Upload your photos, chat, win prizes and much more
Can't Access your Account?
New to ePHOTOzine? Join ePHOTOzine for free!
Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more for free!
Test image wth 40D at ISO 1600
Join ePHOTOzine for free and remove these adverts.
Adrian, could you upload the full version in large?
Quote: Adrian, could you upload the full version in large?Quote this post ·
It was..must be something to do with having it up with mods as well
i will investigate
theres two up now...weird!!!
just removed the third one
Quote: tomcat wrote: Test image wth 40D at ISO 1600 here
Well, it's all a bit subjective. Here's a 1600 iso image shot in low light conditions with a 30d. Is there any difference? Maybe, but which is better?
Almost as I typed LR was upgraded. Have done a few test shots. Distant shots look soft while close ups are really sharp. Will have to investigate the settings.
I uploaded a montage of a few test photo's I took trying the camera out. Its my latest upload if you want to see it.
Off to print some for the real test.
I notice the price has fallen again, at this rate it will be free with a memory card by Christmas.
Is there some panic out there?
Thanks for the upload John
Mine was an off the cuff shot but I was quite impressed with the outcome
Weather is good at this end so hopefully off in a bit to do some field shots
Looked good to me Adrian, looking forward to getting one of these myself.
5D is the one you want, Paul...
OK I have not posted my full conclusions till now because I was confused. In the end my thoughts are;
The 40D is a great handling camera and for wildlife and sports I think it represents a major upgrade for me but for landscapes it represents virtually no upgrade for me. The problems is where I want big prints are from my landscapes.
I re-samples the ISO100 images to 22inch high images at 300 DPI and sharpened them to suit (it was almost the same setting required). I then cut out 11 inch slices from the images for my A4 printer. I cannot spot and difference in resolution/noise. This was the conclusion I came to when I also tried the 20D.
For landscapes I am invariably using the camera on a tripod @ ISO100. Response time buffer etc, who cares.
So for up to A3 prints at ISO100 I cannot see a measurable difference. I tried a 5D, and I could see a difference at A3 size.
So my conclusion is the 40D is an improved 30D, and my 300D, but not a large step on in image quality for me. Bugger.
Will I buy a 40D, possibly as a 5D looks too expensive, but the urge to rush out and get one has gone. Oh and I did all this expecting the 40D to blow my 300D in the weeds, just like my 300D did to images produced by my previous cameras.
Now if I did a lot of sports work my views would be different.
ePHOTOzine, the web's friendliest photography community.
Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more.
You must be a member to leave a comment
Get the latest photography news straight from ePHOTOzine in your email every month and win prizes!
01/09/2014 - 30/09/2014
Check out ePHOTOzine's inspirational photo month calendar! Each day click on a window to unveil new photography tips, treats and techniques.
View September's Photo Month Calendar