November 28, 2014, 09:54:49 PM

Author Topic: is the 40D still a good one for 400$  (Read 17667 times)

briansquibb

  • Guest
Re: is the 40D still a good one for 400$
« Reply #30 on: March 31, 2012, 04:57:18 PM »
I know what I'm talking about. I'm a professional photographer, so maybe YOU should have your eyes checked. After all I'm giving my opinion, you don't have to agree with me.

The difference between a professional photographer and an amateur is that the professional gets paid. There is not a direct relationship between professional and capability

canon rumors FORUM

Re: is the 40D still a good one for 400$
« Reply #30 on: March 31, 2012, 04:57:18 PM »

nikkito

  • Canon 6D
  • *****
  • Posts: 371
  • Argentine freelance photographer
    • View Profile
    • Facebook photo page
Re: is the 40D still a good one for 400$
« Reply #31 on: March 31, 2012, 05:03:17 PM »
thats fair enough. It reminds me of a review I was reading a while ago about high-end stereo systems. While you are in the store with a low quality set up, next to a high quality one, you clearly can tell the difference. But once its in your home, and you lose that direct frame of reference... it becomes hard to tell. I think camera gear is  prone to the same effect.

totally! that's why they say once you try L lenses you're spoiled  ;)
www.nicolaszonvi.com - www.facebook.com/zonviphoto

1D X, 5D Mk III, 5D Mk II, 16-35L, 24-70L, 70-200L IS, 85 f1.2, 40 f2.8, 50 f1.4, Sigma 10-20 and many other toy cameras.

nikkito

  • Canon 6D
  • *****
  • Posts: 371
  • Argentine freelance photographer
    • View Profile
    • Facebook photo page
Re: is the 40D still a good one for 400$
« Reply #32 on: March 31, 2012, 05:04:23 PM »
I know what I'm talking about. I'm a professional photographer, so maybe YOU should have your eyes checked. After all I'm giving my opinion, you don't have to agree with me.

The difference between a professional photographer and an amateur is that the professional gets paid. There is not a direct relationship between professional and capability

:)
www.nicolaszonvi.com - www.facebook.com/zonviphoto

1D X, 5D Mk III, 5D Mk II, 16-35L, 24-70L, 70-200L IS, 85 f1.2, 40 f2.8, 50 f1.4, Sigma 10-20 and many other toy cameras.

Marsu42

  • Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 5130
  • ML-66d / 100L / 70-300L / 17-40L / 600rts
    • View Profile
    • 6D positive spec list
Re: is the 40D still a good one for 400$
« Reply #33 on: March 31, 2012, 05:31:36 PM »
The difference between a professional photographer and an amateur is that the professional gets paid. There is not a direct relationship between professional and capability

I'm not a pro (yet), but I'd tend to disagree: Imho a pro needs *another* capability as an amateur - e.g. the ability to shoot with more time constraints and less room for try and error which necessitate more knowledge of one's gear vs. getting the newest, shiniest models. Thus, a pro opinion of the 40d and other bodies or lenses might very well be different, and for good reason.

briansquibb

  • Guest
Re: is the 40D still a good one for 400$
« Reply #34 on: March 31, 2012, 06:13:32 PM »
The difference between a professional photographer and an amateur is that the professional gets paid. There is not a direct relationship between professional and capability

I'm not a pro (yet), but I'd tend to disagree: Imho a pro needs *another* capability as an amateur - e.g. the ability to shoot with more time constraints and less room for try and error which necessitate more knowledge of one's gear vs. getting the newest, shiniest models. Thus, a pro opinion of the 40d and other bodies or lenses might very well be different, and for good reason.

Or it might not - being a pro does not guarantee the best photos. The top amateurs are probably significantly better than jobbing, trailer trash wedding togs

nikkito

  • Canon 6D
  • *****
  • Posts: 371
  • Argentine freelance photographer
    • View Profile
    • Facebook photo page
Re: is the 40D still a good one for 400$
« Reply #35 on: March 31, 2012, 06:37:29 PM »
First of all, I'm not better than anyone, my "I'm a professional photographer" sentence was in response of someone telling me that I should have my eyes checked.

Brian, you are right that being professional does not always mean having talent or being good.

Marsu42, I totally agree with you. Working under pressure was the most difficult thing for me when I started working for this newspaper in Switzerland. I was used to take pictures with lots of time, with people who wanted to pose for the camera and with no assignments from no one other than myself.
« Last Edit: March 31, 2012, 06:44:41 PM by nikkito »
www.nicolaszonvi.com - www.facebook.com/zonviphoto

1D X, 5D Mk III, 5D Mk II, 16-35L, 24-70L, 70-200L IS, 85 f1.2, 40 f2.8, 50 f1.4, Sigma 10-20 and many other toy cameras.

katwil

  • Guest
Re: is the 40D still a good one for 400$
« Reply #36 on: March 31, 2012, 06:49:37 PM »
I have to agree with what Brian said earlier in this thread.  IMHO the 40D is the highpoint of the xxD line, before Canon jumped into the megapixel war and added in non-still photography features.  I still get a good amount of use from mine.  I use it when I want extra reach from my lens kit and for some daytime shots (sort of like a reverse vampire, it only gets out when the sun is up).  The 40D has limitations with respect to lighting/ ISO, but employed in the right conditions the 40D is an excellent value at $400.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: is the 40D still a good one for 400$
« Reply #36 on: March 31, 2012, 06:49:37 PM »

dirtcastle

  • Canon 6D
  • *****
  • Posts: 391
    • View Profile
    • Eric Nord Flickr Page
Re: is the 40D still a good one for 400$
« Reply #37 on: March 31, 2012, 07:20:40 PM »
I use it when I want extra reach from my lens kit and for some daytime shots (sort of like a reverse vampire, it only gets out when the sun is up).

Correct me if I'm wrong, but a 40D doesn't give "extra reach" compared with a 5D2. With the same lens, a cropped 5D shot will get the same (or better) effective resolution). In fact, doesn't the 5D2 have a greater "reach" than the 40D because it has twice the sensor resolution?

Please correct me if I'm wrong. Thanks.


expatinasia

  • 1D Mark IV
  • ******
  • Posts: 972
    • View Profile
Re: is the 40D still a good one for 400$
« Reply #38 on: March 31, 2012, 07:28:16 PM »
I would say if US$ 400 is your absolute max in terms of budget then the 40D is fine. Personally I would look at buying something better, 5D mark II or 7D (probably the latter - as price won't be so high) as you are likely to want more and more out of your camera as time goes on.

It will depend on what you want to use it for but those two cameras above give you much more room and time to grow, plus they do video so you save having to buy something there too perhaps.

Whenever it comes to technology I was try to buy as recent as possible (not always the most recent - think RAM etc) as the benefits last that little longer.
1D X + backup + different L lenses etc.

smithy

  • Canon 70D
  • ****
  • Posts: 290
    • View Profile
Re: is the 40D still a good one for 400$
« Reply #39 on: March 31, 2012, 07:28:30 PM »
I've owned the 40D since it was released in 2007, and while it does have its limitations (poor ISO performance at 800 and higher), I really love it.  Its strengths are build quality, frame rate, and image quality at ISO100-200.

Build quality: alloy frame, some weather sealing - although when shooting in the rain a couple of times I've had some of the controls cease up on me.  (Canon has never suggested that it could be used in such weather).  It's always come back to life after a bit of drying, and the whole camera still looks like new after five years.

Frame rate:  6.3fps is a nice frame rate for the types of photos I like to take: triathlon events, kids running around, wildlife... the AI servo mode suffers a little bit because of the camera's weak AF system though (but I'm comparing it with my lovely 1V, which isn't really fair).

Image quality: at ISO100-200 this camera produces really nice clean images that can be blown up reasonably large.

It is still my main digital camera, and it's only now with the release of the 5D MkIII that I've seriously considered replacing it.  I almost bought a 5D mkI last year (to use for 'wider' angled shots), but it felt so *old* next to my 40D that I spent my money on a new 10-22mm EF-S lens instead (which was the same price as a used 5D).
5D Mark III, 40D, 1V.  Bunch of strobes, lenses and other bits.
They're, their, there, it's, its, too, to, than, then, you're, your.  One lens, two lenses, the lens's aperture.

katwil

  • Guest
Re: is the 40D still a good one for 400$
« Reply #40 on: March 31, 2012, 07:38:30 PM »
Correct me if I'm wrong, but a 40D doesn't give "extra reach" compared with a 5D2. With the same lens, a cropped 5D shot will get the same (or better) effective resolution). In fact, doesn't the 5D2 have a greater "reach" than the 40D because it has twice the sensor resolution?

Please correct me if I'm wrong. Thanks.

Yes, you are absolutely correct.  In the course of shooting a weeklong vacation or a half dozen spring training baseball games I’ll usually get about 1,000 images.  I simply don’t have enough time to devote to a lot of post-process activities.  Cropping down a few dozen images from FF would probably make sense.  I prefer to get the image I want from the camera rather than through post-production.

Aglet

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1081
    • View Profile
Re: is the 40D still a good one for 400$
« Reply #41 on: March 31, 2012, 07:50:08 PM »
40D is still one of my most beloved cameras.  I won't sell mine any time soon.

- good ergonomics
- easy to use, especially if it's your first DSLR
- good image quality with that "certain something" feel that later crop bodies didn't provide for me
- good noise characteristics from base to 800 iso and can even use 1600 and 3200 if IQ isn't as big an issue.
- your best $ value these days if you find a clean one and don't need video or more MP

I just printed a 36x24" shot for a customer that I took with the 40D and 70-200mm f/2.8L IS, handheld, 200 ISO.  At normal viewing distance (5ft) it still looks impressive.

grab a few extra batteries and some decent CF cards and you'll have a ball with it and some of the decent kit-glass you can pick up 2nd-hand for cheap these days.

40D seems to have a strong AA filter on it so expect to have add a little sharpening to some images to get the most from it.

AvTvM

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1126
    • View Profile
Re: is the 40D still a good one for 400$
« Reply #42 on: March 31, 2012, 08:41:33 PM »
I am curretnly using a 7D and before that I had the 40D - it was good back then, but had its shortcomings, especially the really pedestrian AF system. 

If I was looking for a used DSLR in that price range, I would try to get a used Nikon D300 for just a little more - say  around 500. It is a way better camera in really every respect. IQ, AF, metering, speed, responsivenss, sealing .. everything one or even two 2 notches above the 40D and 50D. Get a Nikon 18-105 with it and you have the best and most versatile low budget kit available today. Or if you prefer primes, try the cheap but excellent 35/1.8.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: is the 40D still a good one for 400$
« Reply #42 on: March 31, 2012, 08:41:33 PM »

prestonpalmer

  • Guest
Re: is the 40D still a good one for 400$
« Reply #43 on: March 31, 2012, 09:05:16 PM »
I still keep my 40D in the back of my camera bag as an emergency backup body!  Its a great little camera!

unruled

  • Guest
Re: is the 40D still a good one for 400$
« Reply #44 on: April 01, 2012, 08:16:34 AM »
I use it when I want extra reach from my lens kit and for some daytime shots (sort of like a reverse vampire, it only gets out when the sun is up).

Correct me if I'm wrong, but a 40D doesn't give "extra reach" compared with a 5D2. With the same lens, a cropped 5D shot will get the same (or better) effective resolution). In fact, doesn't the 5D2 have a greater "reach" than the 40D because it has twice the sensor resolution?

Please correct me if I'm wrong. Thanks.

Aside from the approach of getting things right in camera, I wonder which of the two methods would provide higher IQ (at low ISO anyway). I somehow imagine that cropping in the file would yield a less sharp image, but I've never tried. Could anyone shed light on this?

canon rumors FORUM

Re: is the 40D still a good one for 400$
« Reply #44 on: April 01, 2012, 08:16:34 AM »