My first serious Camera, 40D or 5D?

[9secondadidas]

I've had a number of p&s cameras up till this point and right now I've got a Canon G5 powershot which takes some of the noisiest pictures ever.

My father has a 40D which I've used rather extensively which I really like. I'm planning on getting a canon so we will be able to share lenses. I take all kinds of photos, from lightning to still life, low lit atmospheres such as clubs and concerts, hdr type stuff and high speed stuff, like at the race track. I've narrowed it down to the 40D and the 5D.

I know they are both fine cameras, I've researched both quite a bit and while I know I won't really be going wrong with either one I'm trying to decide if the 5D is worth the extra dough. Money isn't a big object here, more of a minor consideration if anything. I like the idea of the full frame as it will take full advantage of whichever lenses I decide to purchase.

So what would the more experienced folk here do if you had the cash-, which camera would you prefer and why?

Lastly, should I just hold off and wait and see what the 5D II yields? lol

 

[keith204]

For the 5D, I would personally hold off a bit longer... even if you get the 5D, it'll drop in price once the new one comes out.

I have the 40D and love it. The 17-55 f/2.8 IS is a great reason for me to stick with the 40D and not upgrade to a full-frame... as silly as it sounds. That range in a 2.8 WITH IS is amazing...and unfortunately the 24-70 doesn't have IS.

For noise handling, the 5D wins...but I don't hesitate using 3200 on the 40D for auto racing when it's night and shutter speed is crucial. I just had some 3200 ISO shots printed in an 8x10. My wife and I inspected the photo closely, and were very impressed with how little noise there was.

 

[Antithesis]

Lastly, should I just hold off and wait and see what the 5D II yields? lol

I think realistically, the soonest we'll see this is mid-summer, or whenever the olympics is.

Both the 5D and 40D handle low light pretty well, with the 5D having a bit of an edge. If you need reach or high speed, like at the race track, the 40D is your best bet and will still be usable in the club. If your looking at strictly L lenses, I'd go with the 5D though.

 

[9secondadidas]

Thanks for the fast responses. When you say the 40D for reach or high speed, exactly what do you mean? I thought the 5D had the edge pretty much across the board.

 

[usayit]

My guess is Photokina 2008.

Unless you are already a working professional, I am more inclined to recommend the 40D and put the cost difference into some nice glass.

If money is a minor consideration, hell.. why not.. get the 5d/1d/1ds which ever falls in budget.

 

[Big Mike]

The 5D is indeed a great camera, but I think the 40D is a much better value at the moment.

The 40D, with it's smaller sensor, makes lenses feel longer (crop factor)...so if you are shooting with telephoto lenses, it's like you get more 'reach' with a 40D. Also, the 40D shoots at 6.5 fps, while the 5D is only 3fps...so that's what is meant by reach and high speed.

 

[notelliot]

The 5D is indeed a great camera, but I think the 40D is a much better value at the moment.

The 40D, with it's smaller sensor, makes lenses feel longer (crop factor)...so if you are shooting with telephoto lenses, it's like you get more 'reach' with a 40D. Also, the 40D shoots at 6.5 fps, while the 5D is only 3fps...so that's what is meant by reach and high speed.

+1