What? :P

 

Please post sample photos, immediately upon taking possesion.

 

I'd rep you for getting a new camera, but AZ won't let me. Damn!

 

Will do!!

 

Haha...thanks anyway!

 

I repped her on ur behalf.... LOLZ!!!!!!!!!!!1

 

Thank you, sir.








....can't get you back yet....

 

well the sample photos on dpreview, show the ISO 1600 and ISO3200 performance as very good

 

One of the main reasons I feel it's worth the upgrade.

 

ISO1600


ISO3200


ISO3200

 

^crazy

 

That's really quite impressive. Beyond just useable.

 

Yeah, I will hopefully be picking it up from the store tomorrow.

The noise level is supposedly the same as the 30D - Canon never made any claims otherwise. Technically I guess that means they improved the S/N ratio since it's the same noise from a higher pixel density.

That's the semi consensus from dpreview - but on the other hand, dpreview users are mostly insane.

Short term the biggest annoyance will be waiting around for Adobe to release an updated lightroom so that it'll recognize the RAW files. Guess it's time to learn DPP.

 

Sweet! Right back at ya dude! Circular reppage.

 

what goes around comes around, lolz

 

^^Stumped again! Sheeit!

 

Those ISO 3200 shots mizouse posted look remarkably noise-free. Amazing.

 

Exactly! Is the 30D really that clean, also?

 

 

i case you want to know the exif the 1st picture is

80 mm equiv, ISO 1600, 1/100 sec, F9.0, +0.0 EV, EF-S 18-55mm IS, PS Standard

the 2nd is

91 mm equiv, ISO 3200, 1/160 sec, F3.5, +0.0 EV, EF 24-70 mm F2.8L, PS Standard

the 3rd is

88 mm equiv, ISO 3200, 1/60 sec, F5.6, +0.0 EV, EF 24-70 mm F2.8L, PS Standard

 

Not if it's similar to the 20D, which I think it is. Maybe someone who owns one can chime in. I think the sensors are identical, if I'm not mistaken.

The 20D's ISO 3200 shots are certainly usable, but they're nowhere near as clean as the 40D's, at least based on what I've seen so far. Up to ISO 1600, the 20D's output is very good, IMO, and both 3200 and 1600 clean up nicely.

 

There's a difference in the 40D's RAW files?

 

I think you have to be insane to follow that thread structure.

 

 

Nice, but I would like to see those Higher ISO tested at night, wide open, no flash.

 

I had stop in between shots, I couldn't remember how to jack up the ISO


ISO 1600 .................................................. .................................................. ................................... ISO 3200
...............

 

I have a possibly n00bish question.... why would you shoot at ISO3200 in daylight?

 

Thanks for posting those...so, so much cleaner than my camera.

 

I'm going to try and shoot the same shot when it gets darker. Plus it's something that lust and I have talked about at the polo matches.

 

You probably wouldn't shoot 3200 during the day, but sometimes bumping ISO during well-lit condtions gets you faster shutter speeds, when shooting sports and the like. I do this for baseball sometimes.

 

Nope - Same MP tho.

- Frank

 

damn, blows my XTi out of the water

 

ok .. makes sense.. Im a creature of the dark, I kinda don't have much experience shooting in daylight.. what would you say is about the highest you would go during the day? or maybe, whats the highest you have gone?

 

Normally you wouldn't, unless you are shrinking your aperture for depth of field.
Or you are just shooting a dark object to begin with.

- Frank

 

I've always tried to keep it 400 or less, just because the noise doesn't clean up that well at 800. There have been times, on shady paths, or heavy cloud cover that I'd have loved to have had a useable 1600, so I didn't have to set up a tripod.

At the twilight polo matches, the games start just before dusk, so it's still daylight, but those ponies move Fast. 1600 would've been great then, too, to freeze the action a bit more.

In bright sunlight, I don't think I've used anything over 400.

 

+1 For shooting sports during the day I'd rarely need to go above 400 and usually 200 suffices if I'm looking for shutter speeds that freeze the action, say in cloudy conditions.

 

These were taken about 5 minutes to 8pm, in the back of my house, the sun sets in the front.


ISO 1600 .................................................. .................................................. ................................... ISO 3200
...............

 

lighting looks the same. noise is pretty good as well

 

Gracias, jup!

 

Just for the interested,
I've gone through all the comments of current 40D owners, and here are the summarized comments of 30D vs 40D.

Notable improvements
buffer
focus is faster, more accurate.
Live view
Viewfinder: bigger than 30D, smaller than 5D
Highlight Tone reduction
Sensor cleaning

Minor improvements (imho)
ISO in viewfinder
LCD display is readable in sunlight
mirror/shutter is quieter than 20D/30D
menu system is improved - uses drop down menus.
drop downs menu can be customized a bit
can make a 'favorite 6-7 options' list in menu.
image playback on LCD shows focus point
Changeable focusing screen
Tilt correction
sRaw support
hotkey for selecting a particular picture style.
Can turn off in-camera high ISO noise reduction

Live view notes:
2 silent shooting modes (no mirror slap, etc)
moveable rectangle to choose AF point.
10x zoom when using live view useful for MF.


bad:
flimsy power button
CF flash door is less robust?
Can only turn on Live view with 'Set' button, so no customized set function if you use liveview.
Live view sucks down battery power fast.

Notes:
Highlight priority runs at ISO 200 or more.
can use old handgrip
New RAW format/tag means 3rd party apps can't read them yet. Just DPP.
CDs do not have PDF for the manuals. (HK anyway)
Nobody has done a servo test yet.