3.8% spot meter
to do it's job and to easily expose the shot correctly!

What if the lens he used didn't allow to zoom in more? Should he not
have taken the shot?

How about moving closer to the subject? Your making excuses for 'her', not a him (not that it matters but this 'reviewer' has been by others that have read her reviews befoore)!

Oh..will spook the bird you say?...then how about aiming the spot meter at the back of the body of the bird where the darker feathers consist of a larger area?

In that case, only a smaller Spotmeter will do the job.
He still could have intended to crop the shot later in pp.

Is there some formula that says if the spot meter covers 'only' 85-90% of the desired metering area, it will not give an accurately desired reading? I doubt this reviewer has the expertise to answer that question ...as well as many others she obviously didn't have a clue on.