# Upgrade from 40D to 5d mkii



## skinkfoot (Sep 28, 2012)

Is the 5d mkii focusing better or worse than the 40d for birds in flight? I understand that the center point is more accurate, but is it faster than the 40d? I only shoot birds about 25% of the time, I use for BIF a canon ef 400mm L f5.6 and for stationary birds an old Heinz Kilfitt 400mm f4.0 manual focus lens as well. The other 75% of the time I know the 5d mkii would fit me perfectly. 

I am happy with my focusing on the 40d with the smaller aperture (f8.0-f11.0) required for birding. As long as it is at par I will be happy. 

I understand that the 1dx 1dmkiv and 5d mkiii are better cameras. I have just installed a new furnace new air conditioning and have completed a basement reno(aka I have no cash flow), I am finding the cheap price of the 5d mkii very tempting, And I would like to know if anyone else has made the switch from the 40d?


----------



## Brand B (Sep 28, 2012)

That's the upgrade I just made recently. Haven't shot many birds, but for everything else, focus is significantly faster.

Edit: oops, sorry, misread ii as iii. Have not used a ii.


----------



## skinkfoot (Sep 28, 2012)

Thanks, I just can't decide. I think I may wait for the 5dmkii to come down a bit.


----------



## tiger82 (Sep 28, 2012)

$1759 -10% for CLP on a Canon refurb 5D2. I'm very happy with mine. I replaced my 50D and the 7D/5D2 combo covers everything I shoot.


----------



## djxavier (Sep 28, 2012)

I just upgraded from a 40d to a 5d2 (Beach Camera $1599 sale) and in my couple days of experience I couldn't find a difference in the center point focusing. Accuracy and speed seem nearly identical to me (even in dark situations). I haven't had a chance to put the outer points through their paces yet, but they don't seem *completely* useless despite being single axis.

I plan to try servo tracking soon with the assist points.

I did a bunch of BIF with my 40d and my tamron 70-300 USD, and to be honest the reason I got my 5d2 was to complement my 24-105. My current plan is to still use my 40d for BIF, mainly so I don't switch lenses around. I think the pixel density is pretty close on both cameras.

just like tiger82 i do eventually plan to replace my 40d with a 7d


----------



## MarkII (Sep 28, 2012)

skinkfoot said:


> And I would like to know if anyone else has made the switch from the 40d?


I upgraded from the 40D to the 5DII and recently added a 5DIII as a second body.

My experience was that the AF of the 5DII was worse than the 40D. If you use the centre point, the 5DII is roughly comparable and possibly a little more accurate, particularly when tracking. If you use the outer points then expect problems locking focus and expect to be disappointed at their placement (everything is much more clustered around the centre in the 5DII, making the outer points not just inaccurate/insensitive, but poorly placed for compositional purposes). The 5DII build quality is almost but not quite as nice as the 40D (creaky battery doors) and the general performance a bit laggy (more blackout and slower frame rate compared to the 40D).

The 5DIII rectifies all of this and is on a completely different level with regards to accuracy, performance and placement of focus points. However the 5DIII image quality when shooting RAW is virtually indistinguishable from the 5DII (slightly more colour noise at low ISO, slightly less luminance noise at high ISO - neither particularly significant).

However, the image quality of either the 5DII or 5DIII will seem quite amazing after the 40D. Plus you have the ability to obtain greater subject isolation via the increased DOF control. You will, however, loose a little reach compared to the 40D and may find yourself wanting longer focal lengths or a teleconverter.

So in short, if you shoot centre point only and do not need extremely high burst rates, the 5DII would be a very nice upgrade over the 40D for BIF shots. The 5DIII would add a faster burst rate and the ability to meaningfully use non-center AF points, but not much else.


----------



## And-Rew (Sep 28, 2012)

I upgraded from the 30D/40D to dual 5D2 almost 4 years ago.

At the time the only wildlife i was shooting was macro or badgers at night.

The 40D A/F was definitely more suited to wildlife than the 5D2 - but the 5D2 is not a slouch either - it's just not a 1DX or 5D3 

My thoughts as to you question are - why do you wish to upgrade?

To go the full frame route? Then get a 6D...

If budget is the issue and you want that gorgeous 21mp ff sensor - then the 5D2 will not let you down as long as you understand you are running with a few fps less.

In respect of the low light A/F - it should be noted that at 800 and 1600 ISO the 40D is better - but in response the 5D2 can comfortably push to an ISO of 6400 and recover or gain the ground - as the A/F is rather good at ISO 6400. I've even been known to push to H2 (25600) and get some acceptable shots - by that I mean better than not having the shot and certainly good enough to put on the front page of newspaper 8)

I've shot birds alongside a Nikon 700D and a Canon 7D - an TBH, i don't think i missed out much - i knew my camera more than well enough to know how to compensate its weak points.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Sep 28, 2012)

skinkfoot said:


> Is the 5d mkii focusing better or worse than the 40d for birds in flight? I understand that the center point is more accurate, but is it faster than the 40d? I only shoot birds about 25% of the time, I use for BIF a canon ef 400mm L f5.6 and for stationary birds an old Heinz Kilfitt 400mm f4.0 manual focus lens as well. The other 75% of the time I know the 5d mkii would fit me perfectly.
> 
> I am happy with my focusing on the 40d with the smaller aperture (f8.0-f11.0) required for birding. As long as it is at par I will be happy.
> 
> I understand that the 1dx 1dmkiv and 5d mkiii are better cameras. I have just installed a new furnace new air conditioning and have completed a basement reno(aka I have no cash flow), I am finding the cheap price of the 5d mkii very tempting, And I would like to know if anyone else has made the switch from the 40d?


The lens is the major factor for speed of autofocus, while the body controls the ability to track and accuracy.
I would not recommend the 5D Mark II for tracking moving objects as they moved to the different AF points. It is certainly quite accurate in the center point and will focus quickly.
Why not move to a 7D? Much more usable AF for BIF, and for $1087.20 in the Canon refurb store (sale ends today), its a good value.


----------



## cpsico (Sep 28, 2012)

They are two very different cameras, one is landscape studio ,the other action oriented. Buy the 5 d II and keep your 40d. I miss mine it's one of the best crop body's in my opinion.


----------



## HarryWintergreen (Sep 28, 2012)

I bought the 5dII and kept the 40d and I am happy with it. To shoot BIF is much easier with the 40d. But doing the same with the 5dII is not as bad as one could think because of the rather sluggish AF, even in low light. The 5d is simply not made for action photography. It's made for IQ and very decent noise handling. To be honest, since I got the 5dII I kind of neglected the 40d - except for BIF.


----------



## skinkfoot (Sep 29, 2012)

Thank You everyone, while not completely sure I think I may end up waiting for a 5d mkiii or 1dmiv, It is just hard to buy a body when you just want to buy a 500 f4.0 or a 600f4.0. But I feel I have reached the end of my cameras life, I have really liked my 40d, I just can't push it any further. I don't make much money but I do make some from nature photography, and perhaps I should just stop being so cheap, and commit a little more.


----------



## Richard8971 (Sep 29, 2012)

I loved my 40D (RIP). I only replaced it with the 7D because someone stole it. 10.1 MP is more than plenty to get incredible, detailed photos. I also have the 5D2 and I can't say that I would choose the 5D2 over the 40D (or even better the 7D) with regards to wildlife shooting. At 6.5fps, the 40D is a workhorse. I look back at the photos I got from my 40D and I couldn't be happier. It's a solid camera (as good as the 50D, in terms of image quality and performance) and I would still be using it if someone else hadn't decided that they wanted it more than me. 

I have a friend who bought the 5D3, (she is one of Southern Arizona's premier wildlife photographiers) and she is not 100% convinced that the 5D3 is all that with a bag of chips. She says it's a wonderful camera, but there are things that she would still use her 5D2 over the 5D3 and she loves the speed and quality of the 7D/40D. 

There is NO 100% perfect camera, sorry guys. I find myself grabbing my 7D over my 5D2 when I go shooting wildlife. It's fast and responsive, like my old 40D was.

I would say a solid 7D is worth ever penny over the 5D3/1DIV for wildlife shooting, esp for the extra money saved on the other 2 cameras. 

Both samples taken from the 7D. Don't let the quality of the "size down" (I had to really size them down to post them) discorage you. The full sized photos are amazing! (The weaver taking the bath was taken at ISO 800. {No noise reduction} I have no issues with the image "noise" at higher ISO's from the 7D. The photos are simply amazing!)

Oh, one more thing, the 5D2 is rated for 1/4000th of a second max shutter speed and the 5D3 is rated at 1/8000th of a second max shutter speed. The 7D is also 1/8000th of a second shutter speed like the 5D3 and 2fps faster for over a grand less! (depending on the sale/where you buy it from!) 

D


----------



## FTb-n (Sep 29, 2012)

Richard8971, great shots, love the first one.

I must admit that I am intrigued by the low light potential of the 5DII or 5DIII, but for sports and wildlife, the 7D is hard to beat. And at $1087.20 from Canon's refurb store, the price is right.

http://shop.usa.canon.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/product_10051_10051_260463_-1


----------



## Richard8971 (Sep 30, 2012)

FTb-n said:


> Richard8971, great shots, love the first one.
> 
> I must admit that I am intrigued by the low light potential of the 5DII or 5DIII, but for sports and wildlife, the 7D is hard to beat. And at $1087.20 from Canon's refurb store, the price is right.
> 
> http://shop.usa.canon.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/product_10051_10051_260463_-1



Very true, and the way the 5D series images colors is amazing. I love that about my 5D2. But the 7D is a NOW camera. The AF is fast and accurate and it fires off a shot as soon as you touch the button. I don't know... it really is an amazing camera. I can't say I would want a 5D2 in the field when you only have one chance to get the perfect shot. 

It is a trade off for sure, you loose some color and detail with the 7D (compared to the 5D2, 5D3) but you gain speed and 2-4 more fps. Tough choice.  Guess I should just get the 1DX...lol Kidding, but I got my 7D for $1550.00 new, so far it has been worth every penny.

D


----------



## LightCrafterPhotography (Oct 2, 2012)

skinkfoot said:


> Is the 5d mkii focusing better or worse than the 40d for birds in flight? I understand that the center point is more accurate, but is it faster than the 40d? I only shoot birds about 25% of the time, I use for BIF a canon ef 400mm L f5.6 and for stationary birds an old Heinz Kilfitt 400mm f4.0 manual focus lens as well. The other 75% of the time I know the 5d mkii would fit me perfectly.
> 
> I am happy with my focusing on the 40d with the smaller aperture (f8.0-f11.0) required for birding. As long as it is at par I will be happy.
> 
> I understand that the 1dx 1dmkiv and 5d mkiii are better cameras. I have just installed a new furnace new air conditioning and have completed a basement reno(aka I have no cash flow), I am finding the cheap price of the 5d mkii very tempting, And I would like to know if anyone else has made the switch from the 40d?


I have used both and still own both. I find that the center points in both cameras comparable, but overall the 40D has an advantage focusing in that its non-central points seem to aquire focus faster and more accurately. Burst rate is much faster too, but the smaller file size has a lot to do with it. I would advise you to save up on the 5d3 and get more advantages (better IQand ISO performance, faster burst rate) aside from faster and more accurate autofocus.


----------



## rh81photo (Oct 3, 2012)

skinkfoot said:


> Is the 5d mkii focusing better or worse than the 40d for birds in flight? I understand that the center point is more accurate, but is it faster than the 40d? I only shoot birds about 25% of the time, I use for BIF a canon ef 400mm L f5.6 and for stationary birds an old Heinz Kilfitt 400mm f4.0 manual focus lens as well. The other 75% of the time I know the 5d mkii would fit me perfectly.
> 
> I am happy with my focusing on the 40d with the smaller aperture (f8.0-f11.0) required for birding. As long as it is at par I will be happy.
> 
> I understand that the 1dx 1dmkiv and 5d mkiii are better cameras. I have just installed a new furnace new air conditioning and have completed a basement reno(aka I have no cash flow), I am finding the cheap price of the 5d mkii very tempting, And I would like to know if anyone else has made the switch from the 40d?



I'm almost in the same boat as skinkfoot. Only difference is that I'm not a BIF shooter but I shoot volleyball. so far I'm mostly happy with my 40D 70-200 2.8L usm combo. has anyone of you experience with a 5DmkII and volleyball? of course a 7D would make more sense for that type of sports shooting. I'm aware of that. But did anyone >try< a 5DmkII for such a high paced sport? what was your experience with it (AF speed, accuracy, tracking...)?
Thanks in advance and sorry for partly highjacking this thread, I hope thats okay...I >think< my question is really close to what the OP asked. 
Cheers!


----------



## skinkfoot (Oct 3, 2012)

So I have been playing with a friends 5d mkii the last couple of days, I am quite impressed with the photo quality upgrade from 40d. The 1.6 crop factor not as bad as I thought, but.... Where in lacks is the snappy focus of the 40d, it takes a bit of time to get focus and the 4ish frames per second was more noticeable than I thought. I think it would make a great second camera with a 7d, or I think I am just going to wait for the 5d mkiii to go on sale in Canada.

Skinkfoot


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Oct 3, 2012)

Richard8971 said:


> Oh, one more thing, the 5D2 is rated for 1/4000th of a second max shutter speed and the 5D3 is rated at 1/8000th of a second max shutter speed.


What should I do, I have lots of images taken with my 5D MK II at shutter speeds over 1/4000. Even at 1/8000 sec. 
Is it broken? I've had two and they both use 1/8000 as stated in the manual on page 236.


----------

