40D, It's here! *dances*

  • Thread starter Thread starter mrk
  • Start date Start date
mrk said:
Well few things off top of my head include 3fps vs +6.4fps, Better AF, more internal featureset, larger RAW buffer and equal (if not better) image quality to the 5D.
Click to expand...

40D image quality isn't on a par with the 5D - the 5D is full frame. The FPS wouldn't be a massive concern in my experience, the AF might and the RAW buffer don't really justify the difference either.

The 5D is a significant upgrade, but the price jump is massive.
 
cleanbluesky said:
40D image quality isn't on a par with the 5D - the 5D is full frame. The FPS wouldn't be a massive concern in my experience, the AF might and the RAW buffer don't really justify the difference either.

The 5D is a significant upgrade, but the price jump is massive.
Click to expand...


I think you might be confusing things a bit here!

The 5D is over £1k still for body only unless I am mistaken, 40D is £519 after cashback on most online places for £530 on the highstreet!

As for image quality, full frame or not the IQ is either the same or better on the 40D, people who have both or have used both have stated this many times (just do a google search for image comparisons). Full frame just gives a bigger picture of the "picture" (heh), not improves image quality all of a sudden.

Remember 5D is 3~ years old now, 40D is brand new and faster technology.

The only thing significant over a 40D is that the 5D has a full frame sensor and nothing else really.
 
I have a 400D and I can not see the point of buying a 450D, with a few more quids you can get the 40D. TBH the cash back is a big help on this camera.
 
Well, i currently have a canon 20D and will be getting a 40D within the next 2 weeks.

Main reasons for me to upgrade:

Better AF points
Custom setting (so if i scout a location i can instanltly switch back)
Better Noise reduction
and generally a better upgrade than the 30D

I was going to save for the 5D replacement but to be honest, unless i get a few more paid photography jobs, it is out of my price range for now.


Would be good if someone on these forums did a full review of the cameras - if we had a format to follow certain things to look for, shoot comment on, then we could start a camera review section here - as we all have different cameras and different lenses, im sure it wouldnt take long to build up a pretty comrehensive list of products that we can review.
 
That sounds like a good idea! Perhaps someone could create a template that people could follow ?
 
Glad someone else thinks its a good idea - you know these things sound good in your head, but when you say them out loud sometimes they dont seem so bright :)
 
mrk said:
the 70-200 2.8 indeed does get better results than the 350D was able to but below f4 it's still too flary for print usage or selling photos so I'm going to sell it and get the F4L IS
Click to expand...

im really struggling to find some logic in that statement.

its like me saying my ferrarri is too fast so im going to sell it and buy a scooter instead.

:confused:
 
neil_g said:
im really struggling to find some logic in that statement.

its like me saying my ferrarri is too fast so im going to sell it and buy a scooter instead.

:confused:
Click to expand...

more like saying "my ferrari is no good at its top speed, so i'm going to buy an elise that is just as good /better until X mph but is half the price"
 
the ferrarri can do everything the lotus could but the lotus cant do as much as the ferrarri.

imo, youd be kicking yourself when one day you wished your lotus could do what your old ferrarri did.
 
the 70-200 2.8 indeed does get better results than the 350D was able to but below f4 it's still too flary for print usage or selling photos so I'm going to sell it and get the F4L IS
Click to expand...

If the IQ isn't satisfactory enough for printing or selling why is this lens used by countless professionals across the world for that exact purpose?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom