Reading mode: Light Dark

400d is not a beginner camera

Go to last post
G

giulianus

Active member
Messages
68
Reaction score
0
I read many comments about 400d as a beginner camera.

May be it's an entry level for its price but for its quality and gadgets surely it's not!!

I'm a photographer from 30 years and i made and saw wonderful shots made with mechanic cameras with the fastest shutter time of 1/1000, with a very simple esposimeter and without any automatism.

Use your eyes and your brain and don't spend time about a gadget more or less

Giuliano from Florence (Italy)
 
That's really just your subjective opinion. To some, the 400D will be a beginner's camera - to others, it may not be. Simple as that.

------------
Collin
 
giulianus said:
I read many comments about 400d as a beginner camera.
May be it's an entry level for its price but for its quality and
gadgets surely it's not!!
Click to expand...
Offcourse image quality is great. And thats its true for practically every dslr out there.

What differs are build and features, and especially feature wise there is no doubt that the 400D is a beginner camera especially compared to the much more advanced and customiseble D80.

I think that is why its called a beginner camera, but IQ is great no doubt about it.

Jakob
 
subjective opinion? It's not a point and shoot. It's an SLR camera. If it's considered a beginner's camera, that's only in the area of SLR's. But the concept of using an SLR camera is a bit more involved than a simple point and shoot and people need to understand that when using them. We all sucked when we first started using them until we learned HOW to use them. Now it's your time to suck until you learn how. ;)

The Rebels and their older brethren are capable of many great shots, but it still takes skill and knowledge beyond what is needed for simple pointing and shooting to get truly great spectacular shots.
Collin85 said:
That's really just your subjective opinion. To some, the 400D will
be a beginner's camera - to others, it may not be. Simple as that.

------------
Collin
Click to expand...
--
Reach for what you want! Don't let anything stop you!
http://www.kingphotosonline.com
Kansas City Photography Community
http://www.kcphotolink.com
 
So would you consider the Leica M8 a beginner camera? It has far less features than the 400D, heck it doesn't even have a grip! Hmm a beginner camera that costs $1000's more....

Roger
Paulotvfc said:
It's a camera for beginners in the DSLR world. Just looking at the
features over a 5D or a 1Ds and it stands as a beginner camera.

--
Check my other photos here: http://www.olhares.com/paulodevasconcelos
(sorry about my english, it's not my native language)
Click to expand...
 
Roger Schliefert said:
Roger
Paulotvfc said:
It's a camera for beginners in the DSLR world. Just looking at the
features over a 5D or a 1Ds and it stands as a beginner camera.

--
Check my other photos here: http://www.olhares.com/paulodevasconcelos
(sorry about my english, it's not my native language)
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
I tought we were talking about Canon DSLR line up. And in that line up i consider the 400D a DSLR for beginners.

--
Check my other photos here: http://www.olhares.com/paulodevasconcelos
(sorry about my english, it's not my native language)
 
.. you used to see great photos in the magazines then learn they were taken with a Zenit 11 or 12.......

Then wonder why I couldnt do as well with my Canon T70!
 
Folks like to call cameras like the XTi and D50 beginners cameras to rationalize their purchase of a more expensive model. The real answer is that most folks should buy the camera they need. As a 40 year armature photographer who does not shoot professionally or travel in the Amazon Rain forest, I chose a d50. Any other model would have been a waste of money . I much prefer lenses.
--
Check my Photo Blog
http://parisea.blogspot.com/

If you saw a man drowning and you could either save him or photograph the event...what kind of film would you use? -Anonymous
 
Yes, subjective opinion.

You even said so yourself: 'beginner's camera ... in the area of SLR's'. Hence, it depends on your own circumstances. So a person moving from a point and shoot to a 1D vs. 400D would obviously view the 400D more as a 'beginner' model, since it's all relative. Plus then there's the proficiency level of that person with point and shoots which also contributes to the argument. A person who only used Auto on a P&S moving to a 400D would most likely not regard it as a 'beginner's model'. Personally, I moved from an S3-IS.. and even prior to that I was accustomed to all the shooting modes, shutter speed, aperture, ISO, metering, white balance etc. so the only issue I really had with the 400D was getting used to it's naturally lower DoF.. it's all relative, and dependent on each person's own circumstances. Hence, I believe the original post is just threadstarter's own personal subjective opinion.
Korrupt said:
The Rebels and their older brethren are capable of many great
shots, but it still takes skill and knowledge beyond what is needed
for simple pointing and shooting to get truly great spectacular
shots.
Collin85 said:
That's really just your subjective opinion. To some, the 400D will
be a beginner's camera - to others, it may not be. Simple as that.

------------
Collin
Click to expand...
--
Reach for what you want! Don't let anything stop you!
http://www.kingphotosonline.com
Kansas City Photography Community
http://www.kcphotolink.com
Click to expand...
--
  • Collin
 
My thought:

Nowadays people mainly base on the price level to determine the classification of a DSLR. I'm also a photographer that started my shooting experience in the film era over decades with cameras like Canon AE-1, Yashica FX-3, Contax 139, Nikon FM-2, Nikon F401, Nikon F90X, etc. At the time when I bought the Canon 350D, everyone mentioned it was an entry level camera. Of course this is an entry-level DSLR as per today's standard. Actually the 350D (and now the 400D) can be a beginner as well as a professional camera depending on how it's being used.

Due to technology advancement, nowadays's entry level DSLRs would be more powerful than professional cameras of the old days.
giulianus said:
I read many comments about 400d as a beginner camera.
May be it's an entry level for its price but for its quality and
gadgets surely it's not!!

I'm a photographer from 30 years and i made and saw wonderful shots
made with mechanic cameras with the fastest shutter time of 1/1000,
with a very simple esposimeter and without any automatism.

Use your eyes and your brain and don't spend time about a gadget
more or less

Giuliano from Florence (Italy)
Click to expand...
 
Do people seriously think of a $900 camera that can use thousand dollar lenses and that has every possible control option in the book (except spot metering, of course) is a "beginner" camera? I don't. There's a difference between entry level DSLR and "beginner" camera.

Just look at that "convince me" poster in here. If anyone needed a beginner camera, it's that dude....and it's not the 400D.
 
Parisis said:
Folks like to call cameras like the XTi and D50 beginners cameras
to rationalize their purchase of a more expensive model. The real
answer is that most folks should buy the camera they need. As a 40
year armature photographer who does not shoot professionally or
travel in the Amazon Rain forest, I chose a d50. Any other model
would have been a waste of money . I much prefer lenses.
--
Check my Photo Blog
http://parisea.blogspot.com/
If you saw a man drowning and you could either save him or
photograph the event...what kind of film would you use? -Anonymous
Click to expand...
But tell me, if all DSLR cameras are suitable for everyone (beginners and professionals) why professionals go spend an obscene amount of money in high-end DSLRS bodies if they can do the job with a $1000 camera. It's like that with digital cameras and was like that with 35mm cameras.

Rhe fact, in my opinion, is that the features in a 400D or a D50 are limited and that's why they are beginners DSLR's.

Cheers

--
Check my other photos here: http://www.olhares.com/paulodevasconcelos
(sorry about my english, it's not my native language)
 
It is an entry level camera to DSLR, but far from a beginner's camera. Many people struggle with a P&S and in the end rely on Auto or Program mode. A friend just returned from Thailand with her Coolpix and asked me why around 40% of the shots were blurred. Can you imagine her using an entry level dSLR?
giulianus said:
I read many comments about 400d as a beginner camera.
May be it's an entry level for its price but for its quality and
gadgets surely it's not!!

I'm a photographer from 30 years and i made and saw wonderful shots
made with mechanic cameras with the fastest shutter time of 1/1000,
with a very simple esposimeter and without any automatism.

Use your eyes and your brain and don't spend time about a gadget
more or less

Giuliano from Florence (Italy)
Click to expand...
--

 
Paulotvfc said:
But tell me, if all DSLR cameras are suitable for everyone
(beginners and professionals) why professionals go spend an obscene
amount of money in high-end DSLRS bodies if they can do the job
with a $1000 camera. It's like that with digital cameras and was
like that with 35mm cameras.
Click to expand...
If I remember correctly, the "pro" cameras have watertight bodies, so they are more durable over a consumer camera.

Also, the 400D does not go above ISO 1600 where the 30d goes to ISO 3200.

--
Steve
Digital Rebel
18-55 Kit Lens
70-300 IS Lens
24-135 Tamron Lens
Sigma EF-500 DG ST Flash
 
Iìll try to explain better my opinions about the word "beginner".
I think a beginner is a person who use auto or program mode,
I think a beginner is a person who don't know what is "depth of view"
or the many rules of optics.
I think a beginner is a person tho tries to learn to see.

I used medium and large format too and i know that is obvious for a Pro to think at his camera as a tool for his job.

If i shot sport for a newspaper,for example, i need a superfast camera with a large buffer and wheatherproof too.
This is not the point.

I repeat the 400d is surely an entry level for its price and his costruction,
but not for beginners (unless they use only auto or programmed modes).

Is a valid and affordable tool for the amateur to enhance own skills and knowledge of photography.
 
giulianus said:
Iìll try to explain better my opinions about the word "beginner".
I think a beginner is a person who use auto or program mode,
I think a beginner is a person who don't know what is "depth of view"
or the many rules of optics.
I think a beginner is a person tho tries to learn to see.

I used medium and large format too and i know that is obvious for a
Pro to think at his camera as a tool for his job.
If i shot sport for a newspaper,for example, i need a superfast
camera with a large buffer and wheatherproof too.
This is not the point.

I repeat the 400d is surely an entry level for its price and his
costruction,
but not for beginners (unless they use only auto or programmed modes).
Is a valid and affordable tool for the amateur to enhance own
skills and knowledge of photography.
Click to expand...
I don't get what you are saying.

Why do you think the 400D is not suitable for anyone to learn the above?

On the contrary, I would say its a perfect camera to learn all of the above.

It has full auto (green square) or the scene modes for the complete beginner. And then it has all of the flexibility you could reasonably need, unless you are a "super-expert".

You can progress from green square to program mode and play around with program shift to see the effect of different apertures and shutter speeds.

You can have a go at aperture or shutter speed priority auto and take better control.

And finally you can get the hang of metering off a variety of surfaces/subjects before chosing your own manual settings.

And of course you have control over the flash too.

The only important ommission (in my humble opinion) is spot metering.

What else could a beginner possibly need?

Chip
 
..it matches up with other brand's entry level unit. Cameras evolve over time and better features and performance are put into them.
 
Chippy99 said:
giulianus said:
Iìll try to explain better my opinions about the word "beginner".
I think a beginner is a person who use auto or program mode,
I think a beginner is a person who don't know what is "depth of view"
or the many rules of optics.
I think a beginner is a person tho tries to learn to see.

I used medium and large format too and i know that is obvious for a
Pro to think at his camera as a tool for his job.
If i shot sport for a newspaper,for example, i need a superfast
camera with a large buffer and wheatherproof too.
This is not the point.

I repeat the 400d is surely an entry level for its price and his
costruction,
but not for beginners (unless they use only auto or programmed modes).
Is a valid and affordable tool for the amateur to enhance own
skills and knowledge of photography.
Click to expand...
I don't get what you are saying.

Why do you think the 400D is not suitable for anyone to learn the
above?

On the contrary, I would say its a perfect camera to learn all of
the above.
Click to expand...
So you're saying that it's a camera for beginners!! :))

--
Check my other photos here: http://www.olhares.com/paulodevasconcelos
(sorry about my english, it's not my native language)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top