30D to 40D

[MN Shutterbug]

I just ran into someone who will give me $500 for my 30D. I also found a site where I can buy a new 40D for $803. Has anyone upgraded between these 2 or at least used these 2, to advise whether it's worth upgrading for another $300? The extra megapixels or the liveview, aren't that important to me. The person I bought my 30D from, who then upgraded to the 40D, thinks the servo mode is a bit quicker. The thing that would sell me is if the 40D would have more precise and faster focus in low light conditions.

Look at this from the perspective of a financially conservative person, not a rich dude.

[Dbl]

Honestly I haven't noticed much difference in focus speed between the 20D, 30D, 40D, or 50D. These are things I notice The 40D/50D is slightly better. The IQ to me is better on the 40D. Is it worth $300? I wish I could answer that for you. If it was me, I don't believe I would make that jump.

[Steve Foss]

I wouldn't make the jump either. I'd make a jump to the 50D, though.

The 30D to 40D upgrade was incremental, and the 2 extra megapixels don't mean much when it comes to print size.

[MN Shutterbug]

I've looked thru hundreds of reviews on Amazon, and the 40D reviews are much more promising then the 50D reviews. Actually, there are some who think the 40D is a better camera. Decisions, decisions. Sigh

Not only that, but then we're talking a difference of $600. If I could get out of paying the state $550 next month, for the sales tax I owe, then it would be easy.

[yakfisher]

You could, buy the equipment and use it as a tax write-off

[Steve Foss]

I'm not going to get into a lot of details in comparing IQ between the 40D and 50D. Suffice to say most of those online reviews compare them at similar iso settings but with the in-camera noise reduction turned off in the 50D, which is a stupid comparison.

Of course, there are other differences, but it's usually for IQ (and usually the type of comparison I mentioned) for which people who rely on pixel peeping rather than prints ding the 50D.

At any rate, if you're hot to upgrade from the 30D, upgrade to either 40D or 50D body and don't look back. They're all good!

[finnbay]

I love my 40D. Had very good luck with it. Didn't have a 30D so can't make that comparison, but I love the 50D as well. I do believe that with the noise reduction on, the 50D is a fair amount better at ISO 3200 than the 40D. Took some basketball photos last night without strobes and am very happy with the results.

[Dbl]

Thanks Steve for saying what I was going to. I never even considered going to the 40D from the 20D/30D. But I couldn't wait for the 50D. I just don't understand people and the reviews they write. Seems some folks spend too much time taking pictures of test charts and dollar bills.

Its too bad they don't actually get out and use the camera to take actual pictures. I am just going through 1,000 or so shots from last night and a number of those from the 50D and I have to say my real world tests over the past few months makes me VERY happy I have a 50D.

[Steve Foss]

Thanks Steve for saying what I was going to. I never even considered going to the 40D from the 20D/30D. But I couldn't wait for the 50D. I just don't understand people and the reviews they write. Seems some folks spend too much time taking pictures of test charts and dollar bills.

Its too bad they don't actually get out and use the camera to take actual pictures. I am just going through 1,000 or so shots from last night and a number of those from the 50D and I have to say my real world tests over the past few months makes me VERY happy I have a 50D.

Dan, those are the sentiments I've heard from the handful of photographers I know when it comes to the 50D. I may actually be able to swing a 50D in the next few weeks. Either that or a lightly used 1D Mk2n. I'm hopeful!

[MN Shutterbug]

This is why I'm asking the question here, because I know you boys know what you are doing and can offer solid and experienced advice. If I shot indoor sports, I'd know what to do in a heartbeat, especially after seeing examples posted on this forum.

I'll just have to wait and see what my residual check amounts to on the 20th. I don't want to spend more than I have.

And yes Yak, I'd definitely write it off. The government will allow new businesses to lose money 3 years in a row, before they consider it a hobby. I might as well start now.

Thanks all, for your unbiased and experienced advice.

[Steve Foss]

This is why I'm asking the question here, because I know you boys know what you are doing and can offer solid and experienced advice. Thanks all, for your unbiased and experienced advice.

Then here's a little more advice. It is experienced, for sure, and while I believe it is balanced advice, it certainly goes against the marketing strategies of all the DSLR makers.

Here it is: For your genre of photography I doubt you have a single client/customer who cares about which body you shoot. I know I don't. What your (and any) clients want is inspiring images of excellent quality, and upgrading your camera body won't produce those. I make large prints with the greatest of ease with the 8.2 Mp sensor you're now shooting.

So why upgrade at all? A new body won't make you a better photographer and it won't get you more clients/sales. Why not spend the money promoting your business? I'll bet you need additional clients more than you need a newer camera body. Or spend it on gas to get to a few very productive avian destinations (I know you're a bird guy), which quite a few people up here can supply you with, and capture more wonderful images of species you don't already have. Or spend it on a photo tour or a photo class or photography books or some other thing that helps you feel inspired.

In the end, once you reach the level of camera body/lens you are already at, it's a lot more about creation than equipment.

Just some food for thought. Mull it over, accept or dismiss it, it's all good.

[MN Shutterbug]

Definitely, words of wisdom. I had been thinking along the same lines. If I got the 50D, I might be able to shoot for an extra 1/2 hour at the end of the day, but that would probably be about the only advantage, for my type of shooting. It's just that, when someone offered to buy my 30D, it got tempting. But, my 30D serves me very well and I have been very happy with it. And, $600 will pay for a lot of gas and a few nights in a motel.

Thanks for the sound advice.

Actually Steve, what you did was bring me to my senses.

[finnbay]

Quote:

Actually Steve, what you did was bring me to my senses.

Man, he does just the opposite with me! "Sure, you need a new camera body!" "Yep, if I was you I'd go for that new lens!"

He is right, though. Too many times that chance to jump to the next generation body or lens length gets to be so big a temptation it's hard to stay reasonable!

[Steve Foss]

Man, he does just the opposite with me! "Sure, you need a new camera body!" "Yep, if I was you I'd go for that new lens!"

Ahhhh, different situations, different advice. Plus, I occasionally get to borrow Ken's gear, so of course I only want him to have the best. When you picking up that 800mm f5.6L, buddy?

[MARINERMAGNUM]

Whew,now that that's settled............I want the name of the guy with the 500 dollars!

[Steve Foss]

XT, you might also consider a different lens option. The new Sigma 150-500 OS (Siggie's version of image stabilization) is getting good reviews. At 500mm it's only 1/3 of a stop slower than the 100-400 at 400mm (f5.6 for the Canon, f6.3 for the Sigma), and Canoga's got it for $950. Selling the 100-400 would finance the Siggie purchase completely with a bit left over.

Just another option to wrap your mind around. For avian photographers, an extra 100mm can be quite a boon.

[MN Shutterbug]

You can separate me from my 100-400 when you can pry my cold dead fingers from it. I'd rather try and learn some bird ninja skills from Mariner.

One good argument for the 40D is, for only another $300, I'd have a brand new camera vs. one with maybe 40,000 actuations.

[Steve Foss]

One good argument for the 40D is, for only another $300, I'd have a brand new camera vs. one with maybe 40,000 actuations.

That's a somewhat better point about upgrading. The 30D is rated to 100,000 shutters, so it would be worth spending a little time figuring out how many actuations you average in a month and calculating a rough estimate on how long the camera might last before the shutter goes.

But that's an inexact science, for sure. My first 20D got just under 100,000 shutters before the shutter failed, and that was rated to only 50,000.

[MN Shutterbug]

The 30D is rated to 100,000 shutters, so it would be worth spending a little time figuring out how many actuations you average in a month and calculating a rough estimate on how long the camera might last before the shutter goes.

I did just that last night. That just give me another reason not to upgrade. On a good excursion, I might take 150 shots, and less most days out. Figuring 5000 shots a year is probably even exaggerating. I can probably get another 10 years out of my 30D. It would be silly to get rid of a camera that has been so good to me. I'm happy with it and I'm hanging onto it. Besides, I don't see the economy improving anytime soon.

[MARINERMAGNUM]

Quote:

My first 20D got just under 100,000 shutters before the shutter failed, and that was rated to only 50,000.

Pull the lens and soak 'er down in there with WD40. That stuff fixes everything!