40D vs 1d MKII vs 1D MK III...

[Dream Merchant]

In a mental quandary right now. Would love to hear what you guys think.

Have been meaning to upgrade for quite some time...

Usage - varied, from a bit of sports, to high speed action (once in awhile) to mainly general usage. High ISO sensor performance fairly important. Have tried the 1D Mk II at above ISO 1000 and it's NOISY! But admittedly, the AF and responsiveness of the 1D MkII is nothing short of spectacular! Have my heart set on this bod for those reasons ... but the noise and image from the 40D looks so much better especially at high ISO! SIGH!

Since prices are dropping, I was thinking of getting a better bod next year.

Out of the 3 options, assuming that Canon every gets the AF issues fixed once and for all on the Mk III, which would you get if you could not get another body for at least 5 years? Hence, overall performance as well as durability to last the distance very important. I generally don't physically abuse my cameras.


Brand New 40D at around 1.6K? CC installment.

Used 1D MK II cond 8 at about 2.2K? Cash upfront.

New 1D MK III at 6+K. CC installment.

5D or 5d MKII etc not considered unless it features 5fps and above. Also have not really considered the older 1D MKI or the 1DS MKI.


Consider: For the price of a 1D MKII + 1K can get 2 40Ds

For the price of a 1D MKIII can get 2 40Ds plus lots of left over, or get 1 40D and keep the left over for the 50D or a by then much more affordable 5D.

Thanks for reading guys!

[sk.images]

What glass do you already have?

I have been using the 1D2 for the past 18 months or so and last week upgraded to the 1D3 and also bought my wife a 40D (Look for my other thread on the saga with that).  Anyway, you sound like you want to have best of both worlds, i.e. fast focusing speeds and low noise at a low price, well, you can't - not with what's available at the moment.  The 40D is very similar to the 1D3 in IQ, taking into account the smaller/more tightly packed sensor (i.e. slightly noisier, but still better then 1D2 at high ISO).  It is 6.5 fps which is plenty for most sports and only a whisker off the 8.5 fps off the 1D2 (but 2 fps makes a BIG difference), but AF speed is noticeable slower.  Construction of the 40D is very good, magnesium alloy chassis but no weather sealing (this may or may not be an issue, depends on the conditions you shoot in).

On the other hand, the MkIII is everything that you want, except FF.  Get a 'blue dot' model and upgrade the firmware to 1.1.3 and AF Servo problems are gone.  I am getting results equal to my 1D2 at the moment without having really got used to the new camera.  The changes in the focussing are not insignificant and even from the MkII there is a learning curve.

If you're horizon is 5 years, get the 1D MkIII.  If your horizon is 3 years get the 40D and save to upgrade to a 1DsIII at that point.  The other thing to factor in, is the weight and bulk.  Personally I don't mind this, but many do - there is a big difference.

[Dream Merchant]

Thanks for that detailed and analytical reply sk.

We all wished we could have the best of all worlds don't we? LOL! I guess that's where balanced and calculated compromises are best made, and in my case, expecially since I do not have surplus funds, decisions become all the more critical.

Lens wise, I use a lot of manual focus lenses from the old Zuiko range, but for AF purposes, I have two which pretty much covers all my needs (at the moment) - a 15-30mil and the venerable 70-200L f/2.8 IS. I may add a 1.4 EF extender later on, if necessary, since I am growing dissatisfied with the 100-400L which I was enamoured with much earlier on. I guess whatever else I may need for work, I would rent as and when necessary, but I've got most of my bases covered.

Most would look at it from the point of view that my choices may be a bit of an overkill (especially considering my love for manual lenses), but I think in terms of longevity of usage, hence the 5-year envelope and higher-end options, as well as the fact that quite often, I need that high ISO performance and blazing AF speed, especially in lower-light conditions where the AF assist of the ST-E2 may not kick in yet. The high fps I need only once in a much longer while, but when I do, it becomes crucial.

However, there could be other better options of working around the equipment, or getting the equipment to work harder for me; I'm open to suggestions. One experienced photographer in the past suggested a 5D and a 1D2, a combination which would have been ideal but simply too expensive for me.

[victor]

Brand new 40D at 1.6K with CC installment? With warranty?

I have been using the 1D2 for a while personally I find noise up to ISO 1600 acceptable if your exposure is spot on. If you really have a budget constrain, get used equipment. It will definitely save you lots of money, and even when you sell of next time, you don't suffer much losses. Looking at your lens collection, may be it is better that you save money and build up on lenses....last longer and better investment.

[sk.images]

Used mkII + used 5D = new mkIII (price wise)

Can't go wrong with the above 2 cams.  You get fast AF and fps and very rugged build in one and great high-ISO performance, FF and portability with the other.  Not to mention the number benefits and flexibility of having 2 bodies with different crop factors.

PM sent...

[Nick]

Either one is good!

It all boils down to how much you are going to fork out. How about a fast lens for sports to add one 

[Dream Merchant]

Yeaa ... I finally remembered my password!

Hmm...actually lens wise, I'm pretty happy for now.

I've got the two AF lenses, 15-30 and 70-200 to cover most AF needs, manual - 24mm, 3 x 50mms (please don't ask ... I guess I should get rid of one), 125mm macro and a 135mm (gift) as well as a Vivitar 70-210 Ser 1 (throw-away from my film days which was buried in my store for the longest time, but was recently re-discovered!) which I prefer for portraits/pictorial use (as compared to the 70-200L) because the rendition is provides, while not as sharp, is etheral, and can't really be duplicated (for me anyways) easily in post. I also have a huge Canon cinematic lens (it was in pristine condition last I remembered) but for the likes of my life, I don't know where I put it.

I guess it's an odd mish-mash of lenses, but basically I've got enough to cover:

1) Wide applications and events,

2) Still life, macro, food and products,

3) Pictorial, portraits and Fine Arts (I prefer all the manual lenses I have for such work) and

4) Some sports/close-mid range fast-paced events.

I had and sold of the EF 50mm 1.4 as it flared too badly for my purposes (pity, because that was a really nice lens) the 100mm macro (since I have the 125 macro as well as extention tubes if needed) and the 70-200L f/2.8 IS.

The only optics I can see myself getting anytime in the further future would be a Sigma 10-20mm (sell the 15-30), the EF 14mm Mk II and (very remotely) an EF 1.4x Extender, but the latter would honestly be indulgences rather than actual needs.

The only reason why I bought my second 70-200L was because I can't focus fast enough manually with my Vivitar if I'm shooting modarately-fast moving subjects wide open. I did consider getting the EF 16-35 Mk II over my Sigma 15-30, since the Sigma is one of my most used lenses over the years, but everytime I see the prints from the Sigma, I couldn't find any reason to get the EF and especially not at that kind of $$$ plus I would be going from 15mm to 16mm, something that does matter to me.

I know this may sound blasphemous to die-hard EF lovers, but please keep an open mind. I'm not saying you have shown any signs of restricted thinking, but I know how brand/model affections can get sometimes. Let's just say I'm happy with my lenses for now, and of course wished that I had tons of $$$ to indulge, but I don't. I would, however, help anyone dispose of their unwanted lenses with absolutely no service fee! LOL!

[victor]

I just got my 40D today, thought for a long time and decided to get a 40D and not a 1DM3 for the moment. 1DsM3 will be considered in future.But for the start the 40D is cool. Open up some new possibility for shooting.

[hwchoy]

I had and sold of the EF 50mm 1.4 as it flared too badly for my purposes (pity, because that was a really nice lens)

my sentiments exactly!

[Nick]

I just got my 40D today, thought for a long time and decided to get a 40D and not a 1DM3 for the moment. 1DsM3 will be considered in future.But for the start the 40D is cool. Open up some new possibility for shooting.

That's good to hear. The 40D is a really good camera. If not for the 1.6x crop, I would have gotten it over the 1D Mark II.

[victor]

yep, cos I already have the 1DM2, so the 40D offers a new dimension of shooting, and also for a 1.6 crop.

[hwchoy]

STOP making me GIAN!!!

[Nick]

STOP making me GIAN!!!

Uncle Choy. You need the fps when you shoot models leh.

[hwchoy]

I wanna hoot your sheep already

[Dream Merchant]

yep, cos I already have the 1DM2, so the 40D offers a new dimension of shooting, and also for a 1.6 crop.

Hi Victor,

Could you share, specifically, what you meant in that the 40D offers you a new dimension?

I'm really interested as I've been leaning towards the 40D for it's later sensor design/performance as compared to the 1D MkII, even though the higher fps as well as the build quality of the 1D is what I would prefer for a long-term investment.