Canon upgrade, 350 to..40D?

shabba

shabba

Messages
936
Edit My Images
No
Hello

I currently have a Canon 350D which has done me proud over the years, but I have the chance to get a Canon 40D now at a good price (around £300) and I know it’s a mint example.

I really want a bigger screen mainly as the 350’s is tiny. However I wanted just to check that this will be a good upgrade path, I can’t afford much more at the moment or for the foreseeable future.
I’m guessing the D40 will give me slightly better images and be a nicer camera to handle. I use a Sigma DC 17-70mm 2.8-4.5 as my main lens and have a Canon 50mm 1.8 Prime for the odd bit of portrait work. I use the camera for anything and everything, also have a 430EX flash.

So the 40D should be good upgrade for me? ISO performance I’d imagine is a bit better too, but the screen is the big selling point for me as I should be able to review my photos a bit better on the move.

Any comments would be greatly appreciated.
 
I love my 40d, its a fantastic piece of kit. They handle noise fairly well and you will find it a speed monster compared to your 350d.

I came from a 400d and much prefer the feel and layout of the 40d, I have not felt the need to upgrade since.

Go for it.
 
I would go with the 40D, it’s a cracking camera and feel it’s the perfect upgrade in your particular circumstance. If you havn’t already done so, try and get hold of a 40D before you buy it, see how it feels in your hand, it may not suit you but I have a feeling it will,
 
Thanks guys, seems a good logical upgrade, I'd rather a 40D than the 500 type range.

I'm thinking 40D now, then 7D one day.

I'ev had a quick handle of one and it seems nice enough, a littel different in the settings layout but won't take long to master. Starting to get paid work requests now so need something a little better than my battered 350, but maybe thats worth £100 body only? Its 'fair' condition.
 
Or if you are now getting some paid work in, and you can afford to keep hold of the 350D, keep it as your back-up. Nothing worse than being with a client and your main camera go's down and you have nothing to fall back on.
 
I had the 300D, and have a 430EX and same Sigma lens.
I now have 2x 40D (with Grips) as they are proving to be a great bit of kit.
It does all that I need and the larger screen is a blessing.
I liked the pics that I took with the 300, but the 40 is better, and the detail you can see on the LCD allows me to make the necessary adjustments.

Take the plunge, get the camera and you shouldn't have any regrets!
 
I have just recently upgraded from the 400D to the 30D and I love it to bits. It feels so much better in the hand and also I can now shoot at ISO 800 :) not like the 400D.

I kept the 400D as a second body as it never let me down and I am sure it has plenty of life in it yet.
 
At that price I'd jump at it.. I upgraded from a 300D to the 40D for much more money a while back and it was well worth it, not only because of ISO performance although that was one of the main reasons I did it. You just gotta get used to carrying a heavier bag. ;)
 
I agree. Go for it. The 40D is a stonker!
ISO performance is seriously good, 'feels' better to handle, more options etc.

I have to say though, I recently bought a 350D as a backup, and for when the 1D MKII is too much, ie holidays etc, and it takes a cracking shot :D
I was so impressed with it, I almost sold my 1D :nuts:
 
I was thinking of going from the 40D to the 550D because you know... video and all. But when I held it in my hand I just couldn't do it. Going back to the small bodies isn't easy.
 
Same here i went from a 450D to a 40D and in the feel and handling department alont it was worth it. ISO and faster fire rate are also bonuses, it also feels a lot better balanced with a better quality, heavier lens. If you can get a mint one for £300 you have got it at a steal, I got mine on here for £370 mint and boxed and I thought I was doing well.

Its funny how we all have our upgrade plans worked out, I have my eye on a 5D for full frame next but wont be within the next year.
 
I've read that the 350D is one of Canon's little gems and that it gives sharpness that more recent offerings can't match. If that's true it's worth thinking about what you'd gain from changing bodies.

Many people say that a better screen is one of their reasons for upgrading but that's not important for me personally as all I use the screen for is checking composition and reviewing the histogram. After all it's not long ago that we managed perfectly well with no review screen at all. Each to his own I suppose.
 
I upgraded to the 40D a while back also, and I've been very impressed with it. I made the jump from a 1000D though........so quite a big leap. AF is better and controls/dials are better to use than the smaller bodies, addition of the jog dial is a great bonus. Also, the top LCD is good for when using on a tripod so you can see settings easily.

Not too sure on difference in image quality...........both cameras I had were 10.1MP and the image quality on the 1000D was great, but the burst rate/processing is a lot better on the 40D.

Problem is..........I now have a big desire to upgrade to the 5DII as I've read that this is an even bigger jump, and offers a lot better image quality and ISO performance. The 40D is definitely a good mid-way point to a full frame camera, the 7D looks like it's not worth the money and has bad reviews for it's low ISO performance so I'd consider very carefully about that body...........but it all depends on what you shoot and want from a body though.
 
woof woof said:
I've read that the 350D is one of Canon's little gems and that it gives sharpness that more recent offerings can't match. .
Click to expand...

Would be genuinely interested in some proof as i might well consider a 350 as a second body. Tis getting on a bit now though so it might be hardish to find one with a shutter count that is respectable.
 
I went from a 350D to a 30D. Should have really waited a couple of weeks and got the 40D.

The 40D is a massive leap forward from the 350D... assuming you need a massive leap forward.
 
"Would be genuinely interested in some proof..."

I've read a few similar comments to the effect that the 350D produces sharp images but you're going to have to let Google be your friend to find them.
 
Being lower res and coupled with some decent glass, yes it can yield some nice photos that don't get bogged down by being 926Mp and subsequently depressing you when your camera out resolves the lenses you are using....

So yes, the 350D can produce nice images - providing you don't need ninja AF, low shutter lag, high FPS, more than ISO400 nor need it to work well below 0 degrees centigrade. If none of these things bother you (and well they might not - not everyone pushes the technical envelope), you'll love it and its a bargain.
 
Well I regularly work at ISO 1600 and my camera is 12MP so won't out resolve most good lenses. A recent shoot with my 50mm properly convinced me that good glass is worth it... so I reckon I will stick with what I have for now.
 
woof woof said:
I've read that the 350D is one of Canon's little gems and that it gives sharpness that more recent offerings can't match. If that's true it's worth thinking about what you'd gain from changing bodies.
Click to expand...

I reckon that the 350D is better than the 400D and probably on a level with the 450D, it really is an amazing little camera (wish I still had mine). I've not used the newer cameras in that range, but upto the 450D I reckon that the 350D held it's own very well and definitely outperforms the 400D in many ways (much better at high ISO). My shots at ISO1600 with the 350D that look better than the 400D at ISO800 (upgrading to the 400D was a definite mistake for me).

All that said the 40D is a step up from the 350D - better AF, cleaner at high ISO, faster frame rate and I prefer the feel in the hand. At £300 it is an absolute bargain, make it yours :thumbs:
 
desantnik said:
So yes, the 350D can produce nice images - providing you don't need ninja AF, low shutter lag, high FPS, more than ISO400 nor need it to work well below 0 degrees centigrade. If none of these things bother you (and well they might not - not everyone pushes the technical envelope), you'll love it and its a bargain.
Click to expand...

have you had problems with a 350D at low temps? I often used mine in sub zero temps (for a few hours at a time) without any issues. I also found that the noise was quite good, not at as good as the 40D but still very useable upto 1600.
 
"...need it to work well below 0 degrees centigrade..."

I've yet to have a low temperature related problem. This last winter my camera looked like a block of ice, as did I as my boots and trousers frozen stiff. If you get really low temperatures batteries don't like it and moisture is always a problem but if you can aviod those things you shouldn't have too many problems, if any at all with a 350D at least in somewhere like the UK.
 
I did a load of lunar eclipse shots with mine (maybe it was -3 celcius) and the (OEM) batteries just bled power like they had their cartoid artery severed.

So yes, the comment is based on real life.

Other Canon/Nikon batteries I have had since (ie more modern types) haven't suffered nearly as badly.
 
Maybe I'm just lucky.

My 20D is on it's original battery and it lasted with no problems at all on a frozen northern hill earlier this year, just has it has in past years. I don't know what the temperature was but as my trousers froze solid below the knee it must have been well below zero. I wouldn't expect too many problems in the UK except maybe in once in a lifetime conditions.
 
Go for it, you deserve it.
I had a 350D a few years ago, then went onto a 400D. Both excellent cameras.
I decided that 2 intermediate cameras to learn from was enough and decided to to get the 50D.
Funnily enough I find the 50D easier to use than either of the other 2...weird.
 
My first DSLR was a second hand 350D. I still use it and still love using it! :love:

I’d intended to keep it as a back-up once I acquired other camera bodies but it still sees every bit as much action as the others. I wouldn’t choose it for low light shots as it’s very noisy at anything above ISO 400 or in situations where I need a high fps rate.

woof woof said:
"Would be genuinely interested in some proof..."

I've read a few similar comments to the effect that the 350D produces sharp images but you're going to have to let Google be your friend to find them.
Click to expand...

No need to Google, look here for a recent shot which I took with the 350D ;). Not the best or sharpest from the day by any means (I was actually going to bin it) but pretty much straight out of camera which will hopefully provide some insight. Exif should be intact but if not, give me a shout.
 
That is a nice shot and I can't believe that you were thinking of binning it. What were you thinking? :lol:
 
I made the move from 350d to 40d and the difference is amazing. Changing setting, aperture, the day to day handling and ergonomics I finds loads better. I also find the settings more accessible so I tend to use them more as my technique improves. I can only remember changing iso a couple of times on my 350d, partly ecause I didn't know what I was doing as much as now but it is a lot easier I find to tweak settings on the 40d than the 350d.

In the hand the 40d is heavier but feels like a more solid semi professional bit of kit. I picked up the 350 the other day and it felt like a toy by comparison!
 
abooth2909 said:
I made the move from 350d to 40d and the difference is amazing. Changing setting, aperture, the day to day handling and ergonomics I finds loads better. I also find the settings more accessible so I tend to use them more as my technique improves. I can only remember changing iso a couple of times on my 350d, partly ecause I didn't know what I was doing as much as now but it is a lot easier I find to tweak settings on the 40d than the 350d.

In the hand the 40d is heavier but feels like a more solid semi professional bit of kit. I picked up the 350 the other day and it felt like a toy by comparison!
Click to expand...

+1

I also moved from 350D to 40D; still have 350D for backup and for my wife to use (much lighter) but 40D is the real deal (in this price bracket).

Andy
 
I went from a 350D to a 40D and the 40D is better at 800 to 1600 ISO but I still also use my 350D super camera
I do prefer the handling and better buffer on the 40D but will never sell the 350
Pete
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top