Looking to upgrade from a 40D. Best bang for your buck full frame?

POTNers,

Looking for some better low ISO performance from my camera. Looking to upgrade my 40D body to something that performs better in low light and in general, better image quality. What would you guys recommend in terms of a full frame camera that I can get the most for my money?

Only running a Tamron 28-75 right now as well.

Does your next body HAVE to be full frame?

the 1D mark 2 is a great body with the 50mm f1.8.....

used 5D at about 900-1100 USD would be (as a matter of fact, was) my choice

used 5D

Is the 5D good for high ISO?

I just moved from 40d to 5Dc, and yes the high ISO is much better. ISO1600 looks like ISO800 on the 40d, and ISO3200 looks almost as good as ISO1600 on 40D (your results may vary). The noise is more "grain" like and easier to clean up, and there is more detail.

Going from 400D to 30d to 40d this is the first camera I have noticed a marked improvement in IQ.

kevinng828 wrote in post #10924675
POTNers,

Looking for some better low ISO performance from my camera. Looking to upgrade my 40D body to something that performs better in low light and in general, better image quality. What would you guys recommend in terms of a full frame camera that I can get the most for my money?

Only running a Tamron 28-75 right now as well.

You'll get more out of your system by spending on a lens or two instead. For example, having a Sigma 30 1.4 and 85 1.8 will give you a LOT more low light shooting options.

People are recommending a 5D version 1. But in reality, adding some primes will allow you to shoot at lower ISO values than using your tamron on a 5D. Which will also give you cleaner image quality.

picturecrazy wrote in post #10926374
You'll get more out of your system by spending on a lens or two instead. For example, having a Sigma 30 1.4 and 85 1.8 will give you a LOT more low light shooting options.

People are recommending a 5D version 1. But in reality, adding some primes will allow you to shoot at lower ISO values than using your tamron on a 5D. Which will also give you cleaner image quality.

I agree, nothing better than a fast sharp prime... watch out though fast primes are addicting

what i think the best bang for your buck FF camera is

1. canon 5D classic.
2. nikon d700
3. 5d mark II

picturecrazy wrote in post #10926374
You'll get more out of your system by spending on a lens or two instead. For example, having a Sigma 30 1.4 and 85 1.8 will give you a LOT more low light shooting options.

People are recommending a 5D version 1. But in reality, adding some primes will allow you to shoot at lower ISO values than using your tamron on a 5D. Which will also give you cleaner image quality.

Yah, this guy hit the nail on the head. I just ordered a 5Dc and pitted it against my 40D in some "tests'. The 5Dc was a little sharper and maybe 1 stop cleaner ISO, but thats about it. Im still shooting the 40D and the 5Dc has moved on to a new owner.

Since I didnt need the thinner DOF offered by FF, these benefits didnt really do much for me. You'd be surprised how similar pics look from the 40D and 5D. If you really want better low light performance - better to spend it on a faster lens.

5Dc

MNUplander wrote in post #10927074
Yah, this guy hit the nail on the head. I just ordered a 5Dc and pitted it against my 40D in some "tests'. The 5Dc was a little sharper and maybe 1 stop cleaner ISO, but thats about it. Im still shooting the 40D and the 5Dc has moved on to a new owner.

Since I didnt need the thinner DOF offered by FF, these benefits didnt really do much for me. You'd be surprised how similar pics look from the 40D and 5D. If you really want better low light performance - better to spend it on a faster lens.

This wasn't my experience at all. I'm getting way better results out of the camera, with my 30d/40d I need to do PP to get them to "pop". I guess it also depends what you are shooting and what lenses you use. I find I am getting more detail in my images, and my Sigma 24-60 which was "ok" on crop seems to work much better on the 5D (sharper wide open).

I went from a 40D to a 5D and uttered the word "wow" when I looked at the first images on my monitor. Never did that before and never since.

I have since moved on to a 5DII for the better noise handling and the pixels which gives me more room to crop, if necessary.

The 5D was a serious image upgrade to the 40D, imo. 40D images need a lot of pp, compared to the 5D/5DII, I find and may still never have that "magic".

And my Tamrom 28-75 is far more happier on a FF than it was on my 40D. I never found the 40D to be a stellar focuser with the Tamron.

My 70-200 is also far more useful on a FF, for me.

One more voice for "wow" when going from 40D to 5D. Same lenses all of the sudden got much sharper, and produced richer images. Highly recommended.

If you're hell bent on a FF, maybe waiting 6 months or so to see if the 5DIII comes out.

Then you'll be able to get a 5DII at a reduced price, probably even cheaper from some 5DII owner who just has to have that 5DIII.

I stole my second 7D from a guy who felt that a month after buying it he just had to have FF to get better pictures. He bought a 5DII.