Canon 40D Vs 400D

[frank]

I might be getting early retirement soon, if I'm lucky due to a recent heart attack and the DVLA (local licensing authority for non-brits) might not allow me to keep my PSV licence, also if insurance pay out I can consider upgrading from Canon 300D.

I was considering the 400D but could possibly persuade my good lady to let me get a 40D, no way I could afford anything dearer cos this would be absolute max I can go.

What advantages will the 40D have over the 400D that would justify paying the extra bucks ? Camera would be used not on a commercial basis but just a simple hobby.

Sorry guys, I posted this in the wrong forum, could admin staff please move it to appropriate forum....thanks

 

[DinoS]

live view, 6.5 FPS, better ISO handling. more buttons and features.

 

[dakid]

I'm buying a camera next year and have that same decision to make. I've gone for the 40D for the 6.5fps (quite fancy doing some sports photography), the slightly-larger body (I have big hands), and the better build quality (metal instead of plastic body).

From what I understand the actual picture quality will vary minimally, depending far more on the lens, so you're paying really for the quality of the camera and the features, rather than better photos.

 

[desantnik]

live view, 6.5 FPS, better ISO handling. more buttons and features.

And faster focusing with DIGIC III, 14 bit colour etc etc.

Is it worth the extra? Yes if you want to muck around with a camera a lot, no if you don't.

These sort of threads on this forum are way to common, the answers must have been posted a million times by now.

 

[stephen ley]

Desantnik

You dont have to read anyones post if you dont want too, I for one am new here and find this stuff valuable

 

[NathanJT]

The thing to consider really is that YES the 40D will offer you 14-bit colour depth and a few more features, BUT you could potentially gain more by spending the difference on better lenses.

I started with a 350D (not THAT dissimilar to the 400D), improved my glass collection and then finally moved up to the 40D when I thought I'd reached the limits of the 350D body. However the biggest step change for me was the results achieved from the better lenses. I'd recommend doing the same to be honest.

I'd even recommend second hand or a Canon refurb just so you can budget more on lenses.

 

[RichieRich]

I've had some great results with my 400D over the last few months. I'm probably going to switch to a 40D for three reasons:

i) I can't seem to find a 400D which has a correctly aligned sensor. Tried 3 so far and all photos are rotated clockwise by a couple of degrees. I've got used to compensating by taking photos slightly off-axis the other way, but it's not ideal. I've read that other people have similar problems with the 400D.

ii) High ISO performance. Apparently it's consierably better on the 40D. I was forced to take photos at ISO 1600 at a sumo tournament in Japan a few weeks ago and they exhibited a lot of noise. ISO 800 was also quite noisy.

iii) FPS.

The only thing is that the 450D is expected to outperform the 40D (ignoring handling and build quality). I might hold out for that. I think it's going to be announced in February.