From Olympus E620 to Canon 40D?

[Lovin]

Hey guys,

For a long time I'm hunted by the idea to switch from Olympus to a different brand, just because trying to be an assistant photograph require to have a Canon or Nikon (but most of them want Canon).
Second I'm kind of sick of Olympus lack of promoting their brand, late updates and marketing strategy. I mean there is a lack of communication or I don't know how to call it, but most of photographers doesn't know about their glass's quality or beautiful natural colors etc etc

Now, I bet that somebody used or still using a Canon 40D.
Is it worth it to buy a "second hand" one or to wait, save more and buy something better ?
If 40D is good enough than I'll be happy to spend more in lenses.
How is 40D in low light ?

Thank you in advance for your inputs.

[AntZ]

I am shooting a 40D and have no short term plan to upgrade. When I got mine it was the latest prosumer Canon model. Where as now you have the 7D too. I know others who chose the 40D over the 50D when buying new as the advantages of going to the 50D were not so great for the $$.

I have some nice glass for mine and some day will upgrade, but would keep the 40D as a backup anyway.

Low light is pretty good, but I don't have much to compare it to other than a very average P&S. I regularly shoot at 800 ISO no probs, but it goes to 1600 which I use rarely.

[Wicked Dark]

I suppose if you want to work for someone who will let you borrow lenses you'll have to match mounts, but I can't think of another reason to switch (I'm not a 'pro' so what do I know?). Maybe the 'pro' wants his assistants to dress the same, too.

[Lovin]

At least in my area, it's like this Wicked.
I just wanna learn from them, and if I'm getting some money that's nice too.
If I can afford not to sell my Olympus gear and buy the Canon, than I'm not gonna sell it. I'll see what can I do.

Wedding photographers (and not them only) are using Canon, and some of them Nikon as a second camera.

Ok than, I'll go for Canon 40D, although I'm ***** scared of good lens's prices...

[Fortytwo]

Don't be scared. There are tons of very good affordable lenses out there made by Sigma/Tamron/Tokina. With a little research, you'll be able to buy the best lens to suit your need for the least amount of money...

[Mad Aussie]

I know others who chose the 40D over the 50D when buying new as the advantages of going to the 50D were not so great for the $$.

Yep ... me!
I brought 2x 40D's over the 50D's because the difference was minimal.

Low light performance is as good as it was but doesn't match the newer models now.

When I do upgrade (and it will be quite a while yet) I'll get something like the 5D Mkll to get that great low light performance and I'll keep 1 of the 40d's to suit the crop factor lens I have.

[masp]

At least in my area, it's like this Wicked.
I just wanna learn from them, and if I'm getting some money that's nice too.
If I can afford not to sell my Olympus gear and buy the Canon, than I'm not gonna sell it. I'll see what can I do.

Wedding photographers (and not them only) are using Canon, and some of them Nikon as a second camera.

Ok than, I'll go for Canon 40D, although I'm ***** scared of good lens's prices...

Hi, this might be a little off-topic, but is Canon a better choice than Nikon if you're an amateur photographer thinking about doing some professional work in the future?

Also, I'm wondering if it's harder to get taken seriously if you are using Olympus or Panasonic, Pentax, Sony, etc.

[Mad Aussie]

Hi, this might be a little off-topic, but is Canon a better choice than Nikon if you're an amateur photographer thinking about doing some professional work in the future?

Also, I'm wondering if it's harder to get taken seriously if you are using Olympus or Panasonic, Pentax, Sony, etc.

I don't believe either Canon or Nikon are better in any situation brand wise.
Nikon currently has an edge with low light performance in their lower to mid range DSLR's but that's about all.

Perhaps due to the huge marketing Canon and Nikon do they do stand out in the public's perception as being 'more professional' than other brands you've mentioned but you only have to look at the quality of the photos here at ph.ca to realize that whether you use an entry level model or a pro model of any of these brands, it's the photographer that takes the photo and makes it's good.

[Lovin]

One of the big names in photography that is using Olympus for his photo journalism assignments is Eli Reed. He is using Olympus E3 and super high grade Zuiko Digital (Olympus brand) lenses.
But for him is simple at that level. If he will say that is using Oly, everyone will say WOW amazing photos (of course I lnow that it's not the camera that is taking the photos :0 ), but if I'll say to a wedding photographer that I wanna work for him, even at cheapest price, and I'm using Oly, he will never call me. They don't know what Oly can do, they haven't try it, I can't use his lenses and many other reasons.

Anyway, I'm trying to keep my Oly because I really like the palette colors and I already have pretty good gear for it, and I will buy a 40D body and to see what lens I will buy first.

[masp]

Yeah, that's the thing about public perception. I guess I'll bite the bullet and go with Canon or Nikon to appease my professional ambitions . I wonder if they have equal standing in the pro photo realm. They both seem to have about 39% market share in the DSLR market, though I don't know if this is in terms of pro models or enthusiast models.

Also, the other benefit to going Nikon or Canon seems to be that there are probably more places where you can rent equipment or have it serviced if need be. Not a huge deal for an amateur but it might be nice to rent a lens now and then to try before buying.