which one? whats the main differences?

xirokx

xirokx

xirokx

Soldato
Joined
2 Oct 2004
Posts
4,362
Location
N.W London
Hi,

I was wondering if you guys could would not mind helping a n00b with a strong desire to increase knowledge with photography...

I would like to purchase one of these cameras, which one is bang for buck:

a) canon EOS 350D
b) canon EOS 400D
c) canon EOS 30D
d) Nikon D70
e) Nikon D80

Now Im aware they are all good, great cameras...

However out these which would you pro's think is bang for buck?

Also which one of these is good for a n00b / intermediate photography individual?

All help and advice would be most appreciated

Thanks
 
Not so sure on the Nikons, but if you are after "Bang for buck" I would say the 350D as I bet you can get some great deals with the 400D released now (Bigger screen and slightly higher resolution, but quality is the same).

The 30D is the best, if you can stretch to it.
 
30D has metal body and is bigger and chunkier. It also has a bigger display than the 350D (about the same as the 400D though). It also has more dials meaning an easier interface.

Depending how important the money is to you, I'd go for the 30D. They are all fantastic cameras though, with very little difference if any in picture quality.
 
starscream said:
30D has metal body and is bigger and chunkier. It also has a bigger display than the 350D (about the same as the 400D though). It also has more dials meaning an easier interface.
Click to expand...

And some more important things such as 5fps, spot meter, larger buffer...
 
xirokx said:
thanks for the swift response,

whats the difference between:

a) 30d and 350d

b) 30d and 400d

thanks
Click to expand...
Well I've found the specs for the 350D, 400D and 30D on the Canon UK site. That might help you although you might want to check out a site like dpreview I think it is for reviews of all three.

DPReview 350D, 400D and 30D. Hope this helps. I'm not an expert in photography but I've been toying with the idea of getting started. I had settled on getting a 350D but realised that 30Ds are pretty popular on the OcUK photography forums and also seem much better performers compared to 350Ds from what I've seen. I'm now targeting a 30D as and when I get the money and I can convince my Mum. :D
 
xolotl said:
And some more important things such as 5fps, spot meter, larger buffer...
Click to expand...

Yeah those as well, although to me the most important difference is the size/build :)

MarcLister said:
I had settled on getting a 350D but realised that 30Ds are pretty popular on the OcUK photography forums and also seem much better performers compared to 350Ds from what I've seen. I'm now targeting a 30D as and when I get the money and I can convince my Mum.
Click to expand...

Remember that the quality if the image is mostly down to the lense. a 350D with an "L" lens will take better quality pictures that a 30D with a kit lens. To make a fair comparison, you need to compare both bodies with the same lens and IMO there is very little in them. Another thing to remember is that as the 350D is the "Budget" DSLR, a lot of photos you will see are taken by amature or new photographers. The 30D is more of a professional camera, so may possibly attract more professional photographers. That is a very general comment though, I have seen some awesome pics taken by 350D's here, and I own one myself.

Edit : to expand on this, I believe a 30D with a kit lense (18-55mm) will not be as good as a 350D with a 17-85mm lens, yet to buy the bodies with those lenses would come out about the same (350D + 17-85mm may even be cheaper)
 
Last edited:
starscream said:
Remember that the quality if the image is mostly down to the lense. a 350D with an "L" lens will take better quality pictures that a 30D with a kit lens. To make a fair comparison, you need to compare both bodies with the same lens and IMO there is very little in them. Another thing to remember is that as the 350D is the "Budget" DSLR, a lot of photos you will see are taken by amature or new photographers. The 30D is more of a professional camera, so may possibly attract more professional photographers. That is a very general comment though, I have seen some awesome pics taken by 350D's here, and I own one myself.
Click to expand...
I do know that. ;) Thats why I'm waiting to see if I can get a 30D and a decent L glass lens. The 350D is a good camera and I've seen some amazing pics from it both here and on photography sites all over the web. Its just I think if I did get a digital SLR I'd want one I could really grow into and use in conjunction with Photoshop etc so I could learn how to take decent pics whilst also learning Photoshop as well.

Would you get the Canon kits lens? The prices I have add about £55-60 onto the camera price so perhaps when I get a camera I might as well not bother with the 18-55 and put the money saved towards a better lense?
 
MarcLister said:
Would you get the Canon kits lens? The prices I have add about £55-60 onto the camera price so perhaps when I get a camera I might as well not bother with the 18-55 and put the money saved towards a better lense?
Click to expand...

Well I got it with my 350D and it's ok, but eventually, you are going to want to replace it with something else over that range. If I did it again now, I would have got the body only and put the difference towards a better lense.
 
starscream said:
Well I got it with my 350D and it's ok, but eventually, you are going to want to replace it with something else over that range. If I did it again now, I would have got the body only and put the difference towards a better lense.
Click to expand...
Yeah I agree. I thought the difference was only about £20-25 but I checked my prices again and found it was at least £55-60 which is a bit much for what isn't the best lens. I'd like to get either the 10-22 or more likely the 17-85mm lens for a general walk around lens. The £55-60 saved will help towards that.
 
17-85 would be your best bet from those two. At least you'd have a range there, rather than being stuck with wide angles for every shot, which would severely limit you in certain circumstances.
 
MarcLister said:
Yeah I agree. I thought the difference was only about £20-25 but I checked my prices again and found it was at least £55-60 which is a bit much for what isn't the best lens. I'd like to get either the 10-22 or more likely the 17-85mm lens for a general walk around lens. The £55-60 saved will help towards that.
Click to expand...

Yeah the 17-85mm is a very nice lens. Remember the those cameras all have the X1.6 crop compared to a normal 35mm. What I ended up doing was getting a 10-22mm and a 28-135mm because I like wide shots. If the 17mm is wide enough for you, thats a great lens to go for.
 
starscream said:
Yeah the 17-85mm is a very nice lens. Remember the those cameras all have the X1.6 crop compared to a normal 35mm. What I ended up doing was getting a 10-22mm and a 28-135mm because I like wide shots. If the 17mm is wide enough for you, thats a great lens to go for.
Click to expand...
Just looked up the 28-135mm lens. Do you mean the f3.5/5.6 IS USM one? That does look pretty good for a walk around lens. I might get that with the camera and then think about a wider angle lens. It'd be either the 10-22 or the 17-85. I think I'd probably get the 10-22 then. The 17-85 would have been my walk around lens until you suggested the 28-135.

Oh and by the way found a site where you can select some cameras and compare them side-by-side. You can also compare lenses. But the best bit I think is the camera/lens and camera/flash compatibility check feature. The first link is comparing the 350D, 400D and the 30D together. The second link is the main page for the site.

http://photonotes.org/cgi-bin/camer...2=eos350d&camera3=eos400d&camera4=*&camera5=*

http://photonotes.org/lookup/
 
MarcLister said:
Just looked up the 28-135mm lens. Do you mean the f3.5/5.6 IS USM one? That does look pretty good for a walk around lens. I might get that with the camera and then think about a wider angle lens. It'd be either the 10-22 or the 17-85. I think I'd probably get the 10-22 then. The 17-85 would have been my walk around lens until you suggested the 28-135.
Click to expand...

Yeah thats the one. I'm pretty happy with it! The only thing is that because I like a lot of wide shots, I do end having to switch them round a lot. If I were you I would try out a 17-85mm in the shop and see if it is wide enough for you. If it is - perfect, if not, the 28-135mm compliments the 10-22mm nicely :)
 
starscream said:
Yeah thats the one. I'm pretty happy with it! The only thing is that because I like a lot of wide shots, I do end having to switch them round a lot. If I were you I would try out a 17-85mm in the shop and see if it is wide enough for you. If it is - perfect, if not, the 28-135mm compliments the 10-22mm nicely :)
Click to expand...
Well I probably won't be buying this year. Perhaps next year towards the end of my Uni year so I have summer to play with the camera and also earn some more money to pay it off.

My current plan is to get the 30D with the 28-135 to begin with and then do some more research, which could include going to a high street shop and testing the 10-22 and the 17-85 and see which I like the best.

Which do you prefer out of the 10-22 and the 17-85? And why? Personally the 10-22 sounds better now. But then I haven't tried either the 10-22 or the 17-85 so I don't know how they compare to each other. It just seems weird to me to get the 28-135 as a walkaround and then get the 17-85. Is the 17-85 really noticeably wider? I suppose it is a fair bit since it can go from 17 to 28 range which gives it some more width over the 28-135?
 
MarcLister said:
Which do you prefer out of the 10-22 and the 17-85? And why? Personally the 10-22 sounds better now. But then I haven't tried either the 10-22 or the 17-85 so I don't know how they compare to each other. It just seems weird to me to get the 28-135 as a walkaround and then get the 17-85. Is the 17-85 really noticeably wider? I suppose it is a fair bit since it can go from 17 to 28 range which gives it some more width over the 28-135?
Click to expand...

Ah, maybe I didn't make myself clear in my last post! If you had the 28-135, there would be no point getting the 17-85. What I mean is you should test the 17-85mm to see if it is wide enough for you at the 17mm end. If it is, you wouldn't need to get the 10-22 or the 28-135mm.

What I did when upgrading from the kit lens was borrow a 17-85mm from a friend but I found it wasn't really wide enough for me at the bottom end. So I got a 10-22 but decided to get the 28-135mm instead of the 17-85mm as there was some cross over at the bottom end with the 10-22mm.
 
MarcLister said:
Ah right, so you suggest choosing between the 17-85 and the 28-135 as my general walk around lens and then get the 10-22?
Click to expand...

Yeah, I'm suggesting the 17-85 if if 17mm is wide enough for you or the 10-22mm and 28-135mm if it isn't :)
 
starscream said:
Yeah, I'm suggesting the 17-85 if if 17mm is wide enough for you or the 10-22mm and 28-135mm if it isn't :)
Click to expand...
So 17-85 + 28-135 or 10-22 + 28-135? Hope I'm not confused again. Thanks for your help. Every so often I change my SLR plans but it helps to have someone focus my thoughts by giving advice on what lenses are good from the range I'm considering.
 
As an "improving" amateur photographer, I'm comparing this topic to an Intel vs AMD or an nVidia vs ATi debate.......everyone's a winner!

Whatever you pick, whatever advice you recieve, go to a real, live camera shop, and physically handle the cameras before you buy anything. I bought a D50 over the 350D mainly on the handling.The 350D just did not feel comfy to me.... I'm now planning to upgrade to the D80.

You're buying into a system, not just a camera. Whether it's Nikon or Canon (and do try the Sony Alpha, and Pentax equivalents if you can, so you can form a balanced opinion) The lenses are the main part of the system IMO, as you can change the body on a whim :)

Whatever you choose, have fun!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom