Worth the upgrade? Canon 40D vs. Canon EOS 5D Mark II

[ACrossley]

Hi all!
I am currently shooting with the 40D .... no major complaints, but considering an upgrade. I read that the 5D really makes shooting in low light situations much easier ... experiences? Any other pluses you have personally experienced? 80% of my work is on location children/ family work with the remainder being weddings - main issue with the lighting. I do own an external flash (580EXII), but no other lighting. Any feedback is much appreciated! Let me know if I need to provide any further information!

THANKS!

 

[bigtwinky]

Definatly worth an upgrade... not just for the low light, but for the full frame too!

Note that if you have EF-S lenses, they wont work on the 5D MkII

 

[SimpleFoto]

yeah, for sure worth the upgrade if you have the cash. The video itself is very nice if you think you would use it. Like bigtwinky sead, the full sensor is a big difference to the APS-C sized one. It doesn't have a flash, but you shouldn't be using the flash on the camera anyhow!

 

[cfusionpm]

It's a completely different kind of camera. 40D is a crop sensor high speed camera, while the 5DII has a massive 21mp full frame which is not suited for speed shooting. Each (type of) camera has its own uses, but it looks like your work (children/family/weddings) would benefit greatly from a 5DII upgrade. Much better image quality, much bigger print capability, better low light ISO performance, etc. But like already said, any current EF-S lenses you have will not work on a full frame camera.

 

[Overread]

The 5DM2 I agree does sound like one of the best tools for the areas of photography that you are working in and I think that it would be a most worthy upgrade from a 40D. Upgrading your glass (if needed) will be a bit of a pain, but its also a move well worth taking if you choose to move into the fullframe formate.

Also as an extra remembe that whilst the 5DM2 gives you increased usable ISOs, do keep learning and mastering control of the flash - since that means you can still use a good low ISO without having lighting problems - and it is always ideal to work with the lowest ISO you can get away with

 

[Montana]

I have a 40D and got a 5DII. Two completely different cameras, but if I could have only one of the two it would be the 5DII. If you aren't trying to shoot super fast paced sports, its great. Image quality is second to none and one of the top ISO performers on the market. I love mine.

 

[Village Idiot]

When I shoot concerts with decent lighting, I can shoot at ISO 6400 and f/4-f/5.6 when needed and just do some slight noise reduction in post. Soooo nice.

 

[Big Mike]

Definitely a very nice upgrade. Keep in mind that you may need to upgrade your lenses (EF-S lenses are not compatible with 'full frame' cameras like the 5D). You may also need to upgrade your computer system because of the large files (and video if you use it).

 

[zapman29]

I currently have the the 40D and now have the MK II, its quite a change, I must admit I am still a little intimidated by it.. but I am learning, sounds like you have plenty of experience so you should enjoy it for your needs...

 

[inTempus]

I had a 40D (sold it) and I still have a 5D2. I love the 5D2 for everything except shooting medium to fast moving things. The images the 5D2 produces are beautiful. I would trade a 40D for a 5D2 in a heartbeat.

 

[rizomes]

If your budget is tight, you may consider a used 5D. I had a 5D in the past and upgraded to a mkII recently. Keep in mind that the workhorse the 5D is has an older cmos than your 40D. The 5D is full frame so you'll have to stick to EF lenses.
When I was very comfortable at 1600 Iso with the mkI, the mkII gives me the same noise at 3200 Iso. I tend to avoid shooting over 3200 though, as the noise starts to get unmanageable.