The "oh no another question about which camera to buy.." Help me out

wobblebottom

Active Member
Hiya chaps n chapesses..

Looking to get myself a proper camera and not a Toy as someone keeps referring ive got.. lol

I would love a 400d but i feel its a tat too complicated for me,not to mention slightly too big and weighty for my little hands.. and Im a stickler for using the LCd and not viewfinder..but would adapt if need to.. I appreciate that you can only use the view finder on the 400d, is this the same on 350?

Is there a significate size difference in 400d/350d ?

My other options are Nikon d40/50 , i already know these are smaller in size and slightly cheaper, but the lenses more expensive, im not really sure that il be buying any other lenses anyway.. maybe just one.. the APO, (of course.. )

Is it the same for viewfinder/lcd on these.. or can both be used..

Or have I anymore options that will enable me to advance my hobby a little further ? sony, fuji etc..

Bear in mind im still a novice here.. lenses and their meanings go way over my little blonde head..as do the majority of the settings, but yes.. ive managed to get over the Auto mode.. lol

So any advice would be nice, good or bad?

Im starting the OU course this May, and looking forward to learning more, and im gonna grab that "understanding exposure book" some one mentioned before somewhere,

I would be grateful if you enlighten me a little and help me out here..whilst i get on with my reading.., cheers folks...

Wobbs
 

tryingtimes

Well-known Member
Hi Wobblebottom.
The size of the actual cameras is the same on the 350/400D. The only real physical difference is the size of the screen (and lack of second LCD display).
Also as far as using the LCD "live view" is concerned no canons or nikon SLR's currently allow this (I think the new 1D mkIII will - so maybe it will filter down the ranges over time).

There are a few cameras that do allow it from other makes - olympus is one and I have a feeling that Fuji might make one - but look for the "live view" feature if it's a must-have for you.
I was reluctant to give it up when I bought my 400D but so far I haven't missed it (although a tilting screen would be really usefull for low down shots).

Out of all the entry-level DSLRs my wife found the Nikon D40 and D40X to be the most comfortable, so go and have a feel of those.

They are great cameras, but have a slight downside of not being able to auto-focus on older or 3rd party lenses. I was confused as to whether this was just older lenses - but we attached a Sigma 70-300 APO to the D40X and couldn't get the AF to work - maybe someone will tell me there's a menu option or something - but we couldn't find one.

On the whole, as long as you understand ISO/Aperture/Shutter speed and how they affect each other and the image, I don't think you'll find any of them too complicated. So far I've used Aperture Priority mode and been pretty comfortable, and I'm a definite beginner (1 week and counting!).
 

senu

Distinguished Member
Hi Wobblebottom.
The size of the actual cameras is the same on the 350/400D. The only real physical difference is the size of the screen (and lack of second LCD display).
The 400D has a more comfortable grip ( the measurments are small but if you owned both you would notice)
Out of all the entry-level DSLRs my wife found the Nikon D40 and D40X to be the most comfortable, so go and have a feel of those.
Good idea but if possible try and shoot with them as well

They are great cameras, but have a slight downside of not being able to auto-focus on older or 3rd party lenses. I was confused as to whether this was just older lenses - but we attached a Sigma 70-300 APO to the D40X and couldn't get the AF to work - maybe someone will tell me there's a menu option or something - but we couldn't find one
There isnt.

On the whole, as long as you understand ISO/Aperture/Shutter speed and how they affect each other and the image, I don't think you'll find any of them too complicated.
The differences apart from size ( not a big difference) is the way they feel to you when you are shooting, and the menu systems
I think the differences in menu system is a bit over hyped as these can easily be learnt with a bit of time
Even cameras from the same stable may have enough of a difference . The Canon 30Ds menu access is way better than the 350 or 400Ds
 

wobblebottom

Active Member
thanks for that, Ive just been into Jessops and had a touchy feely session..lol,I must admit I could live without "live view" im just lazy.. and was more worried about stableness with a bigger lense on .. and holding to my eye,

which means id probably be on the look out for a lense with IS ..

I know auto focus for me is a priority.. so il have a rethink about the APO,

But as it stands im swaying towards the Nikon,whats the difference between the 40 and 40x?

Ive got the chance to play about with the Canon 400D anyway,maybe if I get used to it .. Il throw that into consideration a little more aswell..

Cheers
 
D

Deleted member 152499

Guest
But as it stands im swaying towards the Nikon,whats the difference between the 40 and 40x?

My understanding is that the only significant difference is the D40x has 10mp, while the D40 has 6.1mp............there might be other differences I'm not aware of.
 

tryingtimes

Well-known Member
Have a good long look at the Nikon Lens range and see if they supply what you need at a price you're comfortable with. For me this was a complete showstopper at the time, but in retrospect, I keep looking at the Canon lenses anyway (because of IS and other features) so it might not have been so bad.
When I was thinking of Nikon, I was considering the Nikon 18-200 VR as a good allrounder (it's about £500).

The 40x is basically a 10megapixel version of the 40 but this is the full list of differences according to dpreview
* 10 megapixel sensor
* Lower base sensitivity (ISO 100 vs ISO 200)
* Auto ISO option includes ISO 200
* Faster continuous shooting (3 fps vs. 2.5 fps) (Slower with noise reduction enabled)

BTW most people say that a DSLR against the face is more stable than a compact held so you can see the screen. But I haven't been able to compare myself. All I know if that I still get a few shots which I have to chuck out because of camera shake.
 
D

Deleted member 152499

Guest
The 40x is basically a 10megapixel version of the 40 but this is the full list of differences according to dpreview
* 10 megapixel sensor
* Lower base sensitivity (ISO 100 vs ISO 200)
* Auto ISO option includes ISO 200
* Faster continuous shooting (3 fps vs. 2.5 fps) (Slower with noise reduction enabled)

I knew I'd miss some of the differences....:suicide:
 

senu

Distinguished Member
But as it stands im swaying towards the Nikon,whats the difference between the 40 and 40x?
Mainly the Jump from 6 to 10Mp.and a lower base sensitivity ISO 100 rather than 200.
Note that the sensor size is the same as the D40 for more pixels and this has raised the issue of the D40 possible having more noise free images at higher ISOs ( a bit like the 350D vs 400D noise debate)

PS: The above posters have given a fuller reply suffice to say ..are those differences worth the cost difference to you?
 

Yandros

Well-known Member
Right, let's see if we can sort you out here :)

Firstly, one of the main advantages of an SLR is the viewfinder. For a start, the viewfinder on 'proper' camera is a totally different animal to the little afterthought they stick on compact cameras. There are also a lot of very good reasons for using one over the rear LCD on a compact. Firstly, you can actually see what you're doing on a sunny day! Secondly, accuracy - the LCDs simply aren't high enough resolution to show you whether your shots are properly in focus. Next - camera shake - holding the camera at arms length to see the LCD means the camera is wobbling all over the place. Bracing it against your eye makes for less shake, and so sharper photos. Lastly - responsiveness - LCD displays tend to lag behind reality by a fraction of a second - just enough to always just miss the perfect moment!

If you find the 400D too heavy - try the D40. It's about 25g lighter, and the grip feels different to the Canon. Size-wise it's pretty much identical though.

The D40 is aimed squarely at the novice, with a very user friendly interface, though the more advanced features are there too when you're really to use them. I imagine our D40 users (Sweetgirl for example) will be coming along soon to give you some first hand experiences.

As for lenses on a D40, for everyday shooting the 17-55 kit lens will be fine.
You then have the option of either the Nikon 55-200, the upcoming 55-200VR, or the 70-300VR. If you intend to shoot wildlife, the 70-300VR is no-brainer, assuming the £300 price tag isn't too steep, as it offers vibration reduction. If you don't need 300mm, the 55-200VR would be the next one I'd consider.

The only thing you'd not get on the D40 is any autofocus closeup lens. You could use something like the Sigma 70-300 APO macro, but it would be manual focus only. Similarly, the cheaper dedicated macro lenses like the Tamron 90mm would work, but would be manual focus. This isn't such a big deal actually, since many macro shooters always manual focus anyway.

Incidentally, if you opt for the D40, and then you outgrow it in the future (for example you want more features, support for all lenses, and more megapixels, then you could simply trade up the body alone to a D80 (all the lenses are compatible).
 

senu

Distinguished Member
Yandros,

A lengthy tome with not a mention of the 400D:rolleyes:
These Nikonians... eh:rotfl:
 

Yandros

Well-known Member
Tryingtimes - The D40(x) doesn't have a 'screw drive' - it's a little drive shaft coming from a motor in the camera body. Any lenses that don't have motors of their own build into the lens body can't autofocus on the D40.

The only lenses which have their own motors are the Nikon AF-S lenses, and the Sigma HSM models.

Off the top of my head this means you have available...

Nikon 18-55
Nikon 18-70
Nikon 18-135
Nikon 55-200
Nikon 55-200VR
Nikon 70-300VR
Nikon 18-200VR
Nikon 12-24 f4
Nikon 17-55 2.8
Nikon 70-200VR 2.8
Nikon 105 VR Macro

Sigma 10-20 HSM
Sigma 30 1.4 HSM
 

allymac123

Well-known Member
I'm probably a bit biased due to having the 400d myself but the lack of available autofocus lenses for the D40 would be a killer for me personally. I think the 400d is preferable to the Nikon range up to the point of the D80. It certainly seems to be preferred to the D40 by the reviews I've seen.
 

Yandros

Well-known Member
Yandros,

A lengthy tome with not a mention of the 400D:rolleyes:
These Nikonians... eh:rotfl:

:D Yeah I know. I was going to mention balance my 'essay' with some more 400D comparisons as it did read a bit one-sided, but I feel less qualified to comment on it, and I know you Canonites tend to even things out nicely over the course of a thread :smashin:

For what it's worth though, the 400D is (in my opinion) slightly more of a longer term keeper than then D40, which I suspect a lot of users will upgrade to a D80 in the medium term if they get seriously into the hobby. The fact that the D40 doesn't support the good value Sigma zooms, Tamron 90mm macro and 17-50 2.8, and the Tokina 12-24 and 16-50 2.8 is a crying shame.

I'd say that on a very tight budget, the D40 is the best choice for a beginner assuming you don't need many lenses, and in particular, you don't need macro. Given a slightly bigger budget and the need for more esoteric lenses, the 400D is the obvious choice. Given a bigger budget still, the D80 trumps the 400D, but not by much.
 

jonnypb

Well-known Member
Well being a Canon fan and a 400D owner I can highly recommend this camera. One thing I will say is you'll end up spending a fortune once you get into dslr buying extra lenses and accessories!

The 400D has a wider choice of lenses than the nikon D40 and I suspect that you'd keep a 400D longer than a Nikon D40(x)

If you do prefer using the lcd rather than the viewfinder have you thought about getting a bridge camera, something like the Canon S3, 12X optical zoom and IS built in. Just a thought as you mentioned you'd want a lens with IS which would be another £300+ to fork out on top of your canon 400D or Nikon

I hummed and arghed for over a year about making the jump into dslr but now that I have I'm please I did even though it's gonna eat up all my spare ££££
 

senu

Distinguished Member
Yeah I know. I was going to mention balance my 'essay' with some more 400D comparisons as it did read a bit one-sided, but I feel less qualified to comment on it, and I know you Canonites tend to even things out nicely over the course of a thread ....:smashin: .

:) ..Hmmm

I just felt I had to make a shout for Canon without making another:boring: 40D vs 400D thread...weve done that one to death (I think)
They are slightly different cameras , brand name apart

I suspect the decider is at the point when a potential buyer actually holds the cameras in thier hands

And TBH the price difference has made a very strong argument for the D40 ( unlike its launch price)

And it does have an upgrade path.. But it is likely that a 400D owner would hold on to it for much longer that a D40 as the skills and interest grow
 

Yandros

Well-known Member
:) ..Hmmm

I just felt I had to make a shout for Canon without making another:boring: 40D vs 400D thread...weve done that one to death (I think)
They are slightly different cameras , brand name apart

I suspect the decider is at the point when a potential buyer actually holds the cameras in thier hands

And TBH the price difference has made a very strong argument for the D40 ( unlike its launch price)

And it does have an upgrade path.. But it is likely that a 400D owner would hold on to it for much longer thatn a D40 as the skills and interest grow

Yeah, it's getting to the stage where we almost need a definitive 350/400D/D40(x) sticky! I'm getting tired of the sound of my own voice on this subject :rolleyes:

Incidentally I also favoured the D40 in this case as the OP mentioned that the 400D was too big (btw there's about 1mm difference in dimensions between them, it's just the weight is less on the D40).

Actually I think we need a sticky that says:

"PLEASE GO AND HANDLE THESE CAMERAS BEFORE AGONISING OVER THE SPECIFICATIONS". So much of this is personal taste. As it happens I absolutely HATE the feel of the D40, as it's too light for me :eek:
 

wobblebottom

Active Member
Guys forgive me- i didnt want to start another canon/nikon debate.. soz chaps..

You have all answered my questions thourohgly and accurately..and in a way that a blonde bimbo can understand too..

So a huge thanks.. its time to start saving and clearing out my junk to ebay..

I did notice the complete difference when i held the viewfinder up in the nikon.. My word.. the clarity .. omg.. was astounded.. so its def goin to be a proper Dslr for me.. Ive had a little wander round with the canon earlier.. but not at length.. so im looking forward to prising it out of Mackers hands and having a go..

one thing regarding the bigger cameras, d80 .etc.. after seeing them in Jessops earlier i decided they are too big for me.. so this purchase will be a final one for Body/kit lenses.. .and at the mo im swinging to the canon side now..

Once again thanks for your input and advice.. it is appreciated.. :thumbsup:
 

Yandros

Well-known Member
Guys forgive me- i didnt want to start another canon/nikon debate.. soz chaps..

You have all answered my questions thourohgly and accurately..and in a way that a blonde bimbo can understand too..

So a huge thanks.. its time to start saving and clearing out my junk to ebay..

I did notice the complete difference when i held the viewfinder up in the nikon.. My word.. the clarity .. omg.. was astounded.. so its def goin to be a proper Dslr for me.. Ive had a little wander round with the canon earlier.. but not at length.. so im looking forward to prising it out of Mackers hands and having a go..

one thing regarding the bigger cameras, d80 .etc.. after seeing them in Jessops earlier i decided they are too big for me.. so this purchase will be a final one for Body/kit lenses.. .and at the mo im swinging to the canon side now..

Once again thanks for your input and advice.. it is appreciated.. :thumbsup:

You're welcome - and don't worry, there aren't many (any?) 'true believers' on this forum fortunately, so things are pretty good natured :) .

If you find the D80 etc too big, and are a little concerned about futureproofing & lens choice, then I'd vote for the 400D :smashin:
 

Bursar

Active Member
I'm just curious why you're picking a dSLR over the 'bridge' cameras. I did briefly consider the dSLR route, but I could easily see myself getting carried away and spending loads of wonga on different lenses.

I figured a super-zoom bridge camera would be a better bet for me personally (and it means I don't have to worry about being butter-fingered whilst changing lenses!).
 

wobblebottom

Active Member
Had one..fuji 5600, nothing wrong with it..i loved it dont get me wrong .. it developed a fault.. so it went back, but at the time there was nothing to replace as the reatiler no longer stocked it..so i replaced with what my finances would allow at the time.and quickly as i was camera less... fuji F30... This little baby is fantastic on close up and macro work.. but ive missed my zoooooooooooooooooom terribly..

Im not ruling out any bridge cameras either.. it just seems a wiser choice opting for a full blown DSLR now , rather than 6mths down the line and wishing I had in the first place,if you get me..and I feel that my interest in Photography is now more than a passing phase and something that Im genuinely and seriously interested in..so I personally feel that it would be an investment in my interests..with a huge learning curve thrown in..(AVforums gurus get ur earplugs ready)

I am open to other recommendations..which will be read with enthusiasm and consideration.

Cheers Wobbs
 

Bursar

Active Member
Fair enough. When I see some of the close up work produced by the SLRs, I'm in awe of the clarity. I don't think my FZ8 would be able to get close to some of the things that I've seen posted here. I think you'd be able to spot some noise and other artifacting.

I also see lots of shots where the Exif reports f/11 and higher. I can't get any higher that f/8, so wonder if maybe some landscape shots might suffer from a slight lack of focus.

I'm quite happy with the FZ8 though, and I'm sure it will see through a couple of years at least, and then I can decide after that if I feel the need to step-up to that kind of level (and expense).
 

jonnypb

Well-known Member
Yeah, it's getting to the stage where we almost need a definitive 350/400D/D40(x) sticky! I'm getting tired of the sound of my own voice on this subject :rolleyes:

This subject is going to be around for a long time to come, next year it'll be whats best between the 450D/D60 :rotfl:

Guys forgive me- i didnt want to start another canon/nikon debate.. soz chaps..

People love the Canon v Nikon debate :D

I'm just curious why you're picking a dSLR over the 'bridge' cameras. I did briefly consider the dSLR route, but I could easily see myself getting carried away and spending loads of wonga on different lenses.

I had the S2 for a while as at the time I didn't feel I could justify the costs of dslr and devote enough time to learn the subject. Now that I have jumped into dslr I love it and you will see some pretty amazing results compared to what you can do with normal p&s or bridge cameras. As Bursar said though it can get expensive. I thought I'd be content with my 400D, 50mm 1.8 and Sigma 17-70 lens. Now I'm desperate for a big zoom, probably the Canon 70-300IS and the Canon/Sigma 10-20mm - that means spending £600+ on glass :eek: not to mention all the other accessories you'll want to buy

I do think you'll be making the right choice in choosing the 400D over the nikon as it is more future proof. It's a great camera and you'll have loads of fun with it. If I had the D40 I'd be itching to upgrade to the D80 by now but having the 400D I'm very happy with it and have no intention of upgrading to the 30D or 5D. When the 40d comes out that might be a different matter :rotfl: (Just joking - I hope!)
 

senu

Distinguished Member
This subject is going to be around for a long time to come, next year it'll be whats best between the 450D/D60 :rotfl:
We will have to make it a sticky then:rolleyes:

People love the Canon v Nikon debate :D
In small doses..I think

I do think you'll be making the right choice in choosing the 400D over the nikon as it is more future proof. It's a great camera and you'll have loads of fun with it.
Im tempted to agree with you but only if it feels right in your hands

....... but having the 400D I'm very happy with it and have no intention of upgrading to the 30D or 5D. When the 40d comes out that might be a different matter :rotfl: (Just joking - I hope!)

Hmm...:) He loves his kit

:offtopic: Size aside I bet youll not say no to a free 30D:rotfl: ,
I have a 30 and 350D and was recently " forced" to use a 400D a few weeks ago:
It was easy to use, the images were fantastic but... I have to say the 30D is simply in another league for speed , AF accuracy and responsiveness and lownoise at high ISO compared ( at a cost). I simply get more keepers ( near 100%)
Despite having 10Mp and antidust ( and a similar LCD) the 30D is it...:smashin:
This is no indictment of the 400D ..that is a very nice affordable camera which in the right hands can give you great images

As for the 30D ..I hope the 40D carries on that excellence
 

mjw123

Active Member
If you want good results with the on-board flash and kit lens then the D40 is the better option in my eyes. The 400D kit lens is not as good as the D40's and I feel the on board flash is slightly inferior

If you are worried that you'll be limited by the D40 (doubt it very much by the level you are at) then the 400D would be a better option longer term

I think the D40 would be a better option for you. I made that decision and haven't regretted it. (and no i've no urge to move to a D80, prefer the smaller size of the D40 but wouldn't say no to the extras on the D80)

Remember the downside of 10mp is that your images will be twice the size so you'll fill your memory cards and hard drive twice as quick.

Both great cams though and will give you very pleasing results.

Be aware though in my experience the DSLR is far less forgiving than the P&S cams to operator errors !!
 

senu

Distinguished Member
....If you want good results with the on-board flash and kit lens then the D40 is the better option in my eyes. The 400D kit lens is not as good as the D40's....

We do have a few believers then..:rotfl:

I think you will find that the "better" on board flash and kit lens may not translate to a better photography experience at "new" DSLR user level. The flash system on Nikons in general would seem to be better than the Canons but there are other Canon features which cancel this out.
We are sooo.. not going to do (yet one more ) Nikon Vs Canon:nono:

The lens limitation means you will have a narrower range ( of more affordable 3rd party lenses for) AF use but if you wont be buying many lenses this may not matter.

In short buy either camera with confidence:

The fact of many satisfied users of both should tell you that the technical differences are rather less important than the fact that they will both enable you get great images once you learn them.
Having used the D40 on a 2 week loan ( and D80 for slightly longer) despite being a Canon user primarily, I could easily use any if the other was unavailable.
The debates have a tendency to give you info overload ...:lesson: Dont read too much into them:D
There are even people who use both for different assignments.
 

The latest video from AVForums

Samsung QN95B 4K QLED TV Review
Subscribe to our YouTube channel

Latest News

Grado announces new Statement series wooden headphones
  • By Ian Collen
  • Published
What's new on Netflix UK for September 2022
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
ASUS unveils new 4K OLED gaming monitors
  • By Ian Collen
  • Published
Disney+ confirms price increases coming in December
  • By Ian Collen
  • Published

Full fat HDMI teeshirts

Support AVForums with Patreon

Top Bottom