Even though I downgraded to a smaller chip and lower resolution (14MP vs. 10MP on the 40D), I still like the 40D better. Among the most useful new features are the good FPS performance (I’ve taken advantage of it several times when trying to photograph fast moving things… like birds flying overhead), improved high ISO and the much larger LCD screen. As pointed out elsewhere, the resolution on the LCD screen is considerable less than Nikon’s, but it’s good enough for me. Perhaps if were using the Nikon and switched, I’d have a different opinion.
Another excellent feature is automatic dust removal. My Kodak had a horrible dust problem… I spent a lot of time trying to keep it clean.
I got the “better” wide kit lens… the 17-85mm IS USM. The other contender was the 28-135mm IS USM which I owned with the D60. With the 1.6 factor, I think that lens is really too long for a “walkabout” lens. The glass quality is ok; nothing to write home about. But the coverage is what I consider ideal (at least for the money).
There are several full reviews around the web. Here is one from The Digital Picture and another from < a href="http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos40d/">dpreview.com.
Stay tuned for additional thoughts…
p.s. Flamers, start your engines… I actually liked the Nikon D300 better, but it was out of my price range. I had a pretty tight budget. Maybe after using the Canon a while, I can pick up a used D300 off eBay.