40D to 1-series upgrading reasons

I would like people, who have replaced their 40D with some 1-series camera, to explain why they made that move.

I'm thinking about doing it, mainly because the 1.3x crop seams to be perfect for what I do: indoor sports, some soccer and a little concert photography once in a while (used to own the original 1D). Then of course there is the accuracy and speed of the 1-series, but I find the 40D to be very capable on that point already.
The thing is, I've only had my 40D since October last year and haven't taken more than 7000 pictures, so there better be a good reason.

So, let me hear!

Kristian,
While not the 40d, I made the switch from a 10d to a 1dm2n - and have not looked back. Two primary (can you have two primary?) reasons were the 45 point AF and the larger sensor. With the 1.3 sensor, the 17 is almost wide now - something I was sorely disappointed with with the 1.6 sensor. I figure I also am not yet using the weakest portion of the lens - the extreme corners.

I was doing BIF, and the 10d with the 7 point AF was - well let's say I can function better with the one series 45 pt system.

I've learned to absolutely love the feel - the heft is not a big issue - in fact it may help control the mirror slap at slow speeds - that is just conjecture. Though you will not notice moving from the 40d, the startup speed, and the read-write speed to the cards is light years ahead of the 10d. The 2.5" finder was a welcome change from the 1.8" on the 10d.

The adjustability of the camera is beyond amazing - I still have work to do on that front.

If you're going to a 1d3, then menuing will be much more in line with the 40d - earlier models, like mine, are different, night and day, with most everything being 2-button + dial or wheel. As long as you are not going back and forth on the same job, there will be no problem.

I'm at the point where I do not think I want to shoot anything but a one...

I made the jump twice. Went from 40D to 1DMkII. Loved the feel of the camera, the viewfinder, and the AF performance, but didn't like the amount of PP work I had to do to the images (due to the very heavy AA filter used in that series). Sold it and bought another 40D, all the while regretting the loss of the features I liked on the 1-series. Came across a great deal on a MkIIn and jumped again. Have not looked back since. The MkIIn produces stunning images that require very little work after the shot (due to a revised AA filter), and the few other little updates are nice as well. I loved my 40Ds, and think they're great cameras, but for critical focus in AI-Servo for sports use, there really is no comparison. The 1-series AF absolutely blows the 40D out of the water. I didn't understand what critical focus was until I started using the 1.

The name or number 1 is enough for me to get those 1-series bodies, they are the top line of Canon DSLR so then i will go for them always.

The amazing performance of the 40D made it difficult for me to justify the extra for the 1 series. In the end, the biggest draw was the focusing system and the dual card slots. Otherwise, my opinion is the 40D could hold it's own against just about any camera.

For me 40D to 1D MK3 was the much better ISO low noise at higher ISO.
and Now for me the Focus system is working a lot better it is a stunning camera.
I did not miss the 1.6 crop like I thought I would doing Football on full size pitches
But I agree the 40D is a stunning camera for its price,

I went from 10D --> 1D MkI --> 40D

I missed the ruggedness of the 1D body so I bought a 1Ds MkI to complement my 40D. That means I'm selling my 5D which is a very good body, but I like to stay outside independent of the weather.

Went from 30d to 1dmk2. AF is so much better, in AI servo mode.

prime80 wrote in post #5795933
I made the jump twice. Went from 40D to 1DMkII. Loved the feel of the camera, the viewfinder, and the AF performance, but didn't like the amount of PP work I had to do to the images (due to the very heavy AA filter used in that series). Sold it and bought another 40D, all the while regretting the loss of the features I liked on the 1-series. Came across a great deal on a MkIIn and jumped again. Have not looked back since. The MkIIn produces stunning images that require very little work after the shot (due to a revised AA filter), and the few other little updates are nice as well. I loved my 40Ds, and think they're great cameras, but for critical focus in AI-Servo for sports use, there really is no comparison. The 1-series AF absolutely blows the 40D out of the water. I didn't understand what critical focus was until I started using the 1.

You mean you had to do more pp to 1dmk2 shots?

For me compared to 30d, my 1dmk2 shots need very little pp if any at all. This is when using 70-200mm f2.8 or the 500mm f4 IS (with or without 1.4xTC).

ebann wrote in post #5802781
I went from 10D --> 1D MkI --> 40D

I missed the ruggedness of the 1D body so I bought a 1Ds MkI to complement my 40D. That means I'm selling my 5D which is a very good body, but I like to stay outside independent of the weather.

I might add that when I had the 1D MkI (the 40D wasn't out yet), I sold it and bought a 1D MkII. I didn't find that it had much more to offer for 2.5x the cost of the MkI. I sold the MkII and bought another MkI, which I then went on to swap for the 40D (not much more expensive than a MkI).

I went from a 20D to 1D2n. I have the 40d now in addition. Both cameras are great. I feel that both cameras have different purposes. My 1D rocks for birds and sports. For the wide angles shots, the 40D serves me well.

I went from 350D to 30D to 1Dmk2N to both FF's, each time upgrading i see significant improvement in IQ

Total waste of money in your case. No good reason at all, at all.

The 40D is just as capable as the 1DMKIII ~ sure the 1D has a few refinements, but unless you're moving into the dangerous professional world and need to shoot in wars, hurricanes and floods ~~ no earthy reason at all to change.

Tip. Wait for the 1D2 from Canon.

If I ever had a reason to move up to a 1d series camera, it would be the AF, low noise and how impressive the body looks. If I had a reason to move to 1ds, it would be megapixels, AF, and how impressive the body looks.

bobbyz wrote in post #5802918
You mean you had to do more pp to 1dmk2 shots?

For me compared to 30d, my 1dmk2 shots need very little pp if any at all. This is when using 70-200mm f2.8 or the 500mm f4 IS (with or without 1.4xTC).

Yes...the extremely strong AA filter gave the files a look that I didn't care for. I could get excellent results from it after processing the images, but I just didn't like the extra work. The files I get from the N are much more pleasing to me. I rarely have to do anything more than crop/resize to them.