Review Canon 40D - special mention

dinners

dinners

In Memoriam
Messages
15,745
Name
Phil
Edit My Images
Yes
Ok - stop laughing.

I'm going back 8 years.

Took mine out yesterday.

Wildlife - 10mp - 9 point Af - centre point locked on well and @ 6.5 fps it's no slouch.

Everything about this camera was good at the time and still is.

ISO & AF - yes things have moved on but this camera still performs.

ISO may not go up so high compared to later models (by the book) but I'd say it beats the 50D and just winks 'told you so' to the 7D mark 1 as it were.
 
Last edited:
A good friend of mine uses a 40D and gets some excellent results. As Ansell Adams said many decades ago and it's still true today....

"The camera takes the photo, but the photographer makes it" - Ansell Adams, 1902-1984
 
i still have mine which i bought new in 2008 i'm reluctant to let it go it's a great camera
unfortunately it spends more time in a cupboard nowadays than out of it but the price they go for on the second hand market i'd rather keep it than let it go for a pittance

one of the very early photos i took with it


and the camera itself ( my attempt at a bit of humor ) :)


hope you don't mind
 
Most of my bird pics on here will have been taken with a 40d
 
I completely agree Phil. I'm fortunate to have some lovely equipment, including the latest full frame offerings - but the 40D remains the one camera I would not part with. It's a great piece of kit and served me well in my business for many years. It's now a backup, but my assistant uses it because he loves it as well.
 
I'm the same

I often toy with the idea of putting it on the classifieds as it's a back up for a back up but whenever I use it I'm reminded of how good it is.
 
I went from a 40D to a 50D and wished I'd kept the 40D.
Other than the focus micro-adjust feature of the 50D there really wasn't much else I preferred over the 40 and tbh, I think I got better results from the 40D.
For what they cost now they're hard to beat I reckon.
 
I still have mine
I would suggest It is a seminal camera
It changed what was on offer at the time, from just good enough to Excellent.
It has become the first true Digital classic.
 
minnnt said:
Just what you shot. :D
Click to expand...

I only got it out yesterday ready to pack as my spare for my trip to Sunart & Mull. There will certainly be pics to follow over and above what I've previously posted as my eldest will be snapping too.
 
Last edited:
I have had three 40D's, but to my mind the 5D deserves the classic label more (still got mine)
 
dinners said:
Ok - stop laughing.

I'm going back 8 years.

Took mine out yesterday.

Wildlife - 10mp - 9 point Af - centre point locked on well and @ 6.5 fps it's no slouch.

Everything about this camera was good at the time and still is.

ISO & AF - yes things have moved on but this camera still performs.

ISO may not go up so high compared to later models (by the book) but I'd say it beats the 50D and just winks 'told you so' to the 7D mark 1 as it were.
Click to expand...

What lens do you use on it?
 
When I'm not photographing weddings I generally use a 40D , which I got second hand from here 3 years ago replacing a 20D ( I still have one 20D), I'm toying with upgrading to a 50D or a 7D1 , but I shall probably keep my 40D or possibly get it IR converted
 
I dont know what others think. But I think a 40D paired with the canon 17 55 F2.8 is near perfect mine rarely come off.
 
Terrywoodenpic said:
I dont know what others think. But I think a 40D paired with the canon 17 55 F2.8 is near perfect mine rarely come off.
Click to expand...

:agree: I generally use a tamron 17-50 f2.8 on mine
 
I went from the 40d to the 70d at Christmas. I passed the 40 to my teenage daughter. I have mentioned that I'd like to swap. I've really tried to fall in love with the 70 but there's something missing from the processed images. I can't put my finger on it.

Dave.
 
The 40D is like a mk1 Ford Focus, might no longer be the best on the block, but it will do what you want it to if you're reasonable. I keep telling my friend to get one.
 
This is all really encouraging, I had a 60d and in a moment of madness sold it and bought a point and shoot, hated the change and sold it with the intentions on getting a 70d but money talks and so took on the most repeated comment on here which is but cheap body and spend money on glass!
So I've just received my 40d in the post today and was planning on pairing it with a canon 17-55 and probably the 55-250 STM looking forward to seeing what if can produce!
 
I've still got mine too, I upgraded to the 7D but kept the 40D
great camera mine never missed a beat and was well used the shutter count when I last checked was 67K
I read on an American site that the image quality of the 40D was as good as the 5D classic, don't know if that's true but up to ISO 800 the IQ was superb
 
mjb123 said:
What lens do you use on it?
Click to expand...

Tends to be used with EF 100-400mm f4.5-5.6L IS USM

Back when the 40D was my main camera I had a variety of EF-S lenses - main one being 17-55 f2.8 and also a Sigma 10-20

I got rid of my EF-S lenses when I moved to 5D2 and 1D3 so apart from a 50mm f1.8 it's all L lenses - 17-40mm / 24-105 / 24-70mm/ 100-400mm

They're not ideal with the 40D but it's not my main body.
 
Last edited:
Wozzaaah said:
I went from a 40D to a 50D and wished I'd kept the 40D.
Other than the focus micro-adjust feature of the 50D there really wasn't much else I preferred over the 40 and tbh, I think I got better results from the 40D.
For what they cost now they're hard to beat I reckon.
Click to expand...

I have the 40d and 50d (400d, 600d and 5d mk3) 5d mk3 being my main camera.

I found the 50d beat the 40d in a number of ways, less noise at higher ISO which was needed with sports at times. Larger image meant you could crop harder for the same results, useful if relying on the reach.

You won't notice the difference if you produce images for the web but large printed images I certainly noticed the differences comparing the same scene, same lenses.

Still use my 50d as a second body if I want reach, or shoot sports with two bodies, or rigging on cars at speed, along with the 400d. Walking pace gets the 5d mk3 ;)

40d is still a very capable camera in the right conditions. In Thailand earlier this year I bought some stunning prints from a student using a 300d and kit lens.
 
Last edited:
Every one loves a 40D

Perhaps not every one has noticed that it has improved with age...........True

When it came out Raw processors struggled to do much with the noise above about ISO 400
The latest processors like in Adobe cc and lightroom do a far better job, and made a very visible improvement.
But don't get too excited, they improve the results on all the other early cameras as well.
 
I absolutely loved my 40D, but after getting an A7R i wasn't using it, my friend bought it off me and now loves it just as i did. Am i right in thinking the later version lost the magnesium solid body, it gave it a great feel.
The only thing i wanted to better was ISO and resolution.
 
50D has magnesium body too. The 60D was the first xxD body to be polycarbonate.
 
Terrywoodenpic said:
Every one loves a 40D

Perhaps not every one has noticed that it has improved with age...........True

When it came out Raw processors struggled to do much with the noise above about ISO 400
The latest processors like in Adobe cc and lightroom do a far better job, and made a very visible improvement.
But don't get too excited, they improve the results on all the other early cameras as well.
Click to expand...

Oh I didn't think about that I will go and have a look at some of my old 40D shots as I'm using CC now
most I'm happy with with but there's one shot in particular that I had to use ISO 3200
thanks terry:)
 
If I look around my viewing room it's interesting to note that some of the nicest display pieces have come from my 40D days - looking great at 30x20 inches (even after some cropping). I think when it comes to good quality prints it's not just about megapixels - the low pixel density of the 40D seems to produce very smooth files which blow up nicely. This is not always the case with some of the later camera offerings which as someone said earlier, do have a digital look to them. I've never been able to tell the difference between the output from my 40D and my 5D mkI (aside from a bit more noise).
 
Have to agree about the lower pixel density, but prefer the colours from the 5D.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top