Rational decisions.

I have a Canon 20D and have become interested in the 40D, which is about
ready to ship to droolers like me.

Got to thinking about technology, like computers, where the latest stuff is
only marginally better.

A rational person would continue to use a 20D and ignore the 30D and the
40D.

Many of us are not totally rational.

 

The 40D is an evolution of the double digit range of Canon DSLRs,
started with the 10D. I can understand someone passing over the 30D.
Unless you sought spot metering and a larger buffer, it offered little
improvement. The 40D offers more improvements and is probably worth
the change for really dedicated users.

If picture quality is the measure of when to change, there does not
seem to be a noticeable difference between 20D and 40D images until
you get into low light situations. The 40D is then noticeably better.
If you have the loose change - buy one. Those currently taking
satisfactory images with a 10D, a 20D or a 30D can decide if the added
features are just more tinsel or will produce them better results.

My choice made a few months ago was to buy a Fuji s5. I still only
have 2 lenses for it and it doesn't address all the areas I work in
but for the profitable part it has improved my productivity. I live in
hope the new Nikons are a breath of fresh air and not just more hot
air. Although I use Canon cameras, I am a long way from being a
supporter of Canon's public beta testing and the strife it causes
those who get caught in it.


Doug

 

That's what I thought.

Yes, they are marginal improvements but important in some situtations.

I have 7 Canon lenses and thus am vested in this model line.

A very intelligent response to my post, and I thank you!

Ran this by my comptroller (wife) and she votes no!

 

Put the money for a 40D in a GIC (CD) until a camera that makes a real
difference comes out.