Canon Upgrade advice reqd!

  • Thread starter Thread starter Rob.Richards
  • Start date Start date
R

Rob.Richards

Guest
I am looking to upgrade my trusty 350D with a limited budget of around £350 (actually that is the budget!). I am thinking a s/h 40D would be good choice, but I have never bought s/h DSLR before and don't know what my other options would be. the main use will be portraits and the odd wedding and nursery shoots...



Any advice on what to consider and what to look out for much appreciated!



Rob
 
A 40D with low shutter count would be a great choice in my opinion. They should be good for over 100,000 shots! One of the best cameras canon have ever produced...again in my opinion.
 
Thats what I figured... Thanks for the quick reply!
 
+1 for the 40D, still got mine and use it as my 2nd camera, it's great :)
 
A 40D seems your best bet and paired with your Sigma 105 macro will be a great combo.
 
I went from the 350D to the 40D, it is a nice step up :)
 
Cheers guys, appreciate the reponses? anyone know what its like at ISO 3200 or using highlight tone priority?
 
3200 is usable in some cases, with well applied noise reduction.
I've made A4 prints of ISO 3200 shots that show great detail and no noise because I selectively apply NR to the background. But if you're not confident with selective noise reduction or would print the shots large, 3200 is probably no go. 1600 is fine though (again, with some limitations).
I'd really be looking at using a tripod or a flashgun instead of using 3200.

HTP doesn't make that much of a difference. I have it turned off because it disables iso 100 (I think it works by shooting at lower ISO's than you set, then brightening the dark areas more than the bright areas).
 
Last edited:
Cheers Adam. I used ISO 1600 on my 350D and it wasnt good, I figured an upgrade to the 40D would give me an extra stop of ISO that I could use more practically so good to now 800 & 1600 are useable!

The info about HTP is handy too - wondered if it made a huge difference!
 
Hi Rob

I upgraded to a 40D from my 300D -> which is still a great camera and my daughters using it presently, getting very good results.

I much prefer the size and weight of the 40D - my daughter much prefers the 300D (or does she just say that so she can have it :thinking::lol:)

The fps is another great bonus for me for motorsport, lowfly etc aswell.

I can have a look through my shots if I have any with a high ISO for an example if you wish ?


Cheers

Andy
 
Thanks Andy, I bit the bullet and bought one off a fellow TP'er but thanks. See you're based around lancashire ever get out and about? PM me if you do! Could do with a day out with a new camera!
 
ISO 3200 is nearly useless unless you really know how to rescue it. ISO1600 is pretty good though (far better than 350/400d).

Highlight priority is better left off to prevent shadow noise and loss of speed. 14bit RAW files will capture more detail and that can be easily pulled back.
 
The 40D is a great and capable camera but if you want to tackle "the odd wedding" you should really be looking to add the 40D rather than upgrade from a 350 (or is that what you meant)?

At ISO3200 it's not great. Sore you can use it but it's not great - I generally used to convert these to B&W to help - but when using 3200 it helps a lot if the exposure is bang on and not under exposed. So it's better with fast lenses if you can to keep it at 1600 or less..
 
Went from 350D to 40D, as others have said;

- Feels much more solid/chunky
- Once used to the controls it handles miles better, very quick to change any settings
- Better ISO performance
- Better screen
- Better quality photos (using same lenses as I was before)

Overall its a very good step, just make sure you have half decent lenses to match it. I think this body will last me now until I go to a 5D mk2 (long way off).
 
5D2 is in a different league.... I was surprised at the difference.
 
Rob.Richards said:
Thanks Andy, I bit the bullet and bought one off a fellow TP'er but thanks. See you're based around lancashire ever get out and about? PM me if you do! Could do with a day out with a new camera!
Click to expand...

Hi Rob

Yes probably about 10 mins away from you

Will give you a shout next time I'm going to play out :lol:

Your more than welcome to come down to Oulton Park with us when the season starts up again.

Cheers

Andy
 
I had read about the ISO and figured 3200 was a no no (why is it Canon's dont handle noise that great until even top end models seem to be outperformed by Nikon?!?!?).

I will be keeping my 350D as a backup until I can upgrade the 40D then use that as backup and so on...

I like B&W and a bit of noise can sometimes be good (did I really say that?)!

Cheers Andy, not really done a lot of motorsport, my father in law used to marshall and love it, he might well be interested too... But yep give me a buzz via pm. I work odd shifts and have 2 kids but try to get out when I can!
 
Have just upgraded my 40D to a 7D and keeping the old body as a backup - the 40D is an excellent camera, you won't be dispointed.

re the Iso Issue - 3200 is really rather ropey, 1600 is ok providing you're not wanting to blow up the images too much. I tried to avoid taking mine beyond 1200 - at which point it was very good, and if you're in conditions to allow keeping it below 800 it's as good as anything on the market
 
I replaced my 350D with a 40D last weekend and have found a big improvement, physically it feels a lot nicer to hold plus having both the dial and the jog dial when in manual makes life easier.

Ive noticed a big diffrence in ISO performance, 1600 is perfectly usable for me, especially after using NR software. I would even bother with my 350D at 1600.

The AF seems to be improved by quite a way too, ive only used it indoors with low light but it focuses accurately quickly in circumstances my 350D would of struggled in.
 
Rob.Richards said:
I had read about the ISO and figured 3200 was a no no (why is it Canon's dont handle noise that great until even top end models seem to be outperformed by Nikon?!?!?).
Click to expand...

Compare the 40D to it's actual nikon competitors and it's good. It's the same as the D300, better than the D80, marginally better than the D200 and marginally worse than the D90.
The 40D isn't good at 3200 because it's not actual ISO. The sensor goes up to 1600, but the camera can use 1600 and underexpose by 1 stop then brighten.

Nikon has some better sensor tech than canon at the moment, but the difference isn't big (the D7000 is about 1/2stop better than the 7D at ISO's above 1600), it's only at the pro level with the D3s that nikon has a big advantage (the D3s is incredible!). Sensor technology moves on fast, there will always be a brand with an edge.
 
Last edited:
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top