*If you own or have used this camera, let us know what you think! Add your own review or comments to this article. We welcome your views.*
This is the second in a series of camera comparisons. The last article compared the Nikon D90 and Canon 50D. Now we look at the 50D and 40D.
The fact that we're even comparing the 40D and 50D says something. It should be a simple, open and shut case. One is newer, better and more expensive; one is older, a bit less attractive but also less expensive. You get the newer one if you can afford it, or if not, get the older one which is still a good value and good camera. That's how it usually works.
Surprisingly, it's not that easy. The fact is that reviews seem to be ambivalent about the image quality advantages of the 50D. Despite the fact that the 50D has 5 extra megapixels (15 versus 10), the 40D manages to keep up remarkably well, and in some respects (such as noise) even out performs it's newer and more expensive sibling.
These conclusion indicate how good a camera the 40D was and should make people think twice about whether it's worth spending less on an older camera to get almost equal image results.
For individual reviews of each camera, see SLR Geek's product review pages for the Canon 40D and Canon 50D. Here are comparisons from some of the major review sites:
CAMERA LABS
...So the EOS 50D essentially takes the 40D body and adds 5 extra Megapixels, a VGA screen, HDMI output, four times the sensitivity and a number of processing and interface enhancements. If you value these improvements, then it’s worth spending the extra or for existing owners to upgrade, but remember the body, viewfinder and AF are the same, so if you want a tough and quick semi-pro DSLR at a bargain price, the 40D remains a superb choice.
BOB ATKINS
...The choice is really based on price. The 50D has everything the 40D has, and more. ...I'd pick the EOS 50D at $1200 if I could afford it, but if not the EOS 40D is quite a bargain at around $850. Yes, the 50D may have slightly higher intrinsic noise than the 40D, but the increased resolution and noise reduction software work together to produce an image at least equal to and usually better than that of the EOS 40D. That, together with the more advanced features of the 50D would make it my preferred choice. Of course I'm still personally using and EOS 40D and it is a very good camera. If you want to save around $350. then I'd have no hesitation in saying that the 40D is a camera worth owning (I do!).
DIGITAL PHOTOGRAPHY REVIEW
...[in jpeg format] As we've mentioned previously in this review, in terms of per pixel sharpness the 50D cannot keep up with its older sibling and shows only very marginally more detail (despite the fact that Canon told us the strength of the AA filter remains unchanged for the new model). In fact, the 50D's output and a 40D image scaled up to match are virtually indistinguishable (thanks to Picture Style the tone and color responses between these two cameras is as good as identical). ...Switching to our benchmark RAW converter, Adobe Camera RAW equalizes image processing between the two cameras and allows us to get a much better idea of the level of detail actually captured. As you can see both cameras images look crisper and exhibit better detail but the 40D stills beats the newer model in terms of per pixel detail. Despite of a 22% increase in vertical and horizontal resolution the extra detail captured by the 50D is marginal
