40D V 5D
- Thread starter Geffen
- Start date
Went into my local photography shop today to try out the 40D and 5D but didn't get much joy. The lady there didn't know how to change any of the settings on the cameras and when i asked about the difference between the two camera was told the main difference was the 40D had liveview and the 5D didn't. After that comment i gave up and left.
With regards to the image quality i would have thought the 14bit colour on the 40D would have given it a slight edge over the 5D in quality but comments above suggest that may not be the case.
At the moment I'm leaning towards the 40D it feels like a substantial upgrade on my current camera. But i keep thinking the 5D is only an extra £300 (if i take into account i can sell my 10-22mm for £300). I will carry on dithering and probably decided as i normally do to keep the cash and stick with my 350D.
With regards to the image quality i would have thought the 14bit colour on the 40D would have given it a slight edge over the 5D in quality but comments above suggest that may not be the case.
At the moment I'm leaning towards the 40D it feels like a substantial upgrade on my current camera. But i keep thinking the 5D is only an extra £300 (if i take into account i can sell my 10-22mm for £300). I will carry on dithering and probably decided as i normally do to keep the cash and stick with my 350D.
If I was going to buy one I'd go for the 5d. Mainly because I'm concerned about how long the EF-S mounting will last, i.e. I can imagine in a few years time the majority of canon DSLRs will be full frame, with fewer crop cameras being sold the value of EFS only lenses will drop a lot. I can't see them phasing out full frame for a long long time so I think it's a safer bet. I find the zoom ranges of the EF lenses to be much better suited to a FF camera. I.e. 17-40mm is great for a huge amount of landscape, the 24-105mm covers a great all round range etc etc. When I use these lenses on my crop body I find I'm always having to switch in order to get it a bit wider or a bit closer.
So if you buying/have L lenses and not a massive sports photographer i'd most certainly go for the 5d. Or you could join the waiting game to see what they replace the 5d with... It'll be pricey but I think it'll be a killer camera
So if you buying/have L lenses and not a massive sports photographer i'd most certainly go for the 5d. Or you could join the waiting game to see what they replace the 5d with... It'll be pricey but I think it'll be a killer camera
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 10 Apr 2004
- Posts
- 13,497
If I was going to buy one I'd go for the 5d. Mainly because I'm concerned about how long the EF-S mounting will last, i.e. I can imagine in a few years time the majority of canon DSLRs will be full frame, with fewer crop cameras being sold the value of EFS only lenses will drop a lot. I can't see them phasing out full frame for a long long time so I think it's a safer bet. I find the zoom ranges of the EF lenses to be much better suited to a FF camera. I.e. 17-40mm is great for a huge amount of landscape, the 24-105mm covers a great all round range etc etc. When I use these lenses on my crop body I find I'm always having to switch in order to get it a bit wider or a bit closer.
So if you buying/have L lenses and not a massive sports photographer i'd most certainly go for the 5d. Or you could join the waiting game to see what they replace the 5d with... It'll be pricey but I think it'll be a killer camera
I've heard about it going the other way and EF-S will take over...
Frankly. It doesn't matter.
Get what you prefer now.
That quote is only looking at the present, not the future 
Well xxxD cameras are entry level; the 300D first launched at £1,000. By the end of this year we could have a full frame camera available for the same.
There is no doubt that in a couple of years full frame cameras are going to be cheap as chips!!
APS-C sensors will still be around but only at the very low end.
All that considered, it's pointless waiting, buy now and use the gear
Well xxxD cameras are entry level; the 300D first launched at £1,000. By the end of this year we could have a full frame camera available for the same.
There is no doubt that in a couple of years full frame cameras are going to be cheap as chips!!
APS-C sensors will still be around but only at the very low end.
All that considered, it's pointless waiting, buy now and use the gear
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 10 Apr 2004
- Posts
- 13,497
That quote is only looking at the present, not the future
Well xxxD cameras are entry level; the 300D first launched at £1,000. By the end of this year we could have a full frame camera available for the same.
There is no doubt that in a couple of years full frame camera are going to be cheap as chips!!
Yes, but smaller sensors will always be cheaper.
Its just the nature of this technology. Once we get down to wavelength size pixels, then FF wins completely...
yeah, sure. but how long will it be untill that? at least three years i'm betting.
It's a bit of a non-issue for me with photography equipment. I.e. with computers you know that within 3 years the chances are that very little of your hardware will be compatible with the latest and greatest. So if you want to upgrade, you have to do the whole system. Now with digital cameras, all the time improvements are made to the bodies. However if I upgrade the body, I do not want to have to upgrade my whole system
I'm buying good glass now, I want to be able to use that glass on the new cameras coming out in 10-20years. I just don't see that being possible with EF-S lenses.
I think EFs will be here for a few years, but it'll stay with the low-end DSLRs I think. Going by canons reluctance to give any EFs lenses the L designation I think you can see that they don't consider this range to be their highest quality.
I'd agree about getting what you prefer now! If you choose the crop because you can't afford a full frame camera it's not a bad choice because there is no point in waiting ages and not being able to take any pictures!!! That's what I did and I'm still on my 350d
But what does matter is say you buy a crop, you take advantage of the lenses designed to work best with that camera (10-22, 17-55 etc). These decent lenses are not cheap. So how would you feel if in 3-4 years time when you you've progressed a lot and want a higher quality camera like a 1 series that you would need to replace all of these lenses. With the inevitability of full frame sensors in more cameras and cheaper then ever before the second hand value of the EFs lenses will be plummeting as the years go on. So no reason not to get a crop body now, but I'd always be factor in how well the lens will work with FF cameras when buying, even if it means the zoom range doesn't quite fit you for now.
That's my view anyway, but not even I listen to it. I couldn't afford a full frame so went for the 350d, when my 17-40L wasn't wide enough I brought the 10-22 EFs
I'm not too worried for the moment because I'm going to be buying a full frame when the 350d eventually dies, I imagine this will be at some point early next year so it shouldn't be too hard selling the 10-22 then.
Last edited:
:O The 17-55 is a very high quality lens (optically) and as sharp as any L wide open at any zoom setting and considering it uses L glass in a non L body I guess that's to be expected.
It's also priced like an equivalent L lens (17-40 being the closest) and you won't be seeing Joe off the streets buying one too often either!
There's also the 60mm EF-s Macro and the 10-22 which are also very high quality lenses for their usage.
Soldato
- Joined
- 5 Nov 2004
- Posts
- 9,302
due to advances in technology you have to say the 40D. Plus the build of the 40D is now very much the same of the 5D whereas the 30D wasn't.
Soldato
- Joined
- 5 Nov 2004
- Posts
- 9,302
probably true but the whole XX series have a similar feel to them and the 5D was just something else. Upon handling Toms 40D I was instantly reminded of the time I handled a 5D. The 40D really is a proper step up in the XX series whereas the 20/30 move was so slight.
Because a sliver of felt on the battery door makes the 40D much better built camera? The 'sealing' on the 40D is simply something tacked on to entice the buyers. If you want proper sealing you get either one of Nikon's prosumer/pro offerings or a 1D.
Yes that's correct, 5d has no seal around battery door so could potentially grab in moisture or water affecting the battery and terminals...a serious problem "should" the worst happen.
In this regard the 40D has better build quality. What is there to not understand about that?