40D or 400D?

[Louisa911]

Following on from my last thread, I discovered I can trade in my 300D for £90 against another second hand SLR. My options would either be £230 for a 400D body, or £439 for the 40D body. I would keep the 18-55 kit lens and my 1.8f 50mm for use with the upgrade.

I know the 40D is the better camera in terms of speed, ISO sensitivity, colour range, durability and weather proofing etc.... but is it really worth the extra cash over the 400D? I normally would just have gone for the 400D but would like to keep my upgrade for a while, and wouldn't see myself needing to upgrade any higher than the 40D until at least far far into the future.

I photograph a few gigs, sports and animals, general trips and visits to places, mixtures of things for my projects on my Illustration Uni course- no particular subject at all. (www.flickr.com/louisabiggin, at the moment most pics on here are just random snapshots, no subject in particular. apart from the gig ones.)

Do you think I would benefit from the 40D over the 400D in the long run? Or should I get the 400D with a second hand 3rd lens (and if so, which)?

Cheers

[havoc]

£200 is a fair chunk of another lens, but the 400D is largely more of the same - a 300D with a bigger sensor and a few other upgrades.

The 40D is better-built (so should last longer) and has a higher FPS plus a few other minor advantages over the 400D...most notably sensor self-clean, which I can attest is pretty effective - on safari the 40D kept itself reasonably clean while my 20D sensor was an utter mess by the end of the holiday.


My 2p - depends how much you need/want another lens right now (i.e. are you happy with the optical quality you're currently getting - the 40D won't improve your photos, it'll just be more flexible), and how long it would take before you could buy it if you got the 40D. I think you WILL want to upgrade from the 400D after a while, whereas I agree with you - I don't need anything more than the 40D so anything I buy now will be lenses etc. So if you think you can manage with your current lenses for long-enough, get the 40D.

[LukeBird]

Quinny said:

If you can manage it, I'd push the boat out, and go for the 40D...

+1

I made the same decision RE 450D vs. 40D. (Although the 40D 'felt' right to me!)
Glad I did, as it will be something I think I will keep for a long time!

[Crafty_]

I would go for the 40D. Have seen bodies for £400 and below on TP, so you may wish to look there.

[Mojocvh]

It is a very subjective but the modern DSLRs at the lower end just do not have the feel of the older film models (A1 AV1 in my case).
My 1000D is well specced as a baseline camera and produces the goods, BUT it is a lightweight body and just does not feel substantial in the hand.
For that reason I wil be keeping my 1000D and when finances permit will almost certainly (at the current model line up anyway) move to the more pro aimed models and then have the 1000D modded for (more) astro work.

cheers

Mo.

[Phunk]

Sell the 300d on eBay and get more for it, then purchase a 20/30/40d from ebay (all of which are better than a 400d)

I currently use a 40d for nightlife photography and it works well with high ISO's

[Louisa911]

Phunk said:

Sell the 300d on eBay and get more for it, then purchase a 20/30/40d from ebay (all of which are better than a 400d)

I currently use a 40d for nightlife photography and it works well with high ISO's

Cheers. Would I be best selling it without the kit lens and keeping that for use with the 40D? Or should I just sell it on with the 300D and put towards another lens? Any in particular I should look at if I do sell it with the body?

[flat-planedCrank]

Just to echo points that others have made - I'd take my 30D over a 400D any day of the week


I'd try and save some money for a new lens if you can, your kit lens is probably best replaced if you want better image quality / faster focusing / non-turning front element for using filters / etc...



Cheers.

[RobDickinson]

Louisa911 said:

Cheers. Would I be best selling it without the kit lens and keeping that for use with the 40D? Or should I just sell it on with the 300D and put towards another lens? Any in particular I should look at if I do sell it with the body?

Sell the kit lens with the 300D and buy another lens. just about anything will be better starting with the new IS kit lens which is much improved.

Then look at sigmas 17-70, 17-50f2.8, 18-55, tamrons 17-50 etc , see what you can find on ebay.

[Louisa911]

RobDickinson said:

Louisa911 said:

Cheers. Would I be best selling it without the kit lens and keeping that for use with the 40D? Or should I just sell it on with the 300D and put towards another lens? Any in particular I should look at if I do sell it with the body?

Sell the kit lens with the 300D and buy another lens. just about anything will be better starting with the new IS kit lens which is much improved.

Then look at sigmas 17-70, 17-50f2.8, 18-55, tamrons 17-50 etc , see what you can find on ebay.

Thanks a lot, will take a look. Is this the IS kit lens you mentioned?

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/NEW-CANON-EF-S-18-55MM-IS-18...

Cheers

[flat-planedCrank]

Louisa911 said:

RobDickinson said:

Louisa911 said:

Cheers. Would I be best selling it without the kit lens and keeping that for use with the 40D? Or should I just sell it on with the 300D and put towards another lens? Any in particular I should look at if I do sell it with the body?

Sell the kit lens with the 300D and buy another lens. just about anything will be better starting with the new IS kit lens which is much improved.

Then look at sigmas 17-70, 17-50f2.8, 18-55, tamrons 17-50 etc , see what you can find on ebay.

Thanks a lot, will take a look. Is this the IS kit lens you mentioned?

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/NEW-CANON-EF-S-18-55MM-IS-18...

Cheers

I'm not RobDickinson, but yes

I'd still look at the other options mentioned though, each has its advantages. Some of them are f2.8 if narrower dof or low light ability is useful to you....


Cheers.

[Louisa911]

I shall do

Being a student I'm not in the position at the moment to afford any £200 lenses, so as long as I have a decent 18-55 or similar for general purpose use, and my 1.8 50mm for low light etc, it should get me by nicely until I can afford more. Are there any other lenses around the £100 region, maybe even second hand, that would definately be worth a look?

Thanks so much

[flat-planedCrank]

Louisa911 said:

I shall do

Being a student I'm not in the position at the moment to afford any £200 lenses, so as long as I have a decent 18-55 or similar for general purpose use, and my 1.8 50mm for low light etc, it should get me by nicely until I can afford more. Are there any other lenses around the £100 region, maybe even second hand, that would definately be worth a look?

Thanks so much

I think for £100 the 18-55IS might be the best option, especially if you start looking for other lenses with stabilisation.

Here are a couple of fairly favourable reviews of the 18-55mm IS - on a 350D and 50D.


Cheers.

[andy-xr]

Played around with a 40D today, the g/f brought one home on test from a photographer who was trying to sell it to her. Quite enjoyed it, I use Nikons but once I worked out how to get rid of Auto ISO it was pretty decent. Using the kit lens so IQ could be better, but pretty useable and quick with the grip on it.

For the money they're going for second hand they do look worth it. Other half has decided to go with Nikon because she's more used to them and we can share lenses. If you're interested (and assuming I havent violated any forum rules) I could put you in touch with it's owner if you want to work out a deal in the mid £400's

[Louisa911]

andy-xr said:

Played around with a 40D today, the g/f brought one home on test from a photographer who was trying to sell it to her. Quite enjoyed it, I use Nikons but once I worked out how to get rid of Auto ISO it was pretty decent. Using the kit lens so IQ could be better, but pretty useable and quick with the grip on it.

For the money they're going for second hand they do look worth it. Other half has decided to go with Nikon because she's more used to them and we can share lenses. If you're interested (and assuming I havent violated any forum rules) I could put you in touch with it's owner if you want to work out a deal in the mid £400's

I may get back to you on that, thanks a lot for informing me. I'm currently having to wait for the end of my first year on my Illustration Uni course, in 2 or 3 weeks time, as then I won't have any more project work to do and therefore won't be relying on having an SLR availiable to use. Oh and the nice £300 bursary for completing the semester

If you want to drop me a PM regarding the owner, please feel free. It'll be an option for me if the camera's still avaliable when the time comes. Thanks

[havoc]

Louisa911 said:

Are there any other lenses around the £100 region, maybe even second hand, that would definately be worth a look?

Thanks so much

I've been toying with selling my 28-135IS for a little while. Wouldn't let it go for £100, but wouldn't ask more than £150-200, inc. 2 filters and a hood. Not the sharpest lens I've got (hence the thoughts to sell it - I've usually got the awesome little Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 on the body), but probably the most versatile.

[tinman0]

havoc said:

£200 is a fair chunk of another lens, but the 400D is largely more of the same - a 300D with a bigger sensor and a few other upgrades.

Sorry, but you are way off.

I went from 300D to 400D about 3 years ago and the difference is huge. The 400D (from the 350D) is a total step up from the 300D.

Forget the megapixels, but the exposure system is better, the DIGIX system is better, the fps is better, the RAW fps is better, boot up is SO much better, the camera feels better put together, and so forth.

The 400D over the 300D is a whole different ball game.

I picked up my replacement 400D s/h off Ebay for £234. (Broke the first 400D after 60k).

[S47]

I have both 400 & 40D, IMO the shots from the 400 look cleaner up to about 400ASA, above 800ASA the 40D is better, I prefer the smaller 400 though the 40D feels more solid, nothing wrong with the 400 though mines done 161K shots without probs.
AF is similar on both, FPS on 40d is significantly quicker, but for most people the 400 is perfectly OK.
I was just thinking of getting a 7d but with the 550's release - maybe I'll get that instead and save some serious cash.
Unless you're a pro I'd get a 400d and be happy

[Killwilly]

Take a look at the side-by-side comparison below between the 40D and the 450D, I am aware that you referred to the 400D. That may help you make your decision. The 450D is a brilliant camera.

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/compare_post.asp

[Thunderace]

My first DSLR was a 20D when it came out in 2004, I carried on using an EOS3 film camera as a backup and for 'proper' wide angle. I won a 400D when they first came out and used that as backup to the 20D. I never really got on with it, didn't like the size and handling, menus, controls, features, and felt that the output from the 20D was superior. In situations where I wanted 2 bodies with a different lens on each I found myself swapping lenses on the 20D rather than using the 400D. When the 40D came out I bought one, gave the 400D to the wifebeast and kept the 20D as backup.

I now have a 5D2 and use the 40D as a backup, the 20D has been relegated to a cupboard and for use where it might get harmed (remote, etc.). The 5D2 is superb but I have no qualms about using the 40D at the same time, sometimes the crop factor and FPS makes it the preferred option. I regularly print to A3 and either will do although the 5D2 is far superior in low light and allows additional cropping. I flirted with replacing the 40D with a 7D but there's nothing it does badly enough to justify it to myself.

As well as listening to opinions and reading reviews you really need to play with both xxD and xxxD to check that you can live with the build, handling, menus and controls. There's quite a difference between the 2 model ranges.