what package to get PLEASE HELP

i have a 400d at the moment and want to upgrade
but i have a few questons

i could get a 40d for £599 from jessops is that a good price?
compared to the 50d at £840

i was thinking if i get the 40D and get a Canon EF 70-200mm f/4.0 L USM Lens that i can get for around £560 would that match well with my 17-55mm f2.8 IS USM ? ( i aslo have the 50mm f1.8 )

or is it worth paying the extra and getting the Canon EF 70-200mm f2.8L Lens or the Canon EF 70-200mm f4.0L IS Lens

is the IS worth a extra £500 or would the lens balance well with the 40D

or the other option would be just to keep my 17-55 f2.8 IS USM and get the 50D

what would be the best deal, for live concert ( low light) portrait and boxing photography?

thanks in advance

andy

If you're going to do a lot of low light work the 70-200 2.8 is the only logical choice. The f4 would not give the performance you need. I'm not a Canon shooter, but I know a few who are and also use the 40D. They tell me that it's a very capable body and from what I have seen the high ISO performance is good as well.

I think either the 40D or the 50D would work well for you. I've had both, as well as the 400D and they're all actually great cameras. My recommendation would be to keep shooting with the 400D and just invest in a new lens. If you find you really can't get the job done with the 400D, then start looking at a new body.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Photo-John

I think either the 40D or the 50D would work well for you. I've had both, as well as the 400D and they're all actually great cameras. My recommendation would be to keep shooting with the 400D and just invest in a new lens. If you find you really can't get the job done with the 400D, then start looking at a new body.

---

I agree, get the new glass and see how it works. A lens is usually a better investment. I good lens on a not so good camera will be better than a crappy lens on a great camera. But, I do love my 50D and I hear the 40D is pretty similar. But I would go with the 70-300 2.8. I don't have IS on my 70-200 but I also shoot fast action sports like mountain biking.

Low light, first off how dark is it?
Will it make a significant difference going to f/2.8 ?
If so then start out with wider aperture lenses.

If you're still going to have to use high ISO is the noise a problem?
Only then consider putting money in a body, to improve the sensor noise at high ISO.

I come back to my 20D and am pleasantly surprised at what it can do woht the 70-200 and 24-70 f/2.8 L lenses.

IS won't help with moving subjects, only with camera shake. So it depends on how steady you are at the shutter speeds you're using. It might make a difference in sharpness of the static parts of the image, but it's not magic and if you have to use a low shutter speed then it won't remove subject blur.