DSLR Do I go for Canon 30D or the 400D

[RichieLee]

Hey guys, I'm not sure whether you guys know much about DSLRs (I dont!) but I thought I'd ask anyway.

Right so I've saved up the cash to get myself a DSLR. I already have a point and shoot jobby, a sony 7.2MP for general use when going out with mates on nights out etc.

Now though I want to get into some serious picture taking, roll on DSLR. I know a DSLR doesn't mean I automatically get better pictures but that's the whole point I want something much more capable than your standard digicam so I can learn to get those awesome pics. I'm doing a course in illustration in uni so it would help

Right I've come to 2 options either I go for the beginner DSLR 400D or the amateur-semi pro jobby 30D

The 30D's only got 8.2MP I think the 400D's got about 10MP?

Which would you suggest?

I'm going canon because my brother already has a canon 40D so I think it'd make sense if I bought into canon too so I could borrow his lenses from time to time.

Cheers,

Richie Lee

[BUFF]

have you handled both?
IQ differences won't be massive but the 30D has a more solid body & more features.
What will you do with any potential saving (i.e. buy a better lens)?

Oh & the 400D may be due for replacement - I believe that Canon have a press conference on the 24th of January.

[IBM]

You're not going to notice the extra 2MP unless you're into serious cropping or printing above A3 size.

The 30D is a fairly serious camera. Just out of interest, why are you going for the 30D over the 40D? Just financial reasons?

I've got a 10D and haven't been able to justify the upgrade to the 40D but I've spoken with people who upgraded from a 30D to a 40D and were very impressed with the update.

If you're seriously considering getting into photography, and spending the cash, then I'd go for the best camera you can get, and although the 400D narrowed the field between the 00 range and the 0 range, the 30D is still the better camera IMO. But if you don't have the spare cash to pick up a couple of decent lenses, then perhaps the 400D would be the better option. And if Buff is right, any new body in the 00 range will cause a drop in price in the 400D (but that's pointless if it's not coming out for six months).

New lenses don't have to cost the earth either, and can make a world of difference.

[Syd]

Like Buff says handling the two is vital, the 30D is considerably bigger than the 400, my stepbrother has a 400d and it is quite compact, light (due to its plastic body) whereas the 30D is a larger Magnesium alloy body and signficantly heavier/chunkier in the hand. Get down to your local camera shop and have a feel.

[IBM]

....and then perhaps pick up a camera or two....

[RavenNight]

....and then perhaps pick up a camera or two....

Ouch...

On a more serious note, you really have to try a camera, do you have any mates with one that you could borrow? Also look at the Nikons in that price range, they've always fitted my hands much better.

[IBM]

*gets his coat*

[BUFF]

, any new body in the 00 range will cause a drop in price in the 400D (but that's pointless if it's not coming out for six months).

Sony just announced the new A200 & it was in the shops within 3 days ...
With competition as it is I don't think that Canon could afford to wait 6 months between announcing & delivering especially as Nikon will have replaced the D40X by the summer as well.

[RichieLee]

Hi again.

Yeh i've had a go with my bro's 40D recently and I quite like the feel of it. I cant say what the 400d is like as I havent tried it but almost bought one from jessops not long ago when they had a sale. I'd rather get a 30d if it's anything like the 40d as opposed to getting a crap quality 400d if that is the case.

The 30D is pretty much the most I can afford to shell out for and then whilst I'm getting to grips with the standard lens then I'll save for a better one. The only thing is being a beginner and all, i'm thinking is maybe I'd be better off getting a 400D with a decent lens as I've heard the standard one is absolute pants? which is more important initially? the lens or the body?

this photography malark is frustrating!

[Bobster]

unless you really need the speed of the 40D or plan on shooting High ISO, 400D with battery grip will do just fine unless your shooting sports then 30D is the way to go

i'm just getting myself another 20D (at a knock out price) to tide me over til the summer..

[CocoPops]

Rumour has it the 450D will be announced at PMA at the end of the month.

Thats what I'm waiting for anyway, just in case. It may bring the 400D price down, or I may go for the 450D

[RichieLee]

Yes I've been pondering this for a while now and I still have no camera! haha if the rumours are true then i might just wait til the end of the month. At least this way I'll i have more money to spend on a decent lens. I think i may go the 400D route since I'm a beginner and have much to learn. I can always upgrade the body later if things get serious, a good lens is a good lens at the end of the day. The more compact build would help with portability too.

For now I'll stick with the point and shoot.

[Bobster]

just picked up a 20D from ebay for £260 (around 21,000 shots on it)