upgrading 350d

[midlandbirder]

Hi. I am thinking of upgrading my 350d in a few months, but im unsure what to upgrade it to.
Does anyone have any thoughts on what would be a decent upgrade and which camera would give me noticable results. I am thinking of spending up to £1000 thanks in advance

[Martin Thomas]

The new 450D has received excellent reviews and potentially out performs the 40D in some areas. See http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/CanonEOS450D/ for details. I'm just about to order one to compliment my 30D so will keep you posted.

[Keith Reeder]

Midlandbirder,

what kind of stuff do you currently shoot, and what lenses are you using?

[Gary Jenkins]

If you can get your hands on a Canon 1D Mark IIn, then go for it. Fast as owt. Should be some around as most owners upgraded to the 1D MarkIII.

Good Luck

[midlandbirder]

Midlandbirder,

what kind of stuff do you currently shoot, and what lenses are you using?


I am mostly using 400mm f5.6 lens and use it mostly as a walkaround lens.

I am finding myself just taking pictures when the oppurtunity of a photo arises, so i use it for flight shots and stills.

[Duck_Pond]

I've recently upgraded from a 350D to a 40D and the difference is noticeable. Bigger, better ergonomics, much better controls, vastly improved image quality - especially noise handling and colours, bigger buffer, bigger LCD screen... I could go on and on...

Leaves you with some leftover cash for alternative lenses...

[paul goode]

Another vote for the 40d, and there's a very good cashback at the moment.
To me the 450D is an entry level replacement for the 350/400D and S/H DSLRs are a potential minefield!

[Keith Reeder]

Well with that lens, I think I'd go for the 40D too - I'm nervous about second hand cameras, and I know the 40D delivers amazing bang for the buck.

[Martin Thomas]

I'd agree that the 450D is a replacement for the 400D but a long way rmoved from the 300 & 350D (I've owned both). Read Askey's review and you'll see it's far from entry level. Canon's problem seems to have been how far to 'dumb it down' in order not to upset 40D sales. That said, the 50D is no doubt waiting in the wings (rumoured to be released in October along with other new models but who knows?).


Another vote for the 40d, and there's a very good cashback at the moment.
To me the 450D is an entry level replacement for the 350/400D and S/H DSLRs are a potential minefield!

[Keith Reeder]

That said, the 50D is no doubt waiting in the wings (rumoured to be released in October along with other new models but who knows?).That's a bit soon, I think?

The 40D was announced in August 2007, so - assuming the "normal" c. 18 month refresh period for the XXD range - we're probably looking at somewhere around Feb 2009.

10D Feb 2003
20D Aug 2004
30D Feb 2006
40D Aug 2007

[midlandbirder]

Thanks everybody for your help! i have been looking at the 40d it does seem to be a good option.

Has anybody got or know of a website that has two similar pictures taken with the 350d and 40d for a comparison?

[Martin Thomas]

Certainly looks as if you might be right based on historic data Keith. Hadn't realised it was only August of last year that the 40D appeared. My info was from a retailer particularly in respect of the 5D replacement which is almost 18 months old I think.

@ Midlandbirder - The 40D review by Askey is at http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos40d/ No comparison with the 350D but a selection of images compared to the 30D and a few others. The review in itself is certainly worth reading (as are all his reviews!).

AJ Purdy has the 40D with free 2Gb card and a spare battery for £629 (less £100 Canon cash back) with free delivery. http://www.ajpurdy.co.uk/erol.html#308X0


That's a bit soon, I think?

The 40D was announced in August 2007, so - assuming the "normal" c. 18 month refresh period for the XXD range - we're probably looking at somewhere around Feb 2009.

10D Feb 2003
20D Aug 2004
30D Feb 2006
40D Aug 2007

[paul goode]

I'd agree that the 450D is a replacement for the 400D but a long way rmoved from the 300 & 350D (I've owned both). Read Askey's review and you'll see it's far from entry level. Canon's problem seems to have been how far to 'dumb it down' in order not to upset 40D sales. That said, the 50D is no doubt waiting in the wings (rumoured to be released in October along with other new models but who knows?).

Martin,

In fairness I never mentioned the 300D. I had the misfortune to waste the best part of a grand on one of them and certainly wouldn't compare it to a current DSLR ;)

I just think at the moment that although I have no doubt the 450D is a fine camera, for bird photography some of the features of the 40D (frame rate, RAW buffer)make it more suitable and with the cashback there is not a big price difference.

[Martin Thomas]

Sorry Paul, you didn't mention the 300D- it was me that grouped it into the progression.

I too bought one when it was first released, thankfully from the USA so saved quite a bit but it was indeed a long way removed from today's models despite being cutting edge in its day.

You're quite right to point out that with the £100 cash back (see my comments re AJ Purdy and Park Cameras have them in stock @£599 inc. post less the £100) meaning there's less than £50 difference between the 40D and the 450D. No doubt the 450D will come down in price a little, perhaps once stock starts to become available?


Martin,

In fairness I never mentioned the 300D. I had the misfortune to waste the best part of a grand on one of them and certainly wouldn't compare it to a current DSLR ;)

I just think at the moment that although I have no doubt the 450D is a fine camera, for bird photography some of the features of the 40D (frame rate, RAW buffer)make it more suitable and with the cashback there is not a big price difference.

[Keith Reeder]

My info was from a retailer particularly in respect of the 5D replacement which is almost 18 months old I think.
;)

The 5D came out in October 2005, Martin - it's ancient!

;) ;) ;)

[Martin Thomas]

Wow! A replacement must be imminent!


;)

The 5D came out in October 2005, Martin - it's ancient!

;) ;) ;)

[Keith Reeder]

People have been saying that about the 5D for at least a year, Martin - but it's pretty much unique in its design and placement (and very, very good at what it does), so Canon have had little incentive to upgrade it so far.

That said, I suspect we'll see a replacement this Autumn.

[Roy C]

I went from the 350D to 30D and it was a nice upgrade but going from the 30D to 40D was even more of an upgrade IMO. To go from the 350D to 40D would be mega upgrade. I use it with the 400 5.6 and it is a great combo.

[Chalky]

I went from 350D to 40D and as Roy says it is certainly a mega upgrade.

Tom

[Duck_Pond]

You could have a look at the shots on my website (linked below) for a comparison, but it's not that apparent from web images... more over from the work involved in reaching the end result.

I have loads of decent shots from the 350D that are as good as the recent ones from the 40D, but the latter requires a lot less tinkering with after the shot has been loaded on to the PC.

However, with the additional mega-pixels, the subjects tend to be a bit better to crop to, so you lose less when zooming in, to get a bigger subject in the end result.

I'm sure that has a technical description... :-O

The 40D tends to handle colours better, so they are more rich straight from the camera, hence meaning less colour manipulation on the pc.

And the 40D also handles noise much better, so shots at ISO 1000+ can be used, whereas the 350D required Neat Image to be employed at anything beyond ISO 400.

Oh, and the auto ISO feature is a Godsend! ;)

[Peter Ericsson]

You could have a look at the shots on my website (linked below) for a comparison, but it's not that apparent from web images... more over from the work involved in reaching the end result.

I have loads of decent shots from the 350D that are as good as the recent ones from the 40D, but the latter requires a lot less tinkering with after the shot has been loaded on to the PC.

However, with the additional mega-pixels, the subjects tend to be a bit better to crop to, so you lose less when zooming in, to get a bigger subject in the end result.

I'm sure that has a technical description... :-O

The 40D tends to handle colours better, so they are more rich straight from the camera, hence meaning less colour manipulation on the pc.

And the 40D also handles noise much better, so shots at ISO 1000+ can be used, whereas the 350D required Neat Image to be employed at anything beyond ISO 400.

Oh, and the auto ISO feature is a Godsend! ;)
Pardon my ignorance but what is an auto ISO?

[Keith Reeder]

In order to maintain a selected aperture, exposure and shutter speed in varying light conditions, some cameras can be configured to move up and down the ISO range as the light changes.

AKA "Auto ISO".

Has to be said - Nikon's implementation is far better than the way it's done in the 40D.

[Martin Thomas]

The more I've read here and in comparisons between the 450D amd 40D I've been persuaded to go for the 40D particularly with the £100 cash back. I alreay have five batteries and four large volume CF cards which are compatible and the cost of a just one card and battery would wipe out the £50 difference between the two.

I thought seriously about going to the 5D but was put off by the loss of magnification power (and not being in a position to afford a 600mm lens to replace the 100-400) as well as it being quite dated as noted.

The other deciding factors are the frame rate and RAW buffer as pointed out by Paul as well as the metal body being more rigid for hanging off long lenses.

For information, I got a 40D body only from Park Cameras for £599 inc free delivery. It's verified UK stock (non grey import) and therefore applicable for the £100 rebate. I'll be keeping the 30D so it will be interesting to see the side by side comparisons.

Thanks for the input. Hope you are able to make a more informed decision Midlandbirder too.