40D - first impressions

[KenPapai]

Nothing earthshaking here, and is impossible to trump Atkins' excellent review

already.

 

However...I spent some time shooting with my new 40D today. This Saturday will

be even better. But, I am impatient to report some news.

 

What immediately comes to mind is that it is so slightly smaller than the 10D;

the viewfinder is brighter (slightly so more than the 10D); I love its noise

suppression, ISO 1000 very usable (ISO 800 and above on 10D is Noise City); it

focuses so much better than the 10D; its auto white balance is more accurate;

and geez! that 3-inch LCD. Wow. I used the 16-35 2.8L all day with it.

 

All this for $200 in real money cheaper than the 10D was four years ago -- THAT

is amazing (to use an overused word)!

 

Now I am looking forward to the 5D Mk2 6-8 months from now that will trump all

Nikon's ever had to offer... you think?<div></div>

[ralph_jensen]

A clear "family resemblance" is evident in your photo of the two camera backs, although as you note the LCD is a pretty significant difference (makes it kind of a "toddler-dad" family relationship).

 

Glad you like it; thanks for your impressions!

[danielleetaylor]

I like how you labeled the bodies, as if we couldn't tell 10D from 40D based on the LCD ;-)

[alexdi]

$200 cheaper, and it only took four years. What do you suppose the computer you had four years ago would cost today, I wonder?

 

Mild cynicism aside, thanks for the impressions.

 

DI

[PuppyDigs]

Hmm, I thought the 40D was slightly larger than the 10D, taller anyway. Certainly larger

and heavier than the 20D. Also has a deeper finger groove in the grip, making for a sure

and comfy grip. The LCD is more than merely larger and brighter, it is viewable from

above, below and to the side!

 

Although the VF is certainly larger than the 10D, the 40D screen texture is more evident,

especially with slow optics. The 10D has an amazingly smooth and clean focusing screen

texture.

 

The E-TTL II flash algorithms are a big step above the 10D and 20D. I had to ride FEC on

those cameras to get consistently good flash. So far I haven't needed to touch the dial on

the 40D. Flash behavior is very similar to the 5D.

 

My only minor complaint about the 40D is a lack of ECF and a cheap battery door hinge.

The sturdy metal hinge with spring loaded release on the 10D/20D whips the plastic

fiction grip hinge on the 40D. I took about one gram of pressure to pull off the door. I

imagine it will be easy to lose in the field during battery changes.

[bobatkins]

One thing I haven't looked at yet is whether the intermediate ISO values have noise/DR problems as they did in the 30D.

 

In the 30D the 1/3 steps between the full ISO stops seemed to be achieved by underxposing or overexposing by 1/3 stop, then correcting in software. What this boiled down to was that for the best image quality, choosing the full ISO stops (100,200,400,800,1600) was preferred.

 

The noise and DR tests are a bit tricky to do and I've never found a real need for 1/3 ISO stops, which is why I haven't done them!

 

As I understand it the 1D series cameras do 1/3 stops in hardware rather than software and don't suffer from the same problems.

 

If I'm wrong, maybe those with more detailed knowledge on the subject can correct me.

[PuppyDigs]

I disabled the in between ISO stops. I couldn't think of any reason to use ISO 640 when 400

and 800 were available. They merely added a delay and additional thumb exercise to ISO

input.

[jim_levitt]

Puppy Face: could you say more about the viewfinder on the 40D? I loved the viewfinder on the 10D; the exposure information was properly illuminated no matter the ambient light level. The 20D and 30D are disasters in this regard. In bright light, I can't read the exposure information at all. Has Canon rectified this problem on the 40D?

[bernardwest]

Just an aside here - Bob's reply made me think of a question. Why is it so hard to find out what is actually going on with our cameras, re implimentation of settings etc. I originally had no idea about the intermediate iso settings on my 5D, and thought that shooting at say 125 asa was exactly that. But I learnt some time ago that this isn't actually the case, and have been sacrificing DR and lower noise. For me (non full-time professional) I guess it hasn't really mattered. But the point is, that at some time it might have mattered, and I might have recorded a sub-optimal capture. Now that I know, it's no problem, I only use the hardware implemented iso settings. Wouldn't it have been fairly simple for Canon to tell me this in my 5D manual in the beginning? Another example that comes to mind is the Picture Styles in the EOS cameras. Altering the settings of two different Picture Styles to be the same, won't result in the same look to an image. Obviously there is more going on behind the scenes. But does anyone know what? If i'm paying 3000 odd dollars for an item, I expect to be informed how the different settings affect its use.

[PuppyDigs]

"Puppy Face: could you say more about the viewfinder on the 40D? I loved the viewfinder

on the 10D; the exposure information was properly illuminated no matter the ambient

light level. The 20D and 30D are disasters in this regard. In bright light, I can't read the

exposure information at all. Has Canon rectified this problem on the 40D?"

 

Hmm, I've read of the problem on forums but have not noticed functional dimness of the

VF data display backlight in my 10D, 20D or 5D. They're all visible in both dim bars and

blazing white sand beaches: the backlight adjusts for ambient light levels. It gets much

brighter in bright light. My main complaint is the 5D display is on the small side. I recall

the 10D VF data being too bright and distracting at first.

 

I no longer have my 10D so I can't do a direct comparison. However I have a 20D and the

VF backlight of the 40D is a little brighter both at night and in sunlight. Is it bright enough

for you? I can't say as my 20D is fine in even the brightest light. I suspect either the VF

display backlight varies from camera to camera or some people simply see better than

others in contrasty situations.

 

" Wouldn't it have been fairly simple for Canon to tell me this in my 5D manual in the

beginning? "

 

No it wouldn't. The manual is designed to be a straight forward operation manual, merely

explaining the "how to" leaving the "why" open. It's also designed to fit in a coat pocket or

camera bag! Otherwise they're have to include a 2000 page tome and explain every mode

and its purpose and underlying design ramifications. It's already hard enough to read and

there are ample sources for the techny white page stuff.

[bernardwest]

<i>It's already hard enough to read and there are ample sources for the techny white page stuff.</i><br><br>

 

Ok, so where are they so I can read them? I didn't see any reference to them in the documentation that came with my camera.

[jobo1]

I didn't find them at Canon's Digital Learning Center, but Google can:

 

http://www.robgalbraith.com/public_files/Canon_EOS_5D_White_Paper.pdf

[wilbur_wong]

"As I understand it the 1D series cameras do 1/3 stops in hardware rather than software and don't suffer from the same problems."

 

Bob, do you or anyone have any idea about intermediate ASA implementation on the 5D?

[bernardwest]

Wilbur, as far as I have been able to tell from info on photo.net forums, it is a digital push (or alternatively a pull?) from the native hardware based sensor settings (100,200,400,800,1600). ie. if you set ISO 640, the sensor will use hardware ISO 400 and push the exposure in software by 2/3rds of a stop (or maybe it pulls 800 by 1/3rd?). This will result in shadow clipping and less shadow detail than if you had set ISO to 800 at the start.

[ken_bynum]

Thanks for the info on the in-between ISO steps.

 

Puppy Face, you said you disabled the intermediate ISO steps in one of your answers. Is that on the 40D? I have a 30D - I didn't see anything in the manual or custom functions that would let me do that. Can I set the 30D to use full ISO stops only?

 

Puppy Face said: "I disabled the in between ISO stops. I couldn't think of any reason to use ISO 640 when 400 and 800 were available. They merely added a delay and additional thumb exercise to ISO input."

 

Thanks, Ken

p.s. Puppy Face, if you steal hubcaps, do you collect guitar picks, too? ;)

[KenPapai]

Ha ha! I collect a few guitar picks during my long hair days rocking out at concerts as a fan.

 

Unless I hear otherwise I am going to disable those 1/3 step ISOs. SO, so long ISO 500, 640, and 1250!

 

For a 1.6 cropper this a super nice camera. I've even used Adobe's digital negative convertor to create DNG files that my one PC still with CS2 on it can process these new RAWs. I am still having problems with CS3 Bridge displaying 40D RAWs. Nothing works so far (cache clearing especially).

 

I am not used to the whooshing 40D shutter sound yet and also not used to the left-right/up-down arrow control on the back.

 

I took some ISO 1600 shots last night way after sunset and am still astounded at the noise control Canon does packing in 10.1 million sensors on the APS-C.

[PuppyDigs]

"Can I set the 30D to use full ISO stops only?"

 

Yes you can. I guess that's a new CF. I haven't read any complaints about that one but it

always bothered me on my 5D.

[daniel_smith6]

Since this has gone onto the 30 D in addition, just How do you set the ISO equivalents to full stops? Mine only shows 1/3 and 1/2 stops.

 

In addition, is the image quality any different from ISO 100 to ISO 200? I have been told it is the same and Canon uses a ND filter or similar to get the ISO down to 100.

 

Can I get the same results at each setting or is 100 actually better for ultimate quality?

[w_t1]

I thought the 40D was supposed to have a Kodachrome mode? Seriously thanks for the comparison - I'm happy with my 10D but getting a lot of camera envy reading about the 40D. Tom

[jacob_g.]

I stopped by the local photo store to satisfy my curiosity today - and I wish I hadn't, from the sole standpoint of ergonomics (now I want one). I almost went Nikon instead of Canon, because of that factor alone, and they have made the 40D so much better from a grippage standpoint - still not quite as nice as a 200D, imho, but far better than it was. I agree with whoever mentioned the battery door thing though - cheap cheap! The menu system might take a little getting used to as well, but I'm sure it would just be a learning curve like anything else.

 

Seemed like a nice little package. That's the problem in the digital world. Whenver you buy something, another faster/cheaper/better something else comes out waaay too soon.

[fourfa]

if you do a lenscap exposure with the 5D and vary only ISO, you get a measurable change in noise showing that whole ISOs are treated differently than the in-between ISOs. See here:

<p>

<a href="http://andyradin.com/tests/5D%20noise%20vs%20ISO.jpg">http://andyradin.com/tests/5D%20noise%20vs%20ISO.jpg</a>

<p>

Lenscap exposure, fixed shutter speed and aperture, same settings applied to each in RAW conversion, noise levels measured in photoshop histogram info window. However shoot the same series in real light with a real scene, it requires extreme pixel peeping to spot a difference. So if they did in fact use firmware to generate the in-between ISOs on the 5D, they did a pretty dang good job.

<p>

Anyway this is a quick and easy test to do, would be nice to know what happens with the 40D.

[adam_j1]

Andy - You can see the results of that same lens cap test on the 40D at <a

href="http://forums.canonphotogroup.com/showthread.php?

p=5225">http://forums.canonphotogroup.com/showthread.php?p=5225</a>

<br><br>

 

You will note that the 40D handles ISO levels a bit differently...

[anthony_chapa]

I have been very impressed with this camera. I was looking foward to the D300, but this camera just blew me away with the ISO quality and why pay so much for a diff. camera that does the same thing for the most part? Ok, so there isnt AF in canon's live view, who cares. 2. High ISO at 1600 performed much much better than the 20D that I have. 3. The feel is a lot better and its a tad bigger than the 20D and its a good thing(just feels better in your hand). 4. Better balance with lenses. So if you cant afford a 1D MarkIII and you shoot sports or just need high FPS, get this camera! But a updated 5D will prove a worthy upgrade in 2008 so be on the look out!