Canon EOS 40D Digital SLR Camera - Body Only - Electronics / Photography (Canon)

Canon presents the EOS 40D, a high-tech reflex camera designed for experienced and amateur photographers alike. The EOS 40D contains all the attributes of its predecessor, the EOS 30D, but now has improved performances, including the 10.1 effective megapixel CMOS sensor and larger 3? screen with direct aim function. Inside its sturdy, all-weather, magnesium alloy casing, the EOS 40D packs a wide range of technologies to ensure excellent results in all situations. The EOS 40D offers 9 cross-type AF points and a Canon DIGIC III processor to adapt to all your shots, so your photos turn out bright and clear and in perfect detail. Meanwhile, the EOS 40D will reduce backlighting, reflections and shadows. This reflex camera is low on noise and has a burst mode at a rate of 6.5 images per second. Thanks to the wide range of shooting modes, including night portrait, depth, speed or open priority, the creative possibilities are endless! The EOS 40D even has Pictbridge connectivity and WiFi technology for wireless file transfers and direct printing (WiFi adapter optional). Compatible with Canon EF and EF-S lenses, and with Speedlite EX flashes, the EOS 40D lets you take digital photos of professional calibre!Note: camera sold without lens

Customer Reviews of Canon EOS 40D Digital SLR Camera - Body Only

ESP
Dudley, West Midlands United Kingdom
6th January 2009

A Shot In The Dark
I have been a 400D owner for just over two years now, and been generally very happy with the performance of said beast. However, the lure of brighter, bigger and better 'toys' always beckons, so the 40D or 50D were singing their siren song. I have been regularly and increasingly requested to provide photographs for a charity and local amateur dramatics group, so used this as my excuse. ;o)

Briefly then, I looked at various reviews and comments about the 40D and 50D, and finally took the view that maybe the 50D was a step too far. The value for money aspect was, arguably, in favour of the 40D. As enticing as some of the reviews were for the 50D, at least one respected photographer says that he owns a 40D, is very happy with it, and wouldn't pay the extra to upgrade - "good enough for me" I thought.

Having had the 40D for a few weeks, I can confirm that it is a weighty piece of kit, particularly in comparison with the 400D, and particularly if you stick an 'L'-series Canon lens on the front. Ergonomically, I am not yet completely sure whether familiarity with the 400D layout still needs to be overcome, but sometimes I fumble around for functions too long. Yet, despite the weight and the different layout (particularly the different functions of the two control 'wheels'), the 40D is reassuringly solid and balanced in my hands (not the biggest, I admit). I would also note that I use Image Stabilised lenses, which are a great help in offsetting any perceived weight-related issues.

Generally, I am happy to echo the positive comments of previous reviewers, although the review by R.Searle raises some interesting points. In particular, I would say that he may have 'something' when commenting on the LCD - at first, I was convinced the camera was not taking sharp pictures - they looked out of focus when reviewed on the LCD. Yet, when checked on the computer, they were fine. This has never been such an obvious issue on my 400D. Also, the Live View is a 'nice to have' feature but disappointing because it canot be readily used in all circumstances, unlike many compact models.

One point raised by the Which? review was poor performance in low light, and this seems largely overlooked elsewhere. Admittedly, it is rare that you will want to shoot in low light conditions unless you are more specialised in your photography, but it is definitely worth consideration. Last night I had reason to try the 40D in low light, and quite frankly, I was appalled! My 400D out-performed the 40D hands down! The 40D could not lock onto anything - the assist beam was next to useless. Why should the 400D be better? It readily locked on and focussed without fail where the 40D failed dismally. Not good enough, Canon.

So, in summary, I am pleased with the purchase, but the LCD is a disappointment (though larger than that of the 400D), and the 400D seriously out-performs the 40D in low-light conditions. If either is likely to be an issue, think carefully before purchasing. I am glad I have held onto the 400D as a back-up - it will definitely be handier on occasion.

brainleek007
Manchester, UK
23rd November 2008

Giveaway at the price
I bought the 40D as a replacement for my 400d and the difference is unbelievable.

One of the key features I was after was a better handling of high ISO images as my cameras are use a lot for weddings. Dimly lit churches can be very problematic but the high ISO performance of the 40D take them in its stride. One of the other key features I wanted in this camera was its high frame rate of 6.5 fps. This is pretty damn quick and is a huge improvement over the 3fps frame rates of most entry level DSLR's.

The camera is essentially from Canon's mid or 'prosumer' range and as such is chunkier than entry level cameras and is better built. The shutter is also rated for 100,000 actuations, twice that of entry level models. The camera is made to be a dependable workhorse. The features list is extensive; 10.1 million pixels, 6.5 fps, EF-S mount, Self cleaning sensor and live view being the key ones. Custom functions abound and the camera features three custom settings on the mode dial which is pretty handy for oft-used settings.

The image quality of this camera is astounding for the price. I think it rivals my 5D in quality and frankly eliminates my 400D. At high ISO's such as 1600 the camera produces very usable shots. Only at the expanded ISO setting of 3200 does grain and noise become a little distracting and even then, at smaller sizes the photos would still be usable.

Possibly some folks reading this are thinking about the 50D as indeed I was. Here's how I made my choice: High ISO performance was critical and after reading some of the reviews on respected sites it appeared that the 50D was marginally worse at high ISO's than the 40D due to higher pixel density on the sensor. There's probably not much in it but then I thought what's the point of paying a £300+ premium for a camera that can't match the old one in my key area of concern. I would love the higher res screen of the 50D but have got this far without one - again, is it worth £300 more?

To keep sales of the 40D high Canon are offering £60 cashback until Feb 2009. That means you can pick up a body only for barely over £500 after the rebate. This is a virtual giveaway.

In use the camera feels great and has a nice large viewfinder, the only negative I have is that the buttons on the back of camera are labelled on the 'wrong' side for my taste leading me to keep pressing the wrong one. I'm used to buttons being labelled on the left but these are labelled on the right. Minor niggle. The high speed continuous mode is fantastic and the camera can handle around 17 images (about 3 seconds worth) of continuous shooting in RAW before the buffer fills up. Start shooting JPEGS and these numbers get quite silly. Even at high quality in JPEG mode you could probably hold down the shutter for 10 seconds straight before the buffer filled up! This is a viable option for sports or wildlife photographers. The 3 inch screen is bright and clear and being what I'm used to I won't be pining for the high res version. Live view is handy too - especially if you can't really get your eye to the viewfinder such as when the camera is really low.

The camera has breathed new life into my EF-S lenses like my 60mm macro. The camera can extract even more detailed images from it than my 400D and that, under the right conditions, was no slouch.

The 40D also utilises 14 bit processing. Most cameras before it use 12 bit. What this means is that more subtle variations of colour and tone can be achieved as each pixel can have any one of 16,384 values for each red, blue and green element and opposed to 4096 values in the 12 bit method. This should lead to less colour banding in images - especially when pushing them a bit more in photoshop.

So all in all this is an excellent camera. It's a worthy companion to my 5D for weddings that exceeds even that camera's fantastic capabilities in some regards. I would happily have another 40D body and take three cameras to my wedding shoots! At around £520-530 after the rebate they're a bargain. At this price you could pick up the camera and say the 50mm F1.8 lens for less than £600. That's putting this seriously capable camera in reach of some folks looking for entry level gear. This is no entry level camera though - it's a serious piece of kit.

R. Searle
UK
16th October 2008

Good except for ergonomics, weight and horrid LCD
The other reviews accurately set out all the good points. I am balancing the scales with some of the problems I experienced with my Canon 5D which are replicated with the Canon 40D and why I sold my Canon and bought a Sony A700:

1. Weight - it is pretty heavy for a non-pro camera. With a decent lens this is not the sort of camera you will be grateful for carrying around all day in the tropics on holiday! The A700 is a couple of hundred grams lighter which makes a difference.

2. Ergonomics - this is a personal matter and for me very important. Most modern cameras are capable of taking a nice picture whether it's a Canon, Nikon, Sony, Pentax, Olympus etc. It's how it feels in the hand and in use that really matters. This has the same bland ergonomics as the Canon 5D - it feels very front heavy with almost no grip for the pinky or ring fingers. The Sony A700 has a rock solid grip for my largish hands - I can hold it with one hand with solid stability and no shaking. The 40D and 5D are horrible to hold (IMO) with one or two hands which contributed to camera shake and other problems.

3. The LCD is horrible, as is the one on the 5D. The new 50D and 5D mk 2 have decent LCDs. This was a major reason I moved to the A700 which has the 900,000+ pixel LCD which is on the D300 and D3 Nikons (and new Canons). It is outstanding. With the Sony I can tell immediately if a shot is in focus, sharp, the right colour etc. With the 40D and 5D it is virtually impossible - you can see if the framing is right, but basically the LCD is useless, you may as well use film.

If you want to get a 40D, don't, save up and get a 50D if only because of the LCD, you will thank me for it.

4. Viewfinder. It's not as bright as the 5D for obvious reasons and overall is a bit dull.

5. It's nice not to have the same camera as 90% of other people with an SLR, so think outside the box.

6. Admittedly, Canon makes fantastic lenses which is why I kept all of mine as I am sure to buy another Canon in due course, but not a 40D!

Adrian Engelbrecht

15th September 2008

excellent but beware of cashback
This is a wonderful camera. I upgraded from a prosumer model ( panasonic fx20 ) and it still took me a little while to get used to all the functions.
I would highly recommend it. It is a vast improvement over what I am used to.

Better versatility eg iso performance
Frames per second
Viewfinder does not freeze up when you take a picture
Powerful in built flash
Better automatic white balance
Quality of picture

One word of warning is the canon cashback, it took almost three months to arrive.

Mr. Michael Hudson

16th July 2008

Could this be the best prosumer DSLR Yet ?
I bought this camera recently with the 17-85mm IS USM lens. What an absolutely stunning piece of kit with 6.5 fps shooting and a host of top flight features (some of which you probably wont use) plus magnesium alloy body, this camera excels in all areas. Sure, there are some that are better but pound for pound this is and does the business..buy one......I did........and love it !.