Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Canon 40D outdated? Nikon D90 or Canon 50D instead?

AFABS

AFABS

macrumors regular
Original poster
Dec 23, 2008
104
0
So after about a month of research I thought I'd decided on the Canon 40D with a Tamron lens. However I want this camera, it being my first DSLR, to last me at least 2 or 3 years. I don't care about the video mode on the Nikon, but it would be nice. As well I hear you can have wireless flashes added to the D90. I'm just trying to justify throwing down the extra 300 on the 50D or going for the Nikon instead.
 
From what I've seen, the photo quality from the 40D is better than the 50D.


I really don't think it makes a difference whether you get the Nikon or either Canon. Just go with whichever is the better price.
 
The Canon 40D is still a very nice camera despite having the 50D out. Just go with the 40D and you'll be plenty happy, I've used my 40D professionally as a wedding photographer and it worked fine and the clients were very pleased with the results.
 
I have the 40D and at first was disappointed when the 50D came out as I only got the 40D in March 08, however there isn't too me a feature of the 50D that makes it a must have over the 40D, one could argue that in the case of the 5D & 5dmkII the addition of video etc might be a bigger difference.

I am still very happy with my 40D and when i get around to expanding my lens collection I will be even happier.
 
40D is lighter and only a few steps behind the 50D. Not only that its cheaper than the 50D.
Im proud to say that i will be investing in a 40D over a 50 after June. i can use the left over cash for a nice pair of lenses. i wont miss anything from the 50D while on the 40D to me they are sort of the same camera.
 
Jump on the 40D -- it will always be a fantastic camera, no matter how old it is. Cameras don't [generally] decline in quality the longer you own them!
 
I certainly agree with others about the 40D. It's a solid camera, and right now the best bang for the buck compared to the 50D. There are people out there buying used 20D's and 30D's, and the 40D is a lot more advanced than those two. I have been using the 40D for two years now, and plan to use it perhaps three more years before I upgrade.
 
Definitely 40D over the 50D. The only advantage the 50D offers is the "crystal view" high res preview screen on the back and isn't worth the extra 300-400 bones it will set you back

You won't find much more consensus than all of the replies in this thread. I shoot with 40D and am currently in the market to pick up a second.
 
wow....seems unanimous for the 40D...what about the Nikon D90? does everyone still think it's a better choice than that?
 
AFABS said:
wow....seems unanimous for the 40D...what about the Nikon D90? does everyone still think it's a better choice than that?
Click to expand...

That will spark endless Canon vs. Nikon debates. Both are great cameras and it's more about what you do with them. Look at the types of lenses that you might want, and see which brand covers your bases better -- both now and down the line.

You'll replace a body many times, but good glass can last for decades.
 
40D.
The 50D out-resolves a lot of lenses, especially consumer ones, with its 15mp sensor. Unless you're going to spend a big stack of cash on L-series lenses, then the 50D simply won't be fulfilling its potential.
 
The only reason you'd get the 50D, IMO, is for the microadjust feature, but it's really not desperately nececcary, especially if you're just going to be using the kit lenses anyway.

I have a 40D, and it's brilliant. I also have some decent glass in front of it as well, which helps :D
 
If your desired end result is beautiful pictures, there is nothing the the others can do that the 40D can't. If your desired end result is to be able to tell everyone you have to latest and greatest......
 
I also looked at the Canon 40D vs Nikon D90 and went with the D90. I liked the feel of it better, and I think both cameras are very comparable. I didn't mind the slower FPS on the D90 (6.5 vs 4.5), but I don't take a lot of sports shots, etc. and like the flexibility of video--hence for me, the D90 won hands down.

I excluded the 50D based on price, feel, and actually was worried that the 15.1 megapixel sensor (which is smaller than the D90's at only 12.3 megapixels), would be worse in low-light conditions.
 
AFABS said:
As well I hear you can have wireless flashes added to the D90.
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure that the Canon speedlights work with IR wireless. The 580EX works as both a master/slave, while the 430EXII works as slave-only.

Or you could go with Pocket Wizards or Radio Poppers and have a more reliable flash system. (RF vs. IR)

I think you might be thinking about the ability to use PC Cords for off-camera flash. I believe that the D90 has a PC port, while the Canon's don't ... although maybe the 40D/50D have them and the Rebels don't.

ft
 
AFABS said:
So after about a month of research I thought I'd decided on the Canon 40D with a Tamron lens. However I want this camera, it being my first DSLR, to last me at least 2 or 3 years. I don't care about the video mode on the Nikon, but it would be nice. As well I hear you can have wireless flashes added to the D90. I'm just trying to justify throwing down the extra 300 on the 50D or going for the Nikon instead.
Click to expand...

You need to step back and decide which brand you want to be locked into. If you buy the Nikon then you will buy Nikon mounts leses and then when it's time to upgrade the body you will need to buy a new Nikon DSLR to fit your lenes. Same for Canon So think ahead a few years.

In the end the body you buy matters a lot less than you think. When someone sees one of your images they might be able to guess the lenses that was used but they'd never know if it was a Nikon D40, D90 or D300.
 
Heck, I'm back at the 20D.. :eek:

Lovin' it though....

Get the less expensive camera and buy some nice glass...

When shopping for my first dslr, I decided on a closeout Olympus E-500 with 2 lenses for $499 rather than the D40 and 1 lens for $599 (at the time). I'm glad I did that, IMHO, Olympus has nicer glass at the budget end than the budget Nikon lenses (ED lenses another story, though).

Get the 40D and invest in some Canon L glass or assorted primes...
 
thanks, everyone's advice is much appreciated...i think the 50D will be beyond my needs...i was looking at the D90 mainly because of he the video but i think i'd rather just has a separate camcorder. I also like the 40D 6.5 fps vs. D90 4.5 for snowboarding this coming winter.
 
The video functionality of the D90 is pretty cool, and not to be discounted, however, it takes some work and some very serious stabilization to get the most from these new DSLR video cameras.

I personally think the 40D is an excellent value for what you get. It's far from outdated as it shares a lot of the same technologies with the 1DmkIII. Sure the 50D is higher resolution, but in all honesty the only thing you REALLY benefit from is the ability to shoot at higher ISO settings with more room to crop. It's not faster, in fact it's a touch slower, and it is built the same as the 40D.

I 100% agree with everyone telling you to invest in lenses. That is sound advice because those will far outlast your camera bodies and the good ones almost never lose their value.

I've whittled down my lens arsenal to 6, just the ones I would use most often. I've bought and sold a lot of gear, but also trade a lot as well. I can recommend a lot of good choices for you if you like. PM me.
 
my 2 cents worth

First of all, please consider your system - one you decide on one, buy good lenses and stay within that system. I have worked with canon for 25+ years, so you know which system I pick...

If you are interested in video, want the cheapest price and don't need all the bells and whistles, then Canon is just now coming out with their updated Rebel series - almost identical software and sensor to the 50D with video capabilities as well. It also has the similar focusing as the 50 which is an improvement over the previous rebels. It is sub $1000 with a lens. Pretty sweet.

I've owned the 20, 30 and now the 50D's. Image improvement has been amazing with each jump, and low-light capabilities are amazing. 3200 ASA on the 50 is comparable to 200 ASA on the 20D. The 50 offers several advantages to the 40 I appreciate - the biggest being the micro-adjustment. Cameras that get used a lot DO go out of focus in a minor way, and if adjusted within warranty are freely adjusted, but once out of warranty run @ $215 or so to fix. The ability to do that in camera is huge if you are particular and will hold the camera for a long time.

Cameras are a lot like macs - get the best and newest you can afford, and hold onto it, no looking back. But know what you are getting into and what you want to use the camera for, and what your abilities are - you may find that newest rebel is your best deal. - email me if you want more specific details.

Steve
 
Just got the 40D last month. Upgraded from the Rebel XT, which I've had for 4 years. I absolutely love it and don't regret not spending the extra for the 50D.

Just a heads up, the 60D will be out this fall.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back