Some pretty quick action captured there!

---

a few mediocre pics

KeithT:

  The bottom of the range Mercedes would still be preferable in many ways even though the top of the range Toyoto is a lovely car and might be the business to some drivers.

Don't mention that where I live Keith - there's no such thing as a BOTTOM of the range Mercedes.

sue allen:

Think of it as a straightforward 40D review but the author writing it from the point of view of someone who's used to a top of the range model and finding it a perfectly good and much more than adequate cheaper alternative for amateur use.

And I understand what you're saying also Sue.

BeckyH:

My only gripe is that the white balance on auto regularly under-read but as I take raw pics it didn't much matter.

A well known fact with Canon and the general understanding is that they set the cameras up with protecting the highlights very much in mind. The reason being of course that it easier to recover detail from the shadows than from completely blown away highlights. In fact following reading an article on the Luminous Landscape sight it became apparent that a lot of Pro's regularly leave one half to one full stop over exposure dialled in - they call it 'shooting to the right'. Since reading the article and reading posts on this site it would seem that that I am not the only one to follow that practice. By the way, there are contrary arguments around about whether one should set the correct white balance even when shooting in raw.

With my 5D I tend to use centre weighted average metering - and tend to have 1/3 to 2/3 stop of EC dialed in to push the histogram to the right. With my MkIII I tend to use evaluative - and generally leave it with 0EC - but do compensate when conditions dictate - but the metering is very much better than the 5D.

As for WB - I think its better to get it right even with RAW - although AWB is generally good enough for normal lighting in my experience - the principle being that with the right WB you will tend to blow one channel less often.

---

Mark

Digital Photo Group
My Website

Ne nuntium necare

Yeah, sorry if I have misunderstood your drift, Sue.  It goes back to what I was saying about cameras being tools though.  If the 40d is as good or better than the 1d MK11 at getting shots of birds, then the answer is plain to see - get the 40d.  If you are after build quality then the 1d might be best.  All I know is I wouldn't choose a 5d for sports photography anymore than I would choose the 40d for landscape photography, even though the 40d delivers some stunning images.  Why do manufacturers make it so damn difficult for us?

No basic Mercedes, Alan?    You mean my dream of owning one is just a dream?  What a *** I am.

I leave my 5d permantly set to + 1/3 of a stop these days and adjust according to conditions. 

---

I've got a couple of 20Ds and a daughter in college, so I'm not buying a  lot of new camera bodies these days, but I've looked at the 40D and it seems like a major upgrade compared to the 20D in terms of the viewfinder, interchangeable screens, and other features that matter to me because of my use of lots of weird and wonderful older lenses (like my Vivitar qdos anaglyphic 3D lens!). My only problem with the crop was and is that I do a lot of architectural photography and my old Nikkor 35mm Perspective-Control lens is just too long on a crop body. In a sense, for that purpose, I either need to spring for a 24mm TS-E lens or buy the FF body like the 5D. Since I do want to get a new body, I suspect that one of these days I will go for the 5D MkII when it comes out.

Like KeithT, says, these things are tools and what tools you need depends on what jobs you have to do.

---

Swede
My Gallery