dnauer wrote:
For me the price and features of the 40D brought me from film to digital -- it made enough of a difference for me to make the leap.
Interestingly....(for me) I bought a mint 1V s/h for peanuts from a guy who bought it new, put about a dozen films through it...then 'upgraded' to a 40D as he was offered one by a friend in mint condition.... the friend loved the 40D so much he decided to 'upgrade' to a 1 series body.
I bought a 40D about two years afterwards...but I am grateful to the 40D because not only is it a fantastic camera...it is also the reason I got to own the marvelous 1V as well.....
My vote has to go with the original 1D. It mades its debut about 11 years ago for $5500.00 and is still being used. The technology this camera broght to the market was, and still is groundbreaking. I have yet to find a better autofocus system. Although some are just as good, the 1D still remains my benchmark. The images it produces are still amazing despite its 4.5 mp sensor.
strictly on image quality the 40D is going to give you really good capability for the price; newer cropped bodies won't offer a whole lot of improvement over that.
for full frame you can get a used 5D, 5D2 or 1Ds2 - any of those will offer really good image quality
for sports capability a used 1D2 , 7D, or 1D3 would fit the bill...
Pixel Perfect wrote:
Not IMO. My 1D III was simply amazing and I owned the 1D II for nearly 6 years.
If you can get a 1d III for $1K, you'd be insane to to pass it up. But I doubt they are that cheap except for beaters.
Had one. Looked mint. Had 58x-xxx serial number. Yet it was half-blind in one-shot compared to my photoj-beaten 1D2N. It got a service, no improvement, so I let it go (to someone who used MF glass and wanted the sensor, half-blind AF was announced before the sale occured).
