On the whole I gotta agree with going the buy a 5D and save up for the 17-40 route. I have 40D and 5D, and much as I was a doubter at first, the files out of the 5D are just nicer. There have been lots of arguments and theories about this, but I just have to add one more voice to the anecdotal evidence base. And, I swear that I really was a doubter, I shot with a 40D and 1D2 and I was always pretty happy with both. But now I love the shots out of the 5D like none before.
Weaker AA filter, less pixel density, shallower DOF, standing closer for same reach? I don't know what it is that makes the 5D so good, but boy am I convert. Love the image quality out of that 5D.
In other ways it is a bit of a low tech, old tech camera, but I can live with that.
Only you can decide if you really need live view, small RAW, and a few other bells and whistles that the 40D gives you. The AF for birds and wildlife will be fine for tripod work of birds and mamals that are hanging out. And the 50-500 is great for that. But as for birds in flight, not gonna work well with 40D or 5D, just too big and long, zoom creep when aimed up, not a big enough aperture or fast enough AF.
today i had a chance to play my cousin's 5D, as much as i like the big viewfinder (i never have problem with my 40D actually) and swallow DOF it produces, the camera itself feels pretty slow just like original rebel i owned before (shutter lag and burst).
On 5D, the AF kept hunting when there is not enough lighting (however once the AF nailed down the target, it's very accurate - i tried centre AF). As for interface i prefer the new 40D over 5D (eventhough its not gonna be a problem at all) and on 5D, if i remember correctly, the ISO doesnt really show up on both viewfinder and top LCD panel (unless u want to change the setting).
Here's 100% crop comparison noise at ISO 1600 - Resize to the same pixel then crop (i dint bring tripod at that time, so the pic i took is almost identical but the lighting seems shift a bit)
jvarszegi wrote:
It's very slightly different (200,000 more pixels on the 30D sensor). The image quality is the same. Now you know.
30D has "improved micro lenses" which gives slightly less noise at high ISO, I've owned and put 10s of thousands of exposures on both, and while you can definately tell, you only need to miss your exposure by 1/2 a stop on either to make the difference negligable anyway, so it's hardly night and day.
I just upgraded from a 10D to the 40D. I decided against the 5D for now because of AF speed and trusted reviews that showed the IQ was on par between the two cameras. If it were me, I would get a 40D and go ahead and get the 17-40L. Great deals for both on the B&S forum. Might cost $100 more than you want. Then save up for the 5D, as prices will drop when the 5d2 really hits the market.
jweaver wrote:
I just upgraded from a 10D to the 40D. I decided against the 5D for now because of AF speed and trusted reviews that showed the IQ was on par between the two cameras. If it were me, I would get a 40D and go ahead and get the 17-40L. Great deals for both on the B&S forum. Might cost $100 more than you want. Then save up for the 5D, as prices will drop when the 5d2 really hits the market.
5D IQ is superior especially noticeable in landscapes. 40D is a fine camera but can't match the 5D in noise or IQ IMO. AF speed of the 5D in one shot is quite fast and it's good in low light as is the 40D.
For your budget I would go as stated with a 40D if you plan on a lot of nature or a 5D if your primary is landscapes. If your budget was slightly higher I would say a 1D MKII that can be bought for around 1200 these days, you wont miss a couple of MP. I went from a 40D to a MKIIN and the diffference was astounding. 2MP less but the IQ difference is not even comparable. Nothing can match the AF on a 1D series body. I shoot with a 1D MKIIN when speed counts and a 1Ds MKII for everything else but these are a bit out of your budget.
What is the price difference between 5D and 1D MKII? It doesn't seem like much, and if 1D MKII is best of both worlds as fast as image quality of 5D and a great AF then I might have to just go for that. Not very many 5D up for sale and they look to be around $1300, while 1D MkII looks to be around 1100-1400 (pending on use)? Which is better?
I work right next door to a estuary park so I plan on trying birds in flight, which sounds like it'll be pretty tough with the 5D. Although I still think most of my shots (and ones I enjoy taking most) will be landscape.
Did we lose track of the point of this question... If you have a $1K budget you need to add up the numbers again... I think you passed you limit on Item one??
I f you buy all that for $1K let me know where you got it..
Buy glass you need, the images will improve...GL
Yeah I'm extending budget. If I wait on the WA lens I can squeeze $1300 on body. Then I should have enough to get the 17-40L when January rolls around.
I'll have to live with 28-75 for my WA, its not really wide but it will do on a full frame.
look at a used 1D2 or 1D2N. avg $1250-2000 on eBay.
heck, used 1Ds2's are going for $2250-2500 on eBay...
a used 5D would also be a good choice but won't do as well with the birds, other wildlife, or sports (still a great camera, but the AF doesn't compare to a 1D-anything)
Robert Birnie wrote:
I work right next door to a estuary park so I plan on trying birds in flight, which sounds like it'll be pretty tough with the 5D.
Actually, the 5D's AF will likely be at advantage for BIF as the center AF point is expandable via CFn to 6 assist points. That will make tracking much easier than with the 40D.
I recently moved from a 40D to a 5D, and as others have said the 5D has a definite IQ edge, especially at high ISO's. Still, I consider the 40D to be the better all-round camera that can handle a plethora of different shooting situations very well and has a lot of creature comforts which the 5D lacks.
Robert Birnie wrote:
What is the price difference between 5D and 1D MKII? It doesn't seem like much, and if 1D MKII is best of both worlds as fast as image quality of 5D and a great AF then I might have to just go for that. Not very many 5D up for sale and they look to be around $1300, while 1D MkII looks to be around 1100-1400 (pending on use)? Which is better?
I work right next door to a estuary park so I plan on trying birds in flight, which sounds like it'll be pretty tough with the 5D. Although I still think most of my shots (and ones I enjoy taking most) will be landscape. ...Show more →
I have/had (sold the 5D last week) both cameras. There are really designed for different purposes. For me, as a non-professional nature, landscape, street type photographer the 5D was a better fit. It is lighter, has better low light images, and 3 fps more than fast enough. The 1DMK2 is a bigger and heavier camera, but in situations where you need the fps, or faster AF it is great. The 1DMK2 has a bit more noise and it occurs earlier (by ISO 400).
Regarding AF, my keeper ratio of cars at 60-30 mph, coming directly at me, was 60% with the 5D and 70% with the 1DMK2. The biggest different was that with the 1DMK2 the 8 fps makes the set of images like frames of animation. In comparison, the 3 fps of the 5D is very slow.
