Canon 30D update

[colincurry]

I have a Canon 30D which gives very good results subject to operator error and asking too much (especially in terms of reach) with my 100-400.

I have researched the 50D but have ruled that out as IMHO the jury is still out and the file size is colossal (along with the increased price).

The other option is the 40D (I have several Canon and Canon fit lenses and so would not wish to cross over to the dark side). By shopping carefully, the price is not too extortionate.

I have looked at all the reviews and these suggest that it might be worthwhile updating - larger screen, higher pixel count that might aid cropping of distant birds etc and an alleged faster AF speed; plus better picture results.

This all sounds pretty wonderful. I am aware of the ERR99 problem. I wonder if any of you pragmatic WABers have made this change and what you think of it?

Look forward to hearing from you....

Thanks

Colin

[glsammy]

As a 40D user, I'm one that's not so sure about the wonderful AF on it. In certain circumstances it struggles to lock onto subjects you would have thought it should be OK with.
When I first mentioned this on other sites I was told it was probably me that was the problem..Quite possible no doubt, but I then found a reviewer who found exactly the same problem here: Canon EOS 40D Digital Camera - Full Review - The Imaging Resource!
In most cases the AF is fine and fast but in others it really struggles, especially when the subject is head on and coming towards you. I've recently had to use my 20D and I've found that to be better in that one area.
Apart from that I can't fault the camera. 95% of the time the AF works perfectly.

[LCPete]

Hi I went from the 350D to the 40D not quite what you are thinking of doing but am really happy with the 40D
I use it with our 100-400L great combination
Pete

[matt_xyz]

I have both a 30D and a 40D Colin and I do prefer the 40D. It is a very nice camera in my opinion. The main benefits are the Liveview (good for macro), larger screen, sensor cleaner and extra pixels. I also think the image quality is superior, but this might be just my perception.

I'm interested to read Graham's views on the AF. I must admit I've found the problems he describes with all 3 Canon bodies that I've owned (400D, 30D and 40D). They all seem to struggle to lock on in certain circumstances, I put it down to my poor technique and/or less than perfect AF on consumer bodies. I can't say I've found the AF on the 40D to be noticeably worse than the 400D or 30D, but then again I don't take anything like as many in-flight shots as Graham so I bow to his greater experience here

Matt

[JeffH]

Colin, for what it's worth I know of one leading professional who rates his 50D as being as good as his 1D pro bodies, and all those extra pixels will aid the cropping of distant birds even more

I know what you mean about file sizes but with computer/camera memory being so cheap these days, is that really an issue?

Jeff
(Schedule 1 Licence holder for Kingfishers and Barn Owls)

[Jim Ford]

Dpreview didn't think the 50D was a great improvement over the 40D:

"We're by no means saying the 50Ds image quality is bad but it's simply not significantly better than the ten megapixel 40D. In some areas such as dynamic range and high ISO performance it's actually worse and that simply makes you wonder if the EOS 50D could have been an (even) better camera if its sensor had a slightly more moderate resolution."

Full review here:

Canon EOS 50D Review: 31. Conclusion: Digital Photography Review

Jim

[glsammy]

Originally Posted by matt_xyz

I have both a 30D and a 40D Colin and I do prefer the 40D. It is a very nice camera in my opinion. The main benefits are the Liveview (good for macro), larger screen, sensor cleaner and extra pixels. I also think the image quality is superior, but this might be just my perception.

I'm interested to read Graham's views on the AF. I must admit I've found the problems he describes with all 3 Canon bodies that I've owned (400D, 30D and 40D). They all seem to struggle to lock on in certain circumstances, I put it down to my poor technique and/or less than perfect AF on consumer bodies. I can't say I've found the AF on the 40D to be noticeably worse than the 400D or 30D, but then again I don't take anything like as many in-flight shots as Graham so I bow to his greater experience here

Matt

I should explain what I've found with the 40D that I haven't seen with the 20D.

You see a subject in the distance coming towards you and get it slap in the centre. The lens refuses to focus correctly, hunting backwards and forwards. I've even had eight consecutive shots where the subject was slap in the centre, yet not one was in focus. This was a rare one off, it's usually not that bad,but I can have a range of shots where 50% will be out of focus. The funny thing is the better the light the worst it seems to be.
If there's any angle to the subject, then it usually will focus correctly.
It's not the lens as this simply doesn't happen with my 20D which is far more reliable in those circumstances as I've found out lately.

I still rate the 40D and I'll be glad to get it back from repair, hopefully on Monday. As Matt said, the Live view mode is extremely useful for macro work.
I'm trying to get hold of a 1D Mark II N but I'll still keep my 40D to use with my 150mm and my MP-e65mm.

[colincurry]

I borrowed Cordless Dave's 40D today but really should have bothered - the weather was so gloomy and perhaps I should have tried a higher ISO.

Hope for some sun later in the week. Will keep you posted.

Colin

[colincurry]

I managed to get out and try Dave's 40D, but on every occasion the light was grim. I honestly can't say whether or not I would have got better results than if I had used my 30D. I do like the larger screen, it does seem to AF that tiny bit quicker, I did not have chance to try the live screen but can see how this would help with macro (as on a bridge camera). I did use ISO 400 throughout which is higher than I normally go - a hangover from my Panasonic bridge camera days when 200 was the tops.

Here are a few examples - see the thread under Photography technique - focusing with a 40D for some more.


It was really dark and floodwater everywhere - a waste of a day really as I was very limited as to where I could physically go





The best of several shots on another dark afternoon - the sun went in immediately after I had biked about 100 yards from home and never came out again. The owl squealed when it saw me - hardly surprising.



These were taken on a walk from St Ives to Houghton Mill and back - the promised sun stayed in.

The coot was very close and too good a chance to miss



This robin was very close to the path



The grebe happily fished quite close and was co-operative



The bullfinch was very high up and about 35 feet away and against what light there was



Not really a keeper, but an interesting exercise.

All in all, and because of the light, the jury is still out. I took some shots from the garden today in very good light and it will be interesting to compare.

Colin

[Jim Ford]

Ken Rockwell makes a compelling case for the D40 being good enough for most peoples needs for a DSLR:

Recommended Cameras

Whoops - I've just noticed the thread discusses the _Canon_ 40D!

Hmm 40D/D40 - Canon/Nikon - confusing!

Jim