brännvidd 1,4 på zoom-objektiv samt Kameraköp

[Aureola]

Hej Erik! Verkligen fin bild. Men i korthet, hur skiljer denna sig från 400D (mer än i pris?)
Jag fattar alltså inte vad den stora skillnaden är mellan dessa kameror som heter något på två resp tre siffror.
Uppenbarligen är de förstnämnda proffsigare eftersom de är dyrare men rent tekniskt, tar de bättre bilder?
Eller har man bara vräkt på med extra features såsom fler bilder/sek, extra stor LCD-display, ja du fattar.

 

[charlie_foto]

x0D vs x00D

My experience is only limited to Canon cameras. At the time I was at a similar position as you, I borrowed a 300D and a 20D. At the end, I bought a 20D with a kit lens and a 50/1.4. My reasons for getting a 20D, which still apply to today's range (400D vs 40D):
- x0D cameras have much better viewfinders, which comes very handy in available light photography;
- x0D cameras have lower noise at high ISO settings and offer ISO 3200, which can be handy in very low light situations;
- from my personal perspective, x0D cameras have better user interface with the quick control dial at the back, which I find very handy in M mode, and for quick exposure compensation;
- on the downside, x0D cameras are heavier and bigger but I can live with that.
- The choice of Canon was also slightly affected by the possibility to attach various (most) lenses from other (most) manufacturers to a Canon body. I have tried a friend's 16mm fisheye with an adapter (originally for some other camera that I don't remember now) and it was fairly usable. Manual focusing was not a problem, and I was only using it wide open so no oddities with manual aperture setting.

Cheers,

Karol

 

[Aureola]

Hello Karol and thank you for your input!
The possibility to set ISO 3200 is of course tempting. I'll definately consider it; if I buy a used one (30D)it doesn't cost me much more than a new 400D.
Although that depends on how much more they weigh. Because I want to bring this camera with me when I go packpacking and don't want to get lactic acid in my arms whenever I hold it for taking a photo without a tripod ;-)

 

[charlie_foto]

Hi Keisha,

the weight difference is certainly there and one can feel it. But I can also add that the grip on 20D/30D fits my hands much better, and it is much more comfortable to hold even for longer time periods. The grip on 350D/400D is too small for me, and after some time (ca 1 hour of intensive use) it did feel very uncomfortable. Also, I use the camera when/while skiing and the 20D is quite easy to use with gloves on.

You surely tried your friend's 400D, so you should have a good reference point. Now perhaps, try to find a 20D/30D around and hold it, or try to use it for some time to see how it is. A second hand 30D sounds like a good idea. And, it should be relatively easy to sell it (without much loss) if you will not like it.

Good luck with your choice.

Cheers,

Karol

P.S. I can read Swedish reasonably well, as I was able to read the whole previous discussion. Though, my written Swedish is not quite there, yet. Fell free to reply in Swedish.

 

[ekemannen]

Håller med karol ! Jag bytte från 300D till 30D och det var en stor skillnad. Betydligt bättre autofocus (i mörker), mindre brus på höga ISO'n och mer styrning av blix från kameran, samt att 30D har spotmätning (mäter ljus på 3% av bilden i mitten, väldigt användbart i ex. motljus, som min bild på kattugglan). Jämfört med 400D(även 350D) har 30D/40D större grepp och en display för inställningar på ovansidan. Om du tycker det är värt pengarna kan jag inte svara på utan du måste själv jämföra dom (eller 350D och 30D som är föregångarna och ungiför lika stor skillnad som mellan 400D och 40 D). En till sak : 300D orkade inte styra (autofocusen) mitt Sigma 70-200/2.8 men med 30D går det klockrent.

/ Erik