Currently I own a 30D. I was thinking of upgrading though to either the 40D or the 5D. Is it a worthwhile upgrade on either of these? What are the main differences? The most important feature I would like to gain from this upgrade, is better noise reduction at higher ISO settings in the 800-1600range.
TIA!
I am also pondering this question, except I am extremely happy with my 30D but want to add a second body. I'm also considering a 2nd hand 1D mk2n or a second 30D body. I've read as many reviews and forum threads as I can take and I still can't make up my mind. One day I'm thinking that I'm totally happy with the 30D and now is the time to pick one up second hand at a good price, next day I think 5D, good for macro and landscape, then theres 1D2n, solid and reliable ( and with a certain star quality) and the theres the 40D! However, I have definitely concluded that pretty much any of these choices would be good - Perhaps I'll just toss a coin!
One thing that does interest me is that the debate about IQ - which is 'best' seems to me to be pretty subjective with each camera having it's champions and detractors (although most people seem to agree that the 30D is a good 'un). I have seen many claims that the 5D is the ultimate IQ based choice but then I read that the 40D is virtually as good! Add to that the number of comments about the 40D not really being that much better than the 30D (IQ) and confusion starts to mount.... What I would love to see is a detailed comparison of image quality from each camera, however, I suspect that for all but the most critical situations such as making very large prints or extreme crops there would be very little to choose between them. If this is the case then I clearly need to apply some different selection criteria such as reliability, focusing and colour accuracy etc etc. As I personally have had no issues with any of the above with my 30D, and constantly find my own ineptitude rather than the camera, to be the ultimate limiting factor, maybe another 30D is the most sensible choice as I'm fairly sure that I wouldn't be able to take any 'better' photographs with any of the other options! I photograph birds with a 456, insects with a 150mm f2.8 macro, and landscapes with a 24-105 L and a siggy 10-20, the most common lens swap is 456 to 24-105. Any suggestions based on real world experience would be more than welcome!
Chris
I am also looking at the same thing but my use for the 40D 0r 5D would be mainly for landscape work at low ISO and a tripod.
I currently have the 350D and the 30D and for landscape work there is very little difference in IQ IMO. The 30D is the better of the two for birding with a long lens and high ISO but for landscapes I can see no difference. So my next question is how much difference would there be between the 30D and 40D at say ISO 100 with a 17-40 lens on a tripod with remote release? Anyone have any experience of these two.