Should I replace 20D with a 40D?

Anyway, the result is that the 5D MK1 is one of the classic bargains of the second hand market, a shame that many are too blinded by Mp to pick one up, there are plenty out there..
Agree :) Got mine for $1K Adam, had the mirror recall fix and had canon put a brand new $215 shutter and tune to my 70-200 f2.8 at 200 mm

happy camper....

see you later when I've shot 100,000+ ... :)
 
all technically tests and my own test using RAW analayze program showed me the 50D has a bit less noise at image level than the 40D.

I had both but Icould honestly say the 50D is a btter body and overall IQ of it is much better than the 40D , to be honest I never touched my 40D after I got 50D and 5D2.

So, I gave my 40D to my dad.

Just dont compare them at 100 percent pixel level but at image level , you will see my point.

but that said after I got my second 5D2 , I never touched my 50D and it became always-stays-in-mybag kind of back up body ,never moved out nor used.

but the 50D at least a better camera than the 40D, IMO the 40D ,350D and 400D were the worst of wost Canon bodies.
 
IMO much of it relates to Canon's sample variance. No doubt there are some very sharp samples of the 100~400 but mine's not in that category. I had two samples of the 400f5.6 and both were noticeably sharper than the zoom. I also have given up using the zoom for tracking BiF as even on my 7D very little comes back sharp where my keeper rate is very good with my 400f5.6, 300f4, 70~200f4LIS with 1.4x and even with my 70~300DO. My 100~400 comes in dead last for AF speed and accuracy and I've tediously performed AF MA on the lens.

Bob
--
http://www.pbase.com/rwbaron
 
I had the 10d for about 2yrs. Recently i upgrade to a used 30d, nice upgrade and full of features, but not much better over all still plain jane. Then i was reading up on the 40d, it had features i could really use like for ex; better 3 inch screen, live view, interchangable screens, new faster af, etc. So, after i searched around i traded in the 30d for a 40d. It cost me several hundred $$$$(us) more but i think it was worth it. The 40d works so much better then the 30d and the pics are bit better also. I was reading about 50d and was not really impressed with it. DP did a review on the 50d and when they compared the 40d with the image quality, the 40d was a bit better. I guess the 50d is a bit more polished in some ways for ex; better screen lcd, menu system , some megapixels,etc. To me it was not worth another $300 to $400 (us) more. So fit wise the 10d was the best in my hands. The 30d didn't fit right in my hands. The 40d was a bit better. Canon changed the grip area slightly with the 40d. I would go the 40d instead of the 50d. Also get the battery grip it's so much better with it. Save some $$ for better glass.
 
yes - 40D is the best APS-C camera canon have made so far. ok not got the fps of the 7D but it has better IQ less noise
I have been offered a 40D body for between £3-400 Should I go for it? Or should I spend a heap more on something better? I love my 20D but having to wear reading glasses to see the small LCD on the back drives me mad, I just can't see it, so the 3" one on the 40D would be great and the major difference as far as i can see. I'm not too worried about the increase in pixels as I rarely print that big, even though I know it is most people's excuse to upgrade.

I like my 10D and it has done me well, but if you know of some ideas to encourage me or dissuade to get the 40D please do. Maybe I'm missing something.

The lenses I use are the beautiful EFS 10-22mm and the accompanying EF 28-135 Image Stabilized.

Jules

--
Does Cameron look like Postman Pat or what?
 

Keyboard shortcuts

Back
Top