40D vs 1DmkII.......... IQ only

Putting all other factors aside, talk to me about the image quality of the 40D vs the 1DmkII. I owned a mkII, I've never owned a 40D. IQ would include but definately not be limited to high ISO...Looking for real life experiences. Anyone own both?

I've owned both of them, although not currently. My impression was that the 40D was a bit sharper with a bit better color in good, natural light, however, the 40D files seem to break apart faster than the 1DMK2 files if the exposure has to be pushed at all during post. Files from the 1DMK2 also, IMHO, have more pleasing bokeh and less noise in the bokeh, especially at high ISO, due to the larger sensor. For overall image quality, I would take the 1DMK2 over the 40D.

I own both, but haven't done a direct comparison of the files. Just off the top of my head, though, I'd have to say that I still prefer the 1DMKIIN files to the 40D files.

i was looking at both cameras too... trying to see what is better, the 40d, or mark II (not N)

assuming you would have to post the same settings with same subject and lens to do an accurate comparison

Thanks for the responses, not what I expected but better in the end for me to have the added bonus' of the 1D build and AF.

in just my opinion under normal conditions, 6 of one to 1/2 dozen the other. But I can tell you that in lower light, high ISO, indoor sporting events I will take the 40D over the mklln. and I own 2 of each.

kong wrote in post #5157867
in just my opinion under normal conditions, 6 of one to 1/2 dozen the other. But I can tell you that in lower light, high ISO, indoor sporting events I will take the 40D over the mklln. and I own 2 of each.

I certainly wasn't expecting that response.

kong wrote in post #5157867
in just my opinion under normal conditions, 6 of one to 1/2 dozen the other. But I can tell you that in lower light, high ISO, indoor sporting events I will take the 40D over the mklln. and I own 2 of each.

For what reason?

Number of keepers?
Weight of camera body + lens?
Overall image quality of a keeper?
Crop factor?
etc.

Which factors are most important for you on your decision?

I'm guessing noise. High ISO performance is important to me, but not the highest thing on the list....

own both, sold my 1D markII mainly because i dnt shoot raw, im not using the full capability of the camera, image quality out of the camera, i say 40D has a very slight edge IQ. picture style helps alot for me, as a jpeg user i go w/ 40D.

Thanks thrash, yeah, I shoot RAW so styles don't play into it for me. Thinking I don't need my 5D anymore since the 1DsmkII outplays the 5D on just about every level. So thinking the 1DmkII might just make a good match, rather than a xxD

thatkatmat wrote in post #5158864
Thanks thrash, yeah, I shoot RAW so styles don't play into it for me. Thinking I don't need my 5D anymore since the 1DsmkII outplays the 5D on just about every level. So thinking the 1DmkII might just make a good match, rather than a xxD

1DmkII paired w/ 1Ds mkII that's a very solid team. wheewww.

yeah, so now the search is on for a trade for a great shape 1DmkII for my 5D. Funny, as soon a s you make up your mind on what you want, the market dries up for that item. last week they were everywhere...This week it's like hunting for a needle in a haystack!

I had a 40D, sold it to buy a 1DMkII, then sold that to buy another 40D. I like the raw files from the 40D better than what I got from the MkII. It's not a huge difference, but it was noticeable to me.

From my experience the 1d bodies meter better than the 20/30/40d and this gives better results than the 40d.