40D vs 30D?

Does anyone have any info on the focusing speed and quality on these 2 cams?

https://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthre​ad.php?t=394884

I had the 30D and the AF on the 40 seems a little bit better to me...*-)

grinchy wrote in post #4161227
I had the 30D and the AF on the 40 seems a little bit better to me...*-)

But, the IQ is the same with the 30D doing a bit better on noise at higher ISO's os it's a matter of what is more important to the user.

Jon_Doh wrote in post #4161429
But, the IQ is the same with the 30D doing a bit better on noise at higher ISO's os it's a matter of what is more important to the user.

Not so sure about that statement. From what I have seen and read the ISO performance is similar but the color gradation from the 40D is better than the 30D due to the increased bits.

Jon_Doh wrote in post #4161429
But, the IQ is the same with the 30D doing a bit better on noise at higher ISO's os it's a matter of what is more important to the user.

That statement is simply not true, unless it's based on personal experience - I have a 30D and a 40D and if anything the 40D is better after you hit ISO 800.

Could I ask where you get your information from? (ie where you read that the 30D is better on noise than the 40D) Or is this personal experience?

Please post a link, if possible, to the specific article to confirm what you wrote.

@ Jon_Doh

After reading your post, I felt like I recognized the content, so I did a bit of investigation.

It seems that your are on some kind of mission to bash the 40D whenever possible, and I'm not the only person to notice:

irishman wrote in post #4032184
Is it your mission in life to run down this camera? You've lost all credibility to me.

I've listed just a sample of your negative posts below - can I respectfully ask what you have against the 40D? And why you feel the need to stir this up in every 40D versus 30D thread?

Jon_Doh wrote in post #4031920
Yes, this is one of the areas Canon cheapened the 40D. The shutter sound is crummy and the shutter button has a cheap plastic feel to it in its motion - nowhere near as smooth as the 30D and 5D.

Jon_Doh wrote in post #3995939
The 40D is a cheap camera. It shares a lot of the XTi parts in it.

Jon_Doh wrote in post #4031911
The 40D has improved autofocus, but except for that the 30D is a better camera and will take better pictures.

Jon_Doh wrote in post #3998337
I agree . I picked up a 40D and it did feel cheap. They have done something to the shutter button - it feels like a toy camera. I had a 30D and Nikon d80 on display to compare and both felt much more substantial and more camera like than the 40D. Canon is trying to pull the wool over its users eyes with this upgrade and the Mark III.

Jon_Doh wrote in post #4013826
The IQ is not close and neither is the noise. For some reason 40D fanboys feel the need to hype their camera beyond all sensibilities because Canon dropped the ball big time on this upgrade. Plus they're looking down the barrel of the soon to be released d300 which is everything the 40D should have been. If I were you I would skip the 40D and wait a few months until the 5D's replacement comes out. Hopefully Canon will have learned their lesson and do this one right.

Jon_Doh wrote in post #3894618
Fanboy all you like, but the ship has left the dock and left Canon and its fanboys standing on the pier with their pants down holding three cameras all with the tiny 10mp amateur (read noisy) sensor. The simple fact is that the Mark III and 40D are duds and Nikon, Fuji and Sony are leaving them in the dust.

Jon_Doh wrote in post #3893991
The D Mark III has the Rebel sensor in it. Get real, Canon took a great camera and turned it into an overpriced toy. Just as they won't acknowledge and fix the electronic problems in their printers they won't fix the focus problems.

Jon_Doh wrote in post #3894594
Canon needs to wake up - they've released two duds in a row (40D and Mark III) and there are too many choices out there now with better offerings. The d300 is tempting, but I despise Nikon's controls. I just wish Canon would step up to the plate and release a real upgrade. Putting the Rebel's sensor in the 40D is not an improvement and neither is putting a couple of pieces of foam tape sufficient weather proofing. The viewfinder is only slightly larger, although they're harping how much bigger it is. And while we're discussing viewfinders, why give only 95% coverage when the competition is giving 100%?

Yes, I know the d300 costs $500 more than the 40D, but the d300 has better features than the current 5D, which costs $1000 more. The 40D has the feature set you would expect in the next generation Rebel, XTi or whatever you call Canon's entry level camera. Except for fps it's no better than Nikon's d40 at twice the cost. I've been loyal to Canon since 1991, but even I have to admit they dropped the ball big time with the upgrade to the Mark III and 40D.

Jon_Doh wrote in post #3894008
Not noise, it's picking up the texture that the 40D smears with its low IQ Rebel XTi sensor.

Jon_Doh wrote in post #3893963
I'm waiting for the 5D replacement and hoping Canon doesn't ruin it like they have their other cameras.

Jon_Doh wrote in post #3893949
"5 - Am i the only one thinking that canon might have slightly lost the edge on the DSLR market?"

Nope. Just look at the their three latest releases. Two of them are complete duds. Not to mention how sorry their printers have gotten.

Canon has become so slow to react to their problems no doubt by the time they wake up and begin making incremental changes Nikon will be way down the road far ahead of them. I've been a Canon user since 1991, but I'm definitely sitting this round of "upgrades" out and will wait to see what they do in the next round. If they still have their head up their arse then I'm switching gear.

Jon_Doh wrote in post #3888758
40D noise levels should be close to the 400 as they share the same sensor.

Jon_Doh wrote in post #3894810
Yes, cameras play a large role. The 40D applies aggressive noise suppression to counter the noise from its smaller sensor which results in less resolution and loss of IQ. The Mark III has severe focusing problems which results in a lot of out of focus shots you have to toss. Then there is the greatly inferior metering and flash system Canon continues to stick with which generates bad pictures. So, yes having a camera without these problems can help make much better pictures.

Jon_Doh wrote in post #3872697
The jury is just now coming in and the 30D in low light beats the 40D; at high ISO's the 30D is marginally better. So, if the IQ overall is comparable what is the reason to upgrade? Bigger LCD? Don't need it. Besides if Canon was going to increase the size of the screen they should have increased the mp resolution. The three inch screen has the same mp as the 2.5. Nikon at least bumped their screen up to 307 mp (although they rate it in terms of dots). More fps? Don't need it. Slightly larger viewfinder? Don't need it. Now the viewfinder is much brighter, which is nice but why not give us 100% view like the d300? I can live without live view and auto ISO, both carry overs from amateur point and shoots. I don't see any compelling reason to get a 40D and in fact, why wouldn't I get the XTi? The 40D is just a jazzed up Xti and not worth the price difference between the two. There are a lot of 10 mp DLSR's out there (Sony, d40, XTi) for half the money. I'm loyal to Canon, but they really dropped the ball on this upgrade. 12 mp with 100% or near 100% viewfinder is standard in this class of camera. So I'll be sitting this one out waiting for the 50D.

$hit the 40D feels better in my hands than my 30D did that for sure...The 40D does not feel like a "Toy" at all...I love this camera and I am still learning with it...the 30D is a GREAT camera but to me the 40D is better....*-)

Since one of the snippets quoted in the above thread references a comment I made, let me address that comment because it is taken out of context.

My comment was directly related to the feel of the row of butttons on the rear of the camera, underneath the LCD screen. After admittedly using the camera for only about an hour in Best Buy I felt that those buttons felt a little more plasticy and that I preferred the slightly mushier feel of the 30D. I believe I did say that 'for me', it cheapened the feel (of those buttons, not the camera as whole) a bit.

Beyond that I made no comments about the camera being or feeling cheap and have never jumped on the 'bash the 40D' bandwagon. I like the 40D very much and I'm still considering getting one.

I've edited my earlier post and removed any reference to you TMR.

The quote was not supposed to involve you in any way.

Thanks Helrain. No harm done. I just like to be clear about those things.

From what I've read, the 20D and 30D are about the same in terms of image quality. I actually own a 40D and in terms of the 20 vs. the 40D, there's no comparison. The 40D smokes the 20D in every respect. Keep in mind I'm not a pixel peeper, but I have over 20 years of experience behind the camera and, to me, the difference if obvious.

Gee it's nice to see you following me over here to this board Helrain. Perhaps I should quote your posts from all the boards you've been banned from. But I'm not going to play that game.

What I was referring to is the number of professional reviews and tests that point out what I said in my post here. Canon has finally recognized the autofocus problems with the Mark III and hopefully they'll soon recognized and offer a fix for the 40D's focus problems. I didn't cause the problems in these two cameras.

Jon_Doh wrote in post #4164970
Perhaps I should quote your posts from all the boards you've been banned from.

Please, quote one - this is the first and only board I have ever belonged to and never heard of you before I first saw your comments a while ago.

Jon_Doh wrote in post #4164970
Gee it's nice to see you following me over here to this board Helrain. Perhaps I should quote your posts from all the boards you've been banned from. But I'm not going to play that game.

What I was referring to is the number of professional reviews and tests that point out what I said in my post here. Canon has finally recognized the autofocus problems with the Mark III and hopefully they'll soon recognized and offer a fix for the 40D's focus problems. I didn't cause the problems in these two cameras.

Can you please give us the reference to at least some of that number of professional reviews and tests?
Let’s say, 3 of them..