# Upgrade from 40D or upgrading lenses



## klems (Aug 26, 2012)

Hi 

I have a 40D-camera and the following lenses - Sigma 18-200 DC OS, Sigma 10-20DC HSM, Sigma 150-500 APPO DG HSM, Tamron 90/2.8. 

My problem is that the noise-level is very high, even at ISO as low as 640. 
I am thinking about an upgrade and are looking at 7D. 

I have 2 questions : 
Should wait a little longer for the 7D mark II (if it comes) or go for the current 7D?
*or* Should I start upgrading my lenses?

Most of my photos are macro-, landscape- or bird-photos.


----------



## kaihp (Aug 26, 2012)

I think that you would find the 7D to have more noise than the 40D


----------



## DArora (Aug 26, 2012)

Upgrading to faster prime lenses will help you shoot at lower ISOs and reduce the noise. However during low light conditions you will still need to bump up your ISO levels. So upgrading just lenses will not help you get rid of noise.

I would say to wait at least till Photokina, Canon might introduce some new DSLRs.


----------



## marek.sykora (Aug 26, 2012)

Hi, I owned 30D and upgraded to 7D in spring. I'm very satisfied, in term of noise 7D is one f-stop better, iso3200 is quite acceptable for me. 

I feel 7D is noisy at every iso level, but it's possible to use software for noise reduction, try it!

7D is superb camera, noise is not everything. With 30D I had issue with AF in low light, also AF precision was not good. Finally I found out microadjustment very imporving my lenses.

Before with 30D: iso max 800, aperture almost f/4 to get proper focus.

After with 7D: iso max 1600, but I can use f/2.2 with my primes because I have better AF including MA.

I'm very satistied with 7D + 28/1.8 + 85/1.8.


----------



## And-Rew (Aug 26, 2012)

I owned a 30D & 40D simultaneously until i moved up to 5D2's.

The thing with the 7D, it's like a 5D2 and other newer cameras - they demand a lot from the glass. That is, they expose poor glass heavily.

You have 3 lenses and 1 body. So for me, the body is the thing to be upgraded first - then you can see which of your lenses needs to be upgraded first (if any).

As said by DArora, wait for Photokina to be over, so you can see what Canon's plans are re the 7D2/ 70D scenario.

At worst, it could mean there is no replacement for this model and you are in the same boat as now - at best you might have a new body announced that suits your needs extremely well, or forces a price cut in the 7D


----------



## dschosd (Aug 26, 2012)

I made the switch from the 40D to the 7D just six weeks ago. Images straight out of the 7D are probably noisier than the 40D but will clean up pretty good in post. If your main reason to upgrade the body is noise alone, I think I would wait.


----------



## elflord (Aug 26, 2012)

klems said:


> Hi
> 
> I have a 40D-camera and the following lenses - Sigma 18-200 DC OS, Sigma 10-20DC HSM, Sigma 150-500 APPO DG HSM, Tamron 90/2.8.
> 
> ...



I'd say upgrade your glass. Signal to noise ratio depends largely on sensor size. It has changed very little in the last several years. Canon could release a shiny new toy but it won't be a game changer as far as sensor noise is concerned. 

Your signal to noise would improve substantially by going full frame, but if you're distance limited (as may be the case with bird shots), that might not help a whole lot. 

A decent tripod will help if you don't have one already (should help you use lower ISOs for landscapes) 

Better glass could help a lot, especially at the mid to long end (e.g. find something to replace the 18-200 and the 150-500). You'll get better images, and the faster apertures could come in handy with the bird shots. With the landscape and macro shots, you might not be able to take advantage of very fast apertures, however. With the landscapes you will generally want a smallish aperture to get more depth of field and with macro, you need to close the aperture to get reasonable dof because the subject is very close to the lens.

Are you primarily using high ISOs for the bird shots ?


----------



## AJ (Aug 26, 2012)

kaihp said:


> I think that you would find the 7D to have more noise than the 40D


Not true. The 7D is less noisy, albeit by a small margin.
http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Cameras/Compare-Camera-Sensors/Compare-cameras-side-by-side/%28appareil1%29/619|0/%28brand%29/Canon/%28appareil2%29/180|0/%28brand2%29/Canon

If high-iso noise bothers you, use lower iso and a tripod. Or else consider a full-frame camera.


----------



## LostArk (Aug 27, 2012)

7D would only be an "upgrade" for your birding.

What I would suggest instead is to upgrade your glass. Pick up a 50 1.8, there's no excuse not to have one. Replace your 150-500 with a Canon 100-400. The Canon is shockingly, amazingly, you-will-poop-your-pantsingly sharper. Ditch your 18-200 and replace it with an 18-55 IS II + 55-250. The IQ is so much better, SO SO MUCH BETTER, than with a single 18-200. So, to recap:

50mm 1.8
18-200 -> 18-55 + 55-250
150-500 -> 100-400

I think with these upgrades you'll see a massive improvement in your IQ, more so than anything else you could do other than go FF or dropping serious bank on some 2.8 zooms or white primes. The 7D would just be writing you checks your glass can't cash.


----------



## bdunbar79 (Aug 27, 2012)

LostArk said:


> 7D would only be an "upgrade" for your birding.
> 
> What I would suggest instead is to upgrade your glass. Pick up a 50 1.8, there's no excuse not to have one. Replace your 150-500 with a Canon 100-400. The Canon is shockingly, amazingly, you-will-poop-your-pantsingly sharper. Ditch your 18-200 and replace it with an 18-55 IS II + 55-250. The IQ is so much better, SO SO MUCH BETTER, than with a single 18-200. So, to recap:
> 
> ...



+1


----------



## klems (Aug 27, 2012)

Thanks for the inputs

My current plan is at least to wait until Photokina before I do any investments, but before that I am going to photocourse/meeting and there I will have the possiblity to test my camera with some better lenses. It will be interresting to see if my problems comes from the the camera or from the lenses.


----------



## koolman (Aug 27, 2012)

The primary advantage of the 7d is the superior AF. Maybe better for the birds.... but not relevant for the macro + landscapes.

40d is a nice body - I'm not sure the 7d is a "leap" as far as IQ.

FF might be a leap.

I'd start upgrading the glass, as you have mostly consumer zooms.

Suggestions on the wide:

1) Canon 10-22

2) Samyang 14mm MF lens - SUPERB - your whole landscape photography will change. For so wide the MF is not a problem.

3) For the macro - you have the Tammy 90 - which is nice.

4) For the birds - maybe consider canon 135mm L OR Canon 70-200 f/4 IS.


----------



## nicku (Aug 27, 2012)

klems said:


> Hi
> 
> I have a 40D-camera and the following lenses - Sigma 18-200 DC OS, Sigma 10-20DC HSM, Sigma 150-500 APPO DG HSM, Tamron 90/2.8.
> 
> ...



I had upgraded from 40D to 7D. In terms of noise comparison the 7D have more noise at base ISO ( when the images are compared at 100%. but here must be mentioned that 7D has 80% more resolution), BUT 7d retain more detail compare with 40D, the colors are more accurate the contrast is better. In terms of camera build, AF speed and features 7D is way over 40D.
To get the maximum out of 7D you must use ONLY high quality lens or fixed focal lens ( like 17-40 f/4L, 70-200 f/4 L ; 50mm f/1.4 USM ; 100mm f/2.8 USM or the equivalent of other manufactures )....; otherwise you will end up writing another review on the internet about how bad is the 7D IQ.

You must apply some noise reduction on all 7D files ( regardless of ISO speed). the 7D Raw files are more versatile compared with 40D.

If you are on budget and want to upgrade to a above average ALL AROUND camera than i suggest 7D.
If you are interested ONLY on IQ than definitely buy a 5D2. 
If the money are not such a big issue buy 5D3 and you will have all 7D features and 5D2 IQ in a single camera.


----------



## tiger82 (Aug 27, 2012)

For roughly the same $, you should consider getting better glass like the 16-35mm or 10-22mm for the Sigma 10-20DC or the 100-400 for the 150-500. I started out with Sigmas which gave decent bang for the buck but when I compared the images, the L lenses far outperform non-L lenses let alone non-Canon lenses. I started with a 20D and Sigma lenses. I switched to a Canon 100-400L IS lens and it gave me better images than any of my Sigma lenses. After I finished upgrading my glass, I upgraded to a 50D in 2007 and added a 7D in 2009. I just upgraded the 50D to a 5D2 and gained an extra 60% FOV on the short end of my zooms and all of my primes. 

Rent the 7D and test it with your lenses then rent a 100-400 to test with the 7D and 40D, then decide. I'd consider a used or refurb 50D if I were you.


----------



## emag (Aug 27, 2012)

koolman said:


> The primary advantage of the 7d is the superior AF......
> 
> 2) Samyang 14mm MF lens - SUPERB - your whole landscape photography will change. For so wide the MF is not a problem.
> .
> ...



I'll second these suggestions. The wallet impact is not too excessive either.


----------



## marek.sykora (Aug 28, 2012)

Today I saw some great photos from my friend using 40D. I was terribly surprised how bad 40D is on iso 1600, the images has worse color saturation, contrast, resolution. My iso 1600 by 7D looks so fresh.

Lenses are important, sure. With 30D I was very happy with my 20/2.8, it was sharper than 28/1.8. Now I have 7D and feel 20/2.8 is average lens and 28/1.8 is better after settin microadjustment.

7D is not cheap, I considered to sold my 20/2.8 and buy 5D2 instead of 7D and 20/2.8. I tried the body, IQ is superb, but I didn't enjoy shooting with the camera. 7D is much more better in term of usability and AF. I found out when light is goog, than photo is good regardless used camera. Good light, solid tripod, focusing via liveview and careful postprocessing is the way to have a great photos.


----------



## Peerke (Aug 28, 2012)

What is wrong with your 40D? OK, less resolution, but do you need the resolution of the 7D, do you print that large?
I would invest in glass. You will notice IQ improvement on your 40D for sure. 
I gave my 40D to my wife and bought a 7D. Nice camera, but if the wife would not have had interest in starting photography, I still would have had only the 40D.

Like mentioned in other replies: Don't pixel peep the 7D files


----------



## tomscott (Aug 28, 2012)

So I have had 2 40Ds so far and use them professionally for a newspaper. 

Anyone giving advice on the 50D, forget it. By far the worst performer out of the 3. As they just crammed 33% more pixels onto the same sensor without any change in tech. Apart from the screen the 40D is better option and cheaper.

I have been waiting for the 5D MKIII and will pull the trigger but like to leave it a while and let the price simmer, make sure there arent any more problems, I like to get as much profit out of all my gear. Anyway the resolution is fine for newspaper work as you basically print on toilet paper. So my 40D became very temperamental last week and has hit 139,000 actuations and didnt want to spend any money on it. So on Saturday became the owner of a 7D.

So I was never that keen on buying any of the 18mp variations of this generation as all the reviews and opinions on here have pointed out how the noise isnt that great and slightly worse than the older generation low down in the ISO. So was waiting for the new gen to see what they offer, but I needed something to fill in for the next couple of months. I found a local guy selling his 7D, year old, less than 10k clicks used completely for amateur stuff. Had a couple of scratches but as my cameras are work horses not museum pieces that didnt bother me. Anyway was on ebay offered him £750 cash so he saves the fees. Camera bought.

First impressions... the build quality seems slightly worce than the 40D on the plastic areas. Card door creaks and the plastic has more give in that area where you grip. But the problem seems fairly common on the 5D MKII and 7D after a quick google, a bit of insulation tape solved that. 

Pros
Feels lighter although its not. The speed is fantastic although only 1.5 frames more it is really noticeable. The screen is incredible! Really great, one of the worst parts of the 40D. The AF is out of this world in comparison to the old 9 point, although you can overcome the downfalls of the 40Ds 9 point the 7Ds helps for every situation you are thrown into with the different modes, especially when using F2.8 lenses. I can see much more keepers. Also has the movie mode which isnt a deal breaker for me but useful. Micro adjust a must have feature! Get the most from those lenses. Half a stop more of dynamic range, 80% more resolution. Slightly better at high ISO probably 1/2 a stop, 100% viewfinder coverage and larger maximum ISO from 3200 to 12800 so 2 stops and useful.

Cons
If you are after a dramatic increase in IQ your heading in the wrong direction. It is better but bread and butter it aint, the pro you can take from this is that you can print much larger at about the same quality. Also ISO 100-400 it seems it is very slightly noisy but negligible! Seriously negligible! Over 1600 it is good but not night and day but useable. Banding is better than the 40D. 

Just this eve had a quick test against the 40D. The 7D isnt bad.. 80% more resolution and about the same noise level up to 1250 past 1600 its a tad better maybe one stop and goes to 12800, add that awesome AF, and screen res its not bad. But if the 40D wasnt on its last legs.. worthwhile upgrade.. debatable. But that AF is worth having it for, on its own and the screen. But I already have the glass so its just the body I have to worry about.

Think you can read too much, the noise issue really is negligible in real life, I have no issue using it professionally. DR could be better but acceptable. Compared to full frame alternatives it has its draw backs with IQ and DR but what it lacks there it makes up in other areas. Full frame is slightly overkill for me anyway but will get one to go with the 7D. I like the extra length you get from the longer lenses with crop APC.

Like others have said get some glass. A 17-55mm F2.8 would be great also a 10-22mm and a 70-200mm F2.8 makes the 40D awesome. The 24-105mm I cant recommend for APC simply because the widest you get is 38.4mm and as an everyday lens its not wide enough, great lens but not suitable. Need two lenses to cover a normal focal length, but obv a pain if going FF in the future. But from the current lenses I would suggest staying APC.

If you want a 7D go get one! Its a good camera, but again with 80% more resolution you need the glass to resolve it so it would be an expensive upgrade for glass and the camera. So I suggest getting some nice glass as its a good camera and still keeps up with todays offerings. The 40D was one of those cameras that was unique and a great camera, still holds its own now.

Hope this helps.


----------



## klems (Sep 6, 2012)

Thanks for alle the answers/ suggestions.

I have now compared my 40D with a 1000D and a 7D. The test have done taking picture of a resolution/noise-testchart. I have used a tripod, both my Tamron 90mm lens and my Sigma [email protected] lens and taken pictures at different ISO-values. 

My interpretation of the picture : The 40D and 1000D has about the same noise-level, but the 1000D gives somewhat clearer/better pictures. Withe the 7D I could go approx double the ISO-value for the same noiselever. The pictures was much clearer/better on the 7D compared to the 40d and the 1000D. 

The diffence in the lenses was quite small, The 90mm was a little better, but not that much. 

I am not satisfied with the performence of my 40D, I will send it in for a check/service. 

From these test, my plan forward is probably to upgrade the camera before the lenses. I am hoping Canon will come up with a 7DmkII or a 70D in the near future.


----------



## klems (Dec 6, 2012)

klems said:


> Thanks for alle the answers/ suggestions.
> 
> I have now compared my 40D with a 1000D and a 7D. The test have done taking picture of a resolution/noise-testchart. I have used a tripod, both my Tamron 90mm lens and my Sigma [email protected] lens and taken pictures at different ISO-values.
> 
> ...




Hi again

I still have my 40D-camera, and after getting a great deal on a 24-105-lens, I still want to upgrade my camera. Initially I was waiting for an upgrade of the 7D-camera (rumors say febr.-march next year), but after getting the 24-105 some friends have suggested that I should go FF. Then I am thinking about the 5DIII or the 6D. 

If I go FF I mayby will change my sigma 150-500 with a Canon 100-400 and getting some primes (35/50). 

Any thoughts/suggestion????

Examples of shots I have done can be seen at http://klemsdal.blogspot.no/


----------



## Corylus (Dec 6, 2012)

The 40D is a great camera. I've had one for a few years and take mainly wildlife portrait shots with it. With decent lenses (I have 100mm macro (non-L) and 400mm f5.6) and some PP I am generally very pleased with what I can get from this camera.

Some examples: http://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/sets/72157627293307584/

I agree with others who say upgrade glass first. That said I'll also be looking to upgrade from the 40D next year, either to the new 70D/7DmkII offering or possibly the 5dmkIII.

Lense-wise I highly recommend Canon's 100mm macros and the 400 f5.6. I also seem to have a very sharp copy of the 70-300 non-L and love this lens too - very good value for money.


----------



## stefsan (Dec 6, 2012)

As someone who went from the 40D to the 7D I would say it definitely was a worthwhile upgrade. Although noise levels even at moderately high ISO settings are considerably high, I quite like the overall image quality of the 7D – better than the already good 40D. Resolution, AF, speed and ergonomics are far better in the 7D. But if you are after a camera with superb image quality especially in low light/high ISO situations, you'd probably be better off with a 5DII.


----------



## iaind (Dec 6, 2012)

I went from 40D to 5D2 and it is superb for landscapes and macro. Go for 5D3 if you can. You will not regret it.

As for glass go for best you can afford L series preferably


----------



## RustyTheGeek (Dec 8, 2012)

I think the 40D is one of the best crop cameras Canon has made. I've sold and repurchased several of them as friends and family wanted a good DSLR without spending a lot of $$. I finally replaced my last 40D with a 60D (same sensor as the 7D). Meh. 60D is fine, faster fps, etc but I'd take another 40D in a heartbeat. I also agree, stay away from the 50D. Increased pixel density was a mistake.

My suggestion - UPGRADE GLASS with good EF or L lenses. KEEP 40D unless you need better focusing.


----------

