Login or Join Now

Upload your photos, chat, win prizes and much more

Username:
Password:
Remember Me

Can't Access your Account?

New to ePHOTOzine? Join ePHOTOzine for free!

Like 0

Canon 350d vs 400d

Join Now

Join ePHOTOzine, the friendliest photography community.

Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more for free!

New PortraitPro 12 SALE + 10% OFF code EPZROS814
Leave a Comment
    • «
    • 1
    • »
    chrisheathcote
    chrisheathcote e2 Member 8241 forum postschrisheathcote vcard United Kingdom
    27 Oct 2006 - 5:43 PM

    Just a quick one, what are peoples thoughts about these 2 cameras. I bought the 350d because I couldn't see that the extra bits on the 400d was worth paying the extra, I used to the extra cash to upgrade from standard kit lens to the 18-55mm USM and a 50mm 1.8 Prime. Just wondered anyone else had any thoughts.

    Chris

    Sponsored Links
    Sponsored Links 
    27 Oct 2006 - 5:43 PM

    Join ePHOTOzine for free and remove these adverts.

    Carabosse
    Carabosse e2 Member 1139395 forum postsCarabosse vcard England269 Constructive Critique Points
    27 Oct 2006 - 5:52 PM

    Very sensible! Lenses first, camera body second.

    It should be on a banner at the top of the EPZ page! Lol! Wink

    Bensdad
    Bensdad  7
    4 Nov 2006 - 7:13 PM

    Ignorant father here trying to decide on which camera to get for his son, thinking of 350D or 400D, now I don't know what to do about the lens as it seems the advice is "lens first".

    Buy a body only and buy which lens to go with it? (Which supplier does "upgrades"?)

    Buy a body with standard lens (seems as cheap as body only) then buy which lens to supplement it?

    Son will be mostly photographing cars.

    All advice gratefully received!

    Mark

    cambirder
    cambirder  107202 forum posts England
    4 Nov 2006 - 7:57 PM


    Quote: Son will be mostly photographing cars

    Two questions. Are we talking moving cars or static? and what is the total budget?

    Britman
    Britman  81669 forum posts England
    4 Nov 2006 - 7:58 PM

    Mark,
    Have a read of this thread regarding the 350D.

    Body only, buy better lenses, mine came as a kit and I had the lenses on ebay within a week.

    Bensdad
    Bensdad  7
    4 Nov 2006 - 9:04 PM

    Thank you for your interest, here's a little more information:

    Son photographs his and his friends' cars, both static and in motion for action shots.

    He's got a Canon 610, but his friends have 350Ds and he wants the quality in definition and colour that he has seen in his friends' photos.

    Budget is a difficult question, I'll cough up some but not all of the cost, he'll have to top it up. The 350D with standard lens is about 430 at the moment I think, purchase will be at Christmas time, we're in the 430 to 500 bracket I expect.

    So, body plus a slightly better than standard lens, is that feasible in the budget? The thread suggested has given some good pointers and so I'll look into the lenses mentioned in the thread.

    Last 2 questions, what about a second hand lens and new body? And dare I mention it, later he wants to get a fish eye lens, are they available?

    Thanks for the help so far (you've given me lots to look into),

    Mark

    nikon5700ite
    4 Nov 2006 - 10:12 PM

    If he wants the resolution of his freinds why not the 630 at 8Mp and a good editing programme like Paint Shop Pro to sort out the colour problems? Staying within your budget.

    Bensdad
    Bensdad  7
    5 Nov 2006 - 6:25 PM

    Like all kids (OK he's 25 but you know what I mean) my son wants instant results, press the button and there it is. He's getting better though and is using more of the features on his current 5Mp camera, and he's seen what his mates can do so he wants to achieve the same. So it's a DSLR or bust.

    Following the theme of lenses first, went to Jessops today to see what they have to offer. They'll meet any Web prices from a British company (except Pixmania they said as they're actually French) so that's a start. They are doing a kit of camera plus standard Canon lens plus a 70-300 Sigma lens: if you figure in savings by bargaining against Web prices it should be possible to get camera plus Sigma 18-55 plus Sigma 70-300 for the same amount. That'll capture static cars and cars on the track, based on the general assumption that Sigma are better than Canon (?).

    Plenty of time till Christmas, so I'll watch the threads and price trends, and if I'm lucky get good advice, kit and value.

    Thanks for continuing help!

    Mark

    ade_mcfade
    ade_mcfade e2 Member 1014786 forum postsade_mcfade vcard England216 Constructive Critique Points
    5 Nov 2006 - 6:38 PM


    Quote: based on the general assumption that Sigma are better than Canon (?).

    bold statement isn't it?

    Though I'm sure a top of the range Sigma EX would out perform canon's 18-55 plastic kit lens, in general, the only reason Canon users get Sigma kit is causer it's cheaper. That's a long old debate, but I think most of us would rather have Canon L glass than Sigma EX, were money no object

    Anyway...

    the 70-300's are nice and cheap, decent zoom, but I've always found them quite slow to focus and you always get soft shots from them. But on a budget, they cover a lot of the range your son will be after, so would probaly be a good buy to get him up and running.

    Don't let him near L glass, as you'll end up having to mortgage the house to get the longer L gass prime lenses!

    Bensdad
    Bensdad  7
    5 Nov 2006 - 6:55 PM

    Ah... now Britman in his post yesterday on this thread suggested I look at another thread, which I did, and there it said that the standard Canon Lens was not very good (Britman said he put his on Ebay immediately after he had bought the camera) and if I remember rightly the advice was to go for Sigma or Tamron lenses.

    So am I wrong to think then that the Sigma 18-55 is better than the "standard" Canon 18-55?

    Perhaps we should stick with the Canon lens till my son has some shots under his belt and begins to know what he likes/dislikes?

    As always, pointers in the right direction welcomed!

    Mark

    PS If the Sigma 70-300 is slow and soft, is there another lens at a similar price that's faster and crisper? (As you say, without needing a remortgage!)

    ade_mcfade
    ade_mcfade e2 Member 1014786 forum postsade_mcfade vcard England216 Constructive Critique Points
    5 Nov 2006 - 7:37 PM


    Quote: So am I wrong to think then that the Sigma 18-55 is better than the "standard" Canon 18-55?

    I've no idea with these 2 lenses, though having had the canon one, it was nice to start with, but once I bought filters and the lens end was rotating every time it focussed, it got annoying.. so if the Sigma one doesn't have the rotating end, I'd consider that a big advantage.

    The canon one is a kit lens - gets you up and running out of the box. Bit like the 16 meg CF cards you usually get - the work, but 3 shots into a shoot, they are full Smile

    And I've only used Canon's 70-300 IS and 90-300 lenses, so again, not really sure on the Sigma version.

    with both those canon ones, the end still rotates, but for cars and fast shutter speeds, it'll not matter really. you'll not be using a polariser or other filters I'd guess?

    I'm sure someone will find the perfect reivew online for you and post it in the thread before too long - very helpful like that on here Smile

    Bensdad
    Bensdad  7
    5 Nov 2006 - 7:47 PM

    I hope someone posts a pointer to an easy review of lenses, I'm half way through:

    http://photonotes.org/articles/beginner-faq/lenses.html

    and it's got all the detail you could want... but I haven't found the grass roots help I need yet!

    Plenty of time till Christmas to sort it out though (ever the optimist).

    Mark

    ade_mcfade
    ade_mcfade e2 Member 1014786 forum postsade_mcfade vcard England216 Constructive Critique Points
    5 Nov 2006 - 7:55 PM

    that artical looks pretty comprehensive - you'll be telling us about them after reading all that!

    the basic rule that you get what you pay for, as with everything in life.

    you spend 100 on a lens, it'll not give the same results as a 1000 one - for any number of reasons which you'll learn from that artical.

    I'm sure if you got a canon 100-400 L IS and a 16-35 L you'd be pretty happy with the results, but at over 2000, you may not be too chuffed with the price.

    hopefully you'll learn what you need from the artical, then you can look at the lenses that fit the bill, seek out reviews of them online, then make a decision.

    all good fun - like buying toys really Smile

    Bensdad
    Bensdad  7
    5 Nov 2006 - 9:49 PM

    I have made my way through that web page, and the bottom line as you say is generally you get what you pay for. Maybe one or two lenses are better value than others, but very very few.

    My thinking at the moment is we'll probably go for the lens with the camera and the Sigma 70-300 for a start, then if my son isn't happy he can cough up for better ones!

    In the mean time I might look around at second hand lenses, see if there are bargains to be had or if everyone else is doing the same thing.

    Of course, after I've read some specific reviews as you suggest, I might change my mind yet again. But that's the fun of it, always learning!

    Mark

    • «
    • 1
    • »

    Add a Comment

    You must be a member to leave a comment

    Username:
    Password:
    Remember me:
    Un-tick this box if you want to login each time you visit.