40D vs Mark II N

hahah

ed rader wrote in post #3910252
i hear you Snir. i think we'll have to wait about 6 months before we get an honest assessment of the 40d.

so far from what i'm hearing it has better IQ than the 5d and is almost as good at tracking as the mark III.

maybe canon is trying to bolster the entry level numbers by getting us to upgrade to the 40D ?

ed rader

Not to sure about maybe, I think even Canon did not dream they would shift so many 40Ds in such a short time??????, everyone and their dog seems to have one, getting one, or wants one

MaDProFF wrote in post #3910322
Not to sure about maybe, I think even Canon did not dream they would shift so many 40Ds in such a short time??????, everyone and their dog seems to have one, getting one, or wants one

wouldn't it be ironic if the 40d killed upper end body sales ?

i think the 40d is being greeted as a REAL upgrade whereas the 30d was seen as a sideways move.

BTW, i love the 30d. i used it tracking bikes at a triathlon this weekend and got many more keepers than with the 300d (duh) or the 20d !

ed rader

ed rader wrote in post #3910348
wouldn't it be ironic if the 40d killed upper end body sales ?

i think the 40d is being greeted as a REAL upgrade whereas the 30d was seen as a sideways move.

BTW, i love the 30d. i used it tracking bikes at a triathlon this weekend and got many more keepers than with the 300d (duh) or the 20d !

ed rader

You gonna hate me for this, but with a 40D you will get many more too, of all the things upgraded on a 40D, I think the AF and tracking is the most improved over the 30D, VF is nice too, 30D still damm good though for what it costs.

When my wife asks for the MKIIN again, I'll sell a 30D for a 40D.

She's attending PACACE's instruction classes, so, it will happen soon. Too soon.

I do not expect the 40D to surpass the MKIIN, but I do expect it to best the 30D. Good thing I'll be waiting a little while, see what chokes in the 40D, if anything.

Nice to see good words about it.

I have to laugh at this - having just gotten my 1D Mark IIn, and having tested it with the higher ISOs, 1600 and 3200 are TOTALLY usable. ISO 3200 is as good as ISO 800 on my old 1D body - providing you exposure properly and the scene doesn't have lots of dark items in the frame. That's from my limited testing/experience with the unit. The 5D/40D might have slightly better noise performance, but it's not by a huge margin. Anyone complaining about noise performance with higher ISOs in modern DSLRs obviously hasn't shot high ISO film - digital is at least (from my experience) 2 stops better than film with high ISO performance imho.

Dave

<hugs my 40D> Strangely most of my pictures are not action photography but the 40D is really getting to be quite fun to learn how it likes to be treated and what it likes to pick out for focus points etc. It's also interesting to compare it to the IIn and 5D? which boggles me. At this point it's like comparing a mustang a camaro or a vette of different years. one is faster other is more fun one is more expensive is the cost worth the shiney new toy feeling.

So I think LM is saying that you can get some decent pictures with this thing or ?

Mark_Cohran wrote in post #3909905
Oh, I absolutely agree with you on that point, but I've seen far too many posts where 5D owners imply that there are enormous differences in IQ between the 5D and all other cameras, and frankly, my experience just doesn't support those findings.

I seriously doubt anyone would be able to quickly and decisively determine the origin of either of two well exposed prints from a 1DMKIIN or a 5D when printed at 8x12 (no crops) size. I certainly couldn't and I tried.

Mark

Wanna know something funny? I think it's really secretly a matter of us (all of us - Canon, Nikon, FF, crop, etc.) trying convince ourselves that our toys are better than your toys.

We're so lame.

Lord_Malone wrote in post #3909708
To be fair, the 1D2N was the best all-around camera I've ever owned PERIOD. It can do things the 5D and 40D can only dream about, and is probably only bested by the 1D Mark III (AF issues aside) or *GASP* the Nikon D3! as far as overall performance and features go.

I shoot with a 1D2N also but wonder why you don't include the D300 along with the D3 as besting the 2N (going on specs only of course).

RichNY wrote in post #3911583
I shoot with a 1D2N also but wonder why you don't include the D300 along with the D3 as besting the 2N (going on specs only of course).

Cause they'd hate to admit that Nikon may have one upped them.

They already have better flash and metering systems, so all that was left is focus and lowering noise.

Bosscat wrote in post #3911764
Cause they'd hate to admit that Nikon may have one upped them.

They already have better flash and metering systems, so all that was left is focus and lowering noise.

May?

RichNY wrote in post #3911802
May?

hey Rich -- how do you like you FX1? i have one on the way. i use the f2 now but i figure i need a little bit more room....have you used the f2 also?

thanx,

ed rader

Lord_Malone wrote in post #3909639
EDIT: I will add that I was never disappointed with the IQ of my 1D2N, but always knew that there were better cameras out there. What I consider some of my best shots was made with the 1D2N. It's still a great all-around camera, but to be completely honest, I'm not missing it.

whoa buddy did you sell your IIN?

Lord_Malone wrote in post #3911360
Wanna know something funny? I think it's really secretly a matter of us (all of us - Canon, Nikon, FF, crop, etc.) trying convince ourselves that our toys are better than your toys.

We're so lame.

That may well be. But, I don't think I'll ever go back from a 1 series body.

Mark

ed rader wrote in post #3911916
hey Rich -- how do you like you FX1? i have one on the way. i use the f2 now but i figure i need a little bit more room....have you used the f2 also?

thanx,

ed rader

Ed- As of today I'm purely a Canon shooter. In another few months that may or may not be the situation.