December 22, 2014, 05:48:58 AM

Author Topic: 40D vs. 6D AF  (Read 9068 times)

mariusx1

  • Power Shot G7X
  • **
  • Posts: 19
    • View Profile
40D vs. 6D AF
« on: May 11, 2013, 03:22:28 PM »
I'm currently living in South America, but will be returning to the U.S. in June and plan to upgrade my aging 40D. I've got a budget of $4000. Current lenses are 17-40mm f4L, 85mm f1.8, 70-300mm IS (non-L). I teach yearbook at a private K-12 school down here and do much of the photography myself (sports, events, mugshots, candids, etc). My 40D has started to show its limitations. ISO performance is by far my biggest reason for upgrade. Given my budget, these are the two options I've been looking at:

Option 1 - 5D Mark III Kit
- 5D Mark III Kit w/ 24-105mm f4L
- 50mm 1.4 or 50mm 1.8 (depending on kit price)
- Accessories (CF/SD cards, filters, etc)

Option 2 - 6D Kit
- 6D Kit w/ 24-105mm f4L
- 135mm f2L
- 50mm 1.4 or 50mm 1.8 (depending on kit price)
- Accessories (SD cards, filters, etc)

So, the 6D option also gets me an awesome lens. Lenses first, right? I use my 85 1.8 a TON, so I imagine the 135 f2L will see a lot of use. I love everything about the 5DIII and it would be a great all-around camera for me, but I'm starting to wonder if the 6D + 135mm might do more for my photography in the long-term.

So, I'll get to my question. I would certainly love to have 61-point AF, but if the 6D AF is equivalent to or better than the 40D AF, that'd probably be good enough for me. Has anyone upgraded from a 40D to a 6D who could share some thoughts? How are the outer points? The 40D has 9 cross-type, the 6D has only one. In actual practice, has that been noticeable?

Thanks so much!
6D | 40D | S100 | 17-40 f4L | 24-105 f4L IS | 70-300 f4-5.6 IS | 40 f2.8 | 85 f1.8 | 430EX II

canon rumors FORUM

40D vs. 6D AF
« on: May 11, 2013, 03:22:28 PM »

Haydn1971

  • Canon 6D
  • *****
  • Posts: 427
    • View Profile
Re: 40D vs. 6D AF
« Reply #1 on: May 11, 2013, 05:33:11 PM »
I've yet to experience a problem with the AF on my 6D - the 135mm L really does do the business for me for portraits, I upgraded from the 450D rather than the 40D though.
Regards, Haydn

:: View my photostream on Flickr, Canon EOS 6D, EOS M ,  16-35mm II, 24-70mm II, 70-300mm L, 135mm f2.0 L, 22mm f2.0, Lensbaby, EOS M adaptor, Cosina CT1G film SLR & 50mm f2.0 lens

bholliman

  • 1D Mark IV
  • ******
  • Posts: 800
    • View Profile
Re: 40D vs. 6D AF
« Reply #2 on: May 11, 2013, 09:53:02 PM »
I upgraded from a 550D and 7D to a 6D and am very happy with that decision.  The 6D's 11-point AF system is certainly good enough for what I shoot.  I shoot mostly kid/family shots, portraits, landscapes and kids sports. 

Unless you are doing a lot of fast action sports and wildlife photography, I think you will not have a problem with the 6D's AF system.  I use the center point most of the time, but the off-center points work well also.

BTW, the 6D and 135L are a terrific combo.  I use this pair for most of my portraits and for plenty of sports photography also.  Awesome lens!
Bodies:  6D, EOS-M
EF Lenses: 35mm f/2.0 IS, 100mm f/2.8L IS Macro, 135mm f/2.0L, 16-35mm f/4L IS, 24-70mm f/2.8L II, 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II; EF-M Lenses: 22 f/2, 18-55
Speedlites: ST-E3-RT, 600EX-RT (x3)

elflord

  • 5D Mark III
  • ******
  • Posts: 705
    • View Profile
Re: 40D vs. 6D AF
« Reply #3 on: May 11, 2013, 10:51:51 PM »
So, I'll get to my question. I would certainly love to have 61-point AF, but if the 6D AF is equivalent to or better than the 40D AF, that'd probably be good enough for me. Has anyone upgraded from a 40D to a 6D who could share some thoughts? How are the outer points? The 40D has 9 cross-type, the 6D has only one. In actual practice, has that been noticeable?

Thanks so much!

I haven't done exactly that upgrade. I have a 5DII I upgraded from an older rebel (the former is pretty similar to the 6D). The outer points are usable, but I usually go with the center and focus-recompose.

Having more AF points and some more advanced features for AF tracking would be useful for sports shooting, but for one shot AF mode it works quite well. I've even found servo quite good with the center point -- I recently took shots of the finish line in a 5K race (subject running straight at the camera) and didn't bother with several shots per subject and it turned out I didn't need to. Keep rate was very good. I used center point with servo. Most of the misses were "user error" (subject "fell off" the AF point) which could have largely been fixed by taking more shots.  The lens by the way was the 135L.

In your case it seems like a no-brainer -- your overall system will be much more usable if you spend the extra money on glass (and a flash if you don't have one yet)

Chosenbydestiny

  • EOS M2
  • ****
  • Posts: 244
    • View Profile
Re: 40D vs. 6D AF
« Reply #4 on: May 11, 2013, 11:44:22 PM »
I think they're both equal for AF but in different regards. Like, 40D has better AI servo capability for action shots IMO, I didn't complain about it much back when I used one extensively. But with a 6D I can shoot a decent portrait indoors with the center point, something that was more challenging with the 40D.
Nikon electric fan, gas stove, and slippers. Canon Elan 7, 1D Mark III, 5D mark III, and 2x6D. Canon 24mm Samyang/Rokinon, 85L, 135L, and many other lenses. 2x Canon 580ex II, third party speedlites, studio strobes

mariusx1

  • Power Shot G7X
  • **
  • Posts: 19
    • View Profile
Re: 40D vs. 6D AF
« Reply #5 on: May 12, 2013, 01:27:03 PM »
Thanks for the responses, all. Sounds like the two AF systems are pretty comparable. After doing a little more research, I think I've decided on the 6D option. For action shots, the 5D3 AF could very well get me 90% keepers, but I think I'll be ok with the 50-60% that I've heard the 6D offers.

And the 135L looks and sounds awesome...I can't wait to get my hands on it!
6D | 40D | S100 | 17-40 f4L | 24-105 f4L IS | 70-300 f4-5.6 IS | 40 f2.8 | 85 f1.8 | 430EX II

Rocguy

  • PowerShot G1 X II
  • ***
  • Posts: 53
    • View Profile
Re: 40D vs. 6D AF
« Reply #6 on: May 12, 2013, 01:46:29 PM »
I recently upgraded from a t4i(650?) to the 6D. One thing to keep in mind, as you go to the FF camera, is that the "outer points" don't fill up as much of the frame as on the crop camera. There's a big periphery around the AF points where there are no points. If that makes sense. I had kind of thought they would be more spread out to fill up more of the FF frame. But they are not. I still love mine, and still recommend it. But something to keep in mind. And you can always focus in live view too if you want to focus on something in the corner of the frame.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: 40D vs. 6D AF
« Reply #6 on: May 12, 2013, 01:46:29 PM »

dewa

  • Power Shot G7X
  • **
  • Posts: 6
    • View Profile
Re: 40D vs. 6D AF
« Reply #7 on: May 12, 2013, 02:24:52 PM »
I just upgraded from 40d to 6d 2 months ago. I have the 135mm already and bought the sigma 35mm 1.4.
I take many pics of little children active running around, and in term of focusing speed, it seems to be no significant different, but the accuracy is better(?). Anyway it's an upgrade worth the money. The high iso performance also improve my image when shooting moving objects at low lights, something I have had hard time with 40d.

Good luck.

sdsr

  • 5D Mark III
  • ******
  • Posts: 719
    • View Profile
Re: 40D vs. 6D AF
« Reply #8 on: May 12, 2013, 04:41:20 PM »
I can't help with the body decision (I haven't used a 40D but own a 5DII and 6D; and for what I photograph don't see any advantage in the 5DIII over the 6D; you might).  I would note, though, that while the 5DIII has a ton of focus points, they're all lumped in the middle of the frame (I think this is true of all FF DSLRs, isn't it?) in an area not much different from that covered by the far fewer points on the 6D, rather than usefully spread all over it.  I'm inclined to suggest that you hold off on buying a 50mm prime until you've tried your 85mm on your new FF body - you may not feel any pressing need for a wider one (you can experiment with your 24-105).  And while the 135L is a fantastic lens, 135mm isn't much different from 105mm; for a bit more variety you might want to consider the 200 2.8, which creates images that are very similar to those taken with the 135mm but gives you extra reach.  Either way, you can't really lose.... 

mariusx1

  • Power Shot G7X
  • **
  • Posts: 19
    • View Profile
Re: 40D vs. 6D AF
« Reply #9 on: May 12, 2013, 07:40:37 PM »
I'm inclined to suggest that you hold off on buying a 50mm prime until you've tried your 85mm on your new FF body - you may not feel any pressing need for a wider one (you can experiment with your 24-105).  And while the 135L is a fantastic lens, 135mm isn't much different from 105mm; for a bit more variety you might want to consider the 200 2.8, which creates images that are very similar to those taken with the 135mm but gives you extra reach.

Thanks for the sound advice sdsr. You're right that my 85mm might be enough for what I need. I'll probably just buy the 50 1.8 for now. It's cheap and seems like one I should have in my bag. If I like the focal length, I can always upgrade to a more substantial 50mm in the future.

The 135L is pretty close to 105, but the 2 extra stops of light and the background blur are what I'm after. I had initially ruled out the 200 2.8 because I think the reach would be a bit too long for indoor shots (indoor volleyball, basketball, etc). But, I'm also used to crop, so I'll give it another look. Thanks!
6D | 40D | S100 | 17-40 f4L | 24-105 f4L IS | 70-300 f4-5.6 IS | 40 f2.8 | 85 f1.8 | 430EX II

Kengur

  • Power Shot G7X
  • **
  • Posts: 8
    • View Profile
Re: 40D vs. 6D AF
« Reply #10 on: May 13, 2013, 10:21:53 AM »
You can't go wrong with 135!

danjwark

  • Power Shot G7X
  • **
  • Posts: 26
    • View Profile
Re: 40D vs. 6D AF
« Reply #11 on: May 13, 2013, 04:26:03 PM »
I have both the 40D and the 6D. The only real difference I have noticed is that the 6D is able to focus with way less light. Now in all fairness, I typically am a centre point shooter most of the time and the 6D is definitely better at that. If you are happy with your 40D, they you will have no issues with the 6D.

DaveQ

  • Power Shot G7X
  • **
  • Posts: 11
    • View Profile
Re: 40D vs. 6D AF
« Reply #12 on: May 14, 2013, 10:09:22 AM »
I would go with the 6D anytime. I own one, as well as a 40D, 7D and 5DII. The centre AF point on the 6D is far superior than that on the 40D, and is more sensitive than that on the 5DIII, allowing AF at -3EV.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: 40D vs. 6D AF
« Reply #12 on: May 14, 2013, 10:09:22 AM »

Skirball

  • Canon 6D
  • *****
  • Posts: 398
    • View Profile
Re: 40D vs. 6D AF
« Reply #13 on: May 14, 2013, 11:18:01 AM »
I've had no issues with my 6D AF in real life.  On the internet, I've found that it can't even capture pyramids in focus, and forget about getting a clean shot of a bride walking down the aisle.

darshan4eos

  • Power Shot G7X
  • **
  • Posts: 8
    • View Profile
Re: 40D vs. 6D AF
« Reply #14 on: May 15, 2013, 01:54:19 AM »
I am also in the same boad as you are and itching to upgrade my 4 years old 40D, only the "on-paper" inferior AF system is holding me back from pulling the trigger (and ofcourse I will have to re-plan the path for my lenses).
It will be intersting to read your experience when you make this upgrade :).

canon rumors FORUM

Re: 40D vs. 6D AF
« Reply #14 on: May 15, 2013, 01:54:19 AM »