Canon EOS 1D MK III vs Canon EOS 40D
 

Question that continues to puzzle me is the 1D MK III has a 10.1 MP sensor that offers a 1.3X and the 40D has a 10.1 MP sensor that offers a 1.6X.

All things being equal, f/stop, lens and actual physical size of the subject in the frame. What, if any differences should be visible? Does one sensor offer an advantage over the other......other than the obvious crop factor.
Canon will not answer the question.

I think that if everything else is equal the marginally bigger pixel size might offer slightly better dynamic range and tonal range but then again the image from the 1D MK III has to be enlarged slightly which might mean slightly less detail? To complicate things even more the concensus of opinion is that for tonal range and detail the Nikon D3 is just about the best there is although it 'only' has just over 12 mp. Perhaps Canon would like you to buy both and then you can tell us? :D

Hello
I asked a similar question elsewhere and received the following link which you may find interesting:

http://iwishicouldfly.com/iwishicoul...ml/093007.html

Very interesting, thanks for the link.

Very interesting indeed

Should be made clear that the link is from a birder's journal, so is from that point of view. ;) ....there's more than a couple advantages the 1D would have over the 40D in other applications.....depends on your subject matter