- Status
I think so. They are being sold for at least $500 on Craigslist. I would rather have that than a rebel, and I think a lot of people would also, which is why they are sold for that price used.
Upvote
0
R
revo2seven
Guest
reason for asking is I found one for 420 body only, since I don't have a dslr as of the moment and Im waiting for the 7DMkII or the replacement don't want to miss photography =) I was debating between the 40D and 50D but 50D is way too pricey add a bit more I can get the 60D
Upvote
0
G
Gatorsv80
Guest
Why wait for the 7DII? Get the 7D now for what? $1100-1200 used? The new 7DII will most certainly be $1700-2000.
I've had the 7D for 2 years. I don't think there's anything I'd upgrade to the 7DII for. (Until, of course, they blow me away with specs - maybe 5DII ISO performance?) I did have a 40D at one point. Great camera for $400.
I've had the 7D for 2 years. I don't think there's anything I'd upgrade to the 7DII for. (Until, of course, they blow me away with specs - maybe 5DII ISO performance?) I did have a 40D at one point. Great camera for $400.
Upvote
0
B
briansquibb
Guest
I think the 40D is THE classic xxD camera.
Providing you are happy with 10mp then:
- good IQ
- iso fine to about iso800, athough best at 400 and under
- over 6fps
- AF is fine in good light - better than the 5DII
I have just replaced mine with a 7D after nearly 4 years.
Here is a picture from my final set of images - my father's cat on 1st March 2012 using the 55-255
Providing you are happy with 10mp then:
- good IQ
- iso fine to about iso800, athough best at 400 and under
- over 6fps
- AF is fine in good light - better than the 5DII
I have just replaced mine with a 7D after nearly 4 years.
Here is a picture from my final set of images - my father's cat on 1st March 2012 using the 55-255
Attachments
Upvote
0
The 40D was my first "real" camera. It's a great bargain for the right photographer. In optimal conditions, it is a fantastic camera with great IQ. But for me, it's major drawback is the relatively poor ISO performance. After ISO600-800 or so the noise gets dirty, especially in color (B&W conversion can help sometimes). This camera needs fast glass to work in low light without a tripod. If you need low light performance, a fast prime is necessary.
Upvote
0
D
dturano
Guest
I wouldn't pay that much, its to be honest a fair price for the 40d which is a great but dated camera, while dated still functioning.
What cracks me up is like most people i was freaked when saw this, meanwhile the same lenses we use today produced the same great photos on great equipment. The only argument is that great "L" lens, some not all, predate digital cameras, and the lens are patiently waiting the cameras to come full circle and produce film images.
A 40d at $400 is not my issue, its just that for a few bucks more you can get a new camera, or used camera. for example, the rebel of the day IMHO outdoes the 40d, especially since this was an older crop camera but still a great camera, if it were not of rthe 50d and 7d many people would have loyally shot with it still. And of course the 60d
for example, i got a 5d mark III, I'm the type of person that will go in with the intention of buying something i researched but leave with the most expensive thing wasting time. , Which doesn't always work in my favor, just sometimes. But really manual settings, a 70-200mm II 2.8 or about any lens same quality and workability. MY OPINION - i take a shot in manual like i always do, so does shooter number 2, lest say anything, 5dmkII, 5dmkI, 7d, rebel etc.
"recon", where can i get a used 5dmk1 for $400? Im not being facetious, I'm curious, for $400 i would love to try out the old 5d. same thing for 1d.
What cracks me up is like most people i was freaked when saw this, meanwhile the same lenses we use today produced the same great photos on great equipment. The only argument is that great "L" lens, some not all, predate digital cameras, and the lens are patiently waiting the cameras to come full circle and produce film images.
A 40d at $400 is not my issue, its just that for a few bucks more you can get a new camera, or used camera. for example, the rebel of the day IMHO outdoes the 40d, especially since this was an older crop camera but still a great camera, if it were not of rthe 50d and 7d many people would have loyally shot with it still. And of course the 60d
for example, i got a 5d mark III, I'm the type of person that will go in with the intention of buying something i researched but leave with the most expensive thing wasting time. , Which doesn't always work in my favor, just sometimes. But really manual settings, a 70-200mm II 2.8 or about any lens same quality and workability. MY OPINION - i take a shot in manual like i always do, so does shooter number 2, lest say anything, 5dmkII, 5dmkI, 7d, rebel etc.
"recon", where can i get a used 5dmk1 for $400? Im not being facetious, I'm curious, for $400 i would love to try out the old 5d. same thing for 1d.
Upvote
0
U
unruled
Guest
I bought a 2nd hand 40d a few years ago, still use it and love it. It had 12k shots, haven't had issues. Its built very well, great ergonomics, liveview, great burst rate, good AF, great files.
ISO performance is better than you might expect, relatively clean to 800, but I am not afraid to go to 1600/3200 on it especially since noise reduction in lightroom has gotten so good.
for me if i replace it, its gonna be fullframe. I wont replace it with another crop cam.
ISO performance is better than you might expect, relatively clean to 800, but I am not afraid to go to 1600/3200 on it especially since noise reduction in lightroom has gotten so good.
for me if i replace it, its gonna be fullframe. I wont replace it with another crop cam.
Upvote
0
U
unruled
Guest
nikkito said:
wtf? either you have a dud or need to get your eyes checked. IQ depends on the lens far moreso than the body, and the screen is good. It may not be as highres as current screens are on DSLR's, but I can check focus on it without issues. Thats why you can zoom in.
Upvote
0
unruled said:
... iq other than iso noise & low dynamic resolution is really dependent on the lens, so up to iso 400 the 40d should do fine afaik. The colors do degenerate at higher iso speeds - but "colours are terrible" sounds like my grandma after shooting her garden with a 80s fuji quicksnap - there is something like postprocessing, you know?
Upvote
0
R
revo2seven
Guest
Marsu42 said:
Nothing serious at the moment I miss having a descent camera since I sold my Olympus I can't afford the 5D MkII's 7D is still too much for me and beside this is the very first Canon I'll be using. Mostlike for now it will be people and lansdscape street photography until the 7D comes below 1K atleast have the 40D as a spare camera
Upvote
0
tomscott
Photographer & Graphic Designer
I am still shooting with a 40D looking now to get a 5D MKIII
Honestly canon hasn't brought out a much better camera yet. The 50D is the same camera with more pixels crushed into the sensor so higher ISO is even worse than the 40D tbh there isn't much difference apart from the 50D had a better screen slightly slower FPS probably now a better options specifically for the screen but the 15mp doesn't really make a difference.
For people who had a 40D the 50D wasn't worth upgrading to.
The 7D again too many pixels the quality at iso100 is probably better on the 40D but the 7D has better low light capabilities so 1600 is useable unlike 1600 on the 40D. Also has much much much better AF so worth having specifically for that and using a bit more noise reduction.
The 7D is a worthy upgrade from a 40D but for me didn't hit the spot in IQ no poin in spending £1500 on a camera that wasn't a big step up in IQ.
In all honesty the 40D is my all time fav camera produced by canon it hits the all right spots and now they have basically brought out the 5D MKIII its is basically a supercharged full frame 40D so I am very happy
Grab one you won't be disappointed! Apart from the screen and high ISO but back in the day these were amazing.
The 60D is a pointless camera imo it was a complete piss take to the XXD community and a huge backward step. If you want a new crop go 7D if not 50D is a better option but if that feels too pricy get the 40D shoot with it till it dies and it won't owe you any money at all.
Few Shots
Royal Opera House, London by tom_scott88, on Flickr
BMW Z4M Coupe by tom_scott88, on Flickr
M3 by tom_scott88, on Flickr
Conison Water Feb 2011 by tom_scott88, on Flickr
Honestly canon hasn't brought out a much better camera yet. The 50D is the same camera with more pixels crushed into the sensor so higher ISO is even worse than the 40D tbh there isn't much difference apart from the 50D had a better screen slightly slower FPS probably now a better options specifically for the screen but the 15mp doesn't really make a difference.
For people who had a 40D the 50D wasn't worth upgrading to.
The 7D again too many pixels the quality at iso100 is probably better on the 40D but the 7D has better low light capabilities so 1600 is useable unlike 1600 on the 40D. Also has much much much better AF so worth having specifically for that and using a bit more noise reduction.
The 7D is a worthy upgrade from a 40D but for me didn't hit the spot in IQ no poin in spending £1500 on a camera that wasn't a big step up in IQ.
In all honesty the 40D is my all time fav camera produced by canon it hits the all right spots and now they have basically brought out the 5D MKIII its is basically a supercharged full frame 40D so I am very happy
Grab one you won't be disappointed! Apart from the screen and high ISO but back in the day these were amazing.
The 60D is a pointless camera imo it was a complete piss take to the XXD community and a huge backward step. If you want a new crop go 7D if not 50D is a better option but if that feels too pricy get the 40D shoot with it till it dies and it won't owe you any money at all.
Few Shots
Royal Opera House, London by tom_scott88, on Flickr
BMW Z4M Coupe by tom_scott88, on Flickr
M3 by tom_scott88, on Flickr
Conison Water Feb 2011 by tom_scott88, on Flickr
Upvote
0
tomscott said:
... but at the same time, the 60d price tag is lower than the xxd used to be - so I got one and I'm happy with it since it's the cheapest usable body (lcd screen, back dial) with the current crop sensor. And I need the 18mp's crop capability and am happy with the added resolution for macro shots. Personally, the 7d premium wasn't worth it to me for the added features and since it doesn't run magic lantern.
Upvote
0
the 40d is a good camera. I had one, and it was good. At the time it was the poor man's 1dmk3, with very good performance. Now it seems some consider it as some piece of junk that'll be to limiting to a real photographer. That's just silly talk from people who like to buy gear instead of use it. The Af, LCD, FPS, all around speed, build, live view, all are good. I would take it over the 50d, and probably over the 60d unless i needed video.
Upvote
0
At the risk to be stoned to death by the elitist group, could I suggest you to look into the Rebel T3 (any stone yet...?). I know, I know, it's a bit cheap to talk Rebel here. Still, body only (if that's possible anyway) would be in your price range. In the digital age, 5 years is quite a lot. It won't be long until your 40D becomes grandpa. Consider also the sunk investment: in 2 years time, it's value will turn to dust while a recent rebel will still sell. DP technology has made great advances over the last few years. Today, all cameras are good. Besides, you get 2 more MP's and video ... Also, if you are to use it as a second camera besides your anticipated 7DII, you'd better carry something light, easy and inconspicuous. For street shots, Rebel's rock.
Upvote
0
- Status
