Which used Canon body for my new 70-200?

[Mikko Viljamaa]

Hi Guys,

I need another camera body for my new 70-200/2.8. I'm planning to buy a used "cheap" Canon at this point and which I can use also when doing private travelling (I don't want a heavy pro camera at this point). The question is which one of these 10D, 20D, 40D etc. should I look for meaning which one suits best for also shooting birds (AF points, frames per second, crop factor and what else)?

I see a lot of used 40D's on sale around $500. Would that model be a valid option to me?

BTW not that it probably makes a huge difference but my other body is MKIII which I use with my 500/4.


Thanks and cheers,

Mikko

[David Stephens]

If 500-bucks is your ceiling, then the 40D may be your only viable choice.

For birds, the 7D would be ideal, if you could find a used one. The T2i shares the sensor with the 7D and is also above your $500 mark, but probably gains you enough high-ISO performance to make it worth the extra money. I think that the 70-200mm f/4L with the 7D would be a better combo for birds than the 70-200mm f/2.8L on the 40D, mainly due to better high-ISO performance and the fps, but, yes I know, you already own the f/2.8L.

[Don Lacy]

Out of your list the 40D by far has the best image quality and would be my choice in that price range. Now if price is not an option I would go with a 7D or a used MKIII having used both cameras in the last week I am still undecided on what my upgrade will be from my 40D.

[Mikko Viljamaa]

Thanks guys. I haven't set a price range. I just saw that there are lot of used 40D's available. At this point I don't want another 1D body because of its size and weight. And I understand the ISO benefits with 7D but I'm not sure if I need all the pixels which comes with it.


Mikko

[Don Lacy]

Hi Mikko, It's not just the improve ISO with the 7D you will also be getting auto focus as good if not better then the MKIII which none of the other D cameras can match, used 7D are in the 1200 to 1300 range if you do not want to go new.

[Flavio Rose]

To see the ISO benefit of the 7D versus 40D, there is the following chart:

http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/en/Camera-Sensor/Compare-sensors/%28appareil1%29/619|0/%28appareil2%29/180|0/%28onglet%29/0/%28brand%29/Canon/%28brand2%29/Canon (http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/en/Camera-Sensor/Compare-sensors/%28appareil1%29/619%7C0/%28appareil2%29/180%7C0/%28onglet%29/0/%28brand%29/Canon/%28brand2%29/Canon)

Click "18% SNR" for ISO-related signal to noise ratio (SNR) information. The higher the signal to noise ratio, the better the sensor is for noise at each ISO.

A caveat regarding the autofocus of the 7D. Although this is not the majority view, there are some people who say the autofocus on the 7D is inferior to the 40D's. Here is one example:

http://www.birdphotographers.net/forums/showthread.php?76422-40D-vs-better-camera&p=605360&viewfull=1#post605360

It never ceases to amaze me how competent photographers can evaluate the same cameras so differently. (I own a 7D but I'm not good at BIF and not very familiar with the 40D so I have no opinion personally.)

[Arthur Morris]

Just for the record books, Denise Ippolito used the 40D for years as her main camera, loved the images, used a 7D, hated it, sold the 40D and regretted it....

As for AI Servo accuracy I would take the 7D over anything before it. It might be better than the MIV in that category only. Image quality with the MIV is light years better than with the 7D at least as far as I can tell :)

[Andrew Merwin]

Check out this link for a used 7D with other equipment.

http://forums.yellowstone.net//viewtopic.php?f=19&t=8687

[Mikko Viljamaa]

Thanks everybody. I bought a used 40D yesterday. My plan is to buy a MKIV next spring and I think meanwhile this little brother will be more than adequate for my purposes. And even after that when I don't want to carry the bigger pro body.

Plus now I have already saved nearly a thousand bucks for the MKIV... :)


Cheers,

Mikko

[Arthur Morris]

Good luck on all counts!

[Joerg Rockenberger]

A caveat regarding the autofocus of the 7D. Although this is not the majority view, there are some people who say the autofocus on the 7D is inferior to the 40D's. Here is one example:

http://www.birdphotographers.net/forums/showthread.php?76422-40D-vs-better-camera&p=605360&viewfull=1#post605360

It never ceases to amaze me how competent photographers can evaluate the same cameras so differently. (I own a 7D but I'm not good at BIF and not very familiar with the 40D so I have no opinion personally.)

Just for the record: I said - or intended to say - that the rented 7D did not give me(!) a significantly better keeper rate, in fact slightly worse, than my(!) 40D in my(!) hands on two occasions in 2009. I am in no position to make any generalization about one model being better than the other re AF and did not make such statement. I can only relay - and rely on - my experience with those particular individual cameras.

Many possible reasons come to my mind why my experience with my(!) 40D vs 7D may be different than others:
- One being that a new camera may require a learning curve and that perhaps my experience would have been better if I spent more time with it. Not likely IMO though.
- It could be that I had one of the 7D settings wrong though I am pretty sure I followed the recommended AF custom settings and bumping technique etc. at that time.
- Then, there is no doubt in my mind that equipment quality can vary - especially after seeing a well regarded BIF photographer struggle with her first 50D but her second body was okay.
- Another reason for differing assessments of AF quality of different cameras by different folks may be differences in their standards for AF quality and/or a subconscious bias in evaluating the images.
- Different tracking ability and different camera models reacting differently to it. IMO the most likely.
- the phase of the moon or any number of other variables which make field comparisons so difficult, especially in between people.

Many people have posted fantastic images with the 7D. And it has a ton of nice features I long for. So, I most certainly don't doubt that it is a great camera. And the same applies to the 40D as well. I also managed some pretty good images with the 40D under certain circumstances. But the rented 7D unfortunately just didn't deliver the kind of improvement for certain situations that I was hoping for where my(!) 40D appears weak (e.g. busy backgrounds, 1.4TC, distance > 30ft etc.). And then, what's the point of upgrading?

On the other hand, I saw a very clear signal with the 1DMkIV this year when renting it on two occasions for a total of 12-13 days. Believe me I wish my experience with the 7D was better as it would save me some $$$s. :)

I guess the main point of this somewhat rambling post is that it's best to form your own opinion in the field rather than rely on assessments by more (Artie & the Gang) or less (me) competent photographers. Rent a newer model before buying and compare. JR

[Arthur Morris]

I've rarely used the 40D. I have a very high keep rate for BIF with the 7D. Denise Ippolito loves the 40D and hated the 7D; she could not get a sharp flight image with it.

I loved the 1Ds II and the 1D II and did not care for my 1D IIN.

Do I have any explanation for the above other than our quirky perceptions? Not at all :)

ps: I love my two 1DMIVs.

[ldelacruz]

40D. Best bang for your buck! If you can squeeze the extra money the 7D would be better.

[Mikko Viljamaa]

Again thanks everyone. In case someone is interested in here is one of the first trials with my new combo, taken about a week ago. After this Wisconsin has been gray and hazy... :(

Canon 70-200/2.8 II + 2.0 TC II + 40D


Cheers,

Mikko

[David Stephens]

Again thanks everyone. In case someone is interested in here is one of the first trials with my new combo, taken about a week ago. After this Wisconsin has been gray and hazy... :(

Canon 70-200/2.8 II + 2.0 TC II + 40D


Well done Mikko.