Hmmm...
To my eye, in terms of image quality, nothing distinguishes the 40D samples from those produced with the 400D/Rebel XTi.
Compare these two shots:
(Note: I've purposely split the links so that only those readers who actually want to see the comparision shots can do so by stitching the links back together - these are large files.)
http://dpreview-
img.fotki.com/gallery/canoneos400d_samples/originals/img_1251.jpg
Canon EOS 400D Review Samples (23 of 46), 45 mm equiv, ISO 100, 1/320 sec, F8.0, +0.0 EV, EF-S 17-55 mm IS
http://dpreview-
img.fotki.com/gallery/canoneos40d_preview/originals/img_0386.jpg
Canon EOS 40D Beta Preview Gallery (19 of 30), 38 mm equiv, ISO 100, 1/320 sec, F9.0, +0.0 EV, EF 24-70 mm F2.8L, PS Landscape
Here's another pair:
http://dpreview-
img.fotki.com/gallery/canoneos40d_preview/originals/img_0368-raw-dpp.jpg
Canon EOS 40D Beta Preview Gallery (18 of 30), 195 mm equiv, ISO 200, 1/200 sec, F5.6, +0.0 EV, EF 70-200 mm F4L, RAW DDP, PS Portrait
http://dpreview-
img.fotki.com/gallery/canoneos400d_samples/originals/img_1345-raw-dpp.jpg
Canon EOS 400D Review Samples (35 of 46), 88 mm equiv, ISO 100, 1/160 sec, F4.5, +0.0 EV, EF-S 17-55 mm IS, RAW, DP
The 40D has the same size sensor as the 400D/Rebel XTi, the same pixel count, the same lack of enviornmental seals, 9-point autofocus, and a self-cleaning sensor. So what does paying twice as much for a 40D get you over buying a 400D/Rebel XTi? An better build quality? 6.5 fps vs. 3 fps? A faster processor? Live view? An extra-cost wireless transmitter? Menus that look like those on the 1D series? I personally don't need any of that stuff, and I suspect a lot of people who end up buying the 40D don't need it either.
Until I hear reports that the 40D's sensor delivers significantly improved performance at higher ISO settings, or a greater DMax than the 400D, if image quality is what you're after, I'll continue to recommend the 400D as a much better value. Take that extra $650 and buy yourself another lens or whatever...
Mike Davis
