Lorne123 wrote in post #12727531
Thanks for the reply. In response to your question I think it is the 2.5 times larger sensor, the 2 times resolution and the fact that I am so tired of never getting 'the big picture'. Great comment though and one that I did ask myself. I did not jump into this purchase lightly. It was a real debate. I am happy, however with my decision. It also reinforced to me that I am taking my photography seriously.
There are several choices to give an ultra wide view for crop cameras including 8-16, 10-20/22, 12-24, 17-55, 15-85, 17-70. You could have gone for the 15-85 and just kept using your 40D. And a 70-200 on aps-c is about like a 120-300 which Sigma makes as f/2.8 and is a very expensive lens.
So there were options for you that would have saved you $2000+ to keep using your 40D. The bigger image sensor gets you about 1 stop cleaner high ISO. Is that worth $2000? Or you could have gotten a 60D which has higher ISOs built into its firmware though you could simulate the same thing by just under exposing ISO 3200 on your 40D and pushing the image during photo developing.
And do you print so large that you need more than 10 MP? Even 10 MP can make excellent very large prints.