Canon 40D over 400D advice

Marcus Geezer

Marcus Geezer

Suspended / Banned
Messages
3,522
Name
Marcus
Edit My Images
Yes
I currently own a 400D and have upgraded the stock lens to a Canon EF-S 10-22 and 28-135 IS USM. I'm quite pleased with the pictures I'm taking but cant help but look up at the 40D, which my nephew has just bought.

Of course I'm attracted to the build and features of the 40D but my main question about picture quality. If I was to take the same picture at same settings with the same lens, would I see any visible difference in pic quality at all in the 40D over the 400? I'm not really able to do this with my neph's camera as he isnt local to me.

It's a bit of money to spend on an upgrade, and just want to make sure I am spending my money on a justifiable return, (i.e. improved picture quality).

For reference I use my pics for usual family snaps, and my main subjects for more serious photography structures/landscapes etc, typically at ISO 100 - 400. Yet to sell any pictures but I feel I'm just about getting there with the quality of some of my latest efforts (I hope :shrug:)

All comments welcome and please be kind as I'm new to this forum! :)
 
I have a 40D and my son has a 400D, we did do a comparison between the two using the same lens and same settings and we didn't notice any difference between the two of them. However my son wants a 40D because, like me, he finds it much more comfortable to hold.
 
Hi and welcome to the forum.

I did the upgrade you mention relatively recently. I didn't notice much difference in image quality TBH, but I also don't zoom in to 100% on every picture to check a blade of grass is perfect in the far corner.... The ISO performance of the 40d at 800 is much better than the 400d though. and better at 400 though I didn't find it too bad at 400 on the 400D.

I'm not sure you'd notice a significant increase in image quality doing this upgrade that say buying a 'better' lens would.

That said, how can I put this, I liked my 400d, but I love my 40d. If feels much better, I prefer the layout and I'll stick with this camera for a long time regardless of 50d, 60d etc coming out.

It just feels right, and because it feels right I think I take better pictures as result. I know that a bit wishy washy but for me the upgrade was worth it for that reason (and the extra FPS +improved ISO performance). I've yet to use the live view on it.

I'd say go and have a play with one in a shop, or make a visit to your nephews and have a good go with the 40d and see how it feels. If you prefer the feel of the 400d then you're probably best staying as you are.

Good luck

al
 
One thing I've always been curious about, is the 40/50D view finder better than the 400D's?
 
Odd Jim, the view finder on the 40D is much brighter than the 400D, much easier to use in bright sun!
I upgraded from a 400D to a 40D a while ago, and I have to say I did notice an improvement in image quality, but the biggy for me was the much better AF and low ISO performance. Well worth the cash in my book.

Tara
 
40D has brighter veiwfinder, its a camera that can produce lovely smooth images at up to 1600 before you really start to see degredation. Its comfy in the hands, has better weather sealing, and is capable of just about anything you can throw at it.
Gets a :thumbs: from me:)
 
Over the past year or so there have been many threads regarding
"upgrades" from the 400D to the 40D ( do a forum search there are loads of threads)
not one person ( including me) has ever posted anything negative about that "swap"
 
I have to admit I do like the build quality and 'usability' of the 40D over the 400D and if I had spare dosh just sitting around waiting to be spent then I wouldnt think twice about an upgrade. Thing is I havent, but it looks like to take my photography to the next level a 40D seems the way forward, so I need to do a mix of saving and e-baying to get some dosh together.

I have seen that shops are having none or limited stock, but would probably look for a used model, so no rush.

It's nice however to see that at 100-200 iso levels that the 400D is giving probably similar levels of quality to the 40D, so as long as I continue to try and take pics within that range I shouldnt be left wanting every time I open up a new pic on my pc after taking it. :thumbs:

Thanks everyone for taking the time to post, and if anyone else has any thoughts still please feel free to add. A 40D is deffo on the wish llist. Looks like it may take priority over my new pball gun for 2010, which is saying something believe me!

Ta. Marcus.
 
^ 40/50D is on my list this year too!! You have a couple of cracking lenses to keep your 400D on its toes in the meantime though!

Good to hear the viewfinder is an improvement, I do find sometimes I have to really squint sometimes when shooting landscapes, esp with a CPL on, and end up pushing my face into the back of the camera, lol!!
 
I have just upgraded from a 350D to a 40D and there is a significant difference in quality (especially at high iso's) and everything else is just that bit better, well worth the money!
 
My girlfriend uses a 400D and I shoot with a 40D. I do fashion and commercial photography and I'm extremely happy with the image quality. The processor is of a much higher quality DIGIC III over the II. The Layout is far easier to use, the build quality far better and faster frames per second help things along a bit
 
PandaZam! said:
The processor is of a much higher quality DIGIC III over the II. ....
Click to expand...

That is something that I noticed almost immediately
coupled with the 24-105 it produced some amazing results
( the "colour reproduction" was far superior, I thought.)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top