should i just bite the bullet

W

whacky

Suspended / Banned
Messages
100
Name
Steve
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi all,

I have been umming and arring for months now over my first DSLR purchase. I had settled on the 400d but then my mind started wandering and i thought about the 30d. Now i know the 40d is out so that crossed my mind to.

But this will be my first dslr it is if i am honest a bit of an experiment n as far as that it is a purchase to take under water when i am diving. But i have always enjoyed photography and thought i would give dry land photography a proper bash aswell.

So should i just bit the bullet and get the 400d or 30d and see where things take me or keep umming and arring and save for a 40d. I suppose aswell the question is 400d or 30d
 
Get the best you can afford or else you'll always regret your purchase. That's my motto anyway... If I spend less it always ends up costing me more.
 
underwater cases for DSLRs can be very expensive. You might want to research those and see if there is any saving over the 400D or the 30D.
 
by cheap by twice is someting i go by normally but as it's soething i am just trying out is that the wisest idea?
 
I'd tend to agree with theory tbh - get the one you wont outgrow in a hurry, and the 40D is a very well spec'd camera at a great price.

That's not to say you wont get great results from the others. If it turns out to be a flash in the pan though, they'll be queueing up to take the 40D off your hands. ;)

Edit.

As Jimmy says - underwater housings are mega expensive!
 
There is a lot of wisdom both sides of the coin.

I tend to agree with CT about getting the 40D but by the same token my primary is still a 20D and I love it to bits!

Nice lenses will be the next item on your list and so (whether you buy to keep or to uptrade regularly) get a decent body.

I would be ecstatic to find another 20D provided I can get it out the box:nuts:

The 30D was not a great improvement IMHO but the 40 definitely is.

If there is not a great amount of difference in price justifying the "old" 30D I would say get the 40D.

Good luck!
 
whacky said:
by cheap by twice is someting i go by normally but as it's soething i am just trying out is that the wisest idea?
Click to expand...

theory said:
Get the best you can afford or else you'll always regret your purchase. That's my motto anyway... If I spend less it always ends up costing me more.
Click to expand...

That's the way I think too, I've had my 30D for 18 months now and this is my first dSRL too.

If you've got the money get the 40D, IMHO the metal casing alone is worth the money over a plastic 400D
 
whiteflyer said:
If you've got the money get the 40D, IMHO the metal casing alone is worth the money over a plastic 400D
Click to expand...

YES,YES YES!:agree::agree::agree:

Some peeps get very uptight on this point and let me make it clear:WE ARE NOT SAYING THE 350/400D ARE NOT VERY COMPETENT CAMERAS!!:razz::lol::D:naughty::lol:

They are!

They are simply not in the same build class and comparing the 20/30/40D series with the 350/400D series in this regard would be very unfair.

Cheers m8:thumbs:
 
I know about the cost of housings more concerned with which camera the difference in cost of housing is negligible. choice is greater for 400d though
 
Not sure where you have been looking, but the cost of an underwater housing for any of the cameras you have been looking at will amount to at least the same price as the price you pay for the camera .... Unless you intend on using a plastic bag?

Hardly negligible.
 
.......don't forget, there is word that the 450D is due out next month(ish).
 
theory said:
Get the best you can afford or else you'll always regret your purchase. That's my motto anyway... If I spend less it always ends up costing me more.
Click to expand...

Excellent advice.:clap:
 
hypnotic said:
Not sure where you have been looking, but the cost of an underwater housing for any of the cameras you have been looking at will amount to at least the same price as the price you pay for the camera .... Unless you intend on using a plastic bag?

Hardly negligible.
Click to expand...


as i said the difference in cost is negligible (when considering the initial cost) an i am aware of how much they cost. You are looking at about £60 difference in the cost of the housings from 400d 30d to 400d. For comparable housings anyway youcan get housings that are sigificantly cheaper for the 400d. I have no intention of using a carrier a bag i find the lue stripes get in the way;). Although the budget range of housings that go down to around the 10m mark are not to far off being a carrier bag.:bonk:

I want to talk cameras more than housings, as has been said all the cameras are more than capable, i am just trying to decide if the extra cash for the 30d to keep saving for the 40d or to buy the 400d. As i have little DSLR experience i am picking all your brains to find wich camera will suit me on land. A 400d will suffice underwater and if that was all i intended for that wold be what i would get but i want to do some other p[hotography which then makes it more worthwhile considering the more expensive models. :clap:
 
Ok I only have a 300D still does me well but I bought this of a guy my son worked with with in commercial diving. The chap originally bought the 300d when they first came out and his intention was the same as you , to take it underwater. On discovering how expensive it was to get the protective casing he gave me the chance to buy it at a unbelievable bargain price (he was loaded) to buy a cheaper outfit, so as whiteflyer said it would be wise to check the price of casin and strobes as well which are expensive.
 
Honest i am aware of the cost of housings and strobes. Just need to make a decision re camera which is where my knowledge is a bit lacking. I know the specs of the various cameras I know roughly the pro's and cons of each. The biggest issue is wether i will regret buying the lower spec model if ichose that aftr a few months? I know there are plenty of people here who own a 400d but i suspect they may opt for the 30d/40d if that was an option. But on the other hand if it came to be that above ground photography wasnt for me I would have paid a fair bit of extra cash for a camera that wasn't being used to it's full potential.
 
To summarize then;)

Forget the 400,

If you must have it now and you can afford it get the 30D.

If you are willing to wait a bit (you said you would have to save up some more) go for the 40D!

IMHO;):thumbs:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top