Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Forums  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear
Guest
Forums  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon Digital Cameras 
Thread started 10 Jan 2010 (Sunday) 07:24
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links (only for non-logged)

Upgrade from 40D to 7D, can one really justify it ?

 
arkturas
Member
Avatar
214 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Jun 2006
Location: UK
     
Jan 10, 2010 07:24 |  #1

Just want to fire this one out there to the 7D owners, I think there is justification when upgrading from the lower end DSLR units (450's,500D's) but can one justify the cost when upgrading from a 40D/50D ?

I've been subtly reducing my overall camera spend the last few years, as I have slowly come to realise that its not so much the "Kit" that makes the image but the photographer, although the urge to splash out on some new shiny camera is always there, regardless of whether or not its actually worth it.

I’m interested to hear from those photogs that upgraded from the 40D/50D, is the 7D worth it in terms of IQ/performance/feature​s ?


Gear: a camera and some lenses

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
scpictaker
Goldmember
Avatar
1,389 posts
Likes: 11
Joined Feb 2009
Location: Edgerton Wis
     
Jan 10, 2010 07:35 |  #2

I went from the 50D and it was totally worth it. The new AF system was my driving factor. The low noise at high ISO is leaps and bounds better than the 40/50D.


My Flickr (external link)
Canon R5 l R6 MKII l R6 l RF24-105L l RF14-35 L l RF15-35 Ll RF 85L l RF70-200 2.8 L l RF100 Macro L l RF100-500L l RF70-200 4.0 L

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
CxThree
Senior Member
713 posts
Joined May 2009
     
Jan 10, 2010 07:54 |  #3

I upgraded from thr 40D. Never looked back. THe 7D has so many useful new features that it is easily worth the upgrade.


Canon EOS 5D MKIII, 7D
Canon Lenses : 70-200 F2.8L II IS : 24-105 F4L IS : 16-35 F2.8L : 50mm F1.4 : 85mm F1.8 : 100mm F2.8 Macro : 10-22mm
4x 600EX-RT
Speedotron Black Line

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
primalcarl
Senior Member
490 posts
Joined Aug 2007
Location: Devon, UK
     
Jan 10, 2010 08:10 |  #4

I'm not entirely convinced. I was very happy with the IQ from the 40D. For the extra it cost to make the switch I could've got myself another nice L lens. I'm considering going to a 1DIII


http://csimages.daport​folio.com/ (external link)
My Flickr (external link)
Canon 550D 15-85 70-300L 430exII

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
oRGie
Senior Member
398 posts
Joined Nov 2009
Location: Portugal
     
Jan 10, 2010 08:12 as a reply to  @ CxThree's post |  #5

From 40D too, well worth it for me, also the longer you keep the older models the less they are worth for trade in. I dont think I would have from a 50D though, maybe, but I like to jump every couple of generations of body rather than each one. The 7D was a bit different though, the price made the jump from x0D to xD line hard to resist.


oRGie - I am an EOS and the 7D was my idea :cool:
http://www.fluidr.com/​photos/orgie (external link)
EF70-200F4LIS - EF-S15-85IS - EF50 1.8II

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
GSansoucie
Senior Member
Avatar
788 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Jul 2005
Location: Southern Maine
     
Jan 10, 2010 08:16 |  #6

I'm the same boat. I've been researching the hell out of the 7D, I've watched all the videos, read the manual, read the posts. I've been trying to prepare for the switch. I shoot my 40D daily and know it cold. There is a big change procedurally with the 7D. The new AF, High ISO performance, and video are my driving factors.

Just like primalcarl points out, I've also considered upgrading my 70-200 F4L to the 70-200 f/2.8L IS. It is pretty much the same cost.


-=Glen=-
Flickr Stream (external link)
Check out my 2010 PaD (external link)
http://www.pbase.com/g​sansoucie (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Timphoto
Creme de la Curmudgeon
Avatar
11,020 posts
Gallery: 207 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 9603
Joined Apr 2008
Location: Sonoma
     
Jan 10, 2010 08:43 |  #7

I switched from a 40D and I'll admit I like the improved AF & LCD, the brighter viewfinder, the integrated speedlite transmitter, improvements on some of the buttons (especially the on-off switch) and the custom controls feature. But I didn't need or want the 18 megapixels and video.

On the other hand if faced with a choice betweeen upgrading the body or getting better glass, like primalcarl said - go for the glass. There will always be a new improved body to lust after next year.



Tim


  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
arkturas
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
Avatar
214 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Jun 2006
Location: UK
     
Jan 10, 2010 09:03 |  #8

Timphoto wrote in post #9364000 (external link)
I switched from a 40D and I'll admit I like the improved AF & LCD, the brighter viewfinder...

On the other hand if faced with a choice betweeen upgrading the body or getting better glass, like primalcarl said - go for the glass. There will always be a new improved body to lust after next year.

This is true, I use allot of old glass all manual focus the 100% vf & brightness are advantageous, I know there is huge debate on cropped vs full frame censors, but I will probably always remain cropped, the 1D's hold the middle ground though with 1.3x but the 1D form factor is just too bulky.

I also prefer spending money on the lenses, as they seem to hold their value very well and in some cases can give you a return on your investment.

In my opinion the 7D isnt really an upgrade from the 40/50D bodies its a new series of camera occupying the same APS-C format, I guess that’s why its a difficult choice.


Gear: a camera and some lenses

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Timphoto
Creme de la Curmudgeon
Avatar
11,020 posts
Gallery: 207 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 9603
Joined Apr 2008
Location: Sonoma
     
Jan 10, 2010 09:22 |  #9

Everyone's situation is different. It sounds like better glass would be more appropriate for your situation.

And then to muddy the waters even further, and make the decision even more difficult, there are the rumors about what features will be included in the 60D. :)



Tim


  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
pgcaldito
Member
43 posts
Joined Mar 2009
     
Jan 10, 2010 09:49 |  #10

Cost obviously means different things to different people so only you can decide if it's justified. To me, it's worth it. The big difference is, given the way I shoot, the 7D allows me to get shots I simply can't get with the 40D. The 7D's functionality in lesser conditions--both high-ISO performance and AF--is vastly superior; I regularly shoot it at ISO 3200 and 6400, whereas I think 1600 on the 40D is pushing it, and even that's reluctant. The AF is significantly better, I love the additional AF points (and greater coverage within the viewfinder), the metering is noticeably improved. The end result is I get better and more keeper images in less than ideal circumstances (such as low light, indoors, moving subjects, etc.) which, for me, seems the rule, not exception.

That said, the 40D is a great camera, I still use it, and for images made in good circumstances (good light, subjects relatively static), I don't think there is an appreciable difference in image quality.


pgko.zenfolio.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Kirke
Member
Avatar
168 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Jan 2010
Location: Massachusetts, USA
     
Jan 10, 2010 10:00 as a reply to  @ arkturas's post |  #11

I wasn't convinced at first (before I learned how to use 7D), but for the ISO performance alone it was totally worth it for me. With 40D I rarely went above ISO 800, now I take pictures between ISO 1000-2000 all the time. Plus, the new AF system rocks. If you shoot wildlife (or sports, or anything that moves quickly) 7D could more useful than 40D, at least it's been for me. Big time. I wasn't crazy about 18 megapixels, but I got used to it. I love more details, the clarity.

40D is an awesome camera, so you don't need to upgrade if you're satisfied with it. Investing in a good lens is a good choice, too. Don't forget there's going to be even a better camera out soon, so you can always upgrade later. :lol:


7D | 100mm macro f2.8L IS | 70-200mm f4L IS | 100-400mm f4.5-5.6L IS | Tokina 11-16mm f2.8 | Tamron 17-50mm f2.8

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
CxThree
Senior Member
713 posts
Joined May 2009
     
Jan 10, 2010 10:56 |  #12

You can buy all the fast glass you want. The 40D in low light will just not give you anything close to what the 7D can do. I have 1.4 and 2.8 glass. The difference in images at 1600ISO and higher is quite large.

The 7D has more MP, faster FPS, built in wireless flash control, a new autofocusing system with the ability to do many cool features I will cover below, and many other advantages like video.

Some cool features of the AF:
1) More points for AF
2) More AF options (Zone, expanded point af, etc)
3) Memorized AF points. IE. use center spot AF and with the click of one button, jump to far right point for that shot. Instant creativity.
4) Different AF points for horizontal vs vertical shots.
5) built in leveling system for live view and in the viewfinder.
6) Configure the joystick on the camera to give you the ability to move the AF point arounddd the viewfinder as you compose your shot.

I am sure there are more I am leaving out.

Don't get me wrong. I loved my 40D. But a week or 2 with the 7D and the 40d will move to a permanent backup role for you. Mine has not had one click on it since I bought my 7D.


Canon EOS 5D MKIII, 7D
Canon Lenses : 70-200 F2.8L II IS : 24-105 F4L IS : 16-35 F2.8L : 50mm F1.4 : 85mm F1.8 : 100mm F2.8 Macro : 10-22mm
4x 600EX-RT
Speedotron Black Line

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
GSansoucie
Senior Member
Avatar
788 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Jul 2005
Location: Southern Maine
     
Jan 10, 2010 11:06 |  #13

Timphoto wrote in post #9364000 (external link)
But I didn't need or want the 18 megapixels

This is one of the cons in my current decision process. I don't want the increased noise that is the result of cramming so many pixels into the same sensor. There is the potential hidden cost of computer upgrade on my part. My two year old MacBook Pro is keeping up with my 40D images, I think I'd have to upgrade my computer along with the 7D. If I shoot video, my older CF cards aren't going to cut it, at about $100 a pop for the new cards, they add up. I cannot live without my RRS gear, I'd have to get a new RRS L-Plate for the 7D, that's $140 plus a ten day wait. The camera's ability to wirelessly control my canon flashes kind of negates my recent Cybersync investment (kind of).


-=Glen=-
Flickr Stream (external link)
Check out my 2010 PaD (external link)
http://www.pbase.com/g​sansoucie (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Tangledlines
Member
151 posts
Joined Feb 2006
Location: Calgary, AB
     
Jan 10, 2010 11:19 |  #14

the low light ability and quality was worth it to me. Right now I'm starting to really notice a big difference in the amount of detail captured in my 7D images compared to what I had in my 40D images. The AF system is really nice as well as is the LCD screen on the 7D compared to the 40D. Oh yeah and don't forget the HD video.

I shot some comparison photos the other night with a 40D and I was really suprised to see a really noticable difference in image quality from the 7D. I thought the images would be bigger but not really "better", but after comparing the 2 cameras I am really glad I did the upgrade.


www.korbanschwab.com (external link)

Canon/Sigma/Tamron/Man​frotto/Profoto

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
umphotography
grabbing their Johnson
Avatar
12,321 posts
Gallery: 21 photos
Likes: 4203
Joined Oct 2007
Location: Rathdrum, Idaho
     
Jan 10, 2010 11:26 as a reply to  @ Tangledlines's post |  #15

all you have to do is look at your 40d files at 1600-3200 and compare to a 7d file from 1600-3200.........no other explanation is needed really

but the 19 focal points that work and the other goodies are a big contributing factor.

no comparison b/t the 2 cameras.......if you dont plan on shooting above 1000 iso.......stay with your 40d


Mike
www.umphotography.com (external link)
GEAR LIST
Facebook (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links (only for non-logged)

10,236 views & 0 likes for this thread, 26 members have posted to it.
Upgrade from 40D to 7D, can one really justify it ?
FORUMS Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon Digital Cameras 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Forums   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset   •  Home

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.58forum software
version 2.58 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is Mihai Bucur
851 guests, 147 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15,144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.