350D vs 400D

antonroland

antonroland

Inspector Gadget
Suspended / Banned
Messages
4,210
Name
Anton
Edit My Images
Yes
:thumbs: Hey folks

I was fortunate enough that I could test a 400D for a day or two. Now some of you will have seen my previous posts and threads about upgrading.

Now not to rehash these I came to the conclusion that the 350 (IMHO) is a better camera than the 400:shrug:

If anyone out there is interested I can tell how I did a (very basic) comparison and came to this conclusion.:bonk:
 
I'd be very interested to hear Anton, as I have a 400D!
 
OK here goes...:thinking:

What I did was to set the picture styles to "neutral" for some shots and also to "faithful" for some more similar shots.
I set the 350 to neutral settings in its parameters (sharpness,contrast etc).

I used identical settings in all other aspects and swopped my 17-85 between bodies to get the shots as close and fair as possible.

I found the general colour rendition of the 350 to be closer to what my naked eye saw.

I tested the dust vibration feature and found it to make no difference at all.

What I really did like was having all the settings on the screen and the screen shutting down with the eye proximity sensor.

Now if I did something wrong or didn't use the picture styles correctly I would like to have some input on that.

The only thing that remains in my mind is that I would not want to take a 5 grand penalty for a mere 2 Mp and new software...:shrug:
 
5 grand ? Hope your talking SA money ! lol price isnt anywhere near that here ! ;)

I would also have used manual settings and shot in raw not used the picture styles, as they are both different on that front anyway ! Set a fixed speed and aperture and shoot the same piucture with both, see what difference in any you get.

Not sure you see a difference with the self clean mechanism unless you deliberately put loads of crap on the lens either !
 
Hey Ian

Yes S.A. Money:bang:

Just to give you guys a brief break down if anyone wonders about this:thinking: :bonk:

350D goes for about 7 000 to 8 000 ZA Rand

5D + 24-105 : 38 000 TO 40 000

300 mm f/2,8 : +- 50 000

1Ds Mk II : +- 70 000
 
Would have thought the 400D would be similar price to the 350D really Anton, although i know the 350 is relatively old now (seems odd saying a camera that less than 2 years old is old though) .

FYI 350d with kit lens only is £434 from Warehouse express, and 400D is £487 ! So only £50 difference !
 
I think having the settings on the LCD screen is a big plus point, especially when you're shooting in darkness. (Unless there's a way to turn on the 350D status display backlight that I have yet to learn of). :D
 
Ian yes the 400 is not that much more expensive..... in fact it came in cheaper.
I bought my 350 when they were very hot off the press and paid R10 500 for the body only. They now go for 7-7,5k...18 mths later...:bang:

The 400 is up for grabs at R9 000 to R9 500 with a kit lens :bonk:

The best way to compare prices would be to convert your price in Pounds to ZA Rand and then double it.

Therefor : your WE price on the 350 (434 pounds) times 10-12 (Pound sterling vs ZA Rand) and then doubled just about gets there.

If it is a bit pessimistic the change in hand brought on by this reckoning makes for a nice cf or bag or some other essential extra:thumbs: :thumbs: :thumbs:
 
Oh recently the pound costs about 14,xx Rand:bang:
 
Seriously considering it:D

The wife and I plan to visit U.K. in June/July 2007.
We won't be able to do much but would most likely do either the south-east (Devon County?) or the lake district...

Flip a coin on it I reckon:shrug:
 
dont think you can really go wrong with either, Lake District is beautiful but will be really busy so if booking for there i would book it sooner than later ! :) Devon is nice too, have spent some great hols down there :)
 
kamion said:
I think having the settings on the LCD screen is a big plus point, especially when you're shooting in darkness. (Unless there's a way to turn on the 350D status display backlight that I have yet to learn of). :D
Click to expand...

Try the white button on the back ;)

:thumbs:
 
Anton,Thanks for Your review between 350&400 I have the 350 and was thinking of upgrading,but I like the Weight and Pop up Flash of the 350.I will up grade, when Canon come up with a camera that fits me.I take Pic for my own Enjoyment and have some very good Lens.Looking foward to taking some Picks in Paris around the Holidays. :)
 
I agree Marcel
As I have the 350 and fought a brief bout of upgraditis my decision for now at least:D is to stick with the 350.
Even the "terrible" 17-85 surprised me a bit after I UPPED MY TECHNIQUE A BIT:nuts: I mean to say how can one cope with a best f- rate of 4:p

Sean B: Thanx for that compliment. I never quite thought it was anything approaching a review:eek:

I intended it rather as a way to share my thoughts with other forum members and check if I have something far from the truth.:bonk:

It turned out (yet again) that I can always depend on good advice from all you folks out there....

Thanks for that:thumbs: :thumbs: :thumbs:
 
Anton Roland said:
I tested the dust vibration feature and found it to make no difference at all.
Click to expand...

No difference to what ?

Sorry, but I've only just noticed this thread and I have NO idea what that is supposed to mean.

Unless you had the 400D on extremely long term test and swapped the lenses around like a madman, how can you compare it to anything ?
 
Hey Big Kahuna

If you have been on a few forums you would have noticed many people griping about dust on the sensors of out of the box 20D's, 30D's and other cameras so you don't need to swop lenses like a madman to get dust on a sensor.

Now go and take an image of a clean white background on, say f/22 or any higher number and run the image through auto levels in CS 2 and have a good fright initially.

You should start to notice dust from around f/11.

Dust problems are overrated anyway (IMHO) BUT if you want that perfect landscape photo with Max DOF it could be a nuisance.

When I tested the 400D (and I never purported it to be a complete review if you go back and read the whole thread) I did the above test to see if the dust on the sensor shifted but I could not see any difference.

My next question would be even if the sensor clean thin worked where would the dust go?

It must surely remain in the camera and will come back soon even if it sits in another place:bang:
 
Anton Roland said:
My next question would be even if the sensor clean thin worked where would the dust go?

It must surely remain in the camera and will come back soon even if it sits in another place:bang:
Click to expand...

The 400D is like a toaster. There's a little tray at the bottom where the dust collects like crumbs. Once a month you remove the tray and tip the dust into the bin.

Do you know NOTHING !?!??!??!
 
:lol:

What do you smoke boy cause I want som -o- dat sh*t
 
I sense you aren't taking me seriously
 
That is just a hunch you have ,right?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top