Back Modifications (1)
Views 154 Unique 20
Vote 1
Award Shortlist   

40D Test???

By strawman
This is a set of images I took to try and compare the 40D to my current elderly 300D. Fist thing to say, the 40D is so fast and responsive. Turn on time, and focusing speed are a lot better than my old camera.

Next photo's were taken in the shop doorway with my 17-40L while the assistant kept an eye on me lest I did a runner. 40D at 0 compensation, 300D @ -2/3. Instant extra point to the 40D.

Test are taken with the cameras on auto white balance f10 on the lens @17mm. RAW images auto processed via lightroom. No sharpening or levels. also images shown are real pixel size. I will load a mod showing the original scene.

40D JPEG were a disappointment (camera on factory default large JPEG). Images from RAW look cleaner and sharper. at first I thought the 300D was a lot sharper, but you need to re-size the 300D to get to the same viewing size. (hence some 300D images at 2 sizes.)

Noise wise the 40D is a lot better @ ISO1600

Why am I doing this, well trying to decide if I get a 40D now or save longer for 5D.

Conclusion @ ISO100 biggest change is response time/functionality, though there is a resolution advantage with the RAW files. Up the ISO and the later camera wins hands down.

Tags: General 40d test images

Voters: Coleslaw,

Amazon Music Unlimited Offer: 1-Month For FREE!


cameracat 17 8.6k 61 Norfolk Island
16 Sep 2007 12:11AM
Looking at these I'd keep saving for the 5D, Sure the 40D has won out over the 300D, But I would have expected the margin to be mindblowing.

Shows how good the 300D was originally though.
strawman 17 22.2k 16 United Kingdom
16 Sep 2007 12:22AM
It is one of my thoughts. In one aspect the 6mp to 10mp jump is only @26% actual resolution jump.

But there again if you are doing photography of moving objects the 300D can be a bit slow, and the 40D is in another world. Also as it approaches its 4th birthday I wonder how long it will last.
Coleslaw 15 13.4k 28 Wales
16 Sep 2007 9:51AM
Looks good even though JPEG is a laugh.
I am in the same dilemma.
Simon_Palmer 14 759 11 United Kingdom
16 Sep 2007 3:27PM
We just need Peter Shilton to concur now Wink

thanks for the heads up mate, a great deal of work and effort. Good on ya.

KatieR 17 6.2k 6
1 Oct 2007 3:48PM
Very interesting.

How will you make a decision? It's definitely worth waiting for the prices to settle down, though the cashback is reasonable.
BertieP 13 25 Scotland
2 Oct 2007 10:21AM
I have both the 40D and the 5D and used to have the 10D (equivalent to the 300D?) The 40D gives the 5D a very close run for its money and its functionality is greatly improved. The 5D is quite hard to justify now and the EF10-22 which I have just bought overcomes the need for FF to get enough wide angle. Having said that I envisage using the 5D mainly for shots with critical detail in the content bolted to a sturdy tripod and the 40D for less considered work
Hope this helps.

Bob P
strawman 17 22.2k 16 United Kingdom
2 Oct 2007 11:43AM
Thanks Bob it is the conclusion I reached. I have a 10-20 and to be honest I think it and a 40D will do all I need.

Regards john

Sign In

You must be a member to leave a comment.

ePHOTOzine, the web's friendliest photography community.

Join For Free

Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more.