The Online Photographer

Check out our new site at!

Saturday, February 24, 2007

Canon 40D: Needed At All?

'Kay, I'm being kinda snarky again. (If you haven't noticed, "snarky" has replaced "curmudgeonly" as my favorite self-description. I don't even really know what it means, but it reminds me of a "Muttley snigger." I got that from Cotty.)

I have a suggestion for Canon in re the "big" 20D/30D/40D question. (You know, the one causing untold neverending shuddupshuddupSHUDDUP existential anguish all over every Canon forum on the 'net....)

The suggestion: drop it.

That's right. Drop it altogether. Why does Canon need a camera in between the XTi (400D) and the 5D, anyway? Answer: it doesn't.

(For those of you who don't know it, as opposed to those of you who prefer to ignore it, in proper American English a corporation is an "it," not "them" and "they" and "their.")

As fas as I'm concerned—just looking at Canon v. Nikon here, not considering outside contenders (which have much narrower slices of the pie chart anyway)—Nikon dominates the lower reaches of the DSLR market. The D40/D80/D200 trio provide the consumer with the best range of choices and the best cameras in each of their respective price ranges. True, the Canon XTi is a great little camera, for people down on that end of the market who prefer, for whatever reason, to shoot Canon. It falls between the D40 and the D80. Translation: you want cheaper than the XTi? Nikon's got it (the D40). You want better than the XTi? Nikon's got it (the D80). And the D200 is der Übercamera in its price segment. Why does Canon have to have a model to compete against the D200? So it can continue losing to it?

At the top end of the market, the situation is reversed. Up there, Canon is king. Its 5D/1D Mk.III/1Ds Mk.II lineup is the trio with the mostest*. Whatever you want at the top end, Canon's got it. No, it's not like Nikon doesn't exist up at that end: just as the XTi provides a worthy Canonophile alternative at the bottom of the market, the D2Xs provides a worthy Nikonophile contender to the 1D at the top end. Nothing against either of them: the XTi and the D2Xs are both real nice. But Canon's the one with the great range of choices, and the best cameras, on the high side of the DSLR breakdown. You want just as good a sensor as the D2Xs in a smaller, more easily portable, less expensive camera? Canon's got it. You want a pro workhoss that's just as fast 'n' beefy? Canon's got it. You want a much bigger sensor with significantly more pixels? Canon's got it. Game. Set. Match.

So my question for Canon shooters is, what the heck do you think you want in a "40D"? A better camera than the 30D? You've already got it, folks: it's called the XTi. A luscious, higher-MP, full-frame sensor and a great, big, beautiful finder in a tough, solid box? You've got that too: it's called the 5D. True, a lineup without a 30D creates a "price gap." Who cares? Either save your money, or spend less and stop kvetching about all the dough you didn't spend. If the XTi is too cheap to soil your soft pale fingers with, buy two.

And from Canon's perspective—well, all Canon needs to do is to work toward the middle. Give future iterations of the XTi a better viewfinder and more robust build, and/or work on bringing the price of the 5D down, or on putting the 5D sensor into a somewhat more modest camera.

So, Canon might need a 4D. Or a 3D (now that would be a cool camera name). But maybe it doesn't need a "40D" at all. It was a great series in its time; but maybe it's time now for the x0D series to go the way of the station wagon.


*If you can ignore the asinine naming protocols.
Transparent D80:


Blogger DarkPenguin said...

The 20D/30D actually has a viewfinder I can manual focus with. The rebel line does not. The only other thing the x0D line gives you is the great wheel on the back of the camera.

Those two items are worth hundreds to me.

Now if they ditched the x0D line and put its viewfinder in the xti line I'd just buy that.

10:28 PM  
Blogger Adam said...

Which is exactly the point! The XTi is a great little camera, and could be outstanding with just a few tweaks.

But then again, I thought the people who bought the 30D were suckers, too. I don't know anyone who bought a 30D who wouldn't have been better off with an XTi and $600 worth of superior glass instead. Especially since you'll probably replace your body within three years, and good glass will serve you much longer than that.

11:42 PM  
Blogger Quicky said...

Well... I bought a 350D recently because I couldn't spend €1200 on a body just yet, but I really want a X0D camera for the reasons darkpenguin mentioned, but also and more importantly because it has a bigger body. I've been used to a Canon 50E for the past few years and the Olympus OM-2 before that (both from my mom), so I'm used to big viewfinders, big bodies and a big wheel at the back. The 350D and 400D have none of that. A bigger body like the 50E (or the 5D I guess) fit my rather big hands much better than these tiny xx0D camera's. The XTi is a great *little* camera indeed. But I don't WANT little! :P

"Then just buy a 5D!"... Well... I'm a student. And the money doesn't grow on my back you know :(.

So... since I just bought the 350D, I'll be saving money until I can buy a X0D camera in 2010 or something like that. I truly hope they *will* be presenting more camera's in the X0D line-up. Either that or make the 5D about 40% cheaper.

Btw... It's not because I'm disagreeing with you now, that I haven't been enjoying your blog! I've been reading it for a few weeks now with much enjoyment :)!

1:18 AM  
Blogger laurencepak said...

this must be the best post at least in a while.

i just got the 5D from the 350D

it is so good, there is never any turning back to a 1.6X DSLR!

1:53 AM  
Blogger Peterbkk said...

can all speculations of future cameras be "banned".....?

whatever is out there is there and there will always be another super camera around the corner, whatever that might be

it is somewhat exhausting to come across these endless speculations

(yes, I try to avoid them)

3:51 AM  
Blogger under focus said...

International multi companies, like Canon, just go for the money in our pockets. You have to go for the right camera of your needs and hope for a price of your budget (most of the time in agreement with your wife). The problem is that all the camera manufacturers try to get us to buy more than we need (how many functions do you have in your cell phone --- used every day?). So look out for a camera you can trust and like, stay as long as possible with that one. Canon, and all the other giants, has though tangled most of us in the digital net, so we must follow the progress of computing. May be your good old silver-film camera, like Konica Autoreflex T, and a scanner is the answer.

4:11 AM  
Blogger Nemo said...

I don't agree with Mike.
At the lower end the competitive pressure is much higher. There are very strong contenders: Canon, Sony, Olympus, Panasonic, Pentax, Samsung. To be a “king” there is like being the king of France at the end of the XVIII century.
The best product at the lower end of the reflex market is, in my humble opinion, the Pentax K10D. It is more feature-rich than the D200 at half the price! We can’t expect nothing new from Nikon, but the other payers have much to say yet. Nikon has shot all the bullets.

5:30 AM  
Blogger Dr Hiding Pup said...

Why do Canon offer ten different digital IXUS cameras? And what's with Nikon's fifteen Coolpix? Surely, they could each narrow their digicam ranges down to, say, four models each? But, then, everyone might stop believing the stuff that spews forth out of the mouths of photography store salesmen, decide that photography was about the photographer after all, and go out and enjoy the camera they already had rather than buy another -

And that would never do...

One thing you didn't count on, Mike - no-one ever said the primary audience for the Canon 40D was rational...

5:38 AM  
Blogger Adrian said...

Just because on your side of the pond the station wagon was abandoned in favour of SUVs doesn't mean that it doesn't have its merrits.

Or to get back on-topic: As others already stated, consumers want a better camera body with the same image quality as the rebel. An XTi with a D200 body would be the perfect 40D. Yes, you can buy the D200 or D80 (or go Pentax..) instead but then you'd have to sell all the glass.. and then rebuy it again when you're ready to upgrade again. So yes, Canon needs a x0D and if only to keep the glass customers on their way from entry-level to top-range.

7:59 AM  
Blogger MJFerron said...

In someways I think Canon's 3 different sensor sizes complicate it's marketing. They own the full frame market and much of the sports market but still need to compete with Nikon on the APS sized front. I think the D200 was marketing genius. I always said a digital F100 would sell like hotcakes.

8:36 AM  
Blogger r said...

Sometimes the middle is just the right place to be. I still use and love my 1996 Accord station wagon. A sedan is too small, and an SUV is too big. I hope that Honda will release a worthy, modern real station wagon before it dies. Yeah, other auto manufacturers have their own wagons, but I don't want to put up with the less than stellar reliability of a VW or Chrysler or the cheap feel of a Ford.

Similarly, I still use and love my 10D. I hope that Canon will release a worthy, modern update before it dies, too.

9:32 AM  
Blogger Doug said...

In a logical world, this suggestion would make sense. But this isn't a logical world.

The 20D/30D/40D line isn't really about hardware differences, it's about image. It's about not owning an entry-level DSLR. It's aimed at the same people who will not use anything but Raw for taking pictures of their cats, because everyone knows that Raw is the professional way.

If I was in charge, I'd take that suggestion to merge the 400D and 30D lines into one, but I'd make that be the new "advanced amateur" line. Below that I'd introduce a new EVIL (electronic viewfinder, interchangeable lens) model with EF/EF-S lens mount.

10:33 AM  
Blogger stanco said...

Just remember that in American law, a corporation is very much defined as a "you," except with considerably more rights and priveleges.

11:25 AM  
Blogger Stephen said...


I don't ever see Canon abandoning the $1400 prosumer body market segment; they are too smart for that. Canon has their market segment/engineering specification/value proposition for their range of products nailed to a "T"; every bit as much as Honda or Toyota or Acura do. Like Quicky and Laurence said, there are many folks for whom the XTi is just too plain small (ask my 6'5" buddy Geoff about it); also there are lots of advanced amateurs who want the control the XOD line offers them, but don't have the the extra $1300 they'd have to pony up for a 5D; or would prefer to put that money into a 17-40L and a 70-200/f4 L, knowing they'd extremely well set-up with respect to the range of focal lengths and image quality they could obtain. Let's not forget that, at the time, Canon hit one out of the park with the 20D...there was nothing in it's price range that could match it performance, features, low noise, and most importantly, that gorgeous CMOS image quality. And there a LOT of folks who would like to have a $1399 Canon camera with ultrasonic sensor dust removal, 10.2 megapixels, and the image quality, noise, and shadow/highlight performance of DIGIC III (look at the absolutely gorgeous images from the 1DMKIII). Personally, while I find the 1.5-1.6X crop factors on Nikon's and Canon's mid-range prosumer line to be increasingly restrictive for my photographic sensibilities, I think Canon will abandon this segment when Honda stops making motorcycles.

12:09 PM  
Blogger Peter Smith said...

I'm sorry... the OP is over simplistic. Not from a customer perspective (some think the EOS D30 sensor is better than the Nikon D80 sensor) and certainly not from a Canon market perspective.

12:26 PM  
Blogger Peter Smith said...

And another thing... if you haven't noticed... the station wagon is back with a vengeance from both european and japanese manufacturers.

12:37 PM  
Blogger Adam Richardson said...

I just wish either Canon or Nikon would do something different with their naming schemes. "D40" and "40D" are just too similar to one another, and the whole progression leading up to this point has been that way. Pentax's foray into "ist D" etc was wacky, but at least you never confused it for anything else.

Canon's whole line in particular is very confusingly named. It's like how Ferrari or Mercedes name their model numbers, just impossible to know the hierarchy and telling one camera generation apart from another (esp at the high end) unless you really study it.

1:03 PM  
Blogger Monza76 said...

Well, Mike, stay away from a career in diplomacy, you don't seem cut out for it.

Canon has a strange approach to this market, its entry level model keeps leapfrogging its mid-market model in performance, but you must pay the big bucks to get the true Canon user interface with the wheel on the back.

I jumped off this particular bandwagon as soon as I got my first dSLR, a Pentax *istDL to use with all my old Pentax mount lenses, since then I have picked up a used *istDS (better viewfinder, better performance, price I couldn't refuse). I am happy with the 6MP images and see no need to upgrade to the excellent K10D until I can afford to replace my computer as well.

Interestingly of the photographers I personally know there are three 20D owners, a 300D and a 350D, in Nikon there is just one D80 and one D200, one other aquiantance has a Pentax DS, and two more have Olympus E500s. I guess that makes the x0D series Canon the most popular in my neck of the woods.

Well, I am sure you have rattled quite a few Canon fans today. As for diplomacy, yours seems something of a "shoot first ask questions later" approach.

I thouroughly enjoyed it.


1:55 PM  
Blogger Max said...

Leaving out very strong specific advantages (6mp versus 12mp for landscape photography, or tilt shift capabilities), I think I'd be happy to have anyone of the cameras mentioned in this article and its comments, with a good lens of the same brand.
These things are far closer to simple commodities than their manufacturers want us to believe.
And they are more so with every passing minute for most of us, since most good cameras get closer and closer to satisfying most of what the majority of the consumers want, easily.
Is it needed? no. Does it help the manufacturer in convincing every person in the world that there is a camera specifically designed for him/her, hence increasing sales? yes.

3:22 PM  
Blogger dasmb said...

The x0D line used to offer superior features from the Rebels -- better build quality, better staight-to-jpeg image quality, all metal case, better user interface, better control layout, better viewfinder, bigger buffer and a slightly more robust feature set.

Time was, users of the Rebels could "unlock" most of the whiz-bang features with altered firmware. Which meant among savvy users, the x0D had to support its higher price solely based on build quality, buffer size, viewfinder and controls. Savvy users still bought the x0D cameras.

The XTi is a quick, responsive camera that is slightly uncomfortable and slightly dim. I had to ditch my glasses for contact lenses just to be able to manually focus on the thing. Take an XTi, put it in a nice case, add a good view finder and a second wheel to it and I'd gladly pay $1200 for it.

Oh, can we get Auto-ISO too? Thanks.

9:57 AM  
Blogger nalax said...

Thank you for not referring to corporations in the plural. It makes for a very pleasant read, unlike that little country on the other side of the pond.

I agree, I don't need a 40D. Now a 4D Mark V, that would be something.

1:31 PM  
Blogger Mike Johnston said...

I think you have your sentence subjects mixed up at the beginning of your comment, no?

But what it sounds like to me is that what you want may not be a Nikon or Canon at all, but a Pentax K10D.


3:01 PM  
Blogger Severian said...

Fully disagree on this one. Modern marketing requires that a company must never leave price holes in its lineup. There are enough feature, cost and build differences to warrant something between the Rebel and the 5D.

Canon would be nuts to skip this slot.

Besides, some wildlife photographers are overjoyed to get a 60% boost in the effective focal length of their long lenses. Going to a 5D would be an expensive downgrade.

For my part, as a Nikon owner, I hope there is a 40D and I hope it is soon and I hope it is truly spectacular, a D200 killer.

Nothing will motivate Nikon more than having their head bounced off the pavement by Canon.

Without intense (and by some measures, excessive) corporate competition, we end up in a world full of Trabants. No thanks.

- Severian

4:24 PM  
Blogger Jeffrey in Colorado said...

I have 2 20Ds, and they have been great cameras. I like the 1.6 factor when shooting sports. I like the usefulness of the standard IS lens and have found it very versatile. The camera handles fast when I'm on the move, and the AF beats the D200/D80. It has lower noise than the Nikon, too.

While TOP is usally on the mark, the thought that Canon doesn't need the 20/30D camera line is crazy.

What Canon needs to do is make the replacement for the 20/30D with an even faster AF, improve the viewfinder, improve the LCD screen, make it 12MP while holding the line on noise and weather seal the thing. Finally, the price should be exactly the same as the D200. That would be a terrific selling camera that would serve many photographers' needs very well.

Jeffrey in Colorado

8:26 PM  
Blogger Matthew Miller said...

What I don't understand is why anyone is surprised by not having a 40D announcement now. I looked over the timeline on dpreview, and Canon's EOS announcements for each line are pretty typically spaced 18 months apart -- either around PMA or Photokina.

So, 2/2003 for the 10D, 8/2004 for the 20D, 2/2006 for the 30D.

Likewise, 8/2003 for the 300D, 2/2005 for the 350D, and 8/2006 for the 400D.

It's like clockwork!

It works for the 1D too, although n not as precisely for the early releases.

So, it'd be early for a 40D -- we can expect that at the end of the year. But it's not at all surprising to see the right-on-schedule 1D Mark III. And it won't at all be surprising to see a 5D upgrade any day now.

9:13 PM  
Blogger Max said...

I think there's a clear difference: The new camera is a must, for Canon. For users, I believe there was a time when you did what you could with what you had instead of complaining for not having tailor made products and it was quite good too in it's way.
Somehow, these days it seems just having bought a "better" camera makes some people feel better photographers already.

1:49 PM  
Blogger Mike F said...

I can see where Mike is coming from, and don't really know whether I agree or not.

For me, the upgrade from 300D to 30D was worthwhile as the 350D didn't have what I was after and the 400D wasn't around. The value for me of an upgrade to a 5D just isn't there - I shoot wildlife but can't justify the upgrade to 5D plus a 600mm lens to go with it to compensate for the crop-factor change (neither my wallet nor back will support that). I've also spent on EF-S lenses to compensate on the wide side of things, and don't wish to abandon them.

So, I'm sticking with an APS-C crop-factor. The 400D doesn't tempt me to change just now. A switch of systems doesn't work, given the sunk cost I have in glass and the better AF speed I get over equivalent-class cameras from competing manufacturers. So, right now, Canon has no offering that tempts me at a price I want to afford but isn't likely to lose me to a competing system.

I imagine there are plenty of people in my circumstances or similar. So the test, I guess, of Canon's strategy for "our" market segment is what they do next as follow-up to the 400D and 30D.

I suspect their most lucrative tactic would be a 30D follow-up. That will catch those who want to upgrade but haven't been tempted by a 400D (else they'd have bought one already) and may also tempt those who have a 400D to upgrade as well (if the spec is sufficiently superior to the 400D). That may be for the best. Why not have separate price and feature points for the APS-C market segment? Especially if offerings are released at different times in the product development cycle.

I suspect that's what's best for Canon. I don't know if that's what's best for photographers (or even just for me). What I do know is that I'm happy enough with what I have now, and won't be changing camera until I see something that offers me a substantial improvement (for my purposes) at a reasonable price.


9:50 PM  
Blogger Roger said...

The 5D is a non-starter for me, I'm a hobbyist sports photographer, I want the 1.6x crop factor.

I started with a 300D, built up a collection of lenses, and a flash. I looked long and hard when the 30D came along and the 20D came down in price, but ended up with a 2nd hand 10D (for less about £75 after selling the 300D).

I had upgraded the software in my 300D to give me most of the 10D features, but here is why I ended going for the actual 10D, in order of significance.
1. Bigger buffer in RAW
2. 2nd curtain sync
3. Brighter viewfinder
4. Better build quality
5. 2nd control wheel
6. Slightly faster frame rate

If you want to post process a picture of a saloon car, so that the driver inside the car, and the car itself are both correctly exposed, then you have to shoot RAW.
The 10D buffer handles more (at 6.3M instead of 8M) RAW pictures than the 20D or the 30D.


7:22 AM  
Blogger bruz1111 said...

I have been shooting Canon since my ae-1 program back in 80', now fast forward, I bought and AE2e ( if I remember right) then the 1n (while at the same time bought some nice glass ( 15mm all the way to 300 2.8L all the high end lenses), now I went digi bought the D30, then still have the D60 that I shoot at 6.1meg this camera has been great for me.. I'm now ready to step up (I'm now making pet products, I used to make xtreme sports products) and for my new pet stuff I would like a fast 5D that would be my #1 choice.. but I will have to roll with a 30D/40D depending on when I finally step up ( I really would like the 10meg and better auto focus) as I'm now 40 and my manual focus is not what it was back in the 80-90's.. why I won't and lots won't go to Nikon.. I have thousands in glass (also still can shoot my 1N when I want that old school feel) ! Enjoy what you have, as it's the photographer and the subjects that make the shots what they really are in the end ! my picts sell lots of my dog toys and water so I can't complain, but can say I luv Canon prouduct ( now I will say they suck in point and shoot) I have had 4 of them lil digi s430 types, and my stylus 400 from olympus rocked I luved the all weather feature, well I just got today the new 770sw, can you say 33ft underwater and lots of great features for a mere $331, not to mention awesome video abilities ! I now have the best of both worlds ! check my site for some kool underwater shots I'll be taking of the swimming dogs just as soon as the water warms up !!! Take care guys ! ( ps. go to and look for the story they did on my dog and I)... Rene Bruce u can google my name to find it too.. ( I luve apple,

8:20 PM  
Blogger Ross said...

There's also the issue of FPS that the 350D and 400D don't have 5fps because the buffer isn't up to it. But the main reason i love my 20D over those is the fact it's very robust, weather proof and the control layout is perfect for my hands. Non of the tiny av button and twirl. Although the 400D and 350D are great cameras they aren't up to a being used day in day out 365 days a year and still living to tell the tale of that one time they fell off a hi-chair (I thought Cliff might be a tad on the dramatic side)

(Nice discussion points posted by everyone) enjoy taking photos!

12:27 PM  
Blogger Gavin Photography said...

I love the point, but it's bull.

I'm a professional. I use the 30D as a backup and for the 1.6x free tele-extender. I can't carry a rebel due to:

1. the size, which is horrible to use for an entire day.

2. limited controls (or nested in menus), which are necessary for professional use.

3. I'd break the thing after 10 weddings.

4. I'd look like a moron using the same camera as every uncle and aunt in the crowd.

With the INSANE turnover rate of digital bodies, it is not effective as a business to "save up" and buy all 1D's or 5D's. The 30D/40D allows a cheaper alternative to ease the cost of running a business.

Now for the lens, I say go nuts and get the best. Bodies aren't worth it unless you have the business to back it up.

8:54 PM  
Blogger Jedi said...

I haven't had a chance to read all the comments before me, but I completely disagree. I've just been to Japan (Yodobashi Camera is the best camera store in the world - even better than B&H in NYC) and have had a play with many of the Canon cameras . I believe that the 5D and the 1Ds are great for fully professional photographers who are doing studio work, sports etc. But for a photographer who is on the move ie. travel photographer, who shoots ~1000 per week and has to carry his/her equipment on their back every day for a month or two... you can probably guess where I'm going with this. The top end cameras are like carrying a bowling ball around with you. It is bad enough that the glass is heavy without making the body into a weights session. On the other hand the Rebel line of cameras in my opinion is too light and not a particularly solid build. They are really just a point and click that has swapable lenses.

Ultimately my answer is that I've looked at the 5D and although it has a full-framed sensor, it isn't worth carrying the additional weight or the $3500AUD price tag.

9:40 PM  
Blogger Richard said...

There are a bunch of features that the 30D/40D has that I want. The lower spec Canon doesnt have them. The higher spec Canon is a bit out of my range.

I dont want Nikon because although I would be happy with one, my lenses wouldnt be. It does not make sense to have to sell all my lenses and start again with the Nikon brand, when the lenses work so well and are much more valuable than the camera bodies.

I think the 40D is a great idea and price point. In a competitive market you simply can not leave a price gap that big - its just not good business. You will lose a lot of sales to your competitor who will target that price point as a result of the gap.

Although some aspects of your article are definitely valid, the concept of leaving a massive dollar gap between two models so your largest competitor can steal your customers is a little simplistic....

7:40 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I agree with many of the people above, in that the 40D is a worthwhile upgrade from Canon.
I own an xTi, and while it is a lovely camera, the main problem I have is it's durability. I have started doing weddings as a side project, and I need another body so that my wife can shoot as well. To me there's absolutely no point in getting another 400d, but I can't afford the 5D. So the pending 40D, which has all the features of my current 400d with extras on top is the logical choice.
When buying a second camera from the 400d, buying a 30d would be ridiculous. Therefore the necessity to keep the 40D specs above the xti, and therefore the legitimacy of upgrading the 30d to the 40d.

4:47 AM  
Blogger Blackricco said...

Gavin Photography said: I'm a professional. I use the 30D as a backup and for the 1.6x free tele-extender.

Sorry, Sport, but no cigar. You are not getting a free 1.6 tele-extender. A 150mm lens on a 30D is the same 150mm lens on a 5D. The same depth of field, the same compression, and the same overall look. You're merely seeing a cropped version of what the 5D would show.

10:29 PM  
Blogger bking said...

Blackricco said...

Gavin Photography said: I'm a professional. I use the 30D as a backup and for the 1.6x free tele-extender.

Sorry, Sport, but no cigar. You are not getting a free 1.6 tele-extender. A 150mm lens on a 30D is the same 150mm lens on a 5D. The same depth of field, the same compression, and the same overall look. You're merely seeing a cropped version of what the 5D would show.

This is a total misconception, a cropped image on the 5D will not give you the same image quality as a 30D, let alone a 10-12mp 40D. The pixel density on a FF 30D would be closer to 16mp, not 12. The 40D will come, and will be 10-12mp. Hopefully they'll throw in Digic III and 64 bit raw. A few more AF points would be nice as well. Canon can't afford to leave this segment to to Nikon.

The funny thing is that everyone seems to be ignoring the elephant in the room: Sony. They will be releasing mid level cameras this year and hopefully everyone is paying attention.

6:10 AM  
Blogger jason said...

dude. surely 32bit float would be all you need? Hell even 16bit float is heaps compared todays 10/12bit int formats.
Dunno about Sony - you tried the alpha? great features but feels like arse to use.

10:21 AM  
Blogger Declan said...

For me it's all about price. If Canon did scrap the X0D range then you can bet the X00D range would just move up in price to fill part of the space and the XD range would just settle where it is.

I own a 350D and I plan on upgrading in a year or so. Ok it's old but it's still alive and kicking. Already I've got my eye on a 40D or 50D or whatever is out at the time. Anytime I've used a 30D I've been impressed in small little ways, the size, the feel in my hand, the wheel at the back. It just feels like a nicer better camera. Does that justify the extra cash? Sometimes, yes it does. Does it out perform the old 350D for what I want, probably not, but I still like it. Certainly the 5D would be overkill for an amateur like me with more memory cards than talent and I'd rather spend the extra on a good lens. Someone else could pick it up and think "Dear God this is an awful lump of a thing in my hand", but they probably own a Nikon ;-)

So the longer the keep 30 or 40 or 50Ds the better in my opinion.

1:01 PM  
Blogger Shane said...

I have a 30D... why did I by that over the XooD range? Simple - the XooD range is simply too small for my long skinny fingers (note: exception is the old 300D which had a larger grip).

Its may seem only a small thing to many of you, but when your fingers don't fit the grip it makes the camera very very difficult to use.

Worth every penny, and had they not had the X0D range, I would have had to head over to Nikon.

The X0D range keeps selling, so I am not surprised that Canon keeps making it. If people didn't want it then I'm sure this would be reflected in Canons sales figures!

11:07 AM  
Blogger jyanich said...

well, no reason to debate about the benefits of a 40D any longer. This camera seems to fill a nice void between the xti and the 5D and actually appears to beat the Nikon D200 easily.

11:04 AM  
Blogger VdkaShaker said...

As an XT owner (bought just before XTi came out) I'm investing in Canon. Tried out the 5D in Yosemite (they loaned it out) and fell in love again. I'm waiting for a refreshed version of the 5D (in a year or two I hope) or some other full-frame sensor camera from Canon in that range, then I'll upgrade. I'm happy to keep learning on my XT (and getting full frame lenses) in the mean time.

My vote: Skip the 40D

10:00 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home