I called around today and found that one of my local camera stores received a 40D shipment around noon, so I canceled my Amazon order and picked one up for the same price. Had to pay tax, but didn't have to pay overnight shipping. They said the Kit version with the 28-135 would be coming in in a few weeks.
I'll be going up north so I'll play with it this weekend and let you know what I find.
Early impressions:
- Live view + 10x magnification = Showing how shaky I actually am. I can REALLY see the value for macro people though. MF my 100mm macro was much easier than with my 20D.
- Shutter sound is much quieter. I don't have sound on my laptop (speakers broke), so I can't compare to the mp4 posted, but it's much less 'Snappy' sounding than my 20D (which accounts for most of the noise).
-Menu system is easy
-Viewfinder is a HUGE improvement over the 20D. I'm not sure about the 30D since I don't own one, but it's much larger than my 20d.
- I have bigger hands, and the slightly larger body feels easier to grip for me.
- My Battery grip works
- The screen is very bright (even out of the box- on setting 4 of 7). I agree with some of the reviews that it's a touch grainy, although for all practical purposes it's easy to see if you mis-focused.
-Firmware is listed as 1.0.3
It's faster than my 20D, so much so that I accidentally fired off two shots a few times
A few shots of/with it (the numbering continued where my 20D left off because I used the same memory card):
(Small-fine jpg straight out of camera) http://www.brianskibinski.com/40D/
Edited by BrianSkibinski on Aug 31, 2007 at 02:17 PM GMT
I'm doing a little bit of an internal reset. Several have mentioned that increasing pixel count by 25% while keeping noise even is improvement. The other thing, is that the 5D was 3 grand when it came out. If I'm being realistic, I'd have to ask myself what did I expect for $1300. I shouldn't expect a 5D kind of performance, yet. That said, I think the 40D pics look better in that post.
Stunnaz wrote:
I found a blog with many comparisons between the 40D and 20D. I believe the owner is in Hong Kong:
...
On the right under "Top Posts" you can click on other 40D blogs.
Ouch... well, 3200 is useless At least from what examples I've seen so far. When this camera was announced I was SO excited. Now I don't even care.
Hopefully the AF system will be the saving grace for me.
Wow have we become spoiled with the new technology. It wasn't long ago that we would be jumping with joy for pics this clean at ISO 800!
From what I've seen with a little noise removal the ISO 3200 are not bad at all considering. Also keep in mind we are pixel peeking at screen shots and the true test is what it looks like when printed.
The shots by 72chevelle454 seem usable enough to me. The picture of the lady is a bit under exposed in my opinion. A simple auto levels in PS cures that I ran it trough Noiseware Pro (portrait mode, default settigs) and this is the result:
These are processed w/ Photoshop CS 3. Auto Levels, Noiseware Pro and Max's actions (which include sharpening when resizing) were the only commands used.
Got mine. Running out for dinner. Took some quick snaps. 24-70L. Two unprocessed samples here. Cropped slightly and resized for bandwidth. Inside one with speaker uses camera flash. (Forgot it had one....it just popped up.)
Really fast auto focus. First shots seem slightly soft.
Really easy to use.
Sorry - did not realize until I posted that I don't have upload rights.
Max Ackermann wrote:
Hi, brunobarolo, you have a valid point there. No idea why it won't choose the ISO for you in M Mode if set on AUTO. Maybe they think you would always set you ISO manually, too, and never use AUTO...
either they messed it up for 50D purposes.
or they dumbed it down, it is autoiso because it knows for you what iso is best to use in each shooting mode and ISO400 is what one needs to use in the most general purpose M case . ugh .
so it automatically switches iso within certain modes and automatically either sets the range or fixed iso that should be used in each shooting mode type, blah.
Hope this helps those that are curious about the 3200 ISO
Processed using DPP with no noise
Edited by 72chevelle454 on Aug 31, 2007 at 03:02 PM GMT
first picture is just awful. Maybe it's just me,but If I wouldn't know better,I'd say it's ISO 6400. I checked some online photos and they don't look better than 20D's shots. Some look worse. It's true though,print results are all we need.
Yep it looks like the whole universe circles around this guy!
joekraft wrote:
I think this is a joke. We've been going on 3 days now, and still no decent pictures from Max's supposed camera, but he's had time to, ahem, "record" the shutter sound of a "40d" (how do any of you know by the way that is really a 40D?), and write the dickens out of it, but he hasn't had time to take a single decent picture? But he *has* had time to do a nice comparison chart of ISO performance between the two cameras? Who does this? Something smells fishy.
At least from what examples I've seen so far. When this camera was announced I was SO excited. Now I don't even care.
. ugh 