# dslr recommendations, thinking of an EOS 40D



## SeanC (May 12, 2007)

any other recommendations you guys might have in the price range of a 40D? Or is it the king of its class?


----------



## ktc (Jan 10, 2005)

What do you need in a camera?


----------



## SeanC (May 12, 2007)

ktc said:


> What do you need in a camera?


I already have a Canon G9, probably the best point-and-shoot around, but whenever I want to increase the ISO just a little, noise gets pretty bad. I want to be able to take high quality pictures in low light conditions. That's basically what I don't like about point-and-shoots. I am a noob when it comes to photography, but being a physicist, I know some of its terminology. So please take it easy on me


----------



## 335i (Feb 23, 2007)

I would say you're jumping quite a bit from a point and shoot to the 40D. Personally, I suggest looking at something you are going to be able to use comfortably. If money is an object, you could probably find several cameras for less than half the price that would improve your current situation and wouldn't break the bank. You'd also have money left over for lenses, which are more important in my book. If money is no object, I suggest the D300 with some ED glass as an alternative. It's the competitor to the canon. I myself prefer canon point and shoots, and Nikon DSLRs.


----------



## ktc (Jan 10, 2005)

cngzsn said:


> I already have a Canon G9, probably the best point-and-shoot around, but whenever I want to increase the ISO just a little, noise gets pretty bad. I want to be able to take high quality pictures in low light conditions. That's basically what I don't like about point-and-shoots. I am a noob when it comes to photography, but being a physicist, I know some of its terminology. So please take it easy on me


Ah, okay, that helps define the scope quite a bit. If you can bare with 1 more question, that would be:

Is your low-light condition shooting mostly:
1) Low light but stationary scenes with available light + tripod
2) Low light but moving scenes (ie: concerts) with available light
3) Low light but flash photography

Nikon is still the king of flash photography, but Canon is getting there. However, the difference between #1 and #2 would be how much of your budget you need to put into the lens. For example, a lot of concert photography tends to go for those f/1.8, f/1.2 lenses. For #1, which I do, I ended up buying a higher end Canon because for those 10+ minute exposures the camera can do a "dark frame subtraction" to get rid of its own thermal noise; in such case lens speed doesn't matter anymore.

335i brings up a valid but usually underconsidered point, which is that most people put too much emphasis on the camera body and not the lens system. Back in the pre-digital days, one might have $10k worth of lenses but only a $500 SLR body.


----------



## Jon Shafer (Dec 15, 2001)

Canon rep says 5D going to drop in MSRP to $1,200 shortly. 

This would be a better choice than 40D.


----------



## BahnBaum (Feb 25, 2004)

Jon S. said:


> Canon rep says 5D going to drop in MSRP to $1,200 shortly.
> 
> This would be a better choice than 40D.


I'm curious Jon, but why?

For the average shooter, what's the advantage of a full frame pro-sumer body vs a cropped-sensor body with lots of useful bells and whistles like live view and sensor cleaning. Not to mention Digic III vs Digic II processors?

I'm actually going to be looking to buy a 5D, but I've been shooting enough to know that I want a FF, and it will slot nicely with my 1DMkIIn. But I'm not sure it's the body I'd recommend someone start off with.

Alex


----------



## Boile (Jul 5, 2005)

cngzsn said:


> any other recommendations you guys might have in the price range of a 40D? Or is it the king of its class?


The King of the Class is recognizably not the 40D.
It belongs to the Nikon D300, although a bit more expensive, but definitely in the same class.


----------



## Boile (Jul 5, 2005)

BahnBaum said:


> I'm curious Jon, but why?
> 
> For the average shooter, what's the advantage of a full frame pro-sumer body vs a cropped-sensor body with lots of useful bells and whistles like live view and sensor cleaning. Not to mention Digic III vs Digic II processors?
> 
> ...


The OP is concerned about ISO and noise. 
A FF body addresses that squarely. :thumbup:


----------



## Chris90 (Apr 7, 2003)

Can some of the DSLRs show you in the viewfinder what's actually in focus, based on the aperture setting, instead of everything being in focus?

I looked for that on Nikon's site, but couldn't tell.


----------



## Cliff (Apr 19, 2002)

BahnBaum said:


> I'm curious Jon, but why?
> 
> For the average shooter, what's the advantage of a full frame pro-sumer body vs a cropped-sensor body with lots of useful bells and whistles like live view and sensor cleaning. Not to mention Digic III vs Digic II processors?
> 
> ...


A replacement is in the works, presumably. The 5D was released nearly 3 years ago. That's an eternity in this product space. They probably also expect to be feeling some competitive heat from Nikon soon.


----------



## Boile (Jul 5, 2005)

Chris90 said:


> Can some of the DSLRs show you in the viewfinder what's actually in focus, based on the aperture setting, instead of everything being in focus?
> 
> I looked for that on Nikon's site, but couldn't tell.


It's called Depth of Field.
The Nikon D300 and other top tier bodies have it.


----------



## Cliff (Apr 19, 2002)

Chris90 said:


> Can some of the DSLRs show you in the viewfinder what's actually in focus, based on the aperture setting, instead of everything being in focus?
> 
> I looked for that on Nikon's site, but couldn't tell.


Yes, starting with the D80. It's called depth of field preview. You might find this a useful resource:
http://www.bythom.com/currentdslr.htm


----------



## Chris90 (Apr 7, 2003)

Cliff said:


> Yes, starting with the D80. It's called depth of field preview. You might find this a useful resource:
> http://www.bythom.com/currentdslr.htm


Cool thanks. That's one feature that would be worth trading up my D50 for (I'm sure there are others).


----------



## SeanC (May 12, 2007)

thanks to all of you guys! all good points..

I have considered D300 and read its reviews and comparisons to a 40D, but its price was a little high for me, so I had to back up a little. But with 5D dropping to $1200, I might as well go with it. I guess I will have to do a lot of reading until that day comes..


----------



## Cliff (Apr 19, 2002)

cngzsn said:


> thanks to all of you guys! all good points..
> 
> I have considered D300 and read its reviews and comparisons to a 40D, but its price was a little high for me, so I had to back up a little. But with 5D dropping to $1200, I might as well go with it. I guess I will have to do a lot of reading until that day comes..


Of course for now, that price drop is merely a rumor. Be aware that full-frame sensors are not very tolerant of inexpensive lenses either (in other words, learn to like buying L glass).

On the Nikon side, the D200 or the D80 are the competitors to the 40D. There is a rumor on Hogan's site about a D80 successor (D90) being released in June. Based on previous models, it would probably encompass many of the D300 features at a lower price point. Compare the D80 to the D200 and you'll get the idea.


----------



## Jon Shafer (Dec 15, 2001)

BahnBaum said:


> I'm curious Jon, but why?
> 
> For the average shooter, what's the advantage of a full frame pro-sumer body vs a cropped-sensor body with lots of useful bells and whistles like live view and sensor cleaning. Not to mention Digic III vs Digic II processors?
> 
> ...


For $1,200 it would be a steal. I have many friends who own them and they rave about them, not what I'm hearing about 40D...


----------



## ktc (Jan 10, 2005)

cngzsn said:


> thanks to all of you guys! all good points..
> 
> I have considered D300 and read its reviews and comparisons to a 40D, but its price was a little high for me, so I had to back up a little. But with 5D dropping to $1200, I might as well go with it. I guess I will have to do a lot of reading until that day comes..


Cngzsn: While the 5D is very attractive, I would not recommend it for someone who is "going from a point-and-shoot to a 40D". It is a semi-pro/pro camera that, because of its resolving power, can be hard to learn photography with.

There was another thread here on B'fest where someone showed a picture of vignetting. Lens flaws tend to show up more on the periphery, and the 5D will reveal a lot more of that than the 40D. As Cliff pointed out, "get to love buying L lenses." Many people getting into dSLR for the first time does not want to end up having to spend another $2.5k in lenses within the first year. I know people who trade the same L lens because the 5D can show differences between copies of the same lens .

Depth of field preview should not make or break your buying decision. Whenever I use it, it's so dim (b/c the aperture closes down) that I wonder how many people actually base their shot on that feature? Learn the photography theory of the 1/3-2/3 fore-and-aft image plane, and to bracket your depth of field instead.

Just my opinion.


----------



## SeanC (May 12, 2007)

ktc said:


> Cngzsn: While the 5D is very attractive, I would not recommend it for someone who is "going from a point-and-shoot to a 40D". It is a semi-pro/pro camera that, because of its resolving power, can be hard to learn photography with.
> 
> There was another thread here on B'fest where someone showed a picture of vignetting. Lens flaws tend to show up more on the periphery, and the 5D will reveal a lot more of that than the 40D. As Cliff pointed out, "get to love buying L lenses." Many people getting into dSLR for the first time does not want to end up having to spend another $2.5k in lenses within the first year. I know people who trade the same L lens because the 5D can show differences between copies of the same lens .
> 
> ...


Keith, thanks for your comments. Even though I still have to catch up with your terminology , it sounds like you have legit points. As I currently understand it, what you are saying is that even though 5D is a superb camera, it would not be worth getting it unless accompanied by a great (usually meaning "expensive") lense that could unleash its full capabilities. %100 agreed :thumbup:

~Sean.


----------



## ktc (Jan 10, 2005)

Cliff said:


> It's called depth of field preview.


Regarding depth of field preview:

Many lenses have a DOF range built onto the focus plane indicator. If you look at your lens, there is a line that points to the focal distance, and that is surrounded by a series of lines next to it. They pretty much will tell you what range of distance is in focus for each aperture setting.


----------



## Boile (Jul 5, 2005)

ktc said:


> Regarding depth of field preview:
> 
> Many lenses have a DOF range built onto the focus plane indicator. If you look at your lens, there is a line that points to the focal distance, and that is surrounded by a series of lines next to it. They pretty much will tell you what range of distance is in focus for each aperture setting.


That's what people used in the old days of manual focus.
Nowadays, with auto-focus, you almost have to have (if you need such feature) a button to push and see the results, without looking at lens markings, which are no more than estimates.


----------



## Cliff (Apr 19, 2002)

ktc said:


> Regarding depth of field preview:
> 
> Many lenses have a DOF range built onto the focus plane indicator. If you look at your lens, there is a line that points to the focal distance, and that is surrounded by a series of lines next to it. They pretty much will tell you what range of distance is in focus for each aperture setting.


Not the newer lenses, it would seem, at least for Nikon glass. It's not a big feature for me, although I do use it if I feel the need.


----------



## ktc (Jan 10, 2005)

Boile said:


> That's what people used in the old days of manual focus.
> Nowadays, with auto-focus, you almost have to have (if you need such feature) a button to push and see the results, without looking at lens markings, which are no more than estimates.


That's where experiences comes in, my friend 

Given the prevalence of all the "front/back-focusing" problems I have been hearing, I wouldn't trust those systems without bracketing.


----------



## Boile (Jul 5, 2005)

ktc said:


> That's where experiences comes in, my friend
> 
> Given the prevalence of all the "front/back-focusing" problems I have been hearing, I wouldn't trust those systems without bracketing.


I agree. I wouldn't trust it for critical shots neither.
The first time I saw that depth of field feature was in my father's Nikon F3. I have it now in my D300. I have never used it in either camera. But that just reflects how I shoot. :dunno:


----------



## SeanC (May 12, 2007)

as per your suggestions, I decided to take my time on this whole DSLR deal, and try focusing on what I can do with the current gear that I have. I am posting a picture I took with my G9 a while ago, with the contrast increased just a tad. It probably needs a little more blending on the top left and top right corners to get rid of the white areas, but I'd appreciate if you could provide some input/suggestions on the current version.

Regards,
~Sean.


----------



## Boile (Jul 5, 2005)

You want critique on your hardware or your photographic skillz?
On the hardware... notice how the bright spots have a blueish ghost? There's a technical term for that, which escapes me now. 
If you're bothered by that, then a DSLR with a good lens will fix that for you.


----------



## SeanC (May 12, 2007)

^just the hardware would do it for now  Thanks for the comment. I did not even notice it as being a problem it until you mentioned..


----------



## Boile (Jul 5, 2005)

cngzsn said:


> ^just the hardware would do it for now  Thanks for the comment. I did not even notice it as being a problem it until you mentioned..


Yeah, the lenses on point&shoot are their Achiles heel.
Some of them aren't even glass. They're plastic.
Oh, that technical term is Chromatic Aberration.


----------



## 335i (Feb 23, 2007)

Take a peek at the Circuit City ad this week, there's D80 with a 18-135 lens for $999 - it will use the SD cards you have, and has a wealth of features you would use every day - very similar to the more expensive D200. The lens is decent as well, you'd most likely notice a marked improvement over your current P&S without breaking the bank - even look at a lens or two. The other 2 cameras were using CF, not SD.


----------



## SeanC (May 12, 2007)

335i said:


> Take a peek at the Circuit City ad this week, there's D80 with a 18-135 lens for $999 - it will use the SD cards you have, and has a wealth of features you would use every day - very similar to the more expensive D200. The lens is decent as well, you'd most likely notice a marked improvement over your current P&S without breaking the bank - even look at a lens or two. The other 2 cameras were using CF, not SD.


will do thanks! Although I've been a Canon guy so far (just like the design better, owned a cheap Nikon p&s before, and did not like it at all), Nikon has started to grow on me with their build quality and ISO performance.. But from all I've been reading so far, Canon's IQ is better compared to a similarly priced Nikon. It'll be a tough call..


----------



## 335i (Feb 23, 2007)

cngzsn said:


> will do thanks! Although I've been a Canon guy so far (just like the design better, owned a cheap Nikon p&s before, and did not like it at all), Nikon has started to grow on me with their build quality and ISO performance.. But from all I've been reading so far, Canon's IQ is better compared to a similarly priced Nikon. It'll be a tough call..


I think I've said it before, but I prefer canon P&S over Nikon, but Nikon DSLR's over Canon; Nikon glass is unparalleled, albeit expensive.

I think you'll be impressed with build quality of the newer Nikons (excluding the D40 and D40x). Only other thing similarly priced on Canon's side of the Fence would be the XTi, which is a cheaper build IMO, with lesser quality lens. The 30D would be a step up in price and quality over the XTi and D80. As far as noise, well, a wider aperture helps...


----------



## Chris90 (Apr 7, 2003)

cngzsn said:


> But from all I've been reading so far, Canon's IQ is better compared to a similarly priced Nikon. It'll be a tough call..


That's definitely not true, it's gonna depend more on the model and the lens. I'd pick whichever feels better in your hands - that was the Nikon D50 for me (over the too-small Rebel XT).


----------



## SeanC (May 12, 2007)

Chris90 said:


> That's definitely not true, it's gonna depend more on the model and the lens. I'd pick whichever feels better in your hands - that was the Nikon D50 for me (over the too-small Rebel XT).


haven't really been comparing the rebels with its competitors, but if you read the reviews on dpreview.com, that seems to be the case with dslrs priced over a grand. not saying all, but most. Nikon comes close when RAW images are considered... Similarly Nikon has an ISO advantage over the Canons in most of the comparisons.


----------



## ktc (Jan 10, 2005)

335i said:


> Nikon glass is unparalleled, albeit expensive.


:eeps:

The big guys (Nikon/Canon/Zeiss/Leica) are probably very very close nowadays. As I'm sure you know, if you pick up some of the top Canon lenses (135/2L, 85/1.2L, 200/2.8L, etc) they pretty much define tack-sharp.

Without getting into the entire N vs C thing, here is a good website that says everyone is excellent! :thumbup:
http://www.photodo.com/category_2.html


----------



## HW (Dec 24, 2001)

"where's nikon" :eeps: :angel:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/luisvieira/225587416/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/blue-moose/764781348/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/papadopoulos/385177139/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/franzlife/328008184/


----------



## Cliff (Apr 19, 2002)

HW said:


> "where's nikon" :eeps: :angel:
> 
> http://www.flickr.com/photos/luisvieira/225587416/
> http://www.flickr.com/photos/blue-moose/764781348/
> ...


Yup, Canon is the first choice among those who don't pay for their own equipment.


----------



## SeanC (May 12, 2007)

Cliff said:


> Yup, Canon is the first choice among those who don't pay for their own equipment.


is that a bad thing? :dunno:


----------



## Cliff (Apr 19, 2002)

cngzsn said:


> is that a bad thing? :dunno:


I guess it depends. Are your purchase decisions swayed by photos of sports photojournalists using lenses you can't afford (or at least involve a dollar commitment you'd be foolish to make given your current level of knowledge) and which they probably didn't pay for?


----------



## ktc (Jan 10, 2005)

Cliff said:


> Yup, Canon is the first choice among those who don't pay for their own equipment.


Eh you know they're all Tamron's painted white :rofl:


----------



## Cliff (Apr 19, 2002)

ktc said:


> Eh you know they're all Tamron's painted white :rofl:


Oh, I'm sure they're all Canon lenses. I've got around $7k invested in Nikon glass, but nothing exotic yet.


----------



## Jon Shafer (Dec 15, 2001)

At my local camera shop last week they had a minty 20D for $225. For what you'd pay for a 40D you could get that _plus_ a brand new 17-40 f/4 L and have a bit of cash to spare for filters, CF cards, ...etc.


----------



## jcatral14 (Aug 4, 2003)

cngzsn said:


> looks like big rebates are on the way by Canon:
> 
> http://www.unwir3d.com/887171/finally-canon-announces-us-spring-rebates


Yeah, I heard about it yesterday. As one poster on that site said, buy the 5D+24-105 combo and sell the lens for about 900 on Ebay and voila! 5D for ~1500 bucks  Very enticing...


----------



## SeanC (May 12, 2007)

jcatral14 said:


> Yeah, I heard about it yesterday. As one poster on that site said, buy the 5D+24-105 combo and sell the lens for about 900 on Ebay and voila! 5D for ~1500 bucks  Very enticing...


yeah I am thinking about that . anybody need a 24-105? :eeps:


----------



## Jon Shafer (Dec 15, 2001)

Does the 40D support custom functions? Using the back button for AF is a must-have option.


----------



## SeanC (May 12, 2007)

Jon S. said:


> Does the 40D support custom functions? Using the back button for AF is a must-have option.


yes, the 40D already has a dedicated AF button:










On the 5D, you have actually have to customize one of the buttons on the top right for that:


----------



## Jon Shafer (Dec 15, 2001)

cngzsn said:


> yes, the 40D already has a dedicated AF button:
> 
> On the 5D, you have actually have to customize one of the buttons on the top right for that:


That's cool. If you are shooting action in AI Servo mode, back button AF is the only way to go.

Does the 40D also allow you to switch back to standard one-shot AF on the shutter release button, or are you forced to use the back button always?


----------



## SeanC (May 12, 2007)

Jon S. said:


> That's cool. If you are shooting action in AI Servo mode, back button AF is the only way to go.
> 
> Does the 40D also allow you to switch back to standard one-shot AF on the shutter release button, or are you forced to use the back button always?


Both have the focus-lock on half-press if that's what you are asking.


----------



## Boile (Jul 5, 2005)

cngzsn said:


> yes, the 40D already has a dedicated AF button:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Is it just me or others are also bothered by the SET button in the middle of the big thumb wheel being rotated (not perfectly aligned horizontally)? :eeps:


----------



## Jon Shafer (Dec 15, 2001)

cngzsn said:


> Both have the focus-lock on half-press if that's what you are asking.


I'll try to be more specific. Are they both active simultaneously, or do you have a way to shut off focus lock on the shutter release and activate the back button exclusively?


----------



## SeanC (May 12, 2007)

Jon S. said:


> I'll try to be more specific. Are they both active simultaneously, or do you have a way to shut off focus lock on the shutter release and activate the back button exclusively?


hmm .. good question :dunno: can't tell it from the reviews. anybody?


----------



## Cliff (Apr 19, 2002)

cngzsn said:


> hmm .. good question :dunno: can't tell it from the reviews. anybody?


The reviews sort of have it, and the manuals are available online. It looks like you can separate af-on from the shutter in the custom function settings menus. On the 5D it is assigned to the * button, and the 40D has a dedicated af-on button.

FWIW, I have it set up to be separate from the shutter on my Nikon, which has dedicated af-on and ae-l/af-l buttons


----------



## ktc (Jan 10, 2005)

Jon S. said:


> I'll try to be more specific. Are they both active simultaneously, or do you have a way to shut off focus lock on the shutter release and activate the back button exclusively?


Yes, its custom function 4 on one of the last menus. My AF is exclusively on the * button for both vertical and horizontal.


----------



## SeanC (May 12, 2007)

Cliff said:


> The reviews sort of have it, and the manuals are available online. It looks like you can separate af-on from the shutter in the custom function settings menus. On the 5D it is assigned to the * button, and the 40D has a dedicated af-on button.
> 
> FWIW, I have it set up to be separate from the shutter on my Nikon, which has dedicated af-on and ae-l/af-l buttons


thanks.. I love the way they designed it on Nikon's.


----------



## F1Crazy (Dec 11, 2002)

cngzsn said:


> any other recommendations you guys might have in the price range of a 40D? Or is it the king of its class?


Have you made a decision yet, now that the 40D is $939.95 at several places?


----------



## SeanC (May 12, 2007)

F1Crazy said:


> Have you made a decision yet, now that the 40D is $939.95 at several places?


Nope, not yet.. Waiting for 5D, it still is not within reach as of yet. Though I am leaning more towards the 40D, since it has a lot more technology built-in (live view, etc.).. I may not purchase until the end of summer though. I believe those prices will not go up much for a long time, if any at all..


----------



## jcatral14 (Aug 4, 2003)

Pulled the trigger and got the 40D with the 17-40 L lens. Can't wait to get it :bigpimp:
Also got the grip and the 580EX2 flash.


----------



## BahnBaum (Feb 25, 2004)

jcatral14 said:


> Pulled the trigger and got the 40D with the 17-40 L lens. Can't wait to get it :bigpimp:
> Also got the grip and the 580EX2 flash.


Niceness. Where did you buy it from?

Alex


----------



## jcatral14 (Aug 4, 2003)

BahnBaum said:


> Niceness. Where did you buy it from?
> 
> Alex


Thanks Alex. I got it from B&H. It sure is a different place now. I remember when I first went to their store back in '86.


----------



## BahnBaum (Feb 25, 2004)

jcatral14 said:


> Thanks Alex. I got it from B&H. It sure is a different place now. I remember when I first went to their store back in '86.


I was there for the first time a couple of months ago. Cool place. I liked the conveyor distribution system...

Alex


----------



## SeanC (May 12, 2007)

jcatral14 said:


> Pulled the trigger and got the 40D with the 17-40 L lens. Can't wait to get it :bigpimp:
> Also got the grip and the 580EX2 flash.


congrats! Let us know how you like it..


----------

