Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1] 2 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Canon EOS 40D report  (Read 9022 times)
John Camp
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1258


« on: September 05, 2007, 10:48:28 PM »
ReplyReply

In the report, Michael compares the 40D to the (specs) on the upcoming Nikon D300, mentioning the  Nikon's bigger price tag and also the bigger and higher-res LCD screen on the Nikon. I suspect that people will juggle the D300's slightly better feature set against the 40D's US$500 lower price, but that the sales, for good or ill, will be made on the LCD screen. People are habituated to television, and will pay big bucks for better TV. That's what the LCD screen is -- probably doesn't offer that much more in function, but you put the two cameras on the sales counter with the buyer's snapshot on each, and that Nikon LCD is gonna look mighty good...

JC
Logged
Kenneth Sky
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 421


WWW
« Reply #1 on: September 05, 2007, 11:25:30 PM »
ReplyReply

How much better is the LCD? The Nikon specs are in dpi not pixels.
Logged
Ray
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8878


« Reply #2 on: September 06, 2007, 12:04:43 AM »
ReplyReply

Isn't the D300 LCD screen over 900,000 pixels as opposed to the 40D's 230,000?

If each of those pixels has a red, green and blue element, that's equivalent to a semi-high-definition TV set compressed in size to 3" (or is that 3.5"). Very impressive!

I'd really like to buy the 40D. They've just started to become available in Australia although I expect the first shipment would have gone immediately to those who pre-ordered.

I find it strange that the camera is already being sold but there are no thorough reviews available yet. From the few people who have posted images comparing the 40D with the 20D, I'm getting mixed messages. Some say there's no noticeable noise improvement at high ISO and no resolution improvement that's worth mentioning. But one report I came acroos claims that both noise and resolution are much improved at ISO 3200, although very similar at lower ISOs.

I feel I need some solid improvement in either resolution and/or high ISO noise before I can justify buying this camera. I'm not terribly attracted to bells and whistles even though they might be very lovely bells and very impressive whistles.
« Last Edit: September 06, 2007, 12:06:31 AM by Ray » Logged
macgyver
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 510


« Reply #3 on: September 06, 2007, 12:21:56 AM »
ReplyReply

The first thing I noticed about mine was how much quicker it seems than my 30d.  Not just frame rate, but the whole package.  Also, the sound of the shutter is MUCH nicer.  Quieter, should be less annoying.
Logged
Ray
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8878


« Reply #4 on: September 06, 2007, 01:43:21 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
The first thing I noticed about mine was how much quicker it seems than my 30d.  Not just frame rate, but the whole package.  Also, the sound of the shutter is MUCH nicer.  Quieter, should be less annoying.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=137624\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

So you've got one already!  

I'd be interested in seeing a comparison of any identical scene showing any image quality improvement the 40D has to offer over the 30D, whether it be lower noise in the shadows, higher resolution and/or lower noise at ISO 3200, smoother tonal gradations, whatever.
Logged
HiltonP
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 136


WWW
« Reply #5 on: September 06, 2007, 03:30:26 AM »
ReplyReply

It's a trivial thing, but I can't help but notice that whereas the 20D had 5 control buttons on the back (excluding the power switch, joystick and wheel), that the new 40D now has 10 buttons. Coupled with the larger LCD it means things are getting pretty crowded back there! . . .
Logged

Regards, HILTON
HiltonP
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 136


WWW
« Reply #6 on: September 06, 2007, 04:02:06 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
It's a trivial thing, but I can't help but notice that whereas the 20D had 5 control buttons on the back (excluding the power switch, joystick and wheel), that the new 40D now has 10 buttons. Coupled with the larger LCD it means things are getting pretty crowded back there! . . .
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=137646\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Oops! . . . make that 7 on the 20D.  
Logged

Regards, HILTON
Lisa Nikodym
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1702



WWW
« Reply #7 on: September 06, 2007, 10:34:40 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
It's a trivial thing, but I can't help but notice that whereas the 20D had 5 control buttons on the back (excluding the power switch, joystick and wheel), that the new 40D now has 10 buttons. Coupled with the larger LCD it means things are getting pretty crowded back there! . . .

I'd far rather have a bunch of buttons for things I use regularly than to have to search through menus to find them, or remember that a button does three different things in three different modes and figure out what mode I'm in.  That's still a heck of a lot fewer buttons than a TV remote...

Lisa
Logged

macgyver
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 510


« Reply #8 on: September 06, 2007, 01:44:04 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
So you've got one already!   

I'd be interested in seeing a comparison of any identical scene showing any image quality improvement the 40D has to offer over the 30D, whether it be lower noise in the shadows, higher resolution and/or lower noise at ISO 3200, smoother tonal gradations, whatever.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=137634\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


Ha, yeah, I got on the list for one with a smaller retalier when the specs first leaked.  Usually I wouldn't do that sort of thing, but the price was right, the specs were right and [american] football season shall soon pass.

I haven't noticed any radical IQ differences yet (though I've used it very limitedly). I hate shooting JPGs again, feels weird, but I have no recourse until raw support comes along.  I have a very heavy weekend of shooting college sports and events (which will be largely shot between 800-3200) coming up this friday, if anyone is interested I can let you all know what I think.
Logged
Anthony R
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 252


« Reply #9 on: September 06, 2007, 02:16:26 PM »
ReplyReply

I suspect that people will juggle the D300's slightly better feature set against the 40D's US$500 lower price, but that the sales, for good or ill, will be made on the LCD screen.

Bah. Only for those that don't have a preference and already own either a Nikon or Canon and lenses, etc. A pro is bound to have a full kit by either brand and body swapping from that standpoint is silly as they'd have to sell off what they have at a loss and buy again new. Bad logic. Besides, as far as Canon goes, they have been dominating the dslr market since their first real camera have they not? I suspect those that purchased Nikons were going with brand loyalty when they made the switch, couldn't afford the Canon or were mis/ill informed. No offense to Nikon users, I was once one, but wouldn't lately no matter how big the lcd...
Logged
feppe
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2909

Oh this shows up in here!


WWW
« Reply #10 on: September 06, 2007, 02:19:35 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
So you've got one already!   

I'd be interested in seeing a comparison of any identical scene showing any image quality improvement the 40D has to offer over the 30D, whether it be lower noise in the shadows, higher resolution and/or lower noise at ISO 3200, smoother tonal gradations, whatever.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=137634\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Seconded. I was a bit surprised to hear how 40D is what the 30D was supposed to be, when the improvements are merely marginal. The only major improvement (for me) is the sensor cleaning feature. The megapixel increase is negligent, better weather sealing welcome. But everything else is icing on the cake or even useless - live view? Come on, seriously. And I'm so glad Michael is carrying the torch for easy MLU and/or programmable button(s).

The big question remains what the "14-bit" means as at the moment it's just marketing hype - and if it actually is 14-bit. If 40D offers "real" 14-bit results and superior shadow performance at low ISOs, I'll seriously consider upgrading. Otherwise I'll wait and buy L glass, as that's a better investment in my photography than splurging a few hundred euros for a marginal upgrade.
Logged

John Camp
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1258


« Reply #11 on: September 06, 2007, 03:59:00 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I suspect that people will juggle the D300's slightly better feature set against the 40D's US$500 lower price, but that the sales, for good or ill, will be made on the LCD screen.

Bah. Only for those that don't have a preference and already own either a Nikon or Canon and lenses, etc. A pro is bound to have a full kit by either brand and body swapping from that standpoint is silly as they'd have to sell off what they have at a loss and buy again new. Bad logic.[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=137735\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I didn't really think of it as a pro camera -- I was talking about people who are moving up to a DSLR from a P&S, with no pre-conceived notions and without a great deal of photography knowledge. In other words, the market that Canon and Nikon are struggling for. Once somebody has committed to a whole line of lenses, it's difficult to get them to change without a massive difference in the quality of the final image. When Canon had a clearly dominant camera at the top, pros switched; if Nikon comes out with a hi-res D3x to match the current announced D3, I think the switching will pretty much be over, as the two lines will mostly matchup. (And we can, thank God, be mostly done with the fanboy dominance of camera forums.)

JC
Logged
Anthony R
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 252


« Reply #12 on: September 06, 2007, 04:05:05 PM »
ReplyReply

True. I don't think of it as pro either, but that term is used so loosely these days. I remember when 'prosumer' was en vogue. That being said, something like the 5D is only pro for certain 'pro' applications..
Logged
thewanderer
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 106


« Reply #13 on: September 06, 2007, 04:24:07 PM »
ReplyReply

What is the infactuation with the large screen?   ,,, what is the real importance of it,,?  its such a small sample, do you really use it to edit stuff??   i sure dont base any of may work on a 3inch screen. except for the most obviously blown stuff,, otherwise, i use the computer.  heaven forbid trying to determine the sharpness of an eye on that tiny screen,,, beisdes, i am likely to miss a shot chimping thinking i can do some quick editing,,,
Logged
John Sheehy
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 838


« Reply #14 on: September 06, 2007, 09:03:11 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
The big question remains what the "14-bit" means as at the moment it's just marketing hype - and if it actually is 14-bit. If 40D offers "real" 14-bit results and superior shadow performance at low ISOs, I'll seriously consider upgrading. Otherwise I'll wait and buy L glass, as that's a better investment in my photography than splurging a few hundred euros for a marginal upgrade.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=137736\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

The 40D has lower read noise at ISO 100 than the 20D or 30D, by at least a half stop (IOW, at least 1/2 stop more DR).  This may or may not be due to the particular 14-bit ADC, but even if it is, the noise level is not low enough to benefit from 14 bit RAWs; 12-bit RAWs would be sufficient (as it also is with the 1Dmk3, which has a tiny bit less read noise at ISO 100).
Logged
phila
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 260



WWW
« Reply #15 on: September 09, 2007, 01:48:44 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Isn't the D300 LCD screen over 900,000 pixels as opposed to the 40D's 230,000?
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

No.

"... In the post "Nikon D3 and D300," we reported about the Nikon D3 that "the new 3-inch LCD has almost a megapixel of resolution." This was the result of a somewhat disingenuous if not deliberately misleading specification by Nikon, but it turns out it's not true. As LCDs are usually specified, the D3's LCD has 307,000 pixels of resolution."

[a href=\"http://theonlinephotographer.com/the_online_photographer/blog_index.html]http://theonlinephotographer.com/the_onlin...blog_index.html[/url]

Sept 1 post.
Logged

budjames
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 690


WWW
« Reply #16 on: September 09, 2007, 02:32:42 AM »
ReplyReply

I traded in my 2 year old 20D for a 40D early this week. I'm on a 4 day trip to Amelia Island, FL and have shot about 700 images with my new 40D using my Canon 24-105 f4 IS L lens.

Unfortunately, I had to load Canon's aweful DPP 3.0 software on my MacBook Pro in order to read the RAW images. Aside from that temporary inconvenience, the initial images from the 40D look very sharp and smooth. The color is very natural and accurate as well.

When shooting, one of the biggest improvements over the 20D is the much quieter shutter. No more obnoxious mirror slap. The view finder is much brighter. Also very much appreciated is the 3" LCD screen for reviewing images and using the camera menus. I no longer have to bring my reading glasses with me when I take pictures. I didn't bring a tripod with me on this trip, so I have not used the Live View function yet for mirror lockup, but it looks very cool.

Now I can't wait until Lightroom and ACR are able to read my 40D RAW files so that I can make some prints to examine.

I think that anyone with a 30D or earlier model will definitely want to upgrade to the 40D. It's that much better to use.

Cheers,
Bud James
North Wales, PA
Logged

Bud James
North Wales, PA
www.budjamesphotography.com
feppe
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2909

Oh this shows up in here!


WWW
« Reply #17 on: September 09, 2007, 03:33:13 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
When shooting, one of the biggest improvements over the 20D is the much quieter shutter. No more obnoxious mirror slap. The view finder is much brighter. Also very much appreciated is the 3" LCD screen for reviewing images and using the camera menus. I no longer have to bring my reading glasses with me when I take pictures. I didn't bring a tripod with me on this trip, so I have not used the Live View function yet for mirror lockup, but it looks very cool.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=138132\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Quieter shutter, a bigger screen and a bit of bling factor is enough to call for a definite need to upgrade costing several hundred euros? Not in my book.
Logged

budjames
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 690


WWW
« Reply #18 on: September 09, 2007, 03:46:49 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Quieter shutter, a bigger screen and a bit of bling factor is enough to call for a definite need to upgrade costing several hundred euros? Not in my book.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=138136\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

That's easy! Don't buy one. But for me, it was money well spent.

Bud James
Logged

Bud James
North Wales, PA
www.budjamesphotography.com
mkress65
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 25


« Reply #19 on: September 09, 2007, 10:08:08 AM »
ReplyReply

Bud,  being a 20D owner myself, I'm debating the purchase and am glad to see your comments.  I was wondering if you'd noticed any improvement with the new auto focus configuration -- is the AF any faster/ more accurate?  Have fun shooting in FL!

Thanks,

Matt

Quote
That's easy! Don't buy one. But for me, it was money well spent.

Bud James
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=138138\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad