jetmutant
Offline
Upload & Sell: On
|
astrolucida wrote:
I had exactly the same dilemma a few months ago. After trying out both cameras several times in camera shops, I ended up with the 40D. True, the 1D II(n) has advantages in certain type of photography, but I don't do so much of it to justify it.
Also, the 40D actually has several advantages over the 1D II(n):
- lighter weight even with the grip,
- can be used without the grip to get even a smaller and lighter setup,
- custom modes C1-C3,
- My Menu for the most common operations,
- highlight priority mode,
- live view (very important to me),
- auto ISO (though somewhat crippled),
- quicker user interface (don't need two hands or stretching the fingers - important to me as I very often change the settings on the fly),
- telephoto factor (due to smaller pixels),
- can use EF-S lenses (a very important point to me as I really like my 17-55).
Even though the 1D II (n) is a quicker camera when shooting, the 40D is quicker to set up and change the settings on the fly. Thus, under varying conditions, I get the image (if it requires setup) while the small difference in AF speed and fps is not really significant to me.
I did not find significant differences in image quality, and in practice, the 40D AF has been very satisfying in my use - especially when compared with the 30D that I previously had. I don't really need more than 6.5 fps, and even that very seldom as I mostly shoot in single shot mode, pressing the shutter button multiple times as necessary, at the exact moment that I want. I use the center AF point 99% of time.
Not So sure about the speed of the settings issue, once you get used to the way the 1D series work things can be changed very quickly. I am sold on the feel, focus and for me ease of use on the 1DMKIIn's that I have but again if you want a good package in a smaller lighter frame the 40D is a nice machine...Just me throwin copper...
|
. 