Is a 30D worth the extra money over a 400D?

Richard

Richard

Suspended / Banned
Messages
274
Edit My Images
Yes
I'm doing a wedding soon and have been looking at getting a second body for the day, with a view to selling my 350D afterwards. I've been looking at comparisons on the 400D and 30D and as far as I can see the benefits you get for your extra £240 (as quoted by kerso) are:

1. Spot metering
2. ISO3200
3. Extra dedicated buttons
4. Better build quality
5. A few more FPS
6. 1/8000 shutter speed

Is there anything else I'm missing? Is the amount of noise at ISO400+ any different between the two? :shrug:

I've been really happy with my 350D and for the stuff I do there's not a lot that annoys me about the camera, but I'm leaning towards the 400D because I don't think the differences really justify the extra dosh. If you've got a 30D do you ever use ISO3200 or 1/8000? Are the extra buttons really that good? How often does spot metering make a difference?

Thanks :)
 
I do use spot metering all the time...but I know most people dont.

The build quality and size too is better on the 30d.

The extra buttons means you can just press............you dont have to keep going into the menu for things when you should be concentrating on your subject.

Just my take on things.

Whether its worth £240 ..... it depends on how much you have! End of!
 
I can't really answer the question Richard, as I have never owned or held a 350, I have a 400D which was / is my first DSLR a big jump from the point and shoots that I have had in the past. I Like it!
It took me awhile to find my way around the controls ( I get word blind when reading instructions) but with help from people on here I soon got to grips with it, ( no pun intended) But, I have heard a few comments about the small size, I have fairly large hands and don't find it uncomfortable or fiddley in use.
 
The 30D is definitely worth the money for the build quality alone. Don't forget the 30D has a shutter life expectancy of 100K exposures against the 50K exposures of the 350D/400D. The spot metering is invaluable if you know when it'll help and when it wont. It's invaluable to me at times with bird photography.

I doubt you'll see a lot of noise difference at 400 ISO - they're essentially the same sensor.

You don't pay for better pics when you upgrade your camera body, you pay for better build quality and more features which are useful to a skilled photographer , but whether you need those features or not depends on the circumstances at any particular time. :)
 
There is only one way I can answer your question:

GET THE 30D!:thumbs:

If you are going to do any more photography than once a year and Christmas and new year snaps.

I have both the 350 and 20D and even though both these are competent cameras the 20 (and 30) have a few very worthwhile advantages over the 350/400D.


1 Spot metering: Nice but not vital.

2 Like airbags on a car. You might only need it once or twice - possibly never.

3 I don't understand the extra dedicated buttons but once you get used to the 30 you will not want to work with the 350/400 - controls are much more intuitive on the 20/30D.

4 YES!!!

5 After build quality possibly the best thing about the 20/30D IMHO.

6 See # 2

Bottom line to me is I bought my 20 a few months after the 350 and knowing then what I know now I would have started with the 20 if I could do it over.

Please note that I don't say the 350D is junk - far from it - it is just not a workhorse and I don't see the 400 as a workhorse either.

Hope this is useful.
:thumbs:
 
CT put the nail on the head tbh.

All depends whether you require the newer bits I suppose, I'd love to have spot metering for my bird photography, but do I NEED it? Sometimes, yes.

One day ;)
 
I've just finished doing the dreaded research and looked at the 400D against the 30D also. If you compare features on a side by side basis, there's very little to seperate the two cameras. Build quality on the 30D is a given and though I've not used the 400D, I would hate to loose the LCD display on the right flank and the selection wheel on the back. Not neccessary - but useful.

The one thing I did notice was a significant difference in the battery power. The 400D has a 720mAh Li-Ion battery while the 30D has a 1390mAh Li-Ion battery. I'm not sure what bearing that has on the longevity of the battery but considering the similar specs, I would think it has some.

Another thing to consider -the lack of LCD screen on the right flank forces the information to be displayed on the rear LCD. This remains on for a period of time - or until you place your eye to the viewfinder - at which point a sensor will kill the display. If you're busy shooting for an hour or so, the rear display is going to be pretty active. I'm speculating but I would think this consumes more power than the LCD on the right flank. :shrug:

Personally, I think your next logical step up is the 30D from the 350D. The 400D seems too little of an upgrade. Kinda like going from a 20D to a 30D. In your shoes, if I purchased the 30D I know I would be 100% happy with my decision. Buying the 400D would just leave me with a nagging "what if" issue! :lol:
 
My concern in purchasing any of the "older" Canon bodies is that the "new" ones coming out now all have the sensor cleaning facility and dust removal software. I just bought a 400 as a back up for my 1Ds as I'm going on a once in a lifetime trip and needed a 2nd camera- also my wife likes its size (the 400D that is!!) and the 50k shutter life really isn't an issue as I expect few people will shoot that before upgrading, with the current rate of progress in digital photography.
And its10.1 rather than 8.2mega pix, again I don't think that's too important.

The big downside is the lack of spot, but, hey, go to manual settings!

I think, value for money, it's a winner, but if you can hang on, wait for the 30D next upgrade to get the cleaning benefits, dust is the bain of our live!

Incidently, was asking Canon at a recent exhibition and looks as if the 5D isn't going to be upgraded till next year. - but who knows for sure?

George
 
George said:
My concern in purchasing any of the "older" Canon bodies is that the "new" ones coming out now all have the sensor cleaning facility and dust removal software. I just bought a 400 as a back up for my 1Ds as I'm going on a once in a lifetime trip and needed a 2nd camera- also my wife likes its size (the 400D that is!!) and the 50k shutter life really isn't an issue as I expect few people will shoot that before upgrading, with the current rate of progress in digital photography.
And its10.1 rather than 8.2mega pix, again I don't think that's too important.

The big downside is the lack of spot, but, hey, go to manual settings!

I think, value for money, it's a winner, but if you can hang on, wait for the 30D next upgrade to get the cleaning benefits, dust is the bain of our live!

Incidently, was asking Canon at a recent exhibition and looks as if the 5D isn't going to be upgraded till next year. - but who knows for sure?

George
Click to expand...

Lots of common sense here...

But tell me though, if these sensor cleaning maneouvres worked where does the dust go??
 
Having gone up from a 300D to a 30D the things I've found most noticeable are, build quality as said already, it feels a lot sturdier. Spot metering is very useful but not at weddings where you need to expose for larger groups. Instant on (don't know if the 400 has this) I would have missed some good shots if I'd tried to use the 300d yesterday with it taking a couple of seconds to wake up from standby.
Physical size, the 30D is quite a bit larger than the 400D and with the battery pack it's a weighty item which suits me very well but might not others.
 
Just tried the 400- swiched on, upto the eye and "pop"-no noticable lag. Re where does the dust go, I think that's a good serious point, I intend to do exactly what I do regularly with the 1Ds, ie go to "manual cleaning", mirror up, and use a good blower to give the dust a chance to get out (holding the body upside down of course). Or I hear Canon is working with Dyson on the next generation of dust removal.....!!!:) :) :)
 
Now I have NO experience of the 300D but this startup time thing (IMHO) IS A HUGE MISNOMER!

Since (before?) the 350D 0,15-0,2 startup time has been the standard accross the board yet (down here at least) that other brand made a big hoo-hah about their previous entry level d-slr that has a start up time of "only 0,15 seconds...

Methinks marketing B/S baffles brains....Sorry, O/T Minirant I know but...Oh and not meaning to attack you Steep!.....:coat:
 
Buy a 20D. It is superb, and you will get one for 400D money. In terms of specification, it's not quite as good as the 30D, but in the real world, it's every bit as good.
 
Richard said:
I suppose I should have said... lets say you have the money (I don't btw), would you rather spend it on 30D or on lenses?
Click to expand...

Do you need to upgrade any lenses? Does not matter what body you have if you do not have any lenses to take advantage of it.

I you just want a second body for a one-off event and plan then to sell one afterwards can you not just hire or borrow something? If you are happy with the 350D and there is no pressing reason to upgrade I would even say look at buying another second hand. No learning curve or adjustment needed and you should be able to then sell it on again afterwards for about the same price you paid.

As for the 400D's sensor cleaning, it is nice to have but is nowhere near perfect so will still need a regular proper cleaning. It is certainly not something I would use as a reason for choosing between bodies.

Michael.
 
I had the following 350d => 20D =>30D and have just brought a 5D, its been expensive but it just depends if you are happy with your equipment and also if you have the money to upgrade. I'm still deciding if to keep the 30D instead as there are nice features on the 30D compared to the 5D. If you want a mint condition 30D let me know :D

I was very happy with my 350D (my first SLR) and was sad to see it go :'(

To me the 350D, 20D, 30D all have smiliar megapixel the picture quality is about the same although Canon says the 350D sensor is different to the 20D/30D. Ergonomically the 20/30D with the extra muti controller (FP selection) and jog dial are very useful. But i find that the 20D/30D feels much more better and stronger to hand.

I find ISO 3200 very useful as i shoot indoors a lot but if you have a flash gun do you need ti use a high ISO?

20D/30D has the higher 5FPS instead of 3FPs, but ont he 30D you can select 3 or 5 if you want. Also they have a bigger buffer for continous shots compared to the 350D and 400D.

Not having owned a 400D I can't comment, but have read with the extra megapixels you get a bit more noise higher up the ISO. I have also read somewhere about the new cleaning systems appearing in SLRs and that most of them do not do the job right and that even after 10 to 15 times cleaning cycles you will still have stubborn dirt stuck on.
 
Thank you all for your comments and words of wisdom! :thumbs:

I think George hit the nail on the head. I'm tempted with the 30D but guessing that a 40D will be on the cards sometime this year? I suppose it's the same with anything you buy, a newer better version is always round the corner :bang:

My other train of thought is that if I went for a 400D now, the upgrade wouldn't actually cost me a lot and so would be easier to justify with the boss :) I'm guessing I could get £250+ for my 350D+kit lens and a new 400D is about £100 more than that.

Anyway... thanks again. I guess I just need to mull it over, check my bank balance and then just go for it. :lol:
 
Sensible thinking Richard, but a false economy if you're anything like me (and a few other forum members) and end up getting the camera you wanted to get to start with after a few months of 'making do' with what your head told you to do.

I started off with a 350d but have large, clumsy hands that cramped up on the grip. This is not to suggest the 350 was by any means a bad camera! Some of my favourite shots were taken with this and the kit lens 18-55 combo. My next move up was a 30d which i had for a massive 3 months before upgrading to the 5d (which is what i wanted anyway - head v heart!!). I've been very happy with the 5d which i've used almost exclusively for 7 months, but decided that i may as well spend every penny in the bank (plus some that weren;t there).

Well, thats my long-winded tale. Suffice to say its often as well to spend that little bit extra because it's somtimes cheaper to just buy what you want to start with, rather than work up to it and lose money along the way.

Whichever you choose, you'll get a great camera - good luck :thumbs:
 
I've just upgraded from a 350D and the 30D. I bought the 30D secondhand, so the price differential wasn't as big as buying new. I've found its easier to handle, and the 5fps is great for sports, plus spot metering is good and ISO 3200 is useful. The controls take some getting used to. I would have bought a 20D over a 350D new, but couldn't afford it at the time.
 
listen to jonnyreb, buy what your heart tells you to buy cause if you don't will regret it, get limited enjoyment from the one your head told you buy and end up buying the one you really wanted anyway.
pbh.
 
i just up'd to the 30d from a 350D the 400 isnt really that much of an upgrade from the 350d except more mp and a couple of extra focusing points.

For me the 30d can has a better predictive focus with moving targets then the 350-400d.

Spot metering is great for motorsports too,

Theres more ISO adjustments between 100-200. I have found my 30d produces less noise at higher ISO readings too.

Personal if you have a 350d either stick with it or go 30d.

Anyone new to the market then 400d.
 
Has anyone mentioned the battery life?

I moved from 350D to 30D and noticed a significant improvment in battery life. I could go through nearly 3 batteries at the zoo (using a lot of AI Servo) with the 350 but with a similar session I don't even empty one on the 30D. I have no doubt the 400 uses the same battery pack as the 350.

High ISO noise on 30D is better managed than 350D

Oh and focus speed and accuracy is better on 30D than on the 350D.

Not sure on either of those on the 400D.
 
pandabighead said:
listen to jonnyreb, buy what your heart tells you to buy cause if you don't will regret it, get limited enjoyment from the one your head told you buy and end up buying the one you really wanted anyway.
pbh.
Click to expand...

If we did that we'd all be shooting with Hasselblads :lol:
 
I just bought a new 30D this week and choose that over the 400D for the spot metering alone.

Don't get me wrong the 350D/400D is a very good camera and returns some excellent results, Its all about how much do you want to spend and is it worth it to you..:)
 
Well in the end I decided on the 400D as a temporary upgrade until the 40D arrives. I managed to get it for £399 from Jessops (body only) which with the canon discount will bring it down to £350.

In the end it did come down to cost. It's not just the price of the camera but batteries too and I've been spoiled by the grip on the 350D so I'd have to buy one of those as well for the 30D :) The other annoying factor was that my car had to go in for repairs this month and cost me £600.... boo :razz:

Anyway the 400D is very nice. I do like the extra focus points, the RGB histogram is a nice addition as well (although I'm not sure how useful it is yet?) and that bigger screen :thumbs: The shutter sounds different too, which surprised me at first but I think there's a few more fps with this?

New stuff :love:

Thanks for all your comments :)
 
Congrats. That's a lotta camera for 350 quid! :thumbs:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top