350d or 400d

Johnny|lucidcomposure · 15 Oct 2006 at 03:30

Colin_da_Killer said:
It's not the camera, it's the eye behind it

or in cykeys mind. the purse behind it

ElDude · 15 Oct 2006 at 10:09

Fstop11 said:
Bah Sigma 10 - 20. Id love to do my own tests on this lens as Im currently awaiting arrival of Canon 10 - 22.

I keep slagging the sigma off based on reviews I have read but I think I really do cut this lens too short.

I think for the money its a very good deal.

If it's even close to the 12-24 it's a cracking lens. I can only go by my 12-24, and that's really good

Johnny|lucidcomposure · 15 Oct 2006 at 11:19

ElDude said:
If it's even close to the 12-24 it's a cracking lens. I can only go by my 12-24, and that's really good

If I was going sigma..Thats the one I would have. The fact they have a 10 - 20 and a 12 - 24 makes me believe that the 10 - 20 is gonna be the weaker of the two.

SDK^ · 15 Oct 2006 at 11:58

Fstop11 said:
or in cykeys mind. the purse behind it

or in rG's mind... the Insurance claim behind it

rG-tom · 15 Oct 2006 at 18:21

SDK^ said:
or in rG's mind... the Insurance claim behind it

ElDude · 15 Oct 2006 at 21:21

You're impressed. I can tell these things you see

The Darkness · 16 Oct 2006 at 12:52

I was undecided between the two for a while. In the end I went for the 350D for the following main reasons:

1. As an entry level dSLR, cost was important to me. When I purchased it there was a ~£100 price difference between the two which is significent to me.

2. The 350D has been around a long time, lots is known about it, and it still does consistantly well in reviews (recent What digital camera feature for example, where it came out on top for image quality compared to the sony etc). The 400D was a bit of an unknown when I wanted to make a choice, so I went for the safer option (imo).

More is known about the 400d now so (2) may not apply now!

Cheers