Big dilemma 40D or 5D

Hi everyone

I have a big dilemma. Right now I have an XTi with 24-70L and the 17-55 kit

lens and a 50mm 1.4. I vant to sell my XTI kit. My question is should I buy the

40D with 18-55 IS or the 5D body only. The price is approx. the same for the

40D+17-55IS and 5D body. Please help me to decide.

Thanks

Well I just had the same thing and I ended up with the 40D. and I plan to get the 17 to 55

as well. Both are excellent cameras and I don't think you can go wrong with either. The

big question is really do you need full frame?

 

Here is why I ended up with the 40

1. I got it from circuit city and they only charged 1400 with the 28 - 135 lens

2. I like having a pop up flash just in case I am out and about with my camera and dont

have my 580

3. Pop up can be a backup to my flash breaking

4. The 40 has a faster burst mode and a newer processor.

5. Price. I only do a few events a year and full frame was not important to me.

 

I would say get some good glass and a 40D.

 

by the way are you looking to sell your 50 1.4? I am in the market for one.

This is an absolute no brainer to me at least. The 5D without question. The full frame

sensor makes a big difference is photo quality. Also, if you have been watching these

forums there seems to be an out of proportional amount of problems with the 40D. The

5D has been out a while and is a proven product with outstanding image quality including

low noise at higher ISO. Save up and get a good L lens for the 5D.. it will be worth it.

Full frame for the cost. Better quality and better availability of wide lenses. Get the 24/70

and use it as 24mm. That plus the 70/210 , any one, makes a nice two lens set

It depends on what you photograph and whether speed or ultimate resolution are the most important aspects of what you do. Since a 5D and your 24-70L will be a similar setup to a 40D + the 17-55 IS, the price will be similar to get you started.<p>

Making a list of each camera's pros and cons and see how they apply to what you do is perhaps the way to go to decide. User interface and ergonomics are pretty similar, so that is probably not the deciding factor.<p>

Anyway, a short rundown of some of the most noticeable pros and cons:<p>

1) High ISO noise: 5D is better than 40D. Approximately a 1-stop advantage.<br>

2) Absolute potential resolution: 5D is better than 40D<BR>

3) Shooting speed: 40D is better than 5D.<br>

4) Edge sharpness: 40D is better than 5D at large apertures. Whether this is a plus or minus depends on your photos. Sometimes, a picture that has edges less sharp than the central part can make the centre of interest seem even sharper in comparison, and can be very pleasing as a compositional device.<br>

5) Battery life: 5D is better than 40D.<br>

6) Built-in flash: 40D has it, 5D has none.<br>

7) Viewfinder: 5D's is bigger than 40D's, making manual focus easier.<br>

8) Wide-angle landscape work: 5D with its full-frame advantage is the better - in a way. If you do count EF-S lenses, there is not that much of a difference, but that would mean you will have to spend money on new lenses too if and when you eventually go full-frame in the future.<br>

9) Telephoto work: 40D has the "extra reach" of the small frame sensor.<br>

10) Depth of field: whether you want as much as possible or as little as possible, it goes to the 5D or 40D, for a given subject framing and aperture, it will be more shallow on a 5D.<br>

11) Diffraction: Larger sensor of the 5D makes optimum aperture about a stop or so smaller, partly reducing the difference in point 10 when you stop down for ultimate sharpness.<br>

12) Processing: the 40D has the newer 14-bit processor, which - in the tests I have read - give it an edge in bringing out shadow detail with a slightly bigger dynamic range than the 5D.<p>

Myself, I went for the 5D with the very cost-effective 5D + 24-105L IS kit, and it's certainly a choice I've been happy with.

40D without a doubt! Image quality on both is more than acceptable - 40D is faster - Better A/D Resolution (big advantage with shadow detail) - live view - and doesn't have the disadvantage of being full frame.

I agree the 40D is a great camera I am very pleased with it. but I don't see how full frame is a

disadvantage. Again both are very good and if you are talking about quality you can pick

either.

 

Before I got the 40D I used a digital rebel 300 6.3 for with a Tamron 28 - 75 and have taken

many successful shots. So for me I prefer not to invest to much in a body since in 3 years I

may upgrade again. I would rather spend that money on a good lens that will probably still

be good 3 years from now.

I had the same choice, went with the 40D for the newer technologie and will get the 5D upgrade when it is available. 40D is great I have no problems with it.

I shoot full frame, but I'm not so sure that this necessarily your best choice here.

 

Odds are you'll need to get some additional lenses if you go to full frame - not all of your current lenses will work on FF nor will the remaining ones work the same way. Unless

you print really large, there may not be any particular immediate advantage in going to FF under these circumstances. For many types of photography I think it can be a better

choice to have a crop sensor body with a good set of lenses than to have a full frame body with limited lens coverage.

 

An approach that might make a bigger difference in your photography - with the emphasis on "might" - could be to keep the XTi and get the 17-55mm f/2.8 IS (assuming that

you meant to write that you currently have the 18-55 kit lens) and perhaps one of the 70-200mm L zooms. (One of the L wide zooms could also work here: 17-40 f4L or 16-

35mm f/2.8 L.)

 

If you are really set on the 40D, what can I say? The 40D will not produce higher image quality than your current XTi, and least not in a way that will be visible in your

photographs. The potential advantages of the 40D lie elsewhere. Spending the money on the lenses could materially improve the results you get with the current camera and

you'll be able to make photographs that you likely could not make with the FF body and fewer lenses. (A general philosophy that works for many of us is "Good lenses first, better

bodies later.")

 

Dan

That is a dilemma. The 24-70 is fantastic with a 5D, but the

17-55 IS is a very special lens without an EF equivalent. Image quality from both combinations is really close, but the 17-55 gives you 3 more stops hand held - and on the wide end of the lens, you can use some ridiculously slow shutter speeds wide open. If you don't do much hand held low light photography, sell the xti and get the 5D. If not, sell the 24-70, keep the xti and get the 17-55IS.

For image quality, the 5D.

 

For features, 40D.

"Also, if you have been watching these forums there seems to be an out of proportional amount of problems with the 40D"

 

Is that so? Like what?

Read Dan and Paul's posts again. They are making a lot of sense. Why do you want to upgrade anyway? Is it for image quality? If so, you need to look at the lenses not the body. That XTi sensor is darn close to the 40D and 5D if you're making standard size prints.

Whats a 40d? Huh? What do you do with those? (GET A 5D!)

"I agree the 40D is a great camera I am very pleased with it. but I don't see how full frame is a disadvantage."

 

If you REALLY need wide-angle then a 10mm lens on a 1.6 crop-factor gets you to 16mm - the widest (Canon) lens you can get for FF is (unless I'm mistaken) 14mm. 2mm difference isn't going ruin anyones day. However, the 1.6x you lose in reach isn't as easily (cheaply) replaced.

 

I love my 24-70 F2.8L to bits - on a 1.6x crop factor camera it was a great everyday lens - on my current 1.3x crop factor camera it's marginal - on a FF camera (especially for weddings) it's just too darned short (And we end up having to have a 70-200 on a seperate body).

 

I'm really just trying to provide a little "food for though" to all those who seem to automatically assume the FF is the "mecca" of all sensor sizes, whereas in reality it can be a blessing or it can be an absolute curse. In my experience the extra reach of a 1.6x crop is generally appricated by more photographers than the lack of width (which is realitively easily and cheaply solved).

You need to get your 17 and 18mm minimum focal lengths straight. The old kit lens is 18, the inexpensive new IS kit lens is 18mm, and the 17-55mm IS is an L quality and L priced lens (about $1K)

 

 

All of these are EF-S and do not work on FF cameras like the 5D. Frankly I doubt that the extra couple of K of pixels is going to make a really big difference, but it's your money. If photography is your life, then go for it baby.

Dan states it eloquently and with an excellent perspective. Personally, I would go with quality lenses first and wait for the camera body upgrade later.

Thanks for everyone I'll kepp you informed

Get a barely used 30D that some technogeek is selling because he's had the uncontrollable urge to buy the 40D, and get more lenses.....

But if you NEED full frame then get the 5D.

"doesn't have the disadvantage of being full frame" - nearly made my spit my food out in a burst of laughter!

 

5D of course.

Echoing Ross, I also had the same choice, went with the 40D for the much newer technology and will get the 5D Mk2 soon after it is available. 40D is superb and zero problems. The 5D is just too long in the tooth to buy brand new and Canon wil update/replace it likely late 1Q 2008. Just wait.

 

It will simply be the 40D on steroids: FF and its superb VF and 16MP are the extra $1,000 it'll set you back.

Both your 50mm f1.4 and 24-70 will work very nicely with the 5D. The 50mm is the classic full frame normal perspective. The 24-70mm is a near perfect range for "normal zoom" on full frame, imho. A little too wide for some maybe, but I like it.

 

24mm is moderate but not ultra wide (comparable to 15mm on 1.6 crop). 70mm get you a little past the normal perpective of 50mm. The 24-70 shines on the 5D: you finally see all those edges that were cropped away, and it's corner to corner sharpness very good.

Istvan - it would be helpful if we knew how you intend to use the cameras......they both have their strong points and with a newer 5d model on the supposed horizon, the prices on the 5D are very attractive....but only if it fits your needs for the type of shooting you do....jmo...Don

Hi Don

I am a part time wedding photographer, so I use it mainly at wedding reception, dark churches(here in Romania orthodox churches ar very dark), wedding portraits in park. My question is what will be good for these kind of work to have: a 5D with my existing lens (24-70L + 50 1.4) or 40D with my existing lens PLUS the 17-55 2,8 IS?

It's a no brainer, 5D.