30D - 40D

Ive posted here many times(almost a regular now), but I want to ask If many would consider the 40D a worthwile upgrade over my 30D?, I am not looking for a vast Improvement In alot of areas, or wanting to spend a great deal, I have seen 40D's on the web for around £200 so to me I guess that looks like an extra £100 over my 30D, all I am looking to Improve realy Is - slightly more acurate focusing(40D cross type) and a slight Improvement I believe?, abit more IQ from the sensor(I understand the 40D has 14bit) and abit more croppablity, but keepng the 30D's great reliabilty and build.

P.

The 40D is a great camera, but it's fairly old now. I have one and I love it (I use it as a second body), but for a primary body I think you'd probably be better off going with a 50 or 60.

Tiberius wrote in post #15916331
The 40D is a great camera, but it's fairly old now. I have one and I love it (I use it as a second body), but for a primary body I think you'd probably be better off going with a 50 or 60.

I must be honest, I preffer the 60D to any other dslr of any make, Its size and shape, and the technology I love the Idea of a portable smaller but proffesional spec camera, I totally dont like large brick type cameras and could never go back to full frame, to me that would be like going back to brick size cell phones.
Its just the price I an hoping by the time I have abit of spare cash - around yule the 60D will be around second hand for about £250-£300 then with me getting perhaps £100 for my 30D I should be able to get on.

P.

I remember upgrading from the 30d to the 40d and it was a significant upgrade.

I agree with others that the 50d or 60d would be better but on the other hand, the 40d isn't going to depreciate a whole lot in the next few months so if you could find a good deal on one, why not?

I still have my 30D and whilst I would agree a 40, 50 or 60D is an improvement, stick an L lens on the front of the 30D and it is still a very capable camera. I have learnt it really is all about the quality of lens you have.

If you cant make up your mind on glass or body then try renting a 60D and a 100-400mm (if you're still chasing reach) and see what you think of each. It'll give you an idea what your 55-250mm will be like on a newer body, and you can see how the 30D holds up with some better glass in front of it.

You should be able to buy a 100-400mm (or whatever long lens you want, second hand) without it devaluing too much, where you may find that if you get a body now it will lose value before you can get some good glass.

Either that or just save a bit longer. The 40D isn't that much of a step up.

Get some glass, you may be happy with the results. If not, save up and get a better body later on. They're only going to get cheaper.

Pagman wrote in post #15916364
I must be honest, I preffer the 60D to any other dslr of any make, Its size and shape, and the technology I love the Idea of a portable smaller but proffesional spec camera, I totally dont like large brick type cameras and could never go back to full frame, to me that would be like going back to brick size cell phones.
Its just the price I an hoping by the time I have abit of spare cash - around yule the 60D will be around second hand for about £250-£300 then with me getting perhaps £100 for my 30D I should be able to get on.

Save for a used 60D but do not sell the 30D. It's worth much more to you as a spare body than £100 and is still a great camera. I packed in a hurry for a flight to Jersey (CI, not NJ!) a couple of years ago and on arrival found I had the 30D rather than the 50D I'd planned to take. It made no difference to my pictures at all and the only slight inconvenience was the smaller LCD. I still have it and plan an IR conversion when funds allow.

Off topic, but nice use of the word "Yule" by the way. I love it and it's much underused in the UK.

I have two 40D bodies that have served me and my wife faithfully. We have both upgraded to 60D's now so are selling the 40D's if you are interested - bit of a long way to post them though - we are in Australia.

40D is a fabulous camera! I think it's a good upgrade from the 30d. The 40d won't let you down. Plus I think it's a little faster than the 60d, and uses compact flashes like your 30d.

Thank you to All who replied, I love 99.9 percent of what my 30D delivers, and as I view pp as art and I love art, tweaking adjustments In DPP and Fastone are a delight, But where I am falling short Is focus reliablity and reach/cropping, but my problem Is that I want the best of both worlds with my lens, I want Just one lens that covers landscapes 55mm minimum, and prefferably 300-350mm for my longer shots, but I dont want seperate lenses as I dont want the hassle of changing, I just want an all purpose carry round lens that goes from 55-more than my nifty 250, (I dont want much do I.
This Is what led me to ask the question, would I be better off sticking with my nifty 250 but on a 40/50/60D and cropping more - Is this lens good enough does It resolve enough detail to do this? or stay with my 30D and save and save for the closest to my requirements, a 70-300L as surely because of Its qualities I could still get perhaps more decent crops from It than my nifty 250?

Yes I know lots of questions....

P.

4g63photo wrote in post #15922591
40D is a fabulous camera! I think it's a good upgrade from the 30d. The 40d won't let you down. Plus I think it's a little faster than the 60d, and uses compact flashes like your 30d.

The 40D is certainly not faster than a 60D, even though it uses CF instead of SD.

About the only advantage the 40D has is the alloy body, whereas the 60D is all plastic.

Symon777 wrote in post #15922712
The 40D is certainly not faster than a 60D, even though it uses CF instead of SD.

About the only advantage the 40D has is the alloy body, whereas the 60D is all plastic.

OP may have been speaking of FPS, where the 40D does 6.5 to the 60D's 5.3.

The 60D has a mag-alloy frame and poly-carb shell, making it tougher in many ways and less brittle than mag-alloy shells.

mickeyb105 wrote in post #15922911
OP may have been speaking of FPS, where the 40D does 6.5 to the 60D's 5.3.

The 60D has a mag-alloy frame and poly-carb shell, making it tougher in many ways and less brittle than mag-alloy shells.

Thanks. I was referring to fps. The 40 is faster.

My main cameras are 1D series but I keep a 40D in the bag as a backup as it can give excellent images. Look at what you need and what it will give in comparison to the 30D. I use it quite a bit for people pictures as I like the skin tones it produces.