Suggest a upgrade canon 40d

StewartR said:
OK, let's see if we can disentangle this a bit.

Firstly, other things being equal, smaller pixels mean there is more noise at the pixel level. So for example consider the 50D and the 5D II. These came out at the same time so presumably they have sensors which use similar technology. The 50D has 15 MP and the 5D II has 20 MP, but if you scaled up the 50D sensor to full frame size it would have about 38 MP. Therefore the pixels on the 50D are smaller, and you would expect the noise to be worse.

(You have to be very careful when making comparisons like this though, because sensor technology has been improving so rapidly. The "other things being equal" means you have to compare sensors made by the same company at the same time if you want to be confident in your conclusion.)

Secondly, other things being equal, a newer sensor will tend to have less noise at the pixel level than an older one. That's just your basic technology improvement. (Note that it's the age of the sensor design that matters, not the age of the camera. Sometimes Canon will bring out a new camera using the same sensor as its predecessor, and sometimes they cascade down older sensors into the lower models.)

But the third effect is the one I mentioned earlier; reducing the image size reduces noise. If you're aiming for a constant output size such as 2 MP for onscreen viewing or 8 MP for a print, then down sampling from a higher MP image will reduce the noise more than down sampling from a lower MP image.

Does that make sense?

Putting it all together: you'd expect a 50D to have less noise at the pixel level than a 40D because it's a newer sensor design, and if Canon had left it at 10 MP then it surely would have. But they increased the pixel count by 50%, and smaller pixels are noisier, and the net effect was no significant difference at the pixel level. There's still an advantage to the 50D when you're reducing the image size for display or print, but it's probably not a very big advantage.
Click to expand...
And this in practical (and very simplistic) terms can be demonstrated by camera phones in low light. Lots of megapixels on a tiny sensor = noisy images.
 
Last edited:
Well what about the 60d or 70d ?

If I saved up for one of those ?
And the 28 2.8?
 
gothgirl said:
Well what about the 60d or 70d ?

If I saved up for one of those ?
And the 28 2.8?
Click to expand...
No not really, as we've said.... The 70d isn't much different at 1600 and above than my 50d.
 
Look, to get really decent low light images, you need the following (you can't beat the laws of physics!)

FF sensor - so more overall light is captured - ideally a modern(ish) one
Not too many pixels, as high MP cameras are reducing the sieze of each pixel on the sensor, and therefore restricting the light gathering abilities

Personally in your situation, I'd save for a decent FF, in reality a 6D is only slightly more than a 70D, yes you'll have to take a hit on lenses, but ultimately it will get you where you want to go.....in your situation, there really are no small stepping stones
 
Ok So what's a good entry level full frame ?

If I'm willing to take a drop in mp ?

Cost wise ?
 
gothgirl said:
Ok So what's a good entry level full frame ?

If I'm willing to take a drop in mp ?

Cost wise ?
Click to expand...
Again, the Canon 6d (though it's not really an 'entry level' camera in the true sense)!! Body only between £800 and £1k new depending where you go, this has already been covered though!! :)

Don't worry about MP, it's essentially meaningless in this day and age. And it won't be a drop in MP anyway.

The Nikon equivalent is the d610 and Sony has their equivalent too, all similar pricing.
 
Last edited:
I traded in a 6D + Tamron 24-70 f2.8 VC for less than 1K, there was no interest on TP classifieds!!. I would have thought for what you are doing you will want a little more reach, a f4 lens will be fine with a 6D as you can really push the ISO, so in Canon terms you'll probably be looking at a 6D + 24-105 f4, if you are lucky you could be looking around the 1K mark, you need to to cheeky on the classifieds.On MPB you are looking around £1,150 for this combo.

You won't be taking a drop in MP with 6D, but you will be amazed at the low light capability.
 
Her budget is between £150-200 so she's going to be saving a loooong time for that kind of combo! ;)
 
I dont know where you live, but I have A FREE manfrottot479-4b heavy monopod with a chinese ball head and quick release that you can have if you can find a way of picking it up from me in Saddleworth.
(I am home bound at the moment as I have developed double vision and so can not drive.....)
it is in vey good condition with just a few superficial scratches.
 
htid said:
Her budget is between £150-200 so she's going to be saving a loooong time for that kind of combo! ;)
Click to expand...
We know, which is why we've told her to wait and save! There is no other solution to her issues, but that's physics :)
 
Oh dear

What about switching systems ?

Anything cheaper full frame with Nikon / Fuji ?
 
gothgirl said:
Oh dear

What about switching systems ?

Anything cheaper full frame with Nikon / Fuji ?
Click to expand...
No, like I said :)

You have to accept its an expensive move!
 
odd jim said:
No, like I said :)

You have to accept its an expensive move!
Click to expand...

Oh dear.

Well I think I may just have to accept the limitations of my 40d and invest in some more glass

I like my 40d a lot , so think I would have ended up saving it as a second anyway and not parting with it.
 
Last edited:
As others have said, change how you shoot and the type of pictures you shoot within the subject field - that's where creativity comes in! Use the strengths of the 40d rather than compromise :)

The 40d is still a great camera!
 
What about financing one..18 month interest free credit card. Spend £1200 on 6D and lens then pay off monthly at around £70 a month..*

*please seek independent financial advice first :p
 
T_J_G said:
What about financing one..18 month interest free credit card. Spend £1200 on 6D and lens then pay off monthly at around £70 a month..*

*please seek independent financial advice first :p
Click to expand...

I may not have much free cash
But I've got no credit cards , no debt and nothing on tick

Never had and never will

Not about to start now ;-)
 
odd jim said:
As others have said, change how you shoot and the type of pictures you shoot within the subject field - that's where creativity comes in! Use the strengths of the 40d rather than compromise :)
Click to expand...
This. Several of us have already said it previously, but it looks like it needs to be said again.
 
gothgirl said:
I may not have much free cash
But I've got no credit cards , no debt and nothing on tick

Never had and never will

Not about to start now ;-)
Click to expand...

Was just a suggestion, for some people it's finically viable.

You'll have to crack on with your 40d then...and do something different to what you;re currently doing.
 
Which of these would be better...

The 5D or 1DS II

And of these lenses, which would work on full frame?

50mm 1.8

18-55 is

55-250 is
 
Not sure about the camera though I would guess the 1DS II regarding lenses the 50mm is the only one that would work as it is EF rather than EF-S
 
TheGrew said:
Not sure about the camera though I would guess the 1DS II regarding lenses the 50mm is the only one that would work as it is EF rather than EF-S
Click to expand...

That sucks

If I traded in my 40d plush cash and went for the 5D , 1DS-II

And traded in the 18-55 is and 55-250
And got the canon ef 28-200 f3.5 - 5.6Usm

I'd be a bit worried about the 28-200 not having IS but I'm guessing the lens is a better piece of glass than the 55-250
 
Last edited:
Then what's a reasonable ef lens I can get to replace the kit lens and the 55-250 as I use both regularly

I'm leaning towards the 5d Or 1DS II I've seen ...
 
Last edited:
Not one lens, two lenses.
On a budget
#1 , the Canon EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM Lens

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-28-135mm-f-3.5-5.6-IS-USM-Lens-Review.aspx

#2 Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM Lens

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-70-300mm-f-4-5.6-IS-USM-Lens-Review.aspx

I own both lenses and they are OK (there are better ones around however they are $$$)
For the 70-300 you may want to consider a third party lens, they may be better value for money. I have no experience. with those.

Keep in mind both lenses are relatively slow and not Ideal for low light shooting where you cannot use longer exposures.
 
Last edited:
gothgirl said:
That sucks

If I traded in my 40d plush cash and went for the 5ds-II

And traded in the 18-55 is and 55-250
And got the canon ef 28-200 f3.5 - 5.6Usm

I'd be a bit worried about the 28-200 not having IS but I'm guessing the lens is a better piece of glass than the 55-250
Click to expand...
No.

You still need good lenses on FF. The 28-200 a slow, rubbish lens (the 55-250 is actually much better, but efs). You'd a need 70-200 f/2.8 in that range. A used sigma will do nicely.

As we've repeatedly said, this kind of upgrade (a good low light setup) is expensive, there is no cheap option. You still need fast lenses as well good high ISO.

Your best bet with the 5d2 would be a set of primes.
 
Last edited:
True , but I don't JUST photograph low light

In fact I rarely do , if I have a 50 1.8 and a 28 2.8 on the 5d. II That should be an improvement on lowlight combined with improving my technique

The 28-135 would be an ideal every day lens , but what's the quality like ?

I don't want to sell my 55-250 which I love and get a worse piece of glass
 
Oh, and don't forget that on FF the field of view is different too so your 50mm will look like 35mm on your current kit. 24mm is getting very wide on FF (equivalent to 15mm on your current system).
 
i think the truth of the matter is for what you want to do is going to cost you about 1,000 quid ( second hand )

the camera of choice in this thread that will suite ALL your needs is going to be the 6d ( if your sticking with canon ) and then you need lenses
you could keep your 50mm 1.8 and a 24 105mm F4 L IS would be within budget ( just ) and later on save for a 70 - 200mm even the F4 L non IS is a cracking lens for it's second hand price tag

it's all very well looking at F2.8 lenses but even a mk1 24 - 70 is going to cost the best part of 500 quid second hand which will give you 1 stop over the 24 - 105 but the 6d will make up for that and more over your current 40d
low light on a budget is hard but not impossible if you can't get there with lens choice because of the expense then a good low light body will make up for the compromise

it's the best advice i can think of if your sticking with canon
 
As I said low light isn't ALL I shoot ,

And i can't afford to get a great body and great lenses at the same time

Swapping to full frame is going to be costly as 2/3rds of my lenses won't work on it .

Lowlight isn't all that I shoot so...

If I got the 1DS II OR 5D
And used it with my 50 mm 1.8 , that should be much better in low light.

And then swap out the 18-55is kit lens and 55-250is for the 28-135, that covers me for the other needs I have, my day to day shooting

With both sections covered , normal shooting and lowlight
I can then focus on saving more money up to invest in better glass .
 
Last edited:
gothgirl said:
As I said low light isn't ALL I shoot ,

And i can't afford to get a great body and great lenses at the same time

Swapping to full frame is going to be costly as 2/3rds of my lenses won't work on it .

Lowlight isn't all that I shoot so...

If I got the 5DS II
And used it with my 50 mm 1.8 , that should be much better in low light.

And then swap out the 18-55is kit lens and 55-250is for the 28-135, that covers me for the other needs I have, my day to day shooting

With both sections covered , normal shooting and lowlight
I can then focus on saving more money up to invest in better glass .
Click to expand...
No such thing as a 5ds2! (5d2 :)

As I said in a previous post, you've not really spent anything on the EFS lenses so you could almost take that out of the equation, financially at least.
 
odd jim said:
No such thing as a 5ds2! (5d2 :)

As I said in a previous post, you've not really spent anything on the EFS lenses so you could almost take that out of the equation, financially at least.
Click to expand...

I know I won't get s lot of cash for them but could Px them through wed or mpb for another lens
 
I only have a couple of older Canon bodies 5Dc MK1 and a 50D I'm more than happy with what I get from them even high iso wise.
I use a couple of primes in low light situations 50mm f1.4 and the 85mm f1.8.
In your position I would look at getting one of these two lenses 50mm f1.4 or a 1.8 which is better value IMO !
Or if you look at the exif data from your pictures using crop lenses you will get a god idea of what is your most used focal length.
Hence a 85mm f1.8 might be suited better to your style and needs.?
BONUS Both or either of these lens will also work on F.F. camera as well should you upgrade in the future.
Finally have you tried noise reduction in PP there is some good software out there these days :)
 
Phiggys said:
I only have a couple of older Canon bodies 5Dc MK1 and a 50D I'm more than happy with what I get from them even high iso wise.
I use a couple of primes in low light situations 50mm f1.4 and the 85mm f1.8.
In your position I would look at getting one of these two lenses 50mm f1.4 or a 1.8 which is better value IMO !
Or if you look at the exif data from your pictures using crop lenses you will get a god idea of what is your most used focal length.
Hence a 85mm f1.8 might be suited better to your style and needs.?
BONUS Both or either of these lens will also work on F.F. camera as well should you upgrade in the future.
Finally have you tried noise reduction in PP there is some good software out there these days :)
Click to expand...
You've probably not been trying to get the shutter speeds in low light as the OP needs, or I needed, for low light photography (hense me getting a 6d amongst other things). The limits of a 5dc 50d or newer xxd are low when shooting indoor sports.

Thats not to say its not doable but its not great.

As far as software is concerned, you can't polish a turd :) Noise reduction will always reduce detail and clarity and if its not there to start with the end result will be pretty poor.
 
I'm really considering the 5d or 1ds-II

Which with the 50mm 1.8 might do me well for now
 
I've been watching this discussion and am completely confused by one glaring omission. All the bodies and lenses that have been suggested are fine. Every bit of advice is excellent.

Only problem is OP. There appears to be a deal of confusion over what performance is wanted, what type of shots are to be taken. Finally the budget is very elastic. Starting off at around £200 fixed maximum we are now in the region of £1k.

I'm not convinced that OP really knows what is wanted and the way things are at present there is a very great danger of jumping out of the frying pan and into the fire.

My suggestion (which will probably be ignored) is to spend some time really researching the alternatives to the present set up and see which suits style and pocket best. This probably can't be done on a hire basis as most of the gear is probably too old for that. So find others who have the gear you are thinking about. Go out on meets and blag their cameras for a play around. There is a massive difference in weight and handling characteristics between a 40D and 50mm lens and a 1 series body and 24-105 lens.

I fear that in a rush to get a few better pictures of a dog show that common sense and practicality may disappear out of the window.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top