Canon 40D over the 400D

[paulr5604]

Hi

everyone I'm just after a bit of quick advice would I notice a marked improvement in low light high ISO situations if I upgraded to a 40D from my 400D.

[the black fox]

Re: Canon 40D over the 400D

a little bit but IMHO you would be far better going for a 50d for the few extra pounds to have a large improvement ,in fact having just purchased a 7d on my return to canon i wonder if the 50d might have been a better choice after all .i used to own one and there a damn good camera

[paulr5604]

Re: Canon 40D over the 400D

Thanks I am also looking at the 50D and am leaning towards it as it has a higher ISO and more MP I know that MP isn't everything but if I want to get larger than A2 prints it would help.

[Stan]

Re: Canon 40D over the 400D

everyone I'm just after a bit of quick advice would I notice a marked improvement in low light high ISO situations if I upgraded to a 40D from my 400D.

chalk and cheese although its not going to be as good as the more modern cameras.

Thanks I am also looking at the 50D

I would steer clear of the 50D - I upgraded to one from my 40D and it was a real step backwards in terms of noise levels - I found anything above ISO 400 was a waist of time. I only kept it for a few months before moving on to a 7D. I regretted getting rid of the 40D so I bought another, and still have it as my back up body

Stan

[DrJon]

Re: Canon 40D over the 400D

DxO have the 40D as about 5% better than the 400D, so I wouldn't bother. The 50D is effectively the same as the 40D. The 1100D is maybe 15% better but would seem quite a step-down in many ways. I suspect the best cheap low-light solution is a 5D mk 1 that's had the mirror fix and has a reasonable shutter count. But if you have EF-S lenses they won't work on it.
Otherwise a Nikon D5100 is the low-light bargain of the moment (still available new with kit lens for sub £400).

http://www.dxomark.com/Cameras/Compare-Camera-Sensors/Compare-cameras-side-by-side/(appareil1)/272%7C0/(brand)/Canon/(appareil2)/180%7C0/(brand2)/Canon/(appareil3)/184%7C0/(brand3)/Canon#toggleBookmarks

http://www.dxomark.com/Cameras/Compare-Camera-Sensors/Compare-cameras-side-by-side/(appareil1)/698%7C0/(brand)/Nikon/(appareil2)/184%7C0/(brand2)/Canon/(appareil3)/176%7C0/(brand3)/Canon

(Look at the low-light ISO score, more is better. Also can do Measurements Tab -> SNR and Dynamic Range.)

[paulr5604]

Re: Canon 40D over the 400D

chalk and cheese although its not going to be as good as the more modern cameras.



I would steer clear of the 50D - I upgraded to one from my 40D and it was a real step backwards in terms of noise levels - I found anything above ISO 400 was a waist of time. I only kept it for a few months before moving on to a 7D. I regretted getting rid of the 40D so I bought another, and still have it as my back up body

Stan

The 400D is the same anything over ISO400 and I might aswell not bother. Are you saying the 40D is better above ISO400? I'm asking as I have been approached by a friend of a friend to do their wedding but at the moment I can't justify spending loads on new equipment. I also wouldn't dream of doing the wedding with the 400D it would be fine during the day but on an evening I would struggle to get good images.

I haven't said yes or no to the person that has asked me just looking at my options for upgrades on a tight budget.

[Stan]

Re: Canon 40D over the 400D

Are you saying the 40D is better above ISO400

I find the 40D is OK up to ISO 800, sometimes needs a bit of NR in post processing but of course it is only used as a back up. With my 7D I can quite happily go to ISO 3200, which is often needed during the winter, again just subject to using NR on the background areas

Stan

[paulr5604]

Re: Canon 40D over the 400D

I find the 40D is OK up to ISO 800, sometimes needs a bit of NR in post processing but of course it is only used as a back up. With my 7D I can quite happily go to ISO 3200, which is often needed during the winter, again just subject to using NR on the background areas

Stan

The wedding will be in July so hopefully quite bright until quite late so I think ISO 800 would be okay in conjunction with my flashgun, also I would like to use it for wildlife so I think that the higher burst rate and reported faster and more accurate focus should be better than the 400D

[briansquibb]

Re: Canon 40D over the 400D

I had both a 40D and 50D - and found the 40D best. I would skip the 50D and if possible look at the 60D which is a long way ahead of the 400D

I have just got a 70D which is excellent - but very much more expensive than the 60D at the moment.

Brian

[paulr5604]

Re: Canon 40D over the 400D

Thanks I will have a look at the 60D I have a while to get some more money together

[Paulstw]

Re: Canon 40D over the 400D

Aye the 60D represents great value at the moment with it being replaced and prices are good second hand. You can get a new one on DR for £450. I hardly ever use high speed burst on my 7D. I forget I even have it. I find it totally inconsistent, and largely because I think i've set up the really complex AF settings all wrong.

A lot of people are buying the 7D at the moment because it's cheaper now with the 70D on the shelves. They are flooding forums with threads like "This AF sucks" and "7D missing focus" and it's purely because, like me, they don't know what the different AF settings are and what they should be used for.

I look on Flickr and noticed several EOS forum guys with pin sharp pics of flying jetfighters, or racing cars, and stuff like that. They are the real photographers, who know exactly what setting will yield the result they need. Us weekend guys just really need a good camera to work and last on the batteries. In hindsight I could probably get away with a 60D so that's why I think it's probably Canons wee jewel at the moment.

My mate Steven McGrath (On Flickr) uses a 40D. His pictures are some of the best wildlife shot's I've ever seen. He's as much a field work guy and tracker as anything. He'll scope out a good thing for weeks then photograph it in the exact amount of light. He puts anything I've ever done to shame and I bought into the whole "Better camera and lens makes better pics". His 40D is bruised and battered. But the 40D is supposed to be one of the fastest AF systems. His Sigma 150-500 is a variable aperture too. It's seen more dinks than a nascar and it's still going.

Don't put yourself under pressure to chase better gear Paul. I've spent about £3000 so far and I'm still not happy. So it never ends. A Tamron 17-50 2.8 (non VC) is about £200. With your style processing and your ability to get sharp results that 2.8 aperture will really help in the low light of indoor weddings. My 70-200 was redundant for the whole day until the speeches because it was too long at the 70 end. If it wasn't for my crappy 17-85 I wouldn't have got any shots in the reception, and I nearly left it at home. The resulting shots once edited actually look ok.

Aye the 400D is getting on a bit, and a trade in on a better body via MPB Photographic might be an option. They give good rates. I think even a 550D would get good results. It's the same sensor as a 60D and 7D. They only difference on those bodies that I can see would make a difference over a 550D is the speed of it's operation, access to settings fast via dials, and the viewfinder being a pentaprism. Otherwise the 550D is still a good option. Couple that with a Tamron 17-50 2.8 and you could be very pleased :)

[DrJon]

Re: Canon 40D over the 400D

DxO do have the 60D as better than the 40D by enough to notice, but it's not a huge leap. Although prices should be heading downwards now the 70D has been out for a while (with luck). The Canon APS cameras are still a long way behind the curve for high ISO performance, I see the 60D scores the same for low-light on DxO as my GH3, which was a much smaller sensor (and wins in all other categories)...

http://www.dxomark.com/Cameras/Compare-Camera-Sensors/Compare-cameras-side-by-side/(appareil1)/842%7C0/(brand)/Panasonic/(appareil2)/663%7C0/(brand2)/Canon/(appareil3)/180%7C0/(brand3)/Canon

If it's for a specific event have you considered renting a 6D or 70D (which does improve the low-light performance)? Perhaps once to get used to it and once for the event?

[paulr5604]

Re: Canon 40D over the 400D

I think I have settled on the 40d to replace the 400d due to it's AF system being quicker I'm not bothered by MP numbers I'm happy with the quality of the prints I get from the 400d. Will await confirmation that they want me to do it then will order one. Might even do it anyway.

Thanks everyone for your suggestions and advice

[Guesty]

Re: Canon 40D over the 400D

Hi Paul,

Loads of similar points made already but I get shots taken on my old 350d that I am more than happy with. With all the things you can do in post processing the only real advantages are the larger images for larger prints and lower noise at high iso.

If I was out all weather then I'd definitely want a degree of weather sealing but I am vey much a fair weather photographer!

[paulr5604]

Re: Canon 40D over the 400D

Hi Paul,

Loads of similar points made already but I get shots taken on my old 350d that I am more than happy with. With all the things you can do in post processing the only real advantages are the larger images for larger prints and lower noise at high iso.

If I was out all weather then I'd definitely want a degree of weather sealing but I am vey much a fair weather photographer!

Thanks
I have pretty much come to the conclusion that the main advantages of the 40D over the 400D (for me anyway) will be quicker AF and better performance regarding the noise levels at higher ISO. Plus the weather sealing and better build quality. MPB Photographic have offered me £80 for the 400D in part ex but I might try selling it privately first to see if I can get a bit more, however with selling fees on fleabay I might be better off taking their part ex price and not have the hassle with potential buyers.