Canon 40D!!!!

[lukegarnz]

Oh my god i just got my new Canon 40D delivered today and i have to say it's amazing. I've upgraded from a 300D ready for when i start my degree in photography next september. I've only been messing about with it getting to know my way around it but thought i had to put something on here incase there are people trying to decide whether to get one. If you are considering it GET IT!!!

The huge screen is amazing and the features in it are so good. Hopefully once i get out with it i'll be able to stick some pics in the photo of the day forum.

Cheers
One happy canon owner!!

 

[harcosparky]

I definitely agree! ! !

My brother got one and let me play with it for a day. So I went out and bought one.

Hope to do some astrophotography with it tonight. If all goes well should be posting pics tomorrow!!!!!

I have had a 10D, currently own a 30D and 5D, the new 40D will replace the 30D. Not sure what I will do with the 30D, but it will be used somehow!

 

[Techguy172]

I have tried that Camera and was very impressed, enjoy your purchase.

 

[stagi]

Congrats!

 

[taylorwilsdon]

I'm teetering between the 40d or the d300 to replace my current 30d. Ugh... the decisions life throws at us

 

[brad.c]

Major case of the envies. Like you, I have a 300D, and am lusting for:
- USB 2.0
- Live Preview
- Instant power-up

That said, if I could afford the 40D, I'd seriously think about upgrading from the consumer glass first.

 

[magiic]

Good to hear you are liking it. I have a 400D but have been considering selling it and buying a 40D.

 

[harcosparky]

I'm teetering between the 40d or the d300 to replace my current 30d. Ugh... the decisions life throws at us

Hey I just got the 40D and it will replace the 30D.

I just now took a pic of the moon on a tripod. Take a look.

Lens: 75-300 IS
Focal Length: 300mm
Aperture: f16
Exposure: 1/60

Manual Focused using Live View at 10X <--- this is why I love the 40D

NOTE - I had to crop the image a tad because the file was too large for the web site.

 

[kitmos]

I'm teetering between the 40d or the d300 to replace my current 30d. Ugh... the decisions life throws at us

go for the 40d. You won't regret it.

 

[tttexxan]

D300 is in a different league all together...D300 more pro consumer camera with no green auto

go for the 40d. You won't regret it.

 

[Everythingisnt]

I'm teetering between the 40d or the d300 to replace my current 30d. Ugh... the decisions life throws at us

D300 is in a different league all together...D300 more pro consumer camera with no green auto

Tttexxan has it right.. While the 40D and D300 seem to share alot of specs on paper, the D300 is designed for more intensive and demanding work..

If I were you, and able to afford the D300, I would go for it. While the 40D is certainly an incredible camera, the D300 leads in a few features such as weather sealing, build quality, and speed.. Of course that's also why it costs 600 - 800 dollars more.

 

[taylorwilsdon]

Tttexxan has it right.. While the 40D and D300 seem to share alot of specs on paper, the D300 is designed for more intensive and demanding work..

If I were you, and able to afford the D300, I would go for it. While the 40D is certainly an incredible camera, the D300 leads in a few features such as weather sealing, build quality, and speed.. Of course that's also why it costs 600 - 800 dollars more.

Indeed. I owned the d300 for 3 months before the cost exceeded my interest in photography. Looking to go back that way with my stimulus check and otherwise. We'll see where I end up, I just ordered some new canon lenses but they should be easy to sell in the worst case scenario.

 

[harcosparky]

I find it odd in a way that whenever the Canon 40D is compared to the Nikon 300 in reviews, the 40D always ends up being the " recommended " camera.

Here is a quote from one such review ....

But given the Canon's excellent performance in the things that count, we'd call the match differently. The D300 surely gave us the most bang. But the EOS 40D gave us the most bang for the buck!

I did note the Nikon has a higher frame rate 8 fps to Canon's 6.5 fps -IF- you purchase the accessory grip. Without the grip the Canon is 6.5 fps to the Nikons 6 fps. The Nikon goes up to 3200 ISO where the Canon tops at 1600.

Sounds like a tough choice, I use the 40D and lately have been doing a lot of photography of the moon through a telescope.

Sounds to me like the pro's are saying the Canon is the better value.

For the price of the Nikon, you could opt for the 40D and get a real nice lens to go with it.

But you know how it goes, on here the Nikon fans will recommend Nikon, and Canon users recommend Canon. But when it gets down to reading reviews it seems the Canon is the recommended choice.

Oh by the way, before I purchases this Canon 40D I actually went and looked closely at two Nikon models ... the D80 and the D300. After all the hype I read on here about Nikon, I figured what the heck - I got $2,000 budget and it might be time to make a change.

I opted for the 40D, in my mind the Nikon D300 did not bring enough to the table to warrant the cost.

So I came home with the 40D, 28-135 IS, and a another 580EX flash unit.


CONGRATS to the OP of this thread in his excellent choice !!!!

 

[disdat]

Oh congrats!! I have been eying the 40D especially w/ that nice rebate. Alas, I think I need a few more photo stuff first.

I will have to wait. Maybe Christmas.

 

[Everythingisnt]

I find it odd in a way that whenever the Canon 40D is compared to the Nikon 300 in reviews, the 40D always ends up being the " recommended " camera.

Here is a quote from one such review ....


I did note the Nikon has a higher frame rate 8 fps to Canon's 6.5 fps -IF- you purchase the accessory grip. Without the grip the Canon is 6.5 fps to the Nikons 6 fps. The Nikon goes up to 3200 ISO where the Canon tops at 1600.

Sounds like a tough choice, I use the 40D and lately have been doing a lot of photography of the moon through a telescope.

Sounds to me like the pro's are saying the Canon is the better value.

For the price of the Nikon, you could opt for the 40D and get a real nice lens to go with it.

But you know how it goes, on here the Nikon fans will recommend Nikon, and Canon users recommend Canon. But when it gets down to reading reviews it seems the Canon is the recommended choice.

Oh by the way, before I purchases this Canon 40D I actually went and looked closely at two Nikon models ... the D80 and the D300. After all the hype I read on here about Nikon, I figured what the heck - I got $2,000 budget and it might be time to make a change.

I opted for the 40D, in my mind the Nikon D300 did not bring enough to the table to warrant the cost.

It depends on what you're using it for.. Many of the benefits of the D300 are hard to judge on paper.. above average weather sealing, good build, and an excellent focus module. For what I do these things are absolutely necessary..

 

[tttexxan]

Your right for the price the 40D is not bad...I read the article and review that harcosparky is refering to....However you might want to look at current mags on the shelf that are now leading to the D300 being far superior and rating in the professional league. The focus alone on this camera is 10 times better than the 40D. When shooting sports its important to track and be able to maintain that focus. 40D falls short of that.

Don't get me wrong here--- I think the 40D is a great camera but not in the same league....From what Im hearing Canon is attempting to close the gap in the near future. However Nikon keeps pulling ahead esp with the D3...ISO up to 6400 is Insane!!

The cleaner ISO up to 3200 is a major major plus also....If shooting anything low light you know what Im talking about. ISO on the 40D is good till about 1600. So 3200 gives you faster shutter speeds and larger ap when counts.

Lastly a plus (if you want to look at it) the 40D has green auto modes so the wife and kids can pick it up and use when they fancy...
That is a negative in my book------With my D300 no green auto modes so wife and kids don't want to touch or take the time to learn...
Thats a bonus in my book : >) NOOOOO Touchy my camera : >)

Either way though its the photographer that counts and your working knowledge of Photoshop.....
I still believe you can be a horrible photographer, but if your a master at photoshop ANYTHING-----I mean ANYTHING is possible

 

[harcosparky]

Who really shoots at 3200? 1600?

I tend to keep it below 800 and use fast glass.

If the little green square bothers a user, they can always put the dial on [M].

Photoshop ???? Photoshop is to photography, what caulk is to carpentry.

It is interesting but " Photography 101 " is still taught ( at local colleges ) using ... OMG ---> FILM

As far as Nikon pulling ahead, well it's about time. What has it taken them? Twenty years to catch up? :lol: ( I remember the first Autofocusing cameras ) Oh god it was horrible, everyone but Canon had hideous humps and mechanical linkages to make their camera auto-focus. Canon had vision and made the body of the lens, the focusing motor.

The good photographers " do it in the camera " .... all others " do it in Photoshop! " I love the ability to take an image from the camera to the printer, and skipping photoshop altogether. Heck the only reason to go to Photoshop would be to crop / compress an image for use on the internet.

But again this thread is about the Canon 40D and the OP being happy with his camera.

Kudos to him for his very wise choice!

 

[taylorwilsdon]

Who really shoots at 3200? 1600?

Its too bad we don't have a raises hand smiley because that would be appropriate. I'd say 1/3rd of my shots are at f2.8 or wider at ISO 1600 or higher (usually 3200).

Afaik Canon 40d goes to ISO 3200 (High) and the d300 goes to 6400 (HI 1).

 

[RaceTripper]

Who really shoots at 3200? 1600?

I shoot 1600 for motorsports (night racing). I would shoot even higher if I had lower noise. I plan to upgrade to a D300 when I can (have a D200 now). Not only does it have improved ISO quality, but it has vastly improved color, dynamic range, and autofocus. Every D2X shooter I know says the D300 is as good if not better than the D2 and the D300 is the body to get if you aren't getting a D3.

 

[tttexxan]

Yeah Photography means light and the cleaner pics at Higher ISO's is whats selling cameras these days...I heard that Nikon is going to release another camera soon that even goes beyond the 6400 ISO realm. Funny thing ISO of 6400 on the D3 looks like and ISO of 800-1600 on a Canon or D80 Nikon...Its really that good!! The D300 ISO at 3200 is about like the Canon and other Nikon cameras at about 800-1600. Your gaining stops of light!! So clean ISO is very important if you shoot sports, weddings and want to avoid flash all together...

For example I was shooting with a D3 using a 70-200 VR inside low light gym with an ISO of 6400. I was getting shutter speeds well over 1/500 easy with f stop of 5.6-8.
Most people are using f stops of 2.8 with Iso of 1600 or 3200 and shutter speeds are still only around 1/250 or maybe up to 1/500.
So the question is how much do you want in focus and do you want to get the picture that no one else can get...
The die hards will say AMEN

For the cost minded the 40D or the D80 (which the 40D needs to be compared to in the first place) can save you some bank...

Cudos to the OP for getting a great camera also

 

[AlaskaMoose]

It depends on what you're using it for.. Many of the benefits of the D300 are hard to judge on paper.. above average weather sealing, good build, and an excellent focus module. For what I do these things are absolutely necessary..

At twice or more the cost. A 40D body costs around $936.00 until mid July. For a more water tight Canon with a now famous IQ, one would pay $1,800 for a body, twice as much as a 40D.

 

[AlaskaMoose]

harcosparky: the 40D tops at 3200 ISO, too. However, I see no need for 3200 ISO.

 

[wheezy]

Noise is important to me, I shoot drag races and once the sun goes down, it's ISO 3200 or I don't get the shot. As much as I'd prefer the lesser noise of 800 or 1600, I just can't get a fast enough shutter to get anything worth keeping. And this is using either my 135 F2L or 50 1.8... so I'm plenty fast on the Aperture.

I'm using a 20D right now and plan to upgrade to the 40D in a few weeks... and I'm very excited! And yes, the 40D can do ISO 3200, you just need to enable it in the Custom Functions menu.

 

[AlaskaMoose]

Noise is important to me, I shoot drag races and once the sun goes down, it's ISO 3200 or I don't get the shot. As much as I'd prefer the lesser noise of 800 or 1600, I just can't get a fast enough shutter to get anything worth keeping. And this is using either my 135 F2L or 50 1.8... so I'm plenty fast on the Aperture.

I'm using a 20D right now and plan to upgrade to the 40D in a few weeks... and I'm very excited! And yes, the 40D can do ISO 3200, you just need to enable it in the Custom Functions menu.

The 40D is not bad at all for a little over $900.00, but the rebates end by mid July, I believe.

 

[hubristol]

Congrats on your new purchase.

I just sold my 10D, but hopefully the next time I purchase a dSLR it'll at least be a 20D.