get a couple 40D/5D RAW file comparison downloads here!

I was seriously considering a 5D a while ago and put it head to head against my 40D. I used it for a while and eventually went on a hike with the 40D and 5D around my neck.

A lot of people have been asking me for a couple of RAW files from my hike so they can compare the two. So instead of sending them individually like I've been doing, I'll just let the potn public here grab the files at their leisure if they are interested in a little comparison.

There are only 4 files (because they're freaking huge) and it's totally and absolutely unscientific. Used a tokina 11-16 on the 40D and 24-105 on the 5D. The 40D shoots at a lower exposure than the 5D so the shutter speeds vary between the two, though I always used the same the aperture and ISO.

I found them on par up to ISO800, very similar at 1600 (you'd be hard pressed to notice a diff even in large print), and the 5D to be quite noticeably better at 3200. The colours are just as beautiful (IMO) on the 40D as they are on the 5D.

Curious to see what other people's experiences are between the two... drop a comment.

(caution, about 60mb zip file)
right-click and save-as HERE!

Noticed less dof on the 5D, as well as better bokeh. That might be attributed to the lens though. Do you think you could do it again but with the same lens on both (at the same field of view though)

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

I actually find the 40D's colors to be a quite a bit "cooler", which I usally like - I notice that in your shot Lloyd, although this could be the lens.

Here's another "use" comparison that I did a while back....

Again, they are both capable of very nice results....


40D, 85 1.8, f/1.8...

A pro photographer friend of mine did a comparison about year ago between the 5D, 40D, a P&S and 1Ds MkII because of what he called the "mythical image quality" of the 5D. When he just asked people in his studio to rate the images on screen without knowing what camera took them they all picked the 1Ds II or 40D as the best on a particular shot, with prints it was the same again but some of the P&S shots were considered best. The 5D was never chosen as the better image by photographers, models and interns out of 30+ shots.

When he printed the camera model in the corner of the image/print they suddenly became a better image based on the price of the camera, with the 1Ds II and 5D all being chosen as best.

Personally, when I was replacing a broken 400D, I borrowed the same friend's 5D and 40D and played with them for a couple of weeks. While the 5D feels nicer in your hand, I couldn't see this "mythical image quality" either, with the 40D winning hands down on quality and colour for me which is why I bought one.

I know the 5D is a nice camera that still keeps up with it's more modern contemporaries but I just don't see what it's fans see when it comes to image quality. Both the samples posted here don't change my mind either. I ran them all through C1 then printed them and the 40D images just jumped off the page more for me.

I find that my 40D does great too. Many times however I find myself needing to use a 35mm lens on the 40D just to get everything in that I need. I would much rather use a 50mm prime on the 5D for these cases as I understand that optically it is easer to make a better lens past 35mm. My 50mm is much better than my 35mm although it could just be copy variation.

Honestly in comes down to nitpickin' between these two cameras. Under the same conditions with like lens, flash, studio setup and the such the differences are almost not even worth considering whether one is better than the other.

Its really just a matter of who want's FF or the APS-C sensor. Both have their advantages over each other but IQ isn't the marginal point its often made out to be.