Gav Posted September 18, 2007 Share Posted September 18, 2007 having not used a canon slr in over 10 years, its a move to the dark side from using nikon dslrs. as i no longer have the nikon, or any lenses, i felt a change to canon couldnt help. i am trying to decide between the 400d and 40d. i am tempted to get the 40d, paying the extra, as it is likely to be longer before i need to replace it. if i get a decent quality lens, then there wont be much more i need. against that i can save a good $1500 and get the 400d with two cheap lenses then maybe upgrade to a decent lens later. big question is, will i really need the extra. coming from a film nikon f80x and a digital D70, i do like what the higher end cameras tend to offer. i was just hoping that some here had used the 400d or the 30d (since the 40d is that new i doubt anyone has it). from memory there is a few using each of these. so yeah, any help would be most welcome. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lepperfish Posted September 18, 2007 Share Posted September 18, 2007 I have the 40D. Its a good camera. Depending on what you need from a camera I would say the 400D with a nice peice of glass stuck on the front of it would be totally fine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gav Posted September 18, 2007 Author Share Posted September 18, 2007 thanks lepper. its probably the best idea, as then i can get a really nice lens with the money i save on the body. and unless i really work the 400D i most likely wont see too much difference in the output that i get. just nice to get some good opinions before forking out a couple of grand. a spontaneous rush of blood to the head is never good when making decisions (or spending money ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lepperfish Posted September 18, 2007 Share Posted September 18, 2007 Think of the camera bodies as disposable, a nice peice of glass you most likely have for a lifetime. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
enigma Posted September 18, 2007 Share Posted September 18, 2007 well xxD is better than xxxD and $2000 lens better than $800 one the question is what you use the camera for. if you only use it once/twice a week for a general occasion then it's no different having xxD or XXXD. once you go into extreme photography such as macro/sports/wildlife then it is worth investing on a better body. in this case you really need special lens anyway. now that i'm using 30D i can say i will not go anywhere near 350D anymore can't wait to upgrade my camera again Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Palpatine Posted September 19, 2007 Share Posted September 19, 2007 Well the 40D is a better camera with a few better features, but if money is a problem I would go for the cheaper body and better glass. http://www.d-d-photographics.com.au/ Has some good pricing and are reliable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mcsx Posted September 19, 2007 Share Posted September 19, 2007 yeh i got the 400D its pretty good does the job if you got good lenses it would be fine Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cuong Posted September 21, 2007 Share Posted September 21, 2007 You should also take into account camera ergonomics as personally the xxD cameras feel alot better in my hands than a xxxD camera. My hands started to cramp up shooting with my friend's 400D for a few hours. But as everyone has said the extra cash for better lenses would probably give more bang for the buck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fishdance Posted September 21, 2007 Share Posted September 21, 2007 I dont know how slow Australia is to catch up but the price of Nikon D200 body has just dropped from AU$1800 to AUD$1100 in Tokyo. If it isnt discontinued then my feeling is that it will drop further. The Canon 30D body is currently about AUD$1000 but with the release of the 40D I am hoping it will drop further in a few months as I am considering a switch to Canon too. The Pentax K10D is unreal value but probably not well supported for add ons and repairs in Australia. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gav Posted September 21, 2007 Author Share Posted September 21, 2007 have been looking around at the deals on the 30d, cos am tempted to get one over the 400d. this one doesnt seem too bad at all good deal on 30d still, the 400d is the likely final choice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fish Crazed Posted September 22, 2007 Share Posted September 22, 2007 Back before the digital days camera bodys were of secondary importance as long as you have a great lense then you'll pretty much get great results. This is no longer the case as the final result now rests so much in how the technology of the body interprets the image. I haven't read the specs on the 400D compared to the 40D but no doubt the 40D would be the camera of choice. Gav, if you're a fussy sort of bloke then don't go for second best.. you know the feeling afterwards! I made the switch from nikon to canon dslr in April and will never look back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lepperfish Posted September 22, 2007 Share Posted September 22, 2007 have been looking around at the deals on the 30d, cos am tempted to get one over the 400d. this one doesnt seem too bad at all good deal on 30d still, the 400d is the likely final choice. Thats not a bad deal, you could sell that 17-85 IS lens for $600 easy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marls Posted September 22, 2007 Share Posted September 22, 2007 having not used a canon slr in over 10 years, its a move to the dark side from using nikon dslrs. as i no longer have the nikon, or any lenses, i felt a change to canon couldnt help. i am trying to decide between the 400d and 40d. i am tempted to get the 40d, paying the extra, as it is likely to be longer before i need to replace it. if i get a decent quality lens, then there wont be much more i need. against that i can save a good $1500 and get the 400d with two cheap lenses then maybe upgrade to a decent lens later. big question is, will i really need the extra. coming from a film nikon f80x and a digital D70, i do like what the higher end cameras tend to offer. i was just hoping that some here had used the 400d or the 30d (since the 40d is that new i doubt anyone has it). from memory there is a few using each of these. so yeah, any help would be most welcome. Hi Gav, just my 2 cents worth....it all depends on what you'll be using the camera for. For the keen camera enthusiast taking still captures on the weekend the 350D EFS 17-85mm combo will do a fantastic job, its great for taking fish pics too however if your into capturing wedding portraits and alike then I personally consider the 30D as a minimum spec body. In saying that I know of people using compact digital cameras and have shown me magnificant captures of landscape and macros....Having the skill or the eye is a major contribution to great still captures, although a good camera can help too. Just my opinion and hope I haven't confused you in your decision. cheers marls Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.