30D vs 40D

Discussion in 'Canon EOS' started by cjtj50, Aug 22, 2007.

  1. Hi there could someone please tell me the difference between these two
    camera's. Thank you much!
     
  2. This will tell you everything you need to know, just look at the comparison table. <BR>
    http://www.dpreview.com/previews/canoneos40d/
     
  3. If you can't figure it out from that table, they also have a digital camera primer on the site that should make things clear for you.
     
  4. Thank you for asking this question. I too am trying to figure out what the "must have" features of the 40D. As far as I can tell the only significant thing the 40D offers is more precise focusing (though how much more precise I'm not too sure). Are there any other features that are considered significant ?
     
  5. Higher megapixel, higher frame rate burst, live view, better processing of data
     
  6. Thank you very much for your quick contributions on the 30D vs 40D. I will take a look at that website and the digital camera primer site if need be. To all of you gentlemen have a great day.
     
  7. There have been posts on this over the past few days. Do some searches. The features I remember are.
    1) live view and bigger screen with buttons moved from side to bottom.
    2) 10MP instead of 8.2MP
    3) the dust cleaning feature from the XTi
    Not all that exciting to me. I susptected all they would do is give the 30D the XTi features and that's about what they did, which is why I didn't wait for it and got a 30D 6 months ago. If I had it to do over again today, I'd probably grab a 30D at closout prices rather than the 40D. I see they are now $900, I paid $1100 for mine.
     
  8. 10meg, Digi3 proc, 14bit, 3 inch LCD, Live view, 6.5 fps, interchangable screens, etc just read,features you might not need but others will.
     
  9. The weight and the size.
     
  10. Try shooting in a really dusty environment, and you may change your mind about the sensor cleaning --it really does work.

    I shoot a lot with manual focus lenses, so the larger viewfinder and the interchangeable screens really appeal also.
     
  11. The higher the number, the better.
     
  12. `The weight and the size.`

    Now I`m thinkin 40d tooo dang bigger & heavier :eek:(

    `
     
  13. Noise control will be far better than the 30D. The 20D was terrible at 3200 and if its close to the Mark3(Digic 3) then they should be totally usable where the 20d was not. I say 20D because the 20D and 30D were much closer to one another than the 30D and 40D. As Chris mentioned, "10meg, Digic3 proc, 14bit, 3 inch LCD, Live view, 6.5 fps, interchangable screens, etc just read,features you might not need but others will." It also has AUTO ISO. How many time have you wanted to do Portraits outdoors but because there was so much light, to flash sinc at f4.0, you had to fool around with the ISO to get the exposure correct. You might miss a shot foolin with this crap. Now the camera will drop it for you if it can't flash sinc at your aperture setting. This is a good reason to buy this camera. Now the focus point in the middle is set up for the fast 2.8 lenses so the focus will be alot better if you are wide open. I think alot of people are saying this camera is NOT an improvement because they are pissed at themselves for buying a 30D when now they can get a 40D for the same price. You wont get a Mark 3 for $1200 everybody. This is as good as it gets in this category. This is an excellent camera for the money. For most people it will be all you will need for a long time to come.

    mars c, Aug 22, 2007; 08:24 a.m.
     
  14. " For most people it will be all you will need for a long time to come."

    ... or, at least, until the 50D is announced ...
     
  15. BA has put his thoughts here: http://www.bobatkins.com/photography/digital/canon_eos_40D_30D_upgrade.html

    --
     
  16. JDM von Weinberg, Aug 22, 2007; 09:01 a.m.

    Try shooting in a really dusty environment, and you may change your mind about the sensor cleaning --it really does work.

    You just answered your own question. If you are not shooting in dusty environment, you don't need this function. Buy something you will use....IMO
     
  17. Thank you again all of you, I'm sold on the 40D! Thanks again for all your expertise!
     
  18. Right now I'd certainly go with the 40D if you're buying a first DSLR. It's worth the extra $350 or so in my book. It's a more difficult question if you already have a 30D and are thinking of upgrading. The 40D certainly has a lot more features and should show an improvement in image quality. However the 30D is pretty good and just based on image quality alone, I suspect that most people wouldn't really notice any difference. Most people aren't pushing the 30D (or 20d) to it's limits now.
     
  19. I was in market for a 30D, then I decided to wait for 40D for its larger viewfinder, better auto focusing, auto ISO. I don't care about higher number of pixels, and dislike the heavier weight. Had I got the 30D already, I wouldn't upgrade till 50D or 6D is out.
     
  20. This difference is a few hundred dollars and a more capable camera. I suggest buying the best you can afford. You won't regret it!
     
  21. The 30D is currently about $999, while the 40D is pre-order priced at $1299. So yes. . it seems that improved image quality and improved features of the 40D relative to the 30D make it a no brainer.

    However, the XTi is $630. The XTi has a similar 10mp anti-dust sensor to the 40D. With Digic III and a 14bit A/D, there is the implication (but neither proof nor quantified marketing claim) of improved image quality. The primary differences are "user features" such as the more comfortable form factor, improved AF system, and live view. Is that worth $670?

    I may very well buy a 40D . . . but I certainly have this "feeling" that the 40D is a bit overpriced in today's market.

    For me, purchase of the 40D is a moot point until Adobe provides a Camera Raw update to support this new camera. (and I read the review on dpReview)
     
  22. I have a 20D right now and was not sure about the 30D or 40D, so after reading all comments and all about the 30D and 40D, Im going with the 40D
     
  23. I don't know if the 40D is overpriced but I agree that anyone in the market for a Canon DSLR should evaluate their needs/wants against the 40D and the 400D.

    Let's face it, you can buy two 400D's for one 40D ...
     
  24. "Noise control will be far better than the 30D. The 20D was terrible at 3200 and if its close to the Mark3(Digic 3) then they should be totally usable where the 20d was not"

    David, that's complete speculation with nothing to back it up.

    The MKIII-style High ISO NR processing in the 40D might have a positive effect on noise, as might the redesigned sensor and - probably - 14 bit A/D conversion: the only thing the Digic III processor brings to the table is the ability to handle the additional processing.

    Noise is generated at the sensor - before Digic III plays any part in the equation.

    The presence of this processor or that won't, in itself, make one iota of difference to noise performance - it's what they tell the processor to do (in terms of 14 bit processing, NR algorithms etc.) that counts.

    Don't forget that the 5D has Digic II...
     
  25. I'm kind of curious what part of the planet outside a laboratory isn't dusty? I'm sure it's true that if you never change lenses outdoors this feature is of no use to you, but most of us don't live in a pristine environment

    Ashes to ashes, dust to dust.... ;)
     
  26. " David, that's complete speculation with nothing to back it up.

    The MKIII-style High ISO NR processing in the 40D might have a positive effect on noise, as might the redesigned sensor and - probably - 14 bit A/D conversion: the only thing the Digic III processor brings to the table is the ability to handle the additional processing.

    Noise is generated at the sensor - before Digic III plays any part in the equation.

    The presence of this processor or that won't, in itself, make one iota of difference to noise performance - it's what they tell the processor to do (in terms of 14 bit processing, NR algorithms etc.) that counts.

    Don't forget that the 5D has Digic II..."

    This is from Canons very own website Keith: " Dual "DIGIC III" Image Processor
    Developed to maximize performance between the capture and recording stages of digital photography, the EOS-1D Mark III?s Dual "DIGIC III" chips give the camera two of Canon?s newest processing units, working in parallel, to dramatically enhance image quality and deliver the speed and power needed to combine 10 million pixels and 10 frames per second. The latest-generation DIGIC III Image Processor works in concert with Canon?s new CMOS sensors to achieve even higher levels of performance. The entire electronic system is totally re-designed, giving the camera its incredible combination of speed and image quality. Digital noise is significantly reduced in shadow areas, and color reproduction is superior."

    The statement I made was that the new platform of DigicIII as an overall package would be better. I know this because I've used the 20D at 3200 and it sucks. I own an XTi and its better than the 20D at 1600. With that said, I know the 40D will be better than the XTi in that respect. The XTi is a good camera, but we all know it isn't as good as the 40D. As for the 5D, FF sensors have generally been better in the past for noise control and the MarkIII has blown past it with the 1.3 crop sensor. Its because of the all new package that the DigicIII platform brings to the table. It all has to work together.
     
  27. Maybe it's the nefarious influence of all that grainy GAF 500 I shot back in the old days, but I really don't agree that ISO 3200 is so bad on the 20D. In fact, at the time it was released, many reviews specifically praised the 20D for being better at high ISOs than many other cameras. I too have a XTi, and it's nice, but I don't see much difference between the two at ISO 1600. The attached full-size snip from a hand-held night-time shot with a 20D at ISO 3200 out the window of a moving car certainly shows some noise, but compared to other cameras (and high-speed film) it seems OK to me. Opinions may vary, of course.
    00MKpW-38127984.jpg
     
  28. Just for context's sake, here is the entire picture from which the above was clipped. If the new camera is better than this, it will, of course, be super!
    00MKpt-38128084.jpg
     

Share This Page