Canon 40D?

[will82]

Hi Wondered if I could have some views.Previously looking at a Nikon D90 with 55-105 lens & 70-300 lens which I was looking about £1000, then a friend mentioned a second hand Cannon 40D but i never even considered canon until now

Will

 

[redhed17]

The 'Canon' 40D is a good camera, though a generation or two old now (still capable), but as with any camera purchase, try to get into a position to hold and try out the cameras, how they feel plays a big part.

 

[will82]

Thanks
40D 6.5FPS the new generations seemed to be slower even though MP are higher on the newer generations. Off to the shop on Saturday so will have a play.

 

[redhed17]

Thanks
40D 6.5FPS the new generations seemed to be slower even though MP are higher on the newer generations. Off to the shop on Saturday so will have a play.

In some ways the Canon xxD range peaked with the 50D and after that the xxD range was re-positioned in the market, losing some features such as a magnesium body, and as you've noticed, the frames per second amongst other things.

 

[Spiritflier]

With the xxD series, I think it peaked at the 40D! My daughter has my old 40D and I've had the 50D. In my own opinion, I've always thought that the image quality from the older camera was better.

Some of my favourite images were taken on the 40D so maybe I'm being a tad nostalgic but I'd certainly recommend one to anyone.

Si

 

[squishy]

I second the advice to see how they feel.

The D90 is also a superbly capable camera, some of it's technology is more recent than the 40D (slightly better ISO performance, wireless flash control), but the 40D has a metal body and a higher fps rate/larger RAW buffer (buffer = how many shots it can shoot in quick succession before having to slow down to write them to the card).
The only real deciding factor between the two for me would be how they feel in the hand.

Remember to budget for lenses, there is no point spending loads on a camera body then putting a really cheap lens on it.

If you want to save more money on the body to put towards the lens, the canon 20D and nikon D200 are even older choices, but both solid work horses of bodies, there are plenty of people still using them.

 

[will82]

Thanks Si, my friend wishes he never got rid of his 40D so think he felt the same. My other problem is which system to buy into Canon or Nikon, did think Nikon but then started considering speed and from what i believe canon seem quicker.

 

[will82]

squishy, if i went for canon I would be given 18-55 lens to start me off leaving £400 - £500 to spend on a lens.
Will definitely spend some time getting the feel of the cameras before making a purchase.

 

[cam1986]

Is the 40D a good prospect even though it is old?

 

[squishy]

yes, it's still very capable. Just look at the number of people still shooting with it.

One of the best camera choices for sub-£400 in my opinion.



Will, if you're choosing which system to invest in, I think you should only really consider two things, ergonomics and lenses. Also, I don't think you should limit yourself to canon and nikon, because Sony, Pentax and Olympus are all worth considering.

Each brand has their own style of ergonomics, which some people will love and some people will hate.
On the lenses front, all the brands have a good basic selection, but they each have their own stand out lenses that aren't rivalled.

For example:
Nikon (and sony) have a superb cheap 35mm f/1.8 prime which goes really well on crop sensor bodies, and in the more expensive area nikon have the unrivalled 14-24 f/2.8 wide angle and a 24-70 that is generally considered sharper than canon's.
Canon have a superb 70-200 f/4L as a budget telephoto with superb image quality, a very specialist MPE-65 macro lens and more choice in the sub-£2k super telephoto area (300f/4L IS, 400 f/5.6L)
Olympus do compact yet extremely high quality and weather sealed zooms and primes
Pentax do superb short primes and pancake lenses that are superbly suited to the in body stabilisation and has the most backwards compatible mount (any K mount lens will mount and function as fully as it can)
Sony have superb autofocus ziess lenses and the best in class super-tele zoom (the 70-400G, which pips the also excellent canon 100-400L for image quality)

And sigma/tamron/tokina lenses are available for all mounts which gives a wider lens range (particularly with brands like pentax that have a gap in the super-tele zoom area, which sigma fills nicely with the excellent value 150-500 and 50-500).

I'm rambling a bit now, but my point is that even though all the brands offer excellent and reasonably comprehensive lens ranges, each has their individual strengths, and it's worth taking that into account so that if you find yourself after a more specialised lens later on, you don't find yourself envying another brand.

 

[badboy1984]

Thanks Si, my friend wishes he never got rid of his 40D so think he felt the same. My other problem is which system to buy into Canon or Nikon, did think Nikon but then started considering speed and from what i believe canon seem quicker.

What do you mean by speed? FPS? Buff?

Depend what camera you comparing to to determine which one is quicker. I don't think canon is quicker than nikon and vice visa as well.

 

[odd jim]

Thanks
40D 6.5FPS the new generations seemed to be slower even though MP are higher on the newer generations. Off to the shop on Saturday so will have a play.

The 40d doesn't shoot at 6.5 fps, that was a marketing error by Canon which they have held heir hands up to. It is actually 6.3 fps which I know doesn't make any difference I the real world but is the same as the 50/60d bodies.

 

[odd jim]

With the xxD series, I think it peaked at the 40D! My daughter has my old 40D and I've had the 50D. In my own opinion, I've always thought that the image quality from the older camera was better.

Some of my favourite images were taken on the 40D so maybe I'm being a tad nostalgic but I'd certainly recommend one to anyone.

Si

Not at high iso it isnt! The 40d shares the same sensor as the 400d which was abysmal over 800 iso. The sensor in the 50d is leaps and bounds better at high iso, though some critics (though not me!) state the lower iso images are cleaner on the 40d.

It's a great camera though, some say one of Canon's best!

 

[badboy1984]

I believe the older canon camera is great and reliable.

My friend still uses his Canon 20D after many many years of use. I ask him are you thinking about upgrading and here his reply:

"I don't need high mega pixel because I'm not blowing up my photo to print or neither i like to crop my photo. Also I don't shoot at low light that much so high iso performance don't other me, even if i do i use my flash gun. Plus he mention about the 60D is not his cup of tea because he will lose the metal body and the weather sealing on his 20D, then a 7D is cost abit too much, with that 7D money he might as well go for 5D mkii."

Then again he need to change his wide angle lens if he go FF which is something he not prepare to do yet so he happy with 20D

 

[cam1986]

Is the Sony A290 worth considering?

 

[odd jim]

Is the Sony A290 worth considering?

No.

Actually as entry level bodies go its ok. But then you want to consider if you want to lock yourself into a Sony system or Canon / Nikon system. I personally would prefer the Canon/Nikon system as I am always buying and exchanging used kit which is easier to do if you have Canon or Nikon kit.

I think this body has been removed from production IIRC?

 

[odd jim]

I believe the older canon camera is great and reliable.

My friend still uses his Canon 20D after many many years of use. I ask him are you thinking about upgrading and here his reply:

"I don't need high mega pixel because I'm not blowing up my photo to print or neither i like to crop my photo. Also I don't shoot at low light that much so high iso performance don't other me, even if i do i use my flash gun. Plus he mention about the 60D is not his cup of tea because he will lose the metal body and the weather sealing on his 20D, then a 7D is cost abit too much, with that 7D money he might as well go for 5D mkii."

Then again he need to change his wide angle lens if he go FF which is something he not prepare to do yet so he happy with 20D

Before he takes it out in a really bad thunder storm, you might want to tell him the 20d isnt weather sealed!

 

[badboy1984]

Before he takes it out in a really bad thunder storm, you might want to tell him the 20d isnt weather sealed!

Sure I will lol, thanks for the info. I guess he don't take photo during the rain or heavy rain so he might be ok but i will let him know anyway.

or i keep it quite and he will get a new camera hahahahaha

 

[heidfirst]

Is the Sony A290 worth considering?

Depends what you want it to do & what you are comparing it against.
It's cheap (~£300) & would have a manufacturer's warranty.
It uses a CCD sensor which is excellent (imo better than CMOS) at low ISO but at higher ISO gets noisier quicker than a CMOS sensor.
If you are going to compare it against a s/h higher level camera it won't be as well built , handle as well or do the same no. of fps - it's an entry level DSLR after all.
Unless you are doing some highly unusual photography there are plenty of Sony mount lenses available for any normal person.

btw the 6.3fps spec. for the 40D etc. is only achievable under extremely limited circumstances & unlikely to be seen in normal real life usage - 5 fps would be more realistic.

 

[squishy]

Depends what you want it to do & what you are comparing it against.
It's cheap (~£300) & would have a manufacturer's warranty.
It uses a CCD sensor which is excellent (imo better than CMOS) at low ISO but at higher ISO gets noisier quicker than a CMOS sensor.
If you are going to compare it against a s/h higher level camera it won't be as well built , handle as well or do the same no. of fps - it's an entry level DSLR after all.
Unless you are doing some highly unusual photography there are plenty of Sony mount lenses available for any normal person.

btw the 6.3fps spec. for the 40D etc. is only achievable under extremely limited circumstances & unlikely to be seen in normal real life usage - 5 fps would be more realistic.

Dpreview tested and say the 40D reaches 6fps at 1/500, and 6.3 at 1/4000, so it is pretty much that fast in most real use (I know nearly all the continuous shooting I do is at faster than 1/500sec)

There is a graph on this page:
Dpreview - 40D review - page 13 timings and sizes

It only dips below 6fps slower than 1/500 and only hits 5fps under 1/60.

 

[cam1986]

Been offered a 50D for £500 body only. That a bit high?

 

[will82]

yes, it's still very capable. Just look at the number of people still shooting with it.

One of the best camera choices for sub-£400 in my opinion.



Will, if you're choosing which system to invest in, I think you should only really consider two things, ergonomics and lenses. Also, I don't think you should limit yourself to canon and nikon, because Sony, Pentax and Olympus are all worth considering.

Each brand has their own style of ergonomics, which some people will love and some people will hate.
On the lenses front, all the brands have a good basic selection, but they each have their own stand out lenses that aren't rivalled.

For example:
Nikon (and sony) have a superb cheap 35mm f/1.8 prime which goes really well on crop sensor bodies, and in the more expensive area nikon have the unrivalled 14-24 f/2.8 wide angle and a 24-70 that is generally considered sharper than canon's.
Canon have a superb 70-200 f/4L as a budget telephoto with superb image quality, a very specialist MPE-65 macro lens and more choice in the sub-£2k super telephoto area (300f/4L IS, 400 f/5.6L)
Olympus do compact yet extremely high quality and weather sealed zooms and primes
Pentax do superb short primes and pancake lenses that are superbly suited to the in body stabilisation and has the most backwards compatible mount (any K mount lens will mount and function as fully as it can)
Sony have superb autofocus ziess lenses and the best in class super-tele zoom (the 70-400G, which pips the also excellent canon 100-400L for image quality)

And sigma/tamron/tokina lenses are available for all mounts which gives a wider lens range (particularly with brands like pentax that have a gap in the super-tele zoom area, which sigma fills nicely with the excellent value 150-500 and 50-500).

I'm rambling a bit now, but my point is that even though all the brands offer excellent and reasonably comprehensive lens ranges, each has their individual strengths, and it's worth taking that into account so that if you find yourself after a more specialised lens later on, you don't find yourself envying another brand.

Reason I was going for the Nikon D90 was that it felt good in my hands plus my partner has a Nikon but after playing with a 7D with battery grip (giving me a better grip on the camera) and seemed to be very quick made me think about canon.
Basically i'm after a camera that I can get good photos of dogs running/ wildlife, reason why i'm attracted to the 6.5fps (6.3fps). Also enjoy taking landscapes and macro shots. There are times when i would shoot in low light.
As you say I have got stuck with Nikon/Canon as i don't want to be in the position of changing systems later on.

 

[heidfirst]

Dpreview tested and say the 40D reaches 6fps at 1/500, and 6.3 at 1/4000, so it is pretty much that fast in most real use (I know nearly all the continuous shooting I do is at faster than 1/500sec)

There is a graph on this page:
Dpreview - 40D review - page 13 timings and sizes

It only dips below 6fps slower than 1/500 and only hits 5fps under 1/60.

that's with manual focus though - enabling AF (as most will) will almost certainly drop fps rate as the body checks focus between shots.

op, if your partner has Nikon then you would be able to share additional lenses which is obviously a plus.
a 7D plus grip would blow your budget (did you try a 60D?).

 

[cam1986]

Canon 40D has a good review at dpreview. I would say better than the 50D.

 

[will82]

op, if your partner has Nikon then you would be able to share additional lenses which is obviously a plus.
a 7D plus grip would blow your budget (did you try a 60D?).

That was another reason going for nikon being able to share lenses. A friend had the 7D alone with blowing my budget I think i'd be getting a little carried away and would prefer going for a cheaper camera leaving money for lens(es).

I saw a review on the D7000 but when continuous shooting it didn't last long compared to a canon. Thinking about it though i'm not going to be taking big bursts all the time.

60D I haven't held but will be off to london camera exchange on saturday so i'll see about picking a few up 60D being one.

Sorry to ramble last week everything seemed set on D90 and couple of lenses but since then and coming to buy it and seeing a friend who is very bias to canon i seem to be lost.

 

[will82]

Canon 40D has a good review at dpreview. I would say better than the 50D.

What made you go for the D90

Just noticed your looking for a D90.

 

[badboy1984]

D7k is 6FPS and 7D is 8FPS, of course the Canon is faster but the D7k burst is fast enough to shoot alot of stuff and enough to shoot the stuff you mention .......

 

[squishy]

that's with manual focus though - enabling AF (as most will) will almost certainly drop fps rate as the body checks focus between shots.

op, if your partner has Nikon then you would be able to share additional lenses which is obviously a plus.
a 7D plus grip would blow your budget (did you try a 60D?).

That'll be the same for any camera though.
I've only rarely noticed the fps on my 40D slowing down due to AF, and that's when things are moving fast almost directly towards the camera.



Will, if you like the feel of the D90 and there aren't any lenses from other brands that stand out to you, I think you should just go for it. The D90 is one of the best value cameras available at the moment.

 

[cam1986]

I am stuck between getting a 40D or a 90D!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

People keep saying lots for sale here but i can't access the blooming classifrieds!

 

[Shoot Em Up]

I am stuck between getting a 40D or a 90D!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

People keep saying lots for sale here but i can't access the blooming classifrieds!

I've got one in the classifieds if you are interested. Mintier than a Polo.

 

[squishy]

.

 

[cam1986]

I've got one in the classifieds if you are interested. Mintier than a Polo.

I've tried opening the classifieds with the click of a mouse, TNT, Can opener, JCB etc but not possible yet due to not reaching criterior.

 

[odd jim]

Have you looked at London Camera Exchanges website? They quite often have used 40d's around the country if that's what you're after.

 

[odd jim]

Been offered a 50D for £500 body only. That a bit high?

That's about right. They're quite rare to find used.

 

[tijuana taxi]

MPB. Ffordes or Mifsuds should be a used 40D at one of them

Don't fancy the 60D after handling one in a shop, not overly impressed with the 15mp sensor on the 50D and can't afford a 7D, besides which more than satisfied with the 40D anyway

Using my second one now and until something really takes my fancy won't be changing it, not that sure what more I want or need from a camera

 

[will82]

Will, if you like the feel of the D90 and there aren't any lenses from other brands that stand out to you, I think you should just go for it. The D90 is one of the best value cameras available at the moment.

Thanks going to have a good feel of them not exactly in a rush so can take my time a little. Thanks i'll let you know what i end up getting.

As far as lenses the ones that stand out tend to be 10K

 

[will82]

I've tried opening the classifieds with the click of a mouse, TNT, Can opener, JCB etc but not possible yet due to not reaching criterior.

There's four 40Ds on london Camera Exchange and i think one in mifsuds

 

[cam1986]

Thanks. Have looked. Might even thing about buying a new DSLR.