Downgrading

[cds79m]

<p>Hello all, <br>

I was hoping for a little advice. I'm an amateur photographer, who last year came into some money and had the pleasure of buying a Canon 5D mk ii. I think it's a wonderful camera and I've taken some of my favourite pictures whilst using it. However, due to the current cost of living and needing some serious work done on my car it looks as though I'll be selling the 5D Mk ii, to fund the repairs. Whilst I've still got my old Canon 40D and since using it again to familiar myself with it, it's become apparent how spoilt I've been with the detail the 5D mk ii can capture. What's your views on the 550D, 600D? I think the 60D would be out of my price range as I'm looking to get the car sorted, then maybe buy a downgraded body... though the specs all look quite good :-), would it improve on the 40D that I'm current using. I have 2L series lenses, 24-105mm f4 and 200mm f2.8 so I've got good glass.<br>

Also since starting a family last year, I've hardly had a chance to use the 5D mk ii, another reason for selling, so I image a plastic body wouldn't bother me too much as I would have limited use unlike a few years ago when I was shooting on a regular basis and needed a stronger body.<br>

Your opinions would be really gratefully.<br>

Thanks</p>

[paddler4]

<p>The Rebels have substantially different controls and are quite small. I found the difference between the Rebel and xxD controls and ergonomics to be substantial. So I would try a Rebel, making sure you change settings a bunch, before you take the plunge. If you don't like the Rebels, the question would be whether the 60D offers enough advantages over your 40D to make it worth the purchase.</p>

[Marcus Ian]

<p>That's a great question -- and the first time <em>I</em> have seen it posted. </p>

<p>I've still got an old rebel (an XTi (400d)), and for some things I actually prefer it to my 5d2s. When I want something light (specifically, light enough (w/ a prime, or 18-55) so that my kids can shoot w/ it easily... and something that wouldn't be a disaster to loose (like for trips to the amusement park -- on roller coasters), a rebel is ideal. </p>

<p>That said, I expect you'd see a marginal improvement over the 40D (especially if you plan to use video, or higher iso), but you very well may miss the ergonomics of the larger bodies. I know I do when I shoot w/ the old rebel. Also, you may want to consider - since you've no specific need for EF lenses any longer - changing around your lenses to more match the crop (the 24-105/4 may be a bit longer than ideal for GP shooting), as something like a 17-55/2.8 is a little more versatile on the crop. </p>

[cds79m]

<p>But would the 60D's mega pixels (and 550D, 600D) give more detail than the 40D I have at the moment. I know from reading countless arguments about mega pixels not being the be all and end all of photography, but comparing the 100% crops of the 40D to the 5D mkii, you can see the advantage of the 5D mk ii's higher mixels and larger sensor. I know that the 550D, 600D, and 60D use the same sensor as a 7D which is awesome, but I guess I'm looking for as high a quality image I can at a lower price in a downgraded body. I'd still be interested in doing some portrait work for friends.</p>

<p><a href="http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5100/5478548976_dcfd4862b9_b.jpg"><img src="http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5100/5478548976_dcfd4862b9.jpg" alt="" width="333" height="500" /></a><br>

My 40D image above... looks nice until you zoom in and pixel peep.</p>

<p><a href="http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5014/5489870568_cdde11e144_b.jpg"><img src="http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5014/5489870568_cdde11e144.jpg" alt="" width="333" height="500" /></a><br>

My 5D Mkii Image, So much more defined when I zoom in.</p>

[tdigi]

<p>I had the 40D and now a 5d2 and 60D so I have some experience with these cameras. If money is an issue I would just use the 40D you already own. The good glass that you have will get the most out of it. The newer 60D is probably a bit better but not enough to justify the cost considering the situation. If it where me I would sell the 40D and the 200 but I prefer the wider side so I would miss that most about full frame. </p>

[mark_pierlot]

<p>I'm with Tommy. Just use your 40D till your financial situation improves. By that time, the 5DIII (or whatever) might have come out, and you can pick up another 5DII for less than you sold yours for.</p>

<p>I recently acquired a 50D to augment my 5DII, and I have experienced exactly what you have with your 40D, Clive. The images that I get form the 50D look very good at normal magnifications, and less so at higher ones.</p>

[Marcus Ian]

<p>Not a lot. Even though there is almost 2x the num. of pixels, you (most likely) will be unlikely to see a significant improvement in your ability to resolve fine details, and, @ 100%, you most likely will see a <em>decrease</em> in <em>individual</em> pixel detail. The reason you may still see a marginal improvement in *overall* IQ is because the 1.8x pixel count factor very likely will outweigh the <em>decrease</em> in individual pixel resolving power. (that being said, I've never owned one of the new rebels, and only shot w/ the 40D a little bit, so my personal experience is def. limited) This was the same issue that the 50D had (when compared to the 40D)<br>

A significant advantage however is that if you get stuck shooting higher ISO, your NR software will have A LOT more pixels to work with...</p>

[cds79m]

<p>Thanks for your opinion's guys, I really appreciate it. I think I may just stick with the 40D for a while then. I did think about possible selling a lens, but I also thought about what would happen when the 5D Mark III comes out, and that I would see the 5D mark II's second hand value be less. As I'm not shooting much these days anyway, I think I'll get by with what I've got, and bank the money left over after the car is sorted. Maybe save up and buy a newer camera when the 40D packs up, but it's still going strong :-)</p>

[tdigi]

<p>The only thing that may really matter is if you shoot video. The 60D does have some nice features and I personally like its small size, its sorta like a high end rebel, but its only a slight increase in quality to a 40D ( which is still very solid and capable ) A 5D3 is certainly on the horizon so its probably a good move to sell the 5d2 now while it has high value. </p>

[cds79m]

<p>True Tommy, What I've heard is that it takes great video, and I also like the idea of the wireless speedlite control. I also know that they've included the DIGIC 5 processor in the new Canon powershot S100, so maybe Canon's new DSLR's released in 2012/2013 will be worth waiting for and have better features and noise reduction at higher ISOs. That's one thing I will truly miss about the 5D Mark II, being able to shoot at 1250 ISO and higher and having the ISO well controlled. I enjoyed shooting in natural light. The images on the 40D at ISO 800 and above really needed work on the computer.</p>

[matthijs]

Would a 5D classic be an option?

 

Seriously going back in time but it might just yield the best image quality.

 

M.

[symple]

<p>Hello Clive, I have gone from the using 1Ds III and 5D II to a couple of 40Ds and a 20D IR now with no regrets. Cameras are overrated as always, and so long as you have a tripod, a strobe, a remote release, and good glass, the camera doesn't really matter so much. I would have gone below the 40D save for live-view and the cable release socket, and at $400 or less each for basically new bodies I am ahead of where I was with regard to depreciation, and without any impact on image making.</p>

[cds79m]

<p>The 5D would be a possibility, but thinking about what a lot of people have said, especially the last post about downgrading by S.Grant, I think I'm just worrying too much! My 40D took awesome photos before I had even bought L series lenses and the other lenses I have now. For example, I took this photo last night with my sigma 50mm f2.8 macro and although I wasn't too impressed with it last night it's been growing on me throughout the day. I have good tripod, a comprehensive range of lenses, some strobes etc... so I think I should just go back and play more with my 40D and get use to it again :-). I know I'd rather keep my lenses than the bodies. Thanks for everyone's thoughts, it's been appreciated.</p>

<p><img src="http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6154/6215658568_0b58290761_z.jpg" alt="" width="640" height="466" /></p>

[linda_jones1]

<p>Clive, you have a special knack for photography, and that makes up for yards of cameras. The baby photo is really pleasing. I miss my 40D! Hang on to it, and soon alot of used cameras will be flooding the market. The right moment will come. All of my used gear has appreciated in value, other than a few cameras, which are like cars, as you said, they will go down in price. But then you can pick back up the 5DMKII, cheaper. Not buying one right now will allow you a larger savings for your next one.</p>

[markonestudios]

<p>I also agree. Keep the 40d. Offload your 5D Mark II.Don't buy another body till later when it is financially viable for you to do so.</p>

[rustys pics]

<p><em>"My 40D took awesome photos before I had even bought L series lenses "</em><br>

My most recent EOS body is a 20D, which I bought used a few years ago. I know a pro who shoots with a 10D still. Looking at the photographs you've posted here, you already have the most valuable asset a photographer can acquire; a good eye for composition and posing. Frankly the new Rebel bodies feel junky, like something that you get out of a gumball machine for 25 cents. Shoot with the 40D until you can REALLY afford to upgrade. Another advantage to keeping the existing body is that you know where all of the controls are. That's always my most frustrating experience when changing cameras. I just pulled a 16 x 20 inch print out of a 20D file yesterday. It wasn't even shot on RAW. Save that money for the wife and baby. These are tough economic times which show no sign of improvement.</p><div></div>