Need a 2nd body: 30D, 40D or 5D?

[waple]

I tried a search but the search it says "5D" is too short a term to search for.

I currently have a 30D but I need to get a 2nd body in case I have failures with my first, and also to mount a lens on each in times I need to switch quickly.

What I tend to shoot is:
Commercial Produts (food and manufactured items)
Portraiture
Nature
Landscape
Action (mainly my kid running around)
Low Light (I often shoot in 1600/3200 so low noise is important)

My three main options are:

1) get a 2nd used 30D and just go the cheap route.
PROS: spend less
CONS: don't get any improvments anywhere

2) get a 40D and spend a few hundred more but get a new main camera and use my 30D as the backup
PROS: This is one place I need advice. I'd be able to use the same lenses. Is the high ISO noise even better? Anything else really stand out as a benefit? Is it any more weatherproof than the 30D?
CONS: Spend a little more

3) spend a lot more and get a 5D for its low light and full frame capabilities
PROS: This is another place I need advice. Full frame for wider landscape (but I have a 12-24 lens on my 30D so would this really benefit me much?) Better low light noise (is the 40D close to the 5D in this regard? Is it better weatherproofed?
CONS: Higher base price. I'd have to purchase more lenses since my 17-55/2.8 and 12-24/4 won't work on it, which is even more money.

For a while I was thinking that the 5D was what I really wanted, but I'm really not sure. I think I'd have to spend too much right now to get the body and another wider lens. Plus, if I got the 24-70, isn't that like using the 17-55 on the 30D? I'm not sure what the full frame would really give me.

I'd like to see some comparison shots between the 40D and 5D in regard to it's high ISO noise. I've been pretty pleased with the noise on the 30D, and I'm assuming the 40D is better. Like I said, I do shoot a lot in low light so this is important to me.
Thanks much for any and all advice.

[Max@Home]

Hi waple!

Originally Posted by waple

I currently have a 30D but I need to get a 2nd body in case I have failures with my first, and also to mount a lens on each in times I need to switch quickly.

What I tend to shoot is:
Commercial Products (food and manufactured items)
Portraiture
Nature
Landscape
Action (mainly my kid running around)
Low Light (I often shoot in 1600/3200 so low noise is important)

My three main options are:

1) get a 2nd used 30D and just go the cheap route.
PROS: spend less
CONS: don't get any improvments anywhere

2) get a 40D and spend a few hundred more but get a new main camera and use my 30D as the backup
PROS: This is one place I need advice. I'd be able to use the same lenses. Is the high ISO noise even better? Anything else really stand out as a benefit? Is it any more weatherproof than the 30D?
CONS: Spend a little more

I can help here: the high noise ISO is a LOT better,the IQ as a whole has gone up. Thanks to 14bit colour and the HighlightTonePriority you can gain 1 to 2 stops in dynamic range. A benefit to *me* (I wear glasses) is the 'huge' new viewfinder compared to 20D/30D. The body is a little more weatherproof than 30D, but more as a (re-)asssurance to the state-of-mind, if you really need to shoot in adverse weather, save up for a 1D Mk III like I did

3) spend a lot more and get a 5D for its low light and full frame capabilities
PROS: This is another place I need advice. Full frame for wider landscape (but I have a 12-24 lens on my 30D so would this really benefit me much?) Better low light noise (is the 40D close to the 5D in this regard? Is it better weatherproofed?
CONS: Higher base price. I'd have to purchase more lenses since my 17-55/2.8 and 12-24/4 won't work on it, which is even more money.

Again, I can (try to) shed some light: wider landscape IMO will benefit only from the increased pixelcount, 12.7MP from 5D against 8MP from 30D is a true step up.

The 5D is LESS weatherproof than the 40D, according to testers the 40D and 5D are almost similar in low light noise, the 5D having just a tiny edge here...

For a while I was thinking that the 5D was what I really wanted, but I'm really not sure. I think I'd have to spend too much right now to get the body and another wider lens. Plus, if I got the 24-70, isn't that like using the 17-55 on the 30D? I'm not sure what the full frame would really give me.

the 24-70 is a 17-55IS on a 1D Mk III/1.3x crop body, on the 5D it will be wider and shorter than the 17-55IS on a 30D (24-70 vs. 28-90)

I'd like to see some comparison shots between the 40D and 5D in regard to it's high ISO noise. I've been pretty pleased with the noise on the 30D, and I'm assuming the 40D is better. Like I said, I do shoot a lot in low light so this is important to me.
Thanks much for any and all advice.

For real life HighISO comparison shots, browse PBase and search for 5D and for 40D, watch the EXIF's, that will give you a far better idea of the *real* advantages than any 'testshots' in controlled environments...

What you haven't mentioned is Speed-of-Operation: the 40D is quicker, faster than the 30D in every regard, AF, read/write to disk, startup, reaction on buttonpushes, etc... The 5D is WAY slower!

If this had to be my call, I'd go for a 40D main +30D backup combination

Hope this helps some, *my* €0.02 worth...

Kindest regards!

Max@Home

[brian.austin]

I'd hold off on a decision until the new round of product announcements are finished. This is one of Canon's traditional announcement periods, as noted by Max's recent 450D/Rebel XSi post.

[waple]

Originally Posted by brian.austin

I'd hold off on a decision until the new round of product announcements are finished. This is one of Canon's traditional announcement periods, as noted by Max's recent 450D/Rebel XSi post.

Are you refering to the (most likely) pending 5D replacement? I thought about that, but that camera will probably be $2500, which would be out of my price range at the moment. The current 5Ds are more than I'd like to pay as they are (priced about $500 less than what they were new), so getting a 5D Mark II (or whatever they'll be called) would be just too much.

I was thinking though that maybe I should do the 40D now, then when either more photo money comes in, or the prices of the 5DII comes down, I can sell my 30D and get the 5DII.

[brian.austin]

Originally Posted by waple

Are you refering to the (most likely) pending 5D replacement? I thought about that, but that camera will probably be $2500, which would be out of my price range at the moment. The current 5Ds are more than I'd like to pay as they are (priced about $500 less than what they were new), so getting a 5D Mark II (or whatever they'll be called) would be just too much.

I was thinking though that maybe I should do the 40D now, then when either more photo money comes in, or the prices of the 5DII comes down, I can sell my 30D and get the 5DII.

New announcements have an effect on CURRENT model pricing, however. If a 5DII is announced, the current 5D's will start dropping in price, making them a better value when compared to a 40D IF you need that extra MP or something. You'll also see a bunch of them starting to hit the used market, bringing those prices down.

You won't go wrong with a 40D, imo. I'm very pleased with mine. It's just something to think about.

[Worm324]

I can tell you the 40d is awesome IMO. The noise is really reasonable at high ISO compared to my old Rebel xti, but according to the charts I saw it was pretty close to the 30d on that front. Just for the fact that the 5d is full frame I wouldn't get it. It has some other nice benefits, but way more wish it had type stuff. Perhaps the next Gen 5D would be more worth while.

Just my opinion though

Best,
Jay

[waple]

Thanks. Just talked to my wife and she's not keen on me spending more money, let alone even more than more for a 5D.

I think that what I should probably do is go for the 40D now and that way I have two bodies that share the same lenses. Then, at a later date when I get more photo money coming in, I can consider the 5DII (I've heard the 5D is less weatherproof than the 40D which scares me as I was shooting out in the wet snow the other day with my 30D) and the new lens(es) I'll need.

[trentchau]

Waple feel free to meet up with me and try both a 40d and 5d in person. Just bring a CF Card and try a couple shots. You can test my camera's with pretty much any of my lens.

[Doug Johncox]

I have the 40D, I did not own a 30D. You might find the Live view very helpfull with tripod work. The viewfinder is great, but it is nice to have a lcd framing on the back while making all the adjustments that are made before you take your exposure. If you own EF-S lenses for your 30D that would also be a factor. I do like my 17-55 2.8 IS, no dust problems and the IS is when shooting wide open.

[waple]

Well, since no 5D replacement was at PMA, I think I may do the 40D first. I know the 5D is a great camera, but if a new model will be out sometime soon, I'd rather wait to see what they do with it. You never know.

When are the typical times that new models get released other than PMA?

[Max@Home]

Photokina, early September

...€0.02...

Kindest regards!

Max@Home

[Tykimeister]

September?!? The 40D is looking better at the moment. (I too am looking for a DSLR)

[Dont811]

What you haven't mentioned is Speed-of-Operation: the 40D is quicker, faster than the 30D in every regard, AF, read/write to disk, startup, reaction on buttonpushes, etc... The 5D is WAY slower!
Max@Home[/quote]

HOLY COW--I'm ready to but a 30D and you are painting a picture that the poor 30D is "handicapped' ! Does that mean I'd miss my kodak moments 'cause of long lag time ??
You are NOT helping me in making my decision. Folks, I've lost sleep over this impending purchase--can't afford to buy the wrong "walk-around lens" as well as a S-L-O-W 30D. Anyone help me please ??
Would the Canon EOS 30D 8.2MP Digital SLR Camera with EF-S 17-85mm f/4-5.6 IS USM Lens
be a good 1st DSLR for shooting sports & ports(traits, i know)
Maybe i should stay w/ shooting video !

[CI Photography]

I would buy the 40d, if I could, but if not the 30d would be a good camera. But if your going to shoot inside sports, the lens you asked about will be to slow, unless the lights are bright. I would want a lens of f2.8 or faster for inside sports. Hope this helps.



Joe

[aam1234]

I know this will sound wayyy off, waple, and very late.

I believe Max, in his first post gave a very comprehensive reply. One that I'm sure he put a lot of thought into it, and effort too. Yet I didn't see you acknowledging it in any of your replies.

I don't know about you waple, but I will sure thank a guy that tried to help me.

(Woosh, I had this bottled up for so long. Glad I let it go now).

Thank you, Max.

[waple]

Post 7, three weeks ago. I thanked everyone that helped me up to that point. It may not have specifically targeted everyone in the forums that have answered my question, and probably didin't tug any heartstrings, but it was a thank you for Max, Brian and Worm.

[brian.austin]

Originally Posted by waple

Post 7, three weeks ago. I thanked everyone that helped me up to that point. It may not have specifically targeted everyone in the forums that have answered my question, and probably didin't tug any heartstrings, but it was a thank you for Max, Brian and Worm.

And that's how I took it, personally.

You're welcome.

[aam1234]

You missed post #2, waple

[aam1234]

....

[brian.austin]

Originally Posted by aam1234

You missed post #2, waple

Uh....how? He said "Max" in his response to you. Max wrote #2.