5D vs. 40D

I'm making a new camera body purchase to replace my 20D. I like the new features of the 40D, however the 5D having a full sensor would be nice for wide angle shots. The 5D is over due for an upgrade, isn't it? Should I wait till this fall?

What do you guys think? Which is better for a nature photographer?

If it were me I would probably wait till this fall to get the 5D mark II, but that is a long time to wait. If you had to buy one right now, I would definitely recommend the 5D, it is one killer camera.

The 5D wipes the floor with the 40D for landscapes. As to whether you want to wait for the 5D (end of 2008) you can predict what the features will be : probably about 16 megapixels, sensor cleaning, Digic III, 14 bit, live view, similar or slightly better noise performance, maybe a slightly faster frame rate. Are these important to you? How large are you going to print? I doubt you'll see better quality prints below A3 size. I can print 30x20 inches at good quality from my 5D.

It depends what type of photography your going to focus on. If you shoot wildlife I'd go with the 40D, scenics the 5D. The 40D is a great improvement over the 20D and the price is coming down. The 5D price is also coming down and will probably continue to do so as an announcement is anticipated. The current 5D is a great system and will fill my needs no matter what comes out in the next generation. If prices keep falling and you can afford it you might want to pick up both.

depends on what you shoot. Wildlife & photojournalism go with 40D. Everything else 5D. the 40D has an anti dust sensor too i think.

I'll agree that it depends upon what you are going to shoot. Both cameras are incredible. The 1.6x, burst rate, auto focus points, are all advantages the 40D has over the 5D when it comes to birds and wildlife (it has other advantages as well I won't go into, just as the 5D has advantages over the 40D). I was in your position recently and I waited for the new 5D to come out this winter (as it was predicted) and it never did...(this being said I'll believe there will be a new 5D released when I see it). Given I shoot a lot of birds and wildlife and really needed a new body I finally decided the advantages of the 40D completely outweighed that of the 5D (for me) and I went with the 40D (and a 10-22mm for wide angles). Couldn't be happier with my decision. If you exclusively shoot landscapes, the 5D might be for you.

Thank you all for your valuable feedback. What a great resource you all provide!

I am in a similar position. I have three choices: 40D, 5D, 5D II (when it finally comes, but waiting is part of the choice). The point is that it all costs money, and I have EFs 10-22 lens, which won't go with 5D and its upgrade. But 5D is good for landscapes. But again, 5D II will be even better for landscapes. But 40D is so cheap in comparison. 5D is expensive, but 5D II will probably be very much more expensive than 5D. If I have to count points, it seems all three options receive an equal amount of minuses and pluses. This doesn't make any sense and I don't know what to do. I use EOS 350D and I am pretty satisfied with my landscapes, so I expect 40D to perform brilliantly for landscapes, even if it 5Ds would perform even better. But then again... Bloody choices in life, eh?

I'm another who was in your situation, but when Canon came out with the 5D 24-105mm kit for $2999.99 I jumped at it. I held on to my 20D body, not expecting to get much for it at resale. Now I have the best of both worlds: a full frame and 1.6x body. To add to the 5DmkII rumour mill, I've read speculation that the new body will be 16MB sensor with many internal refinements, but will be in the $4000-$5000 range. Ouch.