My very non-technical report after playing with a 40D

Let me start by saying that the intent of this post is not to spit more venom at Canon, nor to praise them. It also is not a 'jump ship' post.

Since the general concensus is that there is no improvement of image quality or low noise/high ISO performance I went to check out a 40D to see how it felt, the ergonomics and aesthetics, larger LCD and viewfinder, shutter sound, etc.

The first thing I noticed, and I don't understand why not a single person has mentioned this, were the buttons (menu, play, jump, info, trash) on the back of the camera. There is a noticable difference in the feel from the 30D or compared to the 5D. The buttons on the 30D have a mushy (for lack of a better word) feel, if you will, that I find very nice. The buttons on the back of the 40D have a plastic click feel that I didn't particularly care for.

The shutter sound is different and whether it is better or nicer than the 30D is purely subjective. I suppose I could say I liked it a little better but honestly it makes no difference to me and would not be a factor in deciding whether to get one or not.

I wear glasses so I do find the larger viewfinder to also be noticably better but it's not like I've had a problem or been suffering with the viewfinder on the 30D. I could say the same of the 3" LCD. It's nice but beyond being nice it has no draw for me since I never use the LCD for more than an occasional histogram or composition check but I never reference the LCD for image quality, focus, or exposure.

The silver hot shoe is cool and eliminates the minor wear on the black paint that occurs on the other Canon models.

The 40D I tried had the 28-135mm IS lens and it seemed to focus at the same speed as on the 30D. AF and metering didn't seem different at all.

If there is a slight difference in contour and body shape or the feel of the right side grip I couldn't tell. It felt exactly the same in my hand as the 30D.

Taking all these things into consideration, and the fact that I'm not one bit unhappy or disappointed in my 30D I can safely say that for me (and I stress, this is for me only. I'm not trying to get anyone to see things my way or sway anyone's decision) there is no practical advantage to making the side-grade to a 40D. I believe it is not at all an upgrade from a 30D unless those features, and perhaps some I didn't mention, are really important to you. I suppose if you have the money and just want to stay current and on top of the latest model technology then that's cool, but for me the justification to side-grade just isn't there.

If I had a 10D or 20D and were looking for an upgrade then I think the 40D is a very nice upgrade and worth the money.

So, in summary, I'm sticking with my 30D and actually considering getting another 30D as a second body. The 5D is still very attractive but out of range for me at this time.

I'm going to sit back and see what happens as the market becomes flooded with 40D owners and the new Nikons come out. I'm not saying I'm switching, but like everyone else I'm curious to see if the actual production models live up to the hype and specs on paper.

That's my very non-technical, objective report.
Don't hate me for not falling in love with the 40D. For me, there just wasn't a WOW factor.

Did you not try any other lenses? As I found a notable difference in AF speed on my lenses
I did not notice a different in the buttons, felt harder to push, more solid, that I prefer, less likely for them to be pushed by mistake.

I didn't try any other lenses but if the AF is a little faster, so be it. Speed of focus has never been an issue for me. It's about accuracy and ability to focus and as I mentioned, I don't have any problems with my 30D in that department.

I'm sure the button feel is also subjective. I actually preferred the 'mushy' feel of the other Canon's and felt the plastic clicking on the 40D almost cheapened it a bit.

Personally, I've never accidentally pushed a button and never complained once about the 30D buttons.

I'm not saying the 40D wasn't nice or that it's not good. I'm strictly giving a very subjective overview of my experience. It was important for me to hold and feel the camera. I could sit here all day and read all the trash about the camera and all the great reviews and it means nothing until I have one in my hands. So I went and did that and it just wasn't a big WOW.

If you're an owner and lover of the 40D then I think that's great. You should love the toys you buy, but I do love my 30D and to spend a few hundred on what I consider a minor upgrade doesn't seem to make sense. I'll pass.

Fair enough ,,, Mk3 then :P

Well to be completely honest other than hype.

If focus speed is not an issue. Button mushyness is preferred focus accuracy is good enough for you. Then to be totally honest there isn't any reason to upgrade. As far as IQ I disagree but maybe my 40D is broke in a good way? I will say the 30D is an excellent camera and I think upgrading from the 30D to the 40D is alot like buying a 2007 Honda because it's a year newer than your 2006 and not the same. benefit may not outweigh the cost...unless the improved AF ability get's you a photo that sells and sells well

Absolutely. Believe me, if photography was how I made my living then I would have already owned a 5D and/or 1D Mk III. Clearly, perspective changes from being a serious amateur to a serious professional and it's easy to justify upgrades and 'rotation' of gear to better the craft and hopefully increase revenue.

I'm one that will benefit from sitting out this round of new models and either waiting for another cycle of model upgrades to occur or make a more serious commitment to a 5D or what might follow the 5D.

I'm not in any hurry to make a change, so I'll just watch for now.

I tend to agree for you in your case, I think the 40d is mostly beneficial to people who have lower than 30D, who shoot sports, and people who love macro shooting.
I got some great shots off my 30D

Note the lim (cannot remember his full name) review ,added sometime over weekend and he shot JPG at 6.5 FPS and never filled the buffer up, and stopped at like 185 shots, and was getting like 22 RAW before the buffer was full

MaDProFF wrote in post #3958117
I he shot JPG at 6.5 FPS and never filled the buffer up, and stopped at like 185 shots

why would you want 185 shots at 6.5fps? I'd just break out my video camera

Thanks for this review. I'll be sticking with my old and decrepit 30d:p

What's interesting to me is you consider the 40D a minor upgrade over the 30D but think it's a worthwhile upgrade for 20D owners. Why is that? The 30D and 20D might as well be the same camera there's so little difference between them.

Just guessing, but I suppose you don't need the better AF and higher frame rate of the 40D among other things? Then I think a used 5D might be in your future, if you can wait for the 5D replacement to drive down prices on used 5D bodies.

'side-grade'...PERFECT word for that..lol. Well put.

I too toyed with one not too long after thay came out and like you saw no major upgrade. Or at least not one that would make me upgrade from a 30D (which i dont have im just saying ...settle down everyone.lol )

The button mushyness i didnt notice....i was trying to get adjusted to the menu

Good review...an honest one....those count,,,also....you know youre going to get someone debating the upgrade....i bet there is one already above me before i even finish this post..lol.

wow! a couple of weeks ago a whole bunch of guys were claiming that the 40d was the new IQ and iso king and that it focussed better than the quirky mark III.

and now today we're saying the 40d is comparable to the 30d in IQ, iso and AF?

well i guess i was wrong about six months...maybe the 40d pink cloud will lift sooner and we'll know the truth !

ed rader

Ed one persons opinion,,,,,, still stand by my one though, I must admit I was surprised about the AF comment, that was the first thing that jumped out at me in use. But I use different lenses, maybe certain lenses will only AF at one speed, and the 30D had maxed it out :P

reading the specs of the 40D on paper, I too did not see the need to dish out the additional money for a 40D vs 30D.

all the new features are a definite selling feature (live view, partil weather seals, 3" LCD, dust sensor, sRaw) but to me, all that isnt worth >500$ (got my 30D for 850 and the 40D is 1500 here in Canada)

would rather have that money go towards a new flash/PW or glass.

MaDProFF wrote in post #3958313
Ed one persons opinion,,,,,, still stand by my one though, I must admit I was surprised about the AF comment, that was the first thing that jumped out at me in use. But I use different lenses, maybe certain lenses will only AF at one speed, and the 30D had maxed it out :P

i think the 40d probably does AF better than the 30d.

but many here were claiming that the 40d was the new IQ and iso king. of course this was before the 40d actually hit the market .

ed rader

heh, well I never claimed that not a lot wrong with the 30D IQ, (I think I know what it means), well I have some damm decent pictures with 30D, though I prefer the slight warmer photos with 40D, but yet to take one that blows my mind (not really had that opportunity though either), just got more I can use so far.
Really need to just go out with it, and shoot things, instead of football now all the time, Stoolball over, so no candids to take