Interesting comparison by someone who's used both for bird photography

http://iwishicouldfly.com/iwishicouldfly/journal/html/093007.html

---

a few mediocre pics

Thanks for the link Sue - made for very interesting reading. I have been toying for some time with the idea of going full frame but have been reluctant to do so as the 5D's replacement is just around the corner and I'm a bit reluctant to purchase an obsolete camera no matter how good it is. Reason? Well basically previous experience has taught me that support for older cameras raw formats tend to get dropped pretty darn fast after the model ceases to be produced. I already have a Canon G5 that is approx 5 years old and whose raw format is no longer supported by the very same people that produced it. Step in Adobe - bless their cotton picking socks - because they still do.

Purchasing the replacement for the 5D will be far too expensive. Not that I can't afford it but photography is a hobby and not the 'be all and end all of my life' and I can think of better and more lucrative ways of spending the same amount of money. Nikons are out for essentially the same reason plus the fact that I have too many expensive and quality lenses from Canon to make it a realistic option even if I wanted to which I don't.

Enter the 40D. Everything that I have ever read about this camera marks it out as a winner for Canon. Unlike the writer of the blogg you posted I won't be splashing out for two at the same time but one certainly seems to be on the cards. At present I am more than happy with my current 30D which will get relegated to a second body if I do decide to proceed with the purchase of the 40D. Most of my life I've owned two SLR's and I feel a bit 'light' only having the one now. Um, think I'll go and read that blogg all over again.

Edit: This post reads as though I believe the 40D to be a FF camera. Of course I know it isn't but just thought I'd better make that point clear.

 

---

Click Me

At the moment the 40D is staggering value for money. £599 with £100 cashback so at £499 it's the same price as a 450D. The D300, has I'm sure, more features and weatherproofing - and I would'nt say no to one - but is almost twice as expensive. Having used most of the previous models in the range, I think the 40D has a fair few improvements in the right places. I could'nt keep up with anything faster. Looking forward to getting out to a few more places during the summer to try it out on some different subjects.

---

a few mediocre pics

OK, convinced. Looking at the Canon cash back page I see we're back into savagely attacking the box the camera comes in to cut out the bar code. You may remember the discussion we had on here the last time round? I'll first have to look into my email inbox to see if I still have the details of the nice friendly lady I communicated with last time. Perhaps I can convince her that a photocopy of it will suffice. Oh my oh my Canon, why are things never simple with you.

---

Click Me

Hmmm, interesting points there Alan.

I'm seriously looking at the 5D as an upgrade to my 400D. I'm happy with the 400D but the low-light performance is not as good as I'd like and doing events such as gigs, evening wedding receptions and the like needs a low noise camera (I would also prefer FF). I was nearly going to splash out the £1700 today for one but something niggles in the back of my mind to hang on til autumn........I'd never even considered the 40D.

Any comments??

---

DCM Gallery | flickr
TBITW 5 Times

Contempo Photography

95% of what i shoot is gigs and was going to buy a MkIII  instead i spent some time talking to folks who had a mk III and decided on the 40d! I can not be happier with it....its fast but not over the top iso wise its good till 1600 and then it gets noisy.

i have also used a 5d and have to say I hated it! The company my other half works for recently bought £4500 of camera gear including a 5d  she used it for a week and was going on and on about how great it was. I lent her my 40d and now she hates the 5d. I know people are going to completely disagree but i find them slow and unresponsive. They are great for landscape and portrait but I would never consider one for gig photography!

Lee

I'll disagree! Mind you it depends how you define slow and unresponsive - the frame rate is only 3FPS - which is not that fast, but everything else is fine - metering is quick enough. Only thing that the 40D will have is better AF - the only thing that I find the 5D lets me down on - particularly the outer focus points.

And even at ISO3200 the images can be clean - if exposed correctly - and preferably RAW.

And I have used one several times for band photography and performed very well. But not to say the 40D is not better.

---

Mark

Digital Photo Group
My Website

Ne nuntium necare

1D mk III is a great camera, and i like it.
I think i will never look back at any canon 1.6x cameras and just stay with FF and 1.3x for now.

---

My Flickr Gallery

My DeviantArt Gallery

A very interesting thread.  Cameras are tools and should be purchased as such in my view.  It is impossible to actually answer the question "Canon 40D v 1 D Mk11" because both cameras are so wide apart from each other.  Having used my 5D for nearly a year now, I have to say it took a few months to get used to, but to be honest I'm with Professional on this and wouldn't trade it back for a new 40D under any circumstances.  It's horses for courses and price shouldn't be the only criteria when looking for a camera.  The 40D is a nice camera and so is the 1D Mk11, but for their own reasons.

---

I used 350D, 30D, 1D MKIIN, 5D, 1DsII and last 1D MKIII, and i can say that with Full Frame and 1.3 bodies i can forget and ignore those 1.6x bodies so easily, not saying that those 1.6x are not good, but those pro bodies blown any canon DSLR non-pro bodies in the water.

---

My Flickr Gallery

My DeviantArt Gallery

The point of the article was simply to point out that, given the huge price difference between the two cameras, the 40D was surprisingly good. The context was bird/wildlife photography where the 1.6x can be an advantage. Of course the 1d Mk lll should blow away the 40D in some respects or who would bother to spend all that cash. He thought it might be a matter of interest for those considering a 40D just how good it seemed to someone who normally used a pro model.

---

a few mediocre pics

The thing is, Sue, you might be better comparing the 40d with the 30d, rather than with the 1d MK11 or even the 5d.  40d vs 1d MK11 is a bit  like comparing a top of the range Toyoto, with the bottom of the range Mercedes don't you think.  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. 

---

You're still missing the point I was trying to make. It's not a case of a direct 'which should I buy' thing because that ultimately comes down to what you can afford. More a case of someone thinking perhaps a 40D would be a good birding camera but wondering if it was fast enough etc and the author of the article saying he was pleasantly surprised when he had to 'make do' with a 40D when his usual much more high spec camera was'nt available. 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.

---

a few mediocre pics

Don't worry Sue... I know what you were on about!

---

Si
DCM
spiritflier.com
My Flickr
BPITW x 4

I agree with you Sue. The 40D is pretty good. especially when you take into account the purchase price.

I have just been on a phote safari to Tanzania, using 40D & 5D cameras. The 40D was bought as a cheaper back-up camera in case anything went wrong with my 5D. But I was very surprised to get such good results from it. My only gripe is that the white balance on auto regularly under-read but as I take raw pics it didn't much matter.

Strangely, with my action shots of birds in flight the 5D gave the best results. Just less of them! So my cards lasted longer.

Some of my pics are on www.flickr.com/photos/BeckyH1 where you can see the comparisons for yourself

---

My Gallery