I was thinking of upgrading my camera, and am considering 40D (from my 20D). My main concern with 20D was high noise with high ISO.
I wonder if anybody is using 40D with Canon 17-55mm IS?
Any comment about this combo? especially if you have experience with 20D as well. I would really appreciate it
As far as high ISO noise on a 20D, I am sure most here know this, but I found noise on the 20D to be very exposure dependent. What I mean is that if I underexposed at all, the noise was much worse. I have actually found that noise at 1600 on a properly exposed shot is less than noise at 800 on an even slightly underexposed shot. It is a very simple thing, but was a revelation to me. I still wish I had a camera that handled noise better, but I now get shots that I am more pleased with since I learned this. Before I would often underexpose a little to be able to avoid a higher ISO, which was actually detrimental to my results.
I use the 17-55 on a 40D and the combo is great. It feels a lot more balanced than the 17-55 on a Rebel. I've never tried a 20D but I think you'll be very happy with the newer combo. Shooting a static scene at high ISO with f/2.8 AND IS isn't something I have to do very often, but when you need the shot, you need the shot. And you'll be really glad you have the gear when that opportunity comes around.
DynaSport wrote:
As far as high ISO noise on a 20D, I am sure most here know this, but I found noise on the 20D to be very exposure dependent. What I mean is that if I underexposed at all, the noise was much worse. I have actually found that noise at 1600 on a properly exposed shot is less than noise at 800 on an even slightly underexposed shot. It is a very simple thing, but was a revelation to me. I still wish I had a camera that handled noise better, but I now get shots that I am more pleased with since I learned this. Before I would often underexpose a little to be able to avoid a higher ISO, which was actually detrimental to my results....Show more →
Exposing to the right is always a good practice on high ISO shots. The 40D definitely benefits from this practice as well. The 40D is capable of very nice ISO 1600 images, just watch your exposure. If you have to recover any shadow areas in post things can get ugly pretty quickly.
my favorite lens. focus is so much better than the 50mm f/1.4 and @ f/2.8 it is exceptional, stop it down just a bit and you get some sharp results that rival L lenses in quality. this lens (along with the 10-22) requires the least amount of post processing for me.. maybe b/c they were optimized for the crop bodies. I can always trust IS will work down to 1/10 - 1/15 a sec. my only complaint is that it can get heavy with the 40D gripped with flash unit attached, shooting for long periods. then again, i can think of heavier set ups..
I have this lens, a 20D and then upgraded to the 40D. I love that lens. It's very sharp and works fine with my 40D. The 40D is an improvement over the 20D, especially at higher ISO, IMO. I felt high ISO with the 20 was much granier. But, I am an amateur and it may have been me.
ansye wrote:
What about the 50D + 17-55 that is different ?
thanks
ansye
The 50D amplifies any glass imperfections. On the 40D CA is minimal, on the 50D it's a downright nuisance. This was a favorite lens on the 40D. Tests on the 50D have me cringing. To be honest I really miss my 40D and may return the 50D and buy another 40. The only thing I will miss is the better LCD.
IMO, my 40D was about a half stop better noise wise than my 20D. 40D has a much better focus system too. 40D is my favorite crop camera, better than the 50D I had but sent back due to error 99s. Here is a 40D 17-55 F 2.8 IS pic. Love taking scenic shots with this combo, the IS allows me to get sharp shots without always having to use a tripod.
Last summer I spend 3 weeks in Europe with the 40D/17-55. It's a damn fine combo and I probably shot a couple thousand images from ISO 800-1600 with excellent results. I normally live between ISO 100 and 320 but those churches and cafe scenes are really dim.
Incidentally, I find the 17-55 just as sharp and effective with my 50D. Although pixel level noise is about the same as the 40D, the 50% more pixels makes the noise less evident in the same sized prints.
I use the 17-55 with both the 20D (now as a backup only) and 40D. Both are great combos! I do not think that the 40D's noise is better than the 20D's. The 40D, however, is more responsive (6.5fps), has better (quicker) AF, sensor cleaning, live view (that I use on a tripod) and I really like the custom C1-C3 modes. I do not regret the upgrade.
