Who here would NOT purchase the 400D, and Why?

Started Sep 22, 2006 | Discussions
stratuss Regular Member • Posts: 191
I agree

jagge wrote:

Yes thats just ground breaking inovative thinking. If Nikon did
that i would hug them to death and never schwitch even if iso 200
became noisy :0). If canon made that move i would schwitch at the
blink of an eye. I think more open standards cant be overestimated.
A bold move from Pentax. Actually they have been quite inovative,
funny to see that one of the small players actually offers some of
the most interesting solutions on several issues.

I've been looking at what the others have been doing and Canon
is lagging. The 400D is 'better', but it's too small and the Pentax's
and others are innovative. Glass investment is what's keeping me from
switching and trying others.

Glenn W. Veteran Member • Posts: 6,428
Re: I agree

Given my recent focus problems with a new f2.8 lens and a old 300D... I'm seriously re-considering everything about my choices in photography... My 'investment' in Canon lenses is reasonably minimal at this point. It would seem due to poor AF with fast lenses on the pre-400D entry level Canon DSLRs I'm going to beforced to buy a new camera body if I want to improve my photography sucsess rate...

Now... if only someone would be so innovative to create a standard AF lens interface to a camera body.... where non of us would have to be married to any camera maker due to our 'investment' in lenses...

I for one at this point (15 years after my first Canon EOS system) am seriously considering bailing on Canon... It's not nessasarly that I thnk the 400D is such a bad camera... it's just that myself I can't see spending $1200 on good lens which seems to be Canon's current price range for anything aproaching 'pro' proformance with IS...

I personaly would not switch to Nikon at this point in time, I think they are at best marginaly better then Canon in the innovation and quality/$$ departement, really I think Canon and Nikon are about equal value to the prosumer photographer... This Pentax stuff looks REALLY interesting...

stratuss wrote:

jagge wrote:

Yes thats just ground breaking inovative thinking. If Nikon did
that i would hug them to death and never schwitch even if iso 200
became noisy :0). If canon made that move i would schwitch at the
blink of an eye. I think more open standards cant be overestimated.
A bold move from Pentax. Actually they have been quite inovative,
funny to see that one of the small players actually offers some of
the most interesting solutions on several issues.

I've been looking at what the others have been doing and Canon
is lagging. The 400D is 'better', but it's too small and the Pentax's
and others are innovative. Glass investment is what's keeping me from
switching and trying others.

jagge Veteran Member • Posts: 4,149
The sensor barrier.

Nikon are about equal value to the prosumer photographer... This
Pentax stuff looks REALLY interesting...

What i find really interesting / frustrating is that the dslr market seems to be somewhat stuck because of sensor technology. Canon have had slight lead on this for a long time, Nikon seems to be very close now with the D80 but the development is far from as big as the development in bodys, features and so on.

I really hope that pentax will break that barrier, but we will have to wait and see. In the end its about IQ and here the advances within the last few years have been limited i think. Resolution yes, but absolute IQ not.

I was hoping that Fuji would drop a bomb, but it seems they will only play in the pro segment, thats a real shame for all brands i think, a great fuji high iso performer in the D80, 400D, 30D segment would have been very interesting.

Best wishes

Jakob

SENSEI Contributing Member • Posts: 537
Re: Who here would NOT purchase the 400D, and Why?

What exactly are you talking about here?

Is this a documented issue? Or just your personal experience?

I use the 17-55IS 2.8, 50mm1.8, 35mm2.0 and the XT perfroms and focusses just at as good as my 20D. In fact in lower light, the XT and the 17-55IS is faster thatn the 20D.

Glenn W. wrote:
Better be carefull... if you buy better glass that happens to be
f2.8 or faster... your 350D may not focus well enough to make use
of that f2.8...

bektravels wrote:

snapware wrote:

Who here would NOT purchase the 400D, and Why?

350d has all the features/af speed/buffer/megapixels etc that I
need in a camera. I was mad keen to upgrade from my old 300d to the
350d, but 350d to 400d? Not really interested:-)

Am more interested in better glass than what I see for my needs as
an un-necesary body upgrade...

B.

-- hide signature --

Shane Ho
Toronto, Canada
http://www.sensei.smugmug.com

kristian1 Senior Member • Posts: 2,385
4 reason why not....

1. it less sensitive as it looks than 350d.
2. it has more noise at haigh iso than 350d.
3. body is too small.
4 i want 5 fps..

all best
kristian.

snapware wrote:

Who here would NOT purchase the 400D, and Why?

 kristian1's gear list:kristian1's gear list
Canon EOS 5DS R Canon EOS R Canon EOS-1D X Mark II Sigma 12-24mm F4 Art Canon RF 50mm F1.2L USM +2 more
Glenn W. Veteran Member • Posts: 6,428
Re: Who here would NOT purchase the 400D, and Why?

See this post...

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1031&message=20137838

and perticularly the refferances to the differance between the high precsion ablitys of the hybrid center AF point that's used on the 20D, 30D, 5D, and now on the 400D... The center point of these AF systems is said to be 3 times better then the center point of the 350D when used with a f2.8 or faster lens...

You may also want to look at Doug Kerr's good explination about Canon's 'standard' and their 'high precsion' focus specifications...

In short... on a 300D or 350D, all your really guarunteed by Canon is that the focus point is somewhere witin the depth of feild for the max aperture of the lens when using a 'basic' or standard canon focus point... also not that on even the 20D, 30D, 400D, or 5D, the only focus point that's capale of the 'high percison' focus is the center one, when using a f2.8 or better lens.

SENSEI wrote:
What exactly are you talking about here?

Is this a documented issue? Or just your personal experience?

I use the 17-55IS 2.8, 50mm1.8, 35mm2.0 and the XT perfroms and
focusses just at as good as my 20D. In fact in lower light, the XT
and the 17-55IS is faster thatn the 20D.

Glenn W. wrote:
Better be carefull... if you buy better glass that happens to be
f2.8 or faster... your 350D may not focus well enough to make use
of that f2.8...

bektravels wrote:

snapware wrote:

Who here would NOT purchase the 400D, and Why?

350d has all the features/af speed/buffer/megapixels etc that I
need in a camera. I was mad keen to upgrade from my old 300d to the
350d, but 350d to 400d? Not really interested:-)

Am more interested in better glass than what I see for my needs as
an un-necesary body upgrade...

B.

Glenn W. Veteran Member • Posts: 6,428
Re: Who here would NOT purchase the 400D, and Why?

I should also add... that if your getting better then 'within depth of focus' accuracy on your 350D with a f2.8 lens, you should consider yourslef very fortunate...

Glenn W. wrote:
See this post...

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1031&message=20137838

and perticularly the refferances to the differance between the high
precsion ablitys of the hybrid center AF point that's used on the
20D, 30D, 5D, and now on the 400D... The center point of these AF
systems is said to be 3 times better then the center point of the
350D when used with a f2.8 or faster lens...

You may also want to look at Doug Kerr's good explination about
Canon's 'standard' and their 'high precsion' focus specifications...

In short... on a 300D or 350D, all your really guarunteed by Canon
is that the focus point is somewhere witin the depth of feild for
the max aperture of the lens when using a 'basic' or standard canon
focus point... also not that on even the 20D, 30D, 400D, or 5D, the
only focus point that's capale of the 'high percison' focus is the
center one, when using a f2.8 or better lens.

SENSEI wrote:
What exactly are you talking about here?

Is this a documented issue? Or just your personal experience?

I use the 17-55IS 2.8, 50mm1.8, 35mm2.0 and the XT perfroms and
focusses just at as good as my 20D. In fact in lower light, the XT
and the 17-55IS is faster thatn the 20D.

Glenn W. wrote:
Better be carefull... if you buy better glass that happens to be
f2.8 or faster... your 350D may not focus well enough to make use
of that f2.8...

bektravels wrote:

snapware wrote:

Who here would NOT purchase the 400D, and Why?

350d has all the features/af speed/buffer/megapixels etc that I
need in a camera. I was mad keen to upgrade from my old 300d to the
350d, but 350d to 400d? Not really interested:-)

Am more interested in better glass than what I see for my needs as
an un-necesary body upgrade...

B.

Antony Smith Junior Member • Posts: 34
Re: I agree

Glenn W. wrote:
...

Now... if only someone would be so innovative to create a standard
AF lens interface to a camera body.... where non of us would have
to be married to any camera maker due to our 'investment' in
lenses...

That was what the Four Thirds was supposed to be. Similarly with DNG, if only one manufacturer supports the "standard", then it may as well be proprietory.

Tony

thw Veteran Member • Posts: 8,089
Actually..

size of XT is PERFECT for me. BUT the grip needs to be better. Mount the 17-55 f/2.8 IS and the whole setup feels so unbalanced.

Pentax K10D sounds perfect, but need to check

(i) availability, price and weight of lenses (no point in switching to HEAVIER lenses without IS. Pentax lenses won't be available till Mar '07 and by then, we'll see if Canon delivers what they've promised: improved DR and high ISO performance.

(ii) image quality is still unknown

(iii) autofocus of Pentax has never been fast enough for me

(iv) jpeg quality is still unknown

(v) RAW files (PEF and DNG) are uncompressed

At the moment, I have almost all the lenses I need in Canon mount. But my 70-300 IS lens has been sent to Canon 3 times now for the portrait issue. If it does not get fixed, I will consider selling my entire Canon gear and move to Pentax; I am so sick of this.

-- hide signature --

See the colors of my world in:
thw.smugmug.com

bjmondpr Forum Member • Posts: 88
Re: Who here would NOT purchase the 400D, and Why?

Because I'm happy with my 350D which still works with RSP.
--
Brian

http://www.bjmontheweb.com

jrynash Veteran Member • Posts: 3,141
too late, got one (nt)
n/t
betterliving Senior Member • Posts: 1,077
I wont buy it

Too close to the 350, Too tiny, Viewfinder not good and placing data on the rear LCD screen is amaturish.

-- hide signature --

David

dovbaer Regular Member • Posts: 168
Too soon

I bought my 350 last November. It's a little early to upgrade. I'll wait one or 2 more upgrades before jumping in. I like the upgrades that they made, though.

cheddargav Veteran Member • Posts: 4,493
Re: A Pentax users 400D experience :)

Hello,

I'm a Pentax DS shooter, but I'm off work, bored and browsing the forums. Thought I'd input my thoughts onto this thread based on a visit to Jessops (UK) today.

I was basically killing time, and I like window shopping, so I thought "Oooh, lets waste some of the salesmans time by asking to try a few cameras out."

So I thought I'd give the 400D a go. Now, I have used a friends 350, and to be honest, I was not impressed. I much prefered my DS (tho naturally I've gotten used to it), but I guess my main 350 dislikes were the grip and the buttons (felt a bit cheap).

Luckily they had a 50 f1.4 there, so he attached the lens and passed it to me. And here's the thing.... I liked it! And I really didn't think I would...
Reasons:
+ With the 50mm attached, the weight and balance felt very good

+ I'm still not a massive fan of the grip, but it seems slightly more prominent than the 350's and it felt a bit better.

+ The screen - ok, it's lame, but I really did like the big screen for reviewing shots

+ The fact that the eye-sensor thing works without you noticing it. You put your eye to the viewfinder, and the LCD goes off, take your eye away, and it comes back on, brilliant...

+ My favourite thing tho (and this may sound strange, but a few of you will understand) was the shutter sound! It was quiet compared to my DS and sounded much nicer than the 20D I had recently tried aswell (which, by the way, sounded, ummm, clunky?? Nice camera all the same)

And just to make sure it wasn't the 50mm making the experience biased, I put the 17-40 on, and it felt equally good.

So to conclude, I liked it. I would be happy to shoot with one of those.

Oh, and then I tried a 5D. Not bad I suppose
--
I'm so bored!

 cheddargav's gear list:cheddargav's gear list
Canon EOS 5D Mark II Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX7 Canon EOS 6D Canon EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM Sigma 50mm F1.4 EX DG HSM +4 more
Stevil Senior Member • Posts: 1,489
Too small, no spot metering (nt)

snapware wrote:

Who here would NOT purchase the 400D, and Why?

 Stevil's gear list:Stevil's gear list
Canon EOS 6D Olympus PEN E-PL2 Canon EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM Canon EF 40mm f/2.8 STM Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 USM +2 more
Pusseapa Contributing Member • Posts: 722
Re: Would not because of Pentax K10D

same here!
--
.

Joe Photo Lover Veteran Member • Posts: 3,040
Re: Who here would NOT purchase the 400D, and Why?

I won't upgrade from my Rebel XT yet (lenses are a better investment) but after seeing the XTi my next camera will absolutely "have to have" that 2.5 inch LCD screen!

cmacc New Member • Posts: 6
Re: Who here would NOT purchase the 400D, and Why?

I'm on the fence, but likely will not go for 400D. After reading initial preview & reviewing specs., my inclination was to trade up from 350D. However, my thinking now is that it's probably best to distinguish between what I want (feature-wise), vs. what I really need. Also, some of the new features likely have pluses and minuses (e.g., the 2 mp jump in resolution will likely necessitate some additional noise @ higher ISO, albeit perhaps minor, etc.).

Most importantly, one begins to realize that the parade of new features and incremental improvements in the DSLR world will be continuous / unending, that many of the "improvements" are marketing-driven changes that may not result in a better camera, & that (for me) it's probably best to wait until more substantial improvements are made.

Finally, I am thinking of specific future changes which will likely come with a future camera (e.g., 40D or 450D) which I may find important, such as :

IS (image stab.) in the camera, Digic III (if it will be adpated for DSLR), possible improvement/tweaking of dust cleaning system, etc.

In short, as time goes by, the same $ will purchase a camera with more capabilities, so perhaps the driving principal should be to make the investment in newest / current technology only when needed.

Hope this perspective helps someone...

Sarajean Senior Member • Posts: 2,988
Pentax K10D (nt)

easy answer

tomiboi Contributing Member • Posts: 889
nice trolling,dude[nt]

right on target.

Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads