Digital SLR Cameras Forum

Digital SLRs Forum Discuss digital SLRs, lenses, RAW conversion, or anything else related to digital SLRs. You may also want to see the Nikon, Canon, and Sony camera forums.
Digital Camera Pro Reviews >>
Read and Write Digital SLR Reviews >>
Digital SLR Buyer's Guide >>
Results 1 to 8 of 8
  1. #1
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    7

    Canon 400D vs 30D vs 40D for a person new to DSLR's

    So i'm looking into getting MY FIRST DSLR camera. I've basically decided to get a Canon 400D which are about $650 with kit lenses.

    However, I keep wondering whether or not I should just spend a little more for a better camera now. Would that be a good idea for a beginner? It's about a $300-500 dollar difference, which is money I could use for another lens for the 400D.

    I would just be using it for general purposes.

    So it's a toss up between a 30D or a 40D. The 30D would definitely fit my budget more. I know the 30D is better than the 400D despite being older. and the only reason I'm considering the 40D is the idea that it's the newer model.

    Once again, this is for a beginner. I have been reading a lot about DSLR's though.

    Feedback? Thanks.

  2. #2
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Louisville, KY
    Posts
    81

    Re: Canon 400D vs 30D vs 40D for a person new to DSLR's

    if its your first camera, i would buy the 400D and instead spend the money on some nice lenses. it is rather pointless to put some low quality glass in front of a 30D/40D. get used to your camera, then later when you find you are really limited by it, you can sell it and get a 30D/40D.

  3. #3
    Captain of the Ship Photo-John's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Location
    Salt Lake City, Utah, United States
    Posts
    15,422

    Re: Canon 400D vs 30D vs 40D for a person new to DSLR's

    I would recommend the 400D. And I don't think the 30D is a better camera, unless you need the faster frame rate - and most people don't. The 40D does offer more, but if you're just going to be learning and don't need more speed, then I'd stick with the 400D. For what it's worth, I bought a 400D a little more than a year ago and I've been using it to shoot sports and pretty much everything else. It's way more camera than most people realize. And it's also more camera than most 30D owners want to admit :-)

    Buy the 400D body only, save a few bucks, and buy a better lens. That will be a much wiser way to spend your money than a body which has features you won't really benefit from.
    Photo-John

    Your reviews are the foundation of this site - Write A Review!

  4. #4
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    7

    Re: Canon 400D vs 30D vs 40D for a person new to DSLR's

    hey thanks for your feedback

    i think i'm gonna get the camera 400d, but i've been getting really mixed ideas on whether or not to get the kit lens that comes with it.

    People that suggest the kit lens say:
    - it's good for a backup
    - it's a decent lens for the extra $100

    People that don't suggest the kit lens say:
    - it's crap, mind as well use it for a better lens (which i also agree with in a way)

    Either way, if I wasn't to get the kit lens, I'm still going to want a zoom lens which are all pretty expensive. Are there any that you suggest? I've been looking around for a long time now and these are the zoom lenses I found to replace it:

    Canon EF-S 17-85 f/4-5.6 - $515
    Canon EF 17-40 f/4L - $650

    Some have said that EF-S lenses are bad though because they wouldn't be compatible with future camera bodies and what not... is this a huge factor? I do plan on getting another camera but not in the near future. The EF-S lenses are definitely lower in price.

    I know there is the EF 70-200mm f/4L USM telephoto lens for $600, but that thing is HUMONGOUS!

    So what do you think? I know it's not that great of a kit lens but I think it's decent for the price...

    Also, I was wondering what you use as a general purpose lens? I've been looking for some of these too. Something nice and portable, not huge.

    I've been leaning toward the cheap $70 Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 lens, but the $300 Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 is so tempting (supposedly, it's a lot nicer)

    Can you help me out? thank you

  5. #5
    Captain of the Ship Photo-John's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Location
    Salt Lake City, Utah, United States
    Posts
    15,422

    Re: Canon 400D vs 30D vs 40D for a person new to DSLR's

    What kinds of subjects are you planning to shoot? That can make a difference. Do you have any kind of preference about wide or telelphoto shooting? Do you expect to do much low light shooting?

    I have the Canon kit lens and I actually think it's a decent lens - especially for the price. That said, I only use it when I want a really small packed to carry. Either zoom lens you mentioned would be a good choice. The 17-40 will have better image quality than the other lens. But I believe the other lens is an IS lens? From my point of view, the best strategy is two lens setup - one for wide and one for wide to telephoto. But we start talking about a lot more money then.

    Tell us a little more about what you like to shoot and what you expect to shoot and so we can get a better idea about what will be the best lens choice for you. I definitely think you should let go of the kit lens and invest the money in something better, though.
    Photo-John

    Your reviews are the foundation of this site - Write A Review!

  6. #6
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    7

    Re: Canon 400D vs 30D vs 40D for a person new to DSLR's

    i was talking to a guy at a camera store today (bel air cameras) and he said yes the kit lens is decent for it's price.

    I want a good lens for general purpose shooting for now.

    For general purpose and to replace the kit lens, he highly recommended the EF-S 17-85mm f/4-5.6 lens which does have Image Stabilization. It's about $500 dollars and I figured it'd be a better idea on putting in the $100 dollars I'd be spending on the kit lens into this better one to replace it. Is this a good idea?

    The total price would be around $1000 dollars (rebel xti body + 17-85mm lens)
    ------------

    Lastly, he was saying how I can get the new Canon EOS 40D and the 17-85mm lens as a package for $1600. I would save $200 dollars on that lens if I did it that way because the body of the 40D is already $1300.

    But can someone seriously tell me what the REAL difference is between the 400D (Rebel xti) and the new 40D?

    The deal sounds tempting because I'd be getting a better camera and a good price on the lens, BUT that's an extra $600 dollars that I could be using for ANOTHER lens if I got the 400D Rebel xti camera body.

    Advice? thanks

  7. #7
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Louisville, KY
    Posts
    81

    Re: Canon 400D vs 30D vs 40D for a person new to DSLR's

    Real differences off the top of my head, since im not a canon user, so im probably missing a lot:

    40D has a faster shutter speed. 1/8000 instead of 1/4000 on the 400D.
    40D has 6.5 fps instead of 3
    40D has a better lcd screen
    40D has smaller steps in ISO
    40D has better AF
    40D has better viewfinder
    40D has bigger buffer

  8. #8
    Lurker PhotoRookie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    AZ
    Posts
    45

    Re: Canon 400D vs 30D vs 40D for a person new to DSLR's

    PJ is right the 400D is a great camera, I own one. I also own a 30D and it does some things much better than the 400D. I'd argue that if you switch between cameras you'd notice the 400D's shutter lag, the 30D produces better images at high ISO's, The extra 2 frames per second doesn't seem like that big of a deal until your waiting for the camera to fire, the 30D has spot metering which for some reason they left off the 400D and the 30D has a better battery. The 400D is small & light and that's a big advantage. The kit lens (which is offered with both cameras) is very good given there is enough light and it's also very light. As for the 40D I'm not sure how much better it is than the 30D I'm certain it not enough to justify the current price difference (+/-$400.00 US). Some advantages that have been pointed out:
    "40D has a faster shutter speed. 1/8000 instead of 1/4000 on the 400D."
    Nice if you have super fast glass but you probably don't (btw same as the 30D)
    "40D has 6.5 fps instead of 3"
    Advantage 40D but the 30D is 5 fps and that's pretty darn fast
    "40D has a better lcd screen"
    Nice but it doesn't help you take better photos
    "40D has smaller steps in ISO"
    Better than the 400D but the same as a 30D. The Digic III may be the best feature offered on the 40D, I've seen some clean high ISO samples much better than either the 30D or the 400D
    "40D has better AF"
    Again only with glass that's f2.8 or faster
    "40D has better viewfinder"
    15% larger than the 400D, 5% larger than the 30D
    "40D has bigger buffer"
    By far the biggest advantage over the other cameras but only usefull when taking action photos.
    Something not mentioned is the sensor cleaning, if you live in a dusty enviroment this may be another advantage to both the 40 & 400D's.
    Any way you decide to go you get a great camera capable of taking outstanding photographs and that's what's important.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •