D90 vs (50D vs 40D)

venZon · 11-18-08, 07:00 AM

Well I just sold my XTi and am looking to upgrade... I'm just looking for personal experience on what everyone thinks of these cameras.

The Nikon D90's movie mode interest me but not sure if it's just a gimmick or if it would be a useful function.

The Canon 50D has been getting some good reviews but some say it's not much better then the 40D.

So nikon vs canon? If canon 50D or 40D?

Thanks in advance for your advice.

bitkahuna · 11-18-08, 08:08 AM

Video on D90 is fun but for me I wouldn't use it much.
Other than that, it depends on your budget, for not only the camera, but more importantly lenses.
If your budget isn't HUGE

then I'd get the 40D and the best lens you can.
For me (owning a 40D), the 50D doesn't offer enough to change - I don't need more megapixels, and my 40D is plenty fast enough.

But I'll say it again, the lens(es) will matter more than any of the differences in those 3 cameras.

venZon · 11-18-08, 08:29 AM

I know glass come first. I just want to make sure I have the right body to start with.

CptnTonus · 11-18-08, 08:33 AM

I would go 40D, but your XTi is a perfect good body to start off with and keep using--it probably wouldn't have held you back too much. The 40D definitely has some cool features, but I doubt you'll notice an immediate difference in IQ just from going to a more expensive body, especially if you're using the same lenses.

venZon · 11-18-08, 10:04 AM

I sold my XTi for a good amount. Almost as much as I paid for it 8 months back.

It seems that most people are saying save the money and get the 40D and buy better glass.

How do you guys like the 40D kit lens? Worth it or buy something else?

RA40 · 11-18-08, 10:13 AM

I'd consider upping to the higher performing glass in this treadmill. That will be the more efficient use of $$. Then buying the bodies based on the intended output.

I've taken movie clips on the P&S and while they are amusing to watch, none of them have or will find their way onto a CD/DVD to be watched again. A dedicated video recorder for HD viewing does it much nicer. It is just cramming more features into a body that adds to clutter. Still images are the main goal so a body that accomplishes that to your satisfaction is the main feature.

venZon · 11-18-08, 10:22 AM

The only reason I'm upgrading my body is because I figured if i don't sell it now I would never sell it for the price I'm getting.

The XTi is gone. My next body I plan to keep for awhile so I want to make the right choice.

I know glass is #1 but right now I'm looking to a body.

I'm leaning toward a 40D right now. It the Canon kit 17-85 IS a good lens?

CptnTonus · 11-18-08, 10:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by venZon

I sold my XTi for a good amount. Almost as much as I paid for it 8 months back.

It seems that most people are saying save the money and get the 40D and buy better glass.

How do you guys like the 40D kit lens? Worth it or buy something else?

Most 40D's come with the EF 28-135 f/3.5-5.6 IS. It's a solid lens, good image quality, the IS is handy, but the range is sort of useless on a crop body if you ask me--28mm just isn't wide enough.

The Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 is a good option if you're on a budget, you can save yourself some money and just buy the 40D body by itself, then pick up the Tamron lens for around $400. I've seen a few used 40D bodies going for around $700 as well, you might want to look in to that.

Quote:

Originally Posted by venZon

It the Canon kit 17-85 IS a good lens?

That lens hasn't gotten great reviews, a lot of people don't like it. I've never used one myself.

Percy · 11-18-08, 12:58 PM

40D.

I've shot with the 50D and 40D but prefer the 40, hands down. The only real advantage that the 50 offers is the megapixels and the ultra fast frame buffer. But the 40 had less noise and better image quality, ime.

40 vs xti/xsi - there is a highly noticeable different in image quality. Different processing algorithms. I had a chance to do a head to head with the xsi vs a 40 and a 50. The 40 is cleaner.

venZon · 11-18-08, 01:05 PM

Alright looks like 40D w/ a Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 look like the best package? I'll pick up another 50mm too.

bitkahuna · 11-18-08, 05:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CptnTonus

I would go 40D, but your XTi is a perfect good body to start off with and keep using--it probably wouldn't have held you back too much. The 40D definitely has some cool features, but I doubt you'll notice an immediate difference in IQ just from going to a more expensive body, especially if you're using the same lenses.

There's more to a camera than just IQ.

40D focusing is a LOT better than the XTi, especially in lower light.
40D is also a LOT faster, a LOT quieter, and has better controls. It also has live view. Way more customization. Bigger LCD. Etc., etc.

Don't get me wrong, the XTi was a GREAT camera for its time. The 40D is just a lot better.

INHOCJP · 11-18-08, 06:48 PM

Don't forget about the improved LCD on the 50d. 920k pixels on the 50d (and the D90) versus the 230k pixels on the 40d...a huge difference.

bitkahuna · 11-18-08, 06:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by venZon

It seems that most people are saying save the money and get the 40D and buy better glass.

That would be my vote, unless the D90's video is important to you.

Quote:

How do you guys like the 40D kit lens? Worth it or buy something else?

The 28-135 is an older full frame lens they decided to bundle with the 40D. It's not bad, although 28 on the 40D is not really wide enough angle. Most bundled lenses for the 'crop' sensor cameras are 18-55 range.

Some people have picked that lens up with the camera and then sold it to put proceeds towards another lens. Might be cheaper but too much hassle for me.

Better choices are the Canon 17-40/4L, the Tamron 18-50/2.8, or my fave, the (not cheap) Canon EF-S 17-55/2.8 IS.

bitkahuna · 11-18-08, 06:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by venZon

It the Canon kit 17-85 IS a good lens?

IMO, no, I hated it. Some people like it, but it depends on what compromises you can live with. To give that 5:1 zoom range something has to give and in this case it's SLOW glass (can't capture light fast enough) which makes the focusing work harder and you can't do as fast shutter with the same available light as with a better lens.

That lens also has purple fringing, it's soft at 17, and yes, can you tell I didn't like it?

bitkahuna · 11-18-08, 06:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CptnTonus

Most 40D's come with the EF 28-135 f/3.5-5.6 IS. It's a solid lens, good image quality, the IS is handy, but the range is sort of useless on a crop body if you ask me--28mm just isn't wide enough.

The Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 is a good option if you're on a budget, you can save yourself some money and just buy the 40D body by itself, then pick up the Tamron lens for around $400. I've seen a few used 40D bodies going for around $700 as well, you might want to look in to that.

That lens hasn't gotten great reviews, a lot of people don't like it. I've never used one myself.

No, I didn't read your post until now... but glad we see things the same way.