I hadn't seen the Clarkvision data, but I have done the rest, DxO Mark and a lot of reviews, and of course I have the images from my copy of the 40D. Putting it all together, the 40D is a little more limited than some later bodies. Whether that makes a critical difference to images depends on many non-body factors. All in all, to my mind, the 40D does not warrant the description "semi-archaic", nor do I think it is irresponsible to use it for professional work. Those judgements do not seem to me to be supported by the sources we have looked at.
Neil
I think we have to look at it from two completely different perspectives, really- firstly, from the perspective of someone who already owns a 40D, and secondly, from the perspective of someone who already owns another DSLR, and is wondering what to upgrade to.
1.) If it ain't broke, don't fix it. Plain and simple. If you don't feel yourself pushing up against the limits of your camera's performance, then you have no need to upgrade.
2.) If you're looking to upgrade but you don't necessarily have a fixed deadline or financial limit, then do yourself a favor and save up for the best that money can buy. Within reason, of course.
I think we have to look at it from two completely different perspectives, really- firstly, from the perspective of someone who already owns a 40D, and secondly, from the perspective of someone who already owns another DSLR, and is wondering what to upgrade to.
1.) If it ain't broke, don't fix it. Plain and simple. If you don't feel yourself pushing up against the limits of your camera's performance, then you have no need to upgrade.
2.) If you're looking to upgrade but you don't necessarily have a fixed deadline or financial limit, then do yourself a favor and save up for the best that money can buy. Within reason, of course.
I think this should make sense to anyone...
=Matt=
Matt a lot hangs on that word you use so casually "BEST" - "best that money can buy". You can go to the marketplace and its hype and find one meaning, one significance of that word, and that changes almost daily! Or you can do the slog and make use of the slog of others and look at what "best" means in terms of real factors in the context of your shooting.
My take-home message is: step aside from the commercial ratrace a moment, from addiction to the adrenaline rush of the arrival and impending arrival of new (often only repackaged) product - and take a hardheaded look at the actual, and at yourself.
Otherwise you might be a victim to your own advertising-induced fantasy. Tomorrow is exciting. It might not be totally relevant!
...My take-home message is: step aside from the commercial ratrace a moment, from addiction to the adrenaline rush of the arrival and impending arrival of new (often only repackaged) product - and take a hardheaded look at the actual, and at yourself.
Otherwise you might be a victim to your own advertising-induced fantasy. Tomorrow is exciting. It might not be totally relevant!
Neil
Once again, all I need to do to reply to this is to quote what I said earlier:
Neil, I know you probably think of me as the type who incessantly upgrades to the newest gear for no significant reason, but in reality I'm quite the champion of used, older generation gear. I haven't bought a new DSLR body since 2004; all four of the camera bodies that I've purchased since my first Nikon D70 have been used, as money was always an important factor. In fact I paid less for my used D700 than for my almost-new D300!
...So, believe me, I'm very much in tune with the whole mindset of buying older, used gear. If it is right for the job. Depending on the situation, I've encouraged many photographers to buy all sorts of used cameras. When the Nikon D700 replacement comes out, I'll most likely be jumping on more cheap used D700's, and waiting 2-3 years before buying a D800 or whatever it is. But I still like to think that I'm helping others buy the BEST gear for the job, within their budget.
Comments
1.) If it ain't broke, don't fix it. Plain and simple. If you don't feel yourself pushing up against the limits of your camera's performance, then you have no need to upgrade.
2.) If you're looking to upgrade but you don't necessarily have a fixed deadline or financial limit, then do yourself a favor and save up for the best that money can buy. Within reason, of course.
I think this should make sense to anyone...
=Matt=
My SmugMug Portfolio • My Astro-Landscape Photo Blog • Dgrin Weddings Forum
Matt a lot hangs on that word you use so casually "BEST" - "best that money can buy". You can go to the marketplace and its hype and find one meaning, one significance of that word, and that changes almost daily! Or you can do the slog and make use of the slog of others and look at what "best" means in terms of real factors in the context of your shooting.
My take-home message is: step aside from the commercial ratrace a moment, from addiction to the adrenaline rush of the arrival and impending arrival of new (often only repackaged) product - and take a hardheaded look at the actual, and at yourself.
Otherwise you might be a victim to your own advertising-induced fantasy. Tomorrow is exciting. It might not be totally relevant!
Neil
http://www.behance.net/brosepix
...So, believe me, I'm very much in tune with the whole mindset of buying older, used gear. If it is right for the job. Depending on the situation, I've encouraged many photographers to buy all sorts of used cameras. When the Nikon D700 replacement comes out, I'll most likely be jumping on more cheap used D700's, and waiting 2-3 years before buying a D800 or whatever it is. But I still like to think that I'm helping others buy the BEST gear for the job, within their budget.
=Matt=
=Matt=
My SmugMug Portfolio • My Astro-Landscape Photo Blog • Dgrin Weddings Forum