SunTsu wrote in post #4113604
Good for you, man. You must be estatic.
Out of curiousity, do you shoot for money? Reason I'm asking is (as I think you know), I'm thinking of getting one too, but I'm just trying to justify the cost for yet another expensive hobby. For $4500, I could get a pretty sweet pair of speakers!
Oh...if you're up to it, maybe post some pics of your camera in your bag, etc. Hehe...Kind of geeky, but it might be something I'd do. And of course....post some 100% crops! Oh....and if you're really up to it, maybe some comparison shots of the 40D vs. 1D. Hehe....I know I'm asking a lot.
No I don't shoot for money, it is a hobby, but I do hope to maybe sell some prints one day, actually sold one to a London newspaper the other day off web site, unusual Sports he called it, being Stoolball
I cannot compare to much over 40D just yet, and TBH the 40D is actually really really good, the sole reason i got a MK 3 is for Low High ISO noise, and that difference between a 40D and MK3 does stand out a mile,
If a person who uses a MK 3 and then picked up a 40D and shot it, I bet they would be pleasantly surprised to as how responsive the AF on the 40D is, though again I not really messed with any settings on the MK3 settings to make it quicker, though it was certainly not slow
, but if you shoot sports in good light a 40D will do a great job. I will post some stuff if you wish tomorrow, after I play football.
It is very different to the 40D in hold and feel, in some ways I a bit disappointed in that the 40D felt good to hold, the Mk3 is different but will soon get used to it, my biggest problem is I am left handed, I am tending to mist up the VF and LCD on the mk3 did not on the 40D
I had a good walk around this afternoon, in some fields, and got a few shots, and loads of duck ones, but these are wild, and there was a small island on the pond every time I moved one way they would swim around the other
, so never got that close, hence 560mm 