is the new 40d the next step up from a 400d !

live view,

larger viewfinder
apost metering

my three reason

i guess i more wanted to know if the 40d is the newer version of the 30d etc...

Sparky98 wrote in post #3977237
I upgraded from a G3 to a 40D and if the only difference between the two cameras was the viewfinder then I wouldn't have upgraded. The larger viewfinder is nice but the tiny, by comparison, G3 viewfinder did everything I needed it to do. I still need to put on my reading glasses to see the 40D viewfinder. I have had my camera a week now and have not even tried use use live view but if you are going to be using it at "hard to reach angles" will you be able to even see the viewfinder? The articulated view finder of the G3 is way more useful for that type shooting than the 40D.

Some people will tell you the larger viewfinder of the 40D is the greatest advancement in modern history but if that is the only reason you are upgrading then I think you will be disappointed. If you just want to upgrade and have the money then do it. You will love the 40D for a lot of reasons more than just the viewfinder and live view.

ok. here is what i really think im trying to ask.

i have the 400d, i have read about the 40d and it clearly has a few feathures over the 400d and it also has a kit lens that appears to be worth three times as much as the 400d standard lens.

so....

based on this listy below - outting aside the "price" /newest models

can anyone simply list the major cameras in order of entry level to excellent?

i know it seems obvious by price, but im also curious to know what are the very latest releases. im not interested in a model that was releasesd 3 yrs ago for example.

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

u wrote:

Another thing I found really annoying is that AF no longer works with my Kenko pro 1.4 converter and Canon 100-400mm. It worked fine on the 30D but won't focus at all with the 40D (center point & pins taped of course) This has been confirmed by others so its not faulty.
I just find it amazing that the 40D with "improved AF" doesn't work as well as the 30D!?!?!


the 30d is an older model right and it dosn have live view...
so, if i am goinf gtom 400d-40d

iks this an issue - what u were saying above?

evandavies wrote in post #3978743
I went from 400D to 30D to 40D...

You will see a big difference going from 400D to either 30D or 40D.
The step from 30D to 40D has some benefits but also some downsides too.
Its easy to find a list of the benefits BUT its not all good:

The 40D is LESS light sensitive than the 30D by 2/3 of a stop. This is what is causing so much confusion with the noise comparisons. For the same exposure settings the 40D image will come out slightly under exposed and so will have more noise especially if corrected to the brightness of the 30D shot.

Another thing I found really annoying is that AF no longer works with my Kenko pro 1.4 converter and Canon 100-400mm. It worked fine on the 30D but won't focus at all with the 40D (center point & pins taped of course) This has been confirmed by others so its not faulty.
I just find it amazing that the 40D with "improved AF" doesn't work as well as the 30D!?!?!

Of course here are some definite benefits of the 40D like the live view is great for macro and fixed base shooting (tethered to laptop). I like The dust reduction, slightly higher burst rate, bigger screen and user presets.

You have to consider what is really important to you. I decided to keep the 40D and sell the 30D mainly because of the higher burst rate but it wasn't an easy decision.

ok

the other reason i wanted to maybet get the 40d is the lens appears to be of a higher quaility and three times dearer. would the 700d thats comes out have a great lens? and live view and spot metering?

would the 700d that co

Dragos Jianu wrote in post #3979467
if those are the main reasons , you do realize that in February Canon will launch the 700D which will have both those features and most likely a 12.5mp sensor for 8-900$ ? Even before the recent Nikon D300.D3 ordeal we've seen it happen with the 400D vs 30D. So i have a feeling the 700D will be even closer to the 40D in terms of features then the 400D was to the 30D.

I am not to sure where the 700D came from, but if a camera was ever called a 700D, it would I think be after 600D. or 650D, and by then the 40D would be like 80D

The 40D is the prob best for what you pay at the moment, and the newest, the next model up is a 5D and that is almost twice the Price , and does not have Live view anyhow.
I would Guess the 40D will be more than sufficient for you for a while, if you are going to out live a 40D it means you are into fast Sports, big fields, in very low light, and even then the 40D do a reasonable job with the right lens.

Live screen = no big deal to me! The things over a 400D, which I have, that would clearly make a difference to me is the High ISO, FSP, Focusing, and the build, but this is because I do alot of nature photography.

Aussie, to answer your question, from best to least IMO based on specs not price: 40D, 30D, 400D, 350D. IMO the 30D is a great value right now that one can be had for around 850! I think this is the camera I will be upgradeding to, for it has just the edge over the 400D I need right now.

I shoot with a 400D and recently got a 40D, great second body however i reckomend grabbing a body and not the kit lens then buy some proper glass. What kind of papparazi work do you do around Sydney??

interestinhg

u still wanna go for the 30d over the newer 40d

BSBXTi wrote in post #3981518
Live screen = no big deal to me! The things over a 400D, which I have, that would clearly make a difference to me is the High ISO, FSP, Focusing, and the build, but this is because I do alot of nature photography.

Aussie, to answer your question, from best to least IMO based on specs not price: 40D, 30D, 400D, 350D. IMO the 30D is a great value right now that one can be had for around 850! I think this is the camera I will be upgradeding to, for it has just the edge over the 400D I need right now.

hey mate

i hate the word paparazzi

but i have slowly been doing red carpet work .

like music aweards that kinda thing

only in syndey.

im doing the nick awards soon

that be kool (nicolodian kids choice awards) (bad spelling)

i have found it easier money to sell images directly to mags rather than
be given accreditation from a compnay who only pays a one off fee and keeps all the copyright....

the faster frames per second really appelas to me too for this kinda work ...

NSWESP wrote in post #3982246
I shoot with a 400D and recently got a 40D, great second body however i reckomend grabbing a body and not the kit lens then buy some proper glass. What kind of papparazi work do you do around Sydney??

Yep 40D would be great for your uses! Red Carpet isnt really Paparazi so i take that back

AussieCat wrote in post #3977051
wow

u upgraded already

how are u finding it?

the kit slens is heaps better and higher quality than the 400 dyeah

There are keys on both sides of your keyboard labeled "shift". Those will allow you to use caps so you may type in sentences.

your a smart cat i see

rklepper wrote in post #3985494
There are keys on both sides of your keyboard labeled "shift". Those will allow you to use caps so you may type in sentences.

i would consider getting more glass before upgrading to the 40D. you can have a sports car, but what good is it if all you use is generic tires.

ok fair point but the 40d has a kit lens that is worth $1000

compard to the kits lens on the 400d that is worth $300

hence - is this already a good upgrade?

e r y k wrote in post #3988380
i would consider getting more glass before upgrading to the 40D. you can have a sports car, but what good is it if all you use is generic tires.

AussieCat wrote in post #3977014
is the new 40d the next step up from a 400d

i am thinking about selling my 400 d that i bought 9 mnths ago
and getting a new 40 d.

i know - call me crazy - but i just want the new one for a few reasons
and im wondering - is the 40d the next step ip from the 400d in terms of quality .... features...

the main things that appeal to me for the 40d is the live view

(which id use cause i do some odd media/paparazzi work and i need to sometime take images from hard to reach angles ....)

also the screen is bigger
and also ist has spot metering.

any thoughts?

if money is not really an issue - is it simply a great step up form the 400d?

I got a 350D and nine months later, having become sick of its small size and viewfinder, upgraded to a 20D. At the time, the price difference between the 30D and 20D was so great( $1,100 vs. $650) and the actual differences so small that it was a no-brainer for me.

If I were doing this now, with the 40D out, I'd be very tempted to get the 40D and skip the 30D. This time though the price differential between the 40D and the 30D is very small and I think the differences in the cameras a great. I don't think you could spend a better $1300 on a camera.