5D or 40D?

[jon_kobeck]

I am trying to decide between the 5D and 40D. I do mostly street photography.

My 30D is no more (its a long story) anyway, I read the specs on both and

unless I am missing something the 6fps and one thousand bucks is the biggest

difference. I would appreciate your advice

[._._z]

Ask in two months, when the lower-cost replacement for the 5d is released.

 

http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/cameras/Canon_5d2_3d_7d.html

[PuppyDigs]

"I read the specs on both and unless I am missing something the 6fps and one thousand

bucks is the biggest difference."

 

Yeah you are. The biggest diff is the 5D has a full frame CMOS whereas the 40D is a 1.6x

crop CMOS. The 5D is 12.8MP whereas the 40D is 10.1MP. Basically if you're looking for the

smoothest big enlargements and want your wides to remain at normal 24x36mm coverage,

the 5D is the ticket. As a side benefit you get a huge viewfinder. If you want to mainly shoot

telephoto and need speed, the 40D is the one.

[jon_kobeck]

A 7D for less money? Interesting

[hakon_soreide]

For what people usually refer to when they say "street photography," that means wide angle work, often with fast primes, and that does give an edge to the 5D. If you like doing manual focus, the edge also goes to the 5D for the bigger viewfinder. If you need as many frames per second as possible and fast wide angle lenses aren't your thing, then the 40D is the best choice.

[Stock-Photos]

Buy the 5D. Wide angle is what you need.

[agustin.benencia]

5D

[bill_morrow1]

If you buy a 5D, be sure to invest in a sensor cleaning kit. Why it's

more of a problem than any of my 1.6 jobs, I am not sure. It really

is a pain keeping it clean. I have a beautiful 20 x 30 blowup from a

300D (6 mp), so don't be dazzeled by a couple of mp difference.

My 40D is superb.

[KenPapai]

Either get the 40D or else wait for the 5D's replacement April - June of next year.

 

Or, but the 40D, use it, sell it, then buy the 5D2 when it becomes available. 5D is getting long in the tooth and the 40D already has many features the 5D lacks.

 

I say all this based on your use and familiarity with your now nonexistent 30D.

[wgpinc]

I bought the 40D and got the 17-55mm lens to go with it. It has most of Canon's latest technology. Very good image quality. Either camera is great. Even the 400D is a nice little camera particularly for using in the street. Pair it with the new 18-55mm IS lens and you have a great little lightweight, inconspicuous outfit for street photography for little money. I'm tempted except for the viewfinder. Can buy that outfit for just over $700 and take a lot of pictures until the 5D Mk II comes along in 5-6 months. Don't think about it too much. They're all so good now, just get something and go out and take pictures.<div></div>

[colinsouthern]

In my opinion the 5D is well past it's use by date, feature wise, compared to the 40D.

 

40D has advantages of Live View (retaining AF) - 14 Bit A/D resolution - Much higher FPS - Ultra-Sonic sensor cleaning - 1.6x extra focal reach - Much cheaper - negligable difference in pixel count.

[PuppyDigs]

I have both a 5D and 40D and the 5D still whips the 40D in terms of IQ and viewfinder

clarity. The 5D VF is amazing compared to a crop camera, although the 40D has the best

cropped VF to date. A big vivid VF is a huge deal for sweeping landscapes and I suspect street

photos need a big bright VF just as badly. Both are comfy to hold (Canon improved the 40D

grip over the 20D/30D). I can't say the 40D Ultra-Sonic sensor cleaner is much more than a

gimmick but I haven't needed to clean the 5D much. I played with the live view for macro

shots but find it awkward in the field--eats up batteries fast and is hard to see in bright light.

I'll stick with the optical VF most of the time.

[davebell]

"If you buy a 5D, be sure to invest in a sensor cleaning kit. Why it's more of a problem than any of my 1.6 jobs, I am not sure. It really is a pain keeping it clean"

 

I don't have any trouble keeping mine clean, only cleaned it once in the last 1.5 years, around 7000 shots and plenty of lens changes.... Maybe it's because I am very careful changing lenses....

[j_smith6]

For me it would be pretty obvious --> EOS 5D. Bigger sensor is almost always better.

[pjmeade]

5D well past its use by date?

 

The 5D is, and will continue to be excellent. Being superseded doesn't make a camera stop working.

[bob_osullivan]

I think getting the 5D soley for the wide angle is a mistake. If you have a 1.6 crop camera all you have to do is get a 10-22 or 10-20 and you've got your wide back. Unless you need the higer res and potential larger print size of the 5D, the 40 D seems to have it on the features. High ISO performance, I hear, is now comparable.

[kevin conville]

Easy on the hyperbole guys.

 

"Buy the 5D. Wide angle is what you need."

Maybe, but that's not a problem with a 1.6x as bob (above) points out

 

"5D well past its use by date"

That's ridiculous, and because the very fine 5D is now selling for just over $2K (after

rebate), it is very tempting indeed. Though it's replacement must be just around the

corner and promises the features of the 40D with added pixels.

 

"I have both a 5D and 40D and the 5D still whips the 40D in terms of IQ and viewfinder

clarity"

Not according to Luminous Landscape (and others). Viewfinder? Sure, it's bigger. IQ? Not

what I'm reading.

 

Editorial: Canon's full frame wide angle line-up (IMO) is nothing to brag about and to me

not a reason to go FF. If one wants to use a manual focus something or other (Zeiss, Leica,

Olympus, etc) then that would be a tasty carrot. For wide angle zoom, I think it's covered

well by Canon, Tokina, and other makers for the 1.6x cameras.

[PuppyDigs]

""I have both a 5D and 40D and the 5D still whips the 40D in terms of IQ and viewfinder

clarity" Not according to Luminous Landscape (and others). Viewfinder? Sure, it's bigger.

IQ? Not what I'm reading."

 

I based my observation on actual use, not other folks opinions. It only takes one second to

view similar files on my cinema display to see 5D file are smoother and creamier in

appearance. To fill the display, the 40D files must be enlarged more and therefore show

more artifacts and texture structure. However, I agree, pixel for pixel they're about the

same in terms of noise and rez. However, I don't want to see the pixels when I blow it up.

 

With all that said, the 5D and 40D make a great team and I'd hate to part with either one.

[kevin conville]

Puppy,

 

You used the word "whips". Michael Reichmann states the 40D is the equal to or better

than the 5D. He also cites other sources to back his claim.

 

Without claiming Michael Reichmann is the last word on this, he is a credible source.

He also posts images for review.

 

Even if one takes Reichmann's statement with a grain of salt, it causes one to raise an

eyebrow when reading your statement "whips".

 

So, to review.. You state your observation is based on actual use. Michael Reicmann's

opinion is based on actual use. Since the rest of us are neither of you, in this thread we

have these two data points to work with. Even without giving Reichmann's review more

weight than yours, it tends to undermine your statement of the 5D "whipping" the 40D in

image quality.

 

There are variables that can account for some of this that we can't know about. I would

just be careful about making statements in absolute terms.

[kevin conville]

Puppy-

"To fill the display, the 40D files must be enlarged more and therefore show more

artifacts and texture structure."

 

Not to pick on you, but this is a telling statement that you may not fully understand what

is happening with your digital files.

Both the 40D and 5D have way more resolution than what's necessary to fill ANY monitor

at screen resolution.

 

I would be looking for another explanation for any "artifacts" and "texture structure".

I'll bet none of these issues materialize in print.

[PuppyDigs]

"whips" means better than or beats. "kickass" = signficantly better. "kill" indicates wipe the

floor with

 

"Not to pick on you, but this is a telling statement that you may not fully understand what

is happening with your digital files. Both the 40D and 5D have way more resolution than

what's necessary to fill ANY monitor at screen resolution."

 

As i stated earlier, pixel for pixel they're about the same in terms of IQ. I'm merely more

aware of 40D pixels and any artifacts therein as more zooming is required to magnify the

40D file to the same size as the 5D file. Realize the 40D CMOS is 40% the size of the 5D

and must be magnified more to get to the same target size. As for viewing the files on my

30" cinema display, you must be aware you can zoom from a fraction of the format size to

400%...

 

"I'll bet none of these issues materialize in print." Well, not at smaller sizes. I certainly ca't

see any diff from 4x6 to 8x12. It would only begin to be apparent at 12 x 18 or larger, and

with close inspection. And I do have many 12 x 18 and 13 x 19 landscape prints. Alas I'm

running out of room on my walls and may have to cut back to 8 x 12.

[alan_myers]

Heh, heh... I just love all this talk about the still-mythical replacements for 5D. It's driving prices on the current model down to the point I'm tempted to pick up a couple used ones!

 

You'd think that the current camera is going to stop working the moment a new model is released, to hear people talk.

 

So, let's see... One should sit there camera-less, missing out on all those Christmas morning candids (or whatever it is that you love to shoot) and wait until sometime next year when Canon may or may not release something that we can only guess will be a satisfactory replacement that we'll want and have to just assume will be priced similarly to the last model when it was released, or even more affordable... Maybe... Sometime....

 

Love that site, too, with it's "Information about Canon's replacement for the EOS 5D"... Substitute "Pure Speculation and Rampant Rumours" for the word "Information", to be more accurate. At least the author has a sense of humor. Too bad too many people take it all seriously.

 

The only things we can say for certain...

 

Some day Canon will replace the current 5D. The new model will differ from the old one. There are some clues to what might be different, based upon recent changes to other Canon models, and based upon what Canon's competition has been up to lately... But these are all just guesses and will remain so until Canon is good and ready and sees fit to offer an official press release announement of the new product... Some day.

 

Jon,

 

If I were you - and I'm not so you gotta decide for yourself - I'd be very tempted get a 5D instead of a 40D. Not that the 40D is a bad camera, or that it's not capable or that it couldn't be fun to shoot with. I just think that for your purposes - street photography - the 5D's low light and wide angle capabilities will come in very handy.

 

Want to save a bunch? Get a low mileage used one. They're widely available and a real bargain, as speculation on the replacement model runs wild. Do it ASAP and get back to shooting pictures!

[bnyc]

The 5D is a great camera. The fact that a Mark II version may or may not appear anytime soon doesn't make it any less great right now. For my humble needs and abilities, it is the last digital SLR I will ever buy, until it breaks or my needs change significantly.

 

I'm sure the 40D is equally great. And if I owned it, it would probably be the last digital SLR I would ever buy, until it broke or my needs changed significantly.

[anson_ko]

5D, my 20D is a backup camera now.

[jon_kobeck]

Wow, thanks guys! You really covered the entire spectrum of the debate here! Well I think tomorrow I am off to b and h to buy my 5D :)