40D or MkIII

I was probably in the same situation as the OP. Weekend hobbyist, with mostly FF needs for portrait, landscape, and travel photography, and hence the purchase last year of the 5D. But I also do the occasional action/sports photography, mostly motorsports, kid's sports, and dog action.

I was drooling at the prospect of getting the Mk III (or the Mk IIN before the stores sold out), for the burst rate, AI Servo tracking, 45 point focus points (reminds me of my EOS 3), and other features that lend itself as the sports/action camera of choice. However, I could never let my 5D (I am a FF addict) go for a crop camera, and I also wanted to budget for some more lenses before I was willing to spend big on a 1D body. That caused me to wait on the Mk III, that is, until the 40D came out.

I now have the 40D, and it is a very capable camera. I've used it to do some of my action/sports photography, and found it adequate and capable to meet my needs. I haven't been spoiled yet by a 1D, which may be one reason why I'm currently satisfied, but the bottom-line is that I've now got the speed to capture the images that I want with the 40D. But, ask me 2 years from now, and my desire for the Mk III may be back.

As another poster indicated, if you're not a shooting pro, then I think it's a matter of whether you have the means and the inclination to invest in the Mk III. For the money, I think the 40D is an excellent sports/action camera.

I shoot professionally and I use two 40D bodies. Why? Frankly I don't want to carry two $4,000 3lb cameras with 3lb lenses and flashes attached when the CUSTOMER can not tell the difference between the two images!

If I was shooting for myself I would get the 1DsMarkIII. But what I really want is Canon to come to terms with what some professionals need and that is the following:

* Center and Portrait high precision cross type AF points
* No tracking AF logic
* 5D body size and weight
* All the other features of the 40D

If you are regularly shooting 11x14 inch prints I would get something better than a 10mp camera. Otherwise the LiveView manual focus for the 40D will do fine for those times that it matters.

This too is my dilemma, currently shooting a 20D and was all set to buy a Mark III until the 40D came out. I know if I buy the 40D I will still lust after the 1D Mark III, but if I bought the Mark III I would always wonder about the money I could've saved. Dilemma indeed.

Good luck with your choice, Stew. I will check up with you later to see which road you chose

I would not buy a MKIII until they fix the AF issues. You might not THINK it has this issue,because you didn't use it in conditions that cause it.

Stay away from it until they fix it. 40D is amazing with AF.

Thanks for input and thoughts. I haven't arrived at any decision (and thankfully am not pressed to do so at the moment). I would not make a move to the MkIII without a definitive resolution to the AF issue, not because I think the cameras still have the problem (I don't for the new ones), but because of stigma of the problem without Canon fully acknowleging it affecting any resale value. Probably look at MkIIIn unless that changes. The best part of the 40D choice is getting cake and eating it too. Only about $700 with sale of 20D so not a major dent. And with possible rebates this fall/winter it might make the better first step. I will also sort out long lens decisions and that would make it a money decision one way or the other for sure.

Thanks again.

Stew

pcunite wrote in post #4033457
But what I really want is Canon to come to terms with what some professionals need and that is the following:
* 5D body size and weight

That's another serious consideration for me as well. For some reason, Canon no longer offers its top-line SLR without it being HUGE. Do all professionals always use or need the extended grip? Getting a 1D means having to buy additional camera bags that can take the extended body height, and as you mention, lugging about more weight.

It's curious that when photogs are doing everything we can to lighten our load, whether with carbon fiber tripods, lighter weight bags, and zooms in lieu of a collection of primes, the camera bodies continue to be heavy. I would love for Canon to come out with a pro digital body that mimicked the Olympus OM series SLRs in size, weight and capability.

EORI wrote in post #4034194
That's another serious consideration for me as well. For some reason, Canon no longer offers its top-line SLR without it being HUGE. Do all professionals always use or need the extended grip? Getting a 1D means having to buy additional camera bags that can take the extended body height, and as you mention, lugging about more weight.

It's curious that when photogs are doing everything we can to lighten our load, whether with carbon fiber tripods, lighter weight bags, and zooms in lieu of a collection of primes, the camera bodies continue to be heavy. I would love for Canon to come out with a pro digital body that mimicked the Olympus OM series SLRs in size, weight and capability.

I like your thinking. Over to you Canon.

Well the size is the differance between weather sealed and weather resistant Camera.

The 40D and Nikons D200 are advertised as weather sealed.

Whats the differance?

Pop up flashes and removable grips give entry points to the elements, both companies have decided that thier High end Pro bodies need a higher degree of protection, and to achive this the built in flash was removed and the grip was incorparated into the body.

Would you buy a body that had no possabilty of adding a grip or one with a grip that cannot be removed?

wilvoeka wrote in post #4036178
Would you buy a body that had no possabilty of adding a grip or one with a grip that cannot be removed?

A body with a weather sealed grip attachment (if they can do it with lenses, they can surely do it with the grip).

EORI wrote in post #4036397
A body with a weather sealed grip attachment (if they can do it with lenses, they can surely do it with the grip).

Once again, The grip(40D and D200) only gives the camera weather sealing, it does not make it weather resistant.

EORI wrote in post #4034194
That's another serious consideration for me as well. For some reason, Canon no longer offers its top-line SLR without it being HUGE. Do all professionals always use or need the extended grip? Getting a 1D means having to buy additional camera bags that can take the extended body height, and as you mention, lugging about more weight.

It's curious that when photogs are doing everything we can to lighten our load, whether with carbon fiber tripods, lighter weight bags, and zooms in lieu of a collection of primes, the camera bodies continue to be heavy. I would love for Canon to come out with a pro digital body that mimicked the Olympus OM series SLRs in size, weight and capability.

Weight is important to me too, but it's not enough to really make me pick one body over another. FYI, at the recent Canon Pro Expo, I was told the 1D III is lighter than the IIN. I haven't looked at the specs yet, but the new Pro catalogue claims there is weight savings in the new battery and the fact that more magnesium is used.

SunTsu wrote in post #4036844
Weight is important to me too, but it's not enough to really make me pick one body over another. FYI, at the recent Canon Pro Expo, I was told the 1D III is lighter than the IIN. I haven't looked at the specs yet, but the new Pro catalogue claims there is weight savings in the new battery and the fact that more magnesium is used.

The 1D III weighs less than the 5D with a grip on it.

wilvoeka wrote in post #4037801
The 1D III weighs less than the 5D with a grip on it.

I would not put the grip on the 5D.... battery weight not considered:

Mark 1155 grams 2.55 lb
5D 810 grams 1.79 lb
BG-E4 320 grams 0.71 lb

pcunite wrote in post #4038022
I would not put the grip on the 5D.... battery weight not considered:

Mark 1155 grams 2.55 lb
5D 810 grams 1.79 lb
BG-E4 320 grams 0.71 lb

BAttery wieght has to be considered, they dont work without one.

Considering that the MKIII AF issue is still not unsolved i wouldn't even think of that option at the moment. Surely there is no doubt the the MKIII is a far superior to the 40D when the AF problem will be solved. But hey the 40D is still a fantastic camera.

In your boat i would keep the 5D for portrait and landscapes and upgrade the 20D for a 40D for wildlife and sports. Considering you have invested in good glass i would hold on to 5D dearly just for landscapes and portraits.