CNET.com review of the 40D

If this has been posted before, my humble apology.

If not here is CNET's review of the EOS 40D:

http://reviews.cnet.co​m …1_7-32572247.html?tag=pop

I finally decided to make the jump from my trusted EOS 3 (film) to the 40D and so far I am impressed. (Bought it at B & H).

Thanks, tonybear. Hope you enjoy your new camera!

i'm actually surprised that they only gave it an 8.1....I'd figure this'd be a camera that cnet would just eat up. their fault is that the spot meter size is too big? weird.

Cathpah wrote in post #4010894
i'm actually surprised that they only gave it an 8.1....I'd figure this'd be a camera that cnet would just eat up. their fault is that the spot meter size is too big? weird.

The 30D got an 8.0 and they made a comment about the size of the spot meter being big but didn't list it as a con. Probably because it was one of the only new features it had over the 20D.

CNet is ok for reviews. I never trust a reviewer when they are biased towards the business market. Don't know if that matters with cameras but it sure does with computer hardware. I liked to read the user comments on CNet for the cons only. If taken with a grain of salt you can get a good feel for the most common problems a product will have.

The CNET review is a joke as they usually are for camera reviews. This one sentence says it all

D80 a lot less? it’s about $275 less, and WTF, they themselves state that the 40D is faster but the Noink feels faster. What the heck is that. Also, there is no mention of performance above ISO400, Live view is glossed over, and even the summation stated that the picture quality is better but some people are too stupid to notice so go Noink. Hmm... Maybe CNET hit it. Only stupid, unobservant people go Noink

gjl711 wrote in post #4011362
The CNET review is a joke as they usually are for camera reviews. This one sentence says it all

D80 a lot less? it’s about $275 less, and WTF, they themselves state that the 40D is faster but the Noink feels faster. What the heck is that. Also, there is no mention of performance above ISO400, Live view is glossed over, and even the summation stated that the picture quality is better but some people are too stupid to notice so go Noink. Hmm... Maybe CNET hit it. Only stupid, unobservant people go Noink

They are saying that the D80 is faster than the 40D based on AF speed, etc... There's more to AF speed than just the body.

proxes wrote in post #4011385
They are saying that the D80 is faster than the 40D based on AF speed, etc... There's more to AF speed than just the body.

Yup and in my experience, 400D is faster focusing than a D80 anyway

I don't think much of the review. It reminds me a lot of some Consumer Reports car reviews. They'd review two vehicles that are just about exactly alike in every measure, then give one a mediocre rating and the other a "best buy" rating based solely on the manufacturer.
Worthless review.

We're all obviously here because we either shoot or have a vested interest in Canon gear, so I'm fairly confident I can surmise what sort of review we would like to have seen...

Honestly, though, anyone who makes a buying decision based solely on one review deserves to be conned into buying a potentially inferior product.

cnet reviewed the markIII and gave it a 9.3....I would have figured that the 40D with many of the same features at 1/4 of the price would have ranked much higher than 8.1 as a result.....reviews can be funny..not very consistent....also cnet suggests the low light focus is not all that good on the 40d..i have found it quite good..in fact a fair bit better than my 30d was so go figure!

I think the cnet review should be changed to be about the kit lens and not the 40D.

CNET? heh .. dunno

CNET sucks IMO. 5D got under 8 even. It's a boring site to check out and the reviews are stupid IMO.

well cnet is more nikon bias...did you see the d80 vs 400d, that should explain it! generally i dont trust there reviews, but for some reason i like reading through them.