40D or 5D?

Breaker

Breaker

Messages
376
Edit My Images
No
Why do good things always seem so complicated?

After suffering the theft of my 10D a couple of weeks ago (along with my brand new Tamron 17-50mm f2.8 :( ) I had opted for a 40D replacement, and was sorely looking forward to getting my hands on it next time I'm across in Hong Kong.

Suddenly, out of nowhere, a friend of mine offered me his nearly new, pristine, <5,000 exposures Canon 5D, for the same price as a new 40D.

What do I do?

Would love to go full frame, but it's not that important for me, and as I'm trying to get into candids, to be honest I'd probably miss the 1.6 crop factor.

I've heard the 5D is being replaced sometime in the not so distant future, but since that's not an option, it doesn't really matter (apart from make me drool when the specs come out).

So all in, when the price is the same, and FF isn't really that big a deal, is it really worth the same money as the 40D. Resolution is greater, but not by that much. Only 3 FPS, and no anti dusk mech. Is the build and superior (?) image quality worth it for a camera which is now 3 years old?

Anyone?
 
Do it do it do it.

The 5D images, in my own opinion and from having owned both FAR better those of the 40D. It's not a resolution thing, it's just something about the full frame sensor that produces amazing pictures.

Fret not about a 5D replacement either, the 5D won't stop being a great camera the minute it's replacement is announced!

Cheers,
James
 
Dude get hold of that 5D even if you don't intend to keep it, 5Ds usualy go for over a grand! Or I will buy it!

As far as the 40D vs 5D debate goes, they way I see it is that the 40D and 5D are kinda similar to the 1D and 1Ds in the way that the 40D is a croppped, cheaper body and the 5D is a more expensive, full frame. Kinda similar price ratios aswel.

Yep there are strong rumours for a new 5D replacement as it's well overdue for one, but Canon have basically said the opposite - that the 5D dosen't need a replacement yet so they won't make one. Could be just making it up to throw everyone off but noone really knows at the moment.

The thing that makes the 5D worth it's cost is pretty much only the high-quality, low noise full frame sensor. The 40D is better in almost every other way. There are slight differences in the body (the 5D is slightly bigger, but not by much) but really it's just the sensor as the 5D is over 2 and a half years old.

But i'd go for it, the 5D really is an excellent camera, i'm looking to get one in the not too distant future.
 
Grab the 5D mate, you will miss the 1.6x crop as it reduces your reach on longer lenses *but* it does open up a whole new world of wide :)

What lenses do you have [if any] as it won't take and EF-S lenses.
 
i've played with the 5D for model based work.
it's a thing of mechanical lovliness. Unless you are into sports photography, for the FPS and crop factor, then go for a 5D. It doesnt' have live view but that's more of a gimmick I think
 
My lenses

Tamron 17-50 f2.8
Canon 35 f2
Canon 50 f1.8
Canon 85 f1.8
Canon 24-105 f4 L

I think that I am going to miss the crop factor, but I'm going to give the 5D a shot anyway. Given the price I'm paying for it I should be able to have a play, and if I don't like it, sell it for the same amount and pick up a cheap 40D from Hong Kong.

I don't tend to use the multi-frame capture, doesn't really suit my shooting style, so I can imagine I can live without, and live view never really appealed to me anyway.

My major concern is to do with the age of the technology involved. Three years is a long time in digital camera world.
 
I am not sure if the 17-50mm F2.8 will work it might be worth checking out although the 24-105mmL is meant to be the perfect partner for a 5d
 
Hi there I am a pro photographer earning a living photography.The one thing i will say about Eos digital cameras is that for years flash photography has been a bit hit & miss. Even using the dedicated flashguns. Now things have changed with the new digicIII proceassor that canon are using in the 40D, 450D, 1D III & 1Ds III. I own a 40D and 1Ds III and what a difference the new processor has made. I now do not waste any time correcting exposure and it is head and shoulders above anything i have used in the past. Forget pixels consistency is what i am after and other than the pixel count you would not know the difference between the exposure consistancy in either camera.You say you are worried about the age of the 5D three years is an age in this game i would say anything with a digic III processor so 40D wins.

Sorry if you think i have put a spanner in the works but just take all the advice from this forum and you are the only one who can make the decision.
 
Apart from the sensor, yes, i'd agree that the 40D is better. In pretty much every way.

I'v used a 5D alot, and have a 40D myself and the difference is huge, the 5D can make up for the fact that it's old and most of the features are practically outdated (and better in the 40D) by having a very good sensor.

I don't agree that 'anything with a digic III processor wins', the 5D can take FAR greater quality photos than the 40D, even without all the extra and improved features of the 40D.

Oh and yeah the Digic III processor is awesome, can't wait until they shove one in a 5D.
 
Brianb said:
I'm sure you will find the attached of interest, if your thinking about the 5D, the 5D MkII.

Brian

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1032&message=27125455
Click to expand...

Pretty much what I was expecting the 5D MKII's specs to be...except the weather sealing...can't see Canon doing that on a 5D to be honest...

And I doubt whoever posted that will actually have somekind of source within Canon, just yet another person speculating on the new model but making it seem like they have the 'inside info' so that people will take more notice of them.
 
Paolo said:
............. A case for the 40D
Click to expand...

TBH, I thought this would be pretty much what everyone was going to say. I was really surprised that the vast majority seemed to favour the good ol' 5D.

I use a 5D quite a bit for jobs when I need a reasonable quality output but have to keep the RAW file to a smallish size. It performs well enough and over the last 6 months or so it's earned quite a bit of respect from me in terms of keeping up with the pace and living in my world where kit HAS to perform and doesn't get coddled.....at all. :LOL:

I still would have expected that 3 years of boffin time at canon would have improved on the image quality, from a 1.6 or ff sensor. :shrug:
 
Forgetting the forecasted 5DII for a moment as this has been rumoured for well over 12 months now. I don't think you will go far wrong with the 5D, however you do need to consider if it's right for you. Will your shots suffer because of the lesser reach? Can you handle the additional weight? Do you need to change all or just some of your lenses?

Now don't get me wrong, I wholeheartedly support the 5D and would reccomend it to anyone. You just need to make an informed decision. Personally [depending on price point] I would buy it and try it for a while, don't just give it a week as it's a steep learning curve.

Most of all enjoy whichever you buy :)
 
I've been using DIGIC II cameras professionally for a long time now, and have had no such exposure problems, just to balance out that argument. The 5D, 20D and 30D have all performed fantastically. The 40D performed just as well, but at no point did I marvel at how well it handled exposure...that's MY job ;)

Cheers,
James
 
I've got a 5D and a 20D and I love the 5D. I don't care if it is three years old, heck my mamiya 645 is probably 20 years old. It's the quality of the image that they are capable of that is my criteria for choosing them. I have the 24-105mm and they are absolutely perfect together. Since I bought them as a pair I hardly use my 70-200.
One reason for my purchase was a studio seminar that I went on. The pro was using a 5D and I had the 20D. Same shot, same exposure but his image was just so much better than mine. The only way you could possibly prise it out of my grubby mitts would be with a 1DMkIII.
 
I'd just like to say thanks to everyone who's taken the time to contribute to this thread. As a new member I'm genuinely delighted with the level of response, and the number of informed opinions put forward.

I've decided to go for the 5D, in part because I've already got the 24-105, and partially because I really want to have a go with a full frame camera, and this is realistically the only way that's ever going to happen in the near future.

Plus, as suggested, if I don't like it, I'll sell it and buy a 40D.

Thanks again!
 
5D is great, but expensive .... and you have to know how to use it perfectly . :) , if not 40D is great too and new.
 
Me and my lady have just got 5D's and we are very pleased with them (we figured that we could make the price now £1150 with discount, but it was unlikly that we could make a price of £2500 which we thought the new 5D would command), we are using 28/105 at the moment as we are shortly off to HK to get some new red band lenses. We are quite excited because if we are turning out good colour and focus with our present lenses then what are our shots with the new lenses likly to be like!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top