Canon 450d Is About To Be Released

[chezzyr]

Ripley: perhaps wait til you have a good play with the new lenses on the current body.

You might be surprised. Another thing, I think you will find the 20d, 30d, 40d etc

heavier, a much more solid camera to be using. Than what you currently have.

Rubiton: I think I know what you are describing. Some would call it "materialism"

[Guest Tess32]

I really didn't see much difference between the 350D and 30D other than size, and spot metering. Unless you have specific demands I really think ALL of those cameras would suit any amateur photographer. It's the lenses that count in the end anyway.

I upgraded to the 30D because I wanted a bigger body as it felt better, and I did want spot metering. But that's it really, spend your money on lenses, not the camera most of the time.

[Ripley]

The only thing that really annoys me on the 350D is the small screen - I have to zoom in to see if the shot is sharp. I've also noticed in low light photographs, if you use ISO 200 and not 100 there is obvious noise. Now I've learned in low light (and darkness) to use ISO 100 and the long exposure noise reduction that solves that problem but just wondering what other Canons are like noise wise. My husband's Olympus 400 he was given through work is a lot noisier than the Canon at ISO 400, I've noticed. Have only noticed this when viewing the photos on my computer monitor at home, full screen.

eta: I cannot wait to get this new lens in a week. Don't know what to practise on but feel the fairly tame lorikeets and their 2 babies I feed will be the first subjects.

Edited April 5, 2008 by Ripley

[Guest Tess32]

The screen on the 30D is much bigger but I still have to zoom in, I think you always have to as it's still impossible at that stage to check if a photo is sharp enough.

Canon's noise is pretty low usually. You're always going to get some noise in the dark areas in lowlight...

[Ripley]

I love this little forum of DOL. If I post the same question in a photographic forum I'm on (I've posted an entire 2 posts and probably won't post anymore as it's all middle aged blokes trying to outdo each other) I get them arguing amongst themselves about the Nikon and the Canon and they don't answer my question .

You guys have been very helpful with what I was tossing up. Thanks.

[chezzyr]

What about the 400d as an "upgrade"? Isn't the screen a bit bigger ie like 2 postage stamps instead of one

Personally I don't think you are going to get a real accurate idea until you can get your images onto a computer

anyway. Just think, atleast you have a screen unlike film cameras where you have to wait until

you get the film processed.

[Ripley]

Speaking of which, how's the slide film going, chezzyr?

[chezzyr]

Slide film - I have finished a couple films and half way through another

I am more particular with what I use it for. Thanks for the prompt!

[kja]

What about the 400d as an "upgrade"? Isn't the screen a bit bigger ie like 2 postage stamps instead of one

The screen is gorgeous on the 400D. That is one slick camera, for sure! I really like the 400D and the images are sweet. One of my dive buddies has this as her primary and when she first got it it knocked my socks off :rolleyes: I was still shooting my 20D and couldn't wait to lay hands on my new 40D just for the bigger screen LOL The 400D is still on my list as a camera for hubby (third backup) for later in the year and I'm pretty sure I won't be swayed by the new 450D. At the current prices, the 40D is still the better camera for about the same money as the new model (though the new model won't keep it's high initial price for long!)

You still have to zoom in to check critical focus on details, but even then those lcds aren't nearly as good as your computer monitor. Best best is to take several frames wherever possible to give yourself some safety net.

Noise is handled much better by the 400D than the 350D. I think, just from personal use, the 20D and the 400D are very similar though I would still give the edge at 800+ ISO to the 20D, surprisingly. The 40D is better yet. For me, the 350 at ISO400 was just acceptable, anything higher and I wasn't that thrilled. The 400D is acceptable to me at 800 and if you're really careful, ok at 1600. I expect the new Canon range probably later this year or maybe next year to see a huge jump in noise improvement since Nikon made an incredible leap with their technology this year (still not quite the level of Canons, imho, but pretty darned close) - hopefully it will encourage Canon to stop resting on this issue!

As has been said before, any of these models will be good workers - there isn't a dud in the batch. You just have to look at the features on the higher end models to see if they are worth the tradeoff in price to you. Any money you do save can then be put towards fun holidays or more glass

Edited April 5, 2008 by kja

[chezzyr]

I am thinking about getting my OH a 400d as a belated birthday present. Not sure what

the prices are doing on the 400d but it seems I can get one with a 17-85mm IS lens

for around $960 which to me seems like a really good deal. I could also get just

the body but I am in need of a semi wide angle lens so thought that might be a

economical way of going about it

Edited April 6, 2008 by chezzyr

[Kirislin]

Well, I'm in no hurry to upgrade. I've only just got the 400D mainly because on a whippet forum I go to so many there have it, it's called the Rebel in the US and they love it. I wanted to be able to capture those intense action shots of whippets running. It's all very new to me but so far I am loving it. I cant post any pics here yet though because I need a new monitor,(there's always a glitch) but I love the instant view with it instead of waiting weeks until you get your film developed only to find you had a problem and they didn't turn out.

I am very much an amateur maybe I am over camera'd but hopefully I will learn and some day make use of all that it can do.

I am so glad this little forum is here though. I dont think I ever visited until I got the camera.

Linda

[Monah]

I'm getting a 450D. I'm happy with all the shots I've seen from the 400D, but just figure I may as well get the 450 as I wont be getting another camera for a while. We have so many cameras here For all sorts of uses.

Personally, nothing has ever beaten the minolta slr I got nearly 30 years ago. I never ever even used a flash. It was terrrific and I won many competitions with it. For me, going digital, has never measured up. I'm sure it's because I'm technologically challenged. I'll just have to rectify the situation.

If anyone has a 450D, can you let me know how you find it please?

[rubiton]

I actually found that the 10D screen while small was the most accurate on focus - on teh 40D the screen is bigger but unless its really out of focus I cant tell til I get home and put them onto the computer.

Found the batteries for the 350D were also far better than the ones I'd been using for the 10D they last for ages (my best current battery is the one I bought for the bigger cameras not one that came with either of them). I've only been using the 350D for the odd handful of photos in the house at the moment but the battery in it hasnt been charged for months - though I think its starting to show 'low battery' now.

As for noise (as in the actual sound it makes) the 40D is incredibly loud far louder than the 10D or the 350D - when I take a group of pics it sounds like that Duran Duran song intro.

I think the noise (as in picture quality in low light situations where you can't use flash) is being worked on for all models as they improve the technology as 18 months ago I had problemswith both cameras taking photos at the harness racing or other lowlight situations. Those with the next model up at the time didnt have the same problem appearing.

[Cordelia]

*sigh* I so want the 40D. :D

[Ripley]

Had a few on watch on ebay out of interest. Here is what a few Canons went for:

The 350D and its 70-300mm lens - same kit one as I have - went for $710. That didn't include the 18-55mm with it.

A second hand 20D, body only, went for $699.

[wagsalot]

Wow, I didn't think the 350D would get that price.

Edited to add - I sold the 70-300 kit lens on ebay when I got my IS lens. I got $160 for it.

Edited April 9, 2008 by wagsalot

[kja]

Ebay cracks me up - some of the prices are so outlandish you wonder if the buyers even check around at all or just get caught up in the moment?!

[chezzyr]

I think its called getting caught up in the moment ;)

Anyone know what a broken 300d with working 18-55mm kit lens is worth? ;)

[Ripley]

Well at least I know what I can get if I chuck in my 18-55mm and 70-300mm with the 350D.

I asked OH if I could do that as he was dashing to work and he waved his hand at me and said "do whatever"

[kja]

I love when they do things like that