buying dlsr 350D

[photofreek]

hi all,

after waiting for almost 3 years, my wife gave green light to buy a new camera ... whooaaa :heart:
i prefer 350D as i do not need those bells and whistles offered by 400D.
any idea what is the latest price for this camera?
which camera shop can give good offer?

please advise and thanks in advance.

 

[paradigm]

think tt the diff bet a brand new 350D and 400D is not a lot, Oracle (one of the guys in CS selling brand new sets w warranty) ... might as well get from him ...

http://forums.clubsnap.org/showthread.php?t=217964&page=4

 

[Isaiahfortythirtyone]

actually, as a 350D user myself, i would suggest u pay a lil more for 400D. the one feature that is worth it - the 9 pt AF that is similar to the 30D's. the AF system on the 350D is not too good and is quite unpredictable in low light. it is important to have a good AF system especially if you use large aperture lenses, e.g. 50/1.4 or 85/1.8. i struggled quite a bit with the 85/1.8 initially, but i have since learnt to work around it.

 

[wanzw]

9 point AF all the way, get it from the oracle (joe). you can spend the saved money on lens and accessories.

 

[photofreek]

think tt the diff bet a brand new 350D and 400D is not a lot, Oracle (one of the guys in CS selling brand new sets w warranty) ... might as well get from him ...

http://forums.clubsnap.org/showthread.php?t=217964&page=4

Thanks for your reply.
price of 400D from Oracle is $1480
Just called Florence-MS and Ray-CP. They offer 350D with 1 GB CF, EOS bag for $1235/1240 with gst. MS throw extra filter.

hmm...i must think hard whether to buy 400D (extra $240) or use the money to buy 50mm f1.8 lense with 350D

:dunno:

 

[mephesto]

bite the bullet and get the 400D, the $240 is worth it.

 

[photofreek]

9 point AF all the way, get it from the oracle (joe). you can spend the saved money on lens and accessories.

Thanks.
is it safe to buy the camera from Oracle than camera shop? Any warranty?
Sorry for being kiasu ...

 

[photofreek]

actually, as a 350D user myself, i would suggest u pay a lil more for 400D. the one feature that is worth it - the 9 pt AF that is similar to the 30D's. the AF system on the 350D is not too good and is quite unpredictable in low light. it is important to have a good AF system especially if you use large aperture lenses, e.g. 50/1.4 or 85/1.8. i struggled quite a bit with the 85/1.8 initially, but i have since learnt to work around it.

thanks for your reply.
If i use smaller aparture lense, am i going to have problem with the AF like you said above?
Is this camera can do AF well with the kit lens?

 

[Isaiahfortythirtyone]

yes. you're still going to have the same problem. only the centre AF point is reliable in dim lighting. the other 6 pts are quite unpredictable. it is mad worse if u use large aperture lenses.

 

[sehsuan]

yes. you're still going to have the same problem. only the centre AF point is reliable in dim lighting. the other 6 pts are quite unpredictable. it is mad worse if u use large aperture lenses.

I would say, quite the contrary. A larger aperture allows MORE light to get to the camera's AF sensors, hence the chances of getting anything useful would be increased.

 

[Stoned]

I would say, quite the contrary. A larger aperture allows MORE light to get to the camera's AF sensors, hence the chances of getting anything useful would be increased.

I think what he means is with a shallow DOF, the camera often cannot lock focus, rather than large aperture. In a totally unfair comparison shooting in low light with an f2.8 lens against my MKII, the 350d's centre AF pt was unable to lock focus for a macro shot, whereas the MKII's side point was still able to. Granted it has 11 cross sensors, so technically the side sensor is also a cross sensor. Point being, not all cross sensors are made the same.

I think even with the diamond shaped AF arrangement, there's still only 1 cross sensor right? If there's still only 1 then it makes no diff to the AF outside of events work IMO.

My advice to the TS is this, don't bother with a new 350d. Either get a new 400d or a used 350d, the new price is really not very worthwhile. Currently a used 350d sells for ~800, whereas a used 400d sells for ~1300+. Factor in the instant depreciation yourself, it's simply not worth while to buy a new 350d. Hope this makes sense in dollars and cents, pun intended

 

[panzerpunk]

Welcome f/1.2

 

[photofreek]

I think what he means is with a shallow DOF, the camera often cannot lock focus, rather than large aperture. In a totally unfair comparison shooting in low light with an f2.8 lens against my MKII, the 350d's centre AF pt was unable to lock focus for a macro shot, whereas the MKII's side point was still able to. Granted it has 11 cross sensors, so technically the side sensor is also a cross sensor. Point being, not all cross sensors are made the same.

I think even with the diamond shaped AF arrangement, there's still only 1 cross sensor right? If there's still only 1 then it makes no diff to the AF outside of events work IMO.

My advice to the TS is this, don't bother with a new 350d. Either get a new 400d or a used 350d, the new price is really not very worthwhile. Currently a used 350d sells for ~800, whereas a used 400d sells for ~1300+. Factor in the instant depreciation yourself, it's simply not worth while to buy a new 350d. Hope this makes sense in dollars and cents, pun intended

Thank you very much for the advise from the pro ..
Point taken...

 

[camplsk]

If you're looking to buy a used-one, email me at colinlee@cam.com.sg

I'm looking to upgrade to 400D if I can sell my 350D at a reasonable price. I'd say it's in fairly good condition i.e. used it a few times, as I juggle between the 1D MKII and the 350. I treat my equipment with respect - always stored in dry cabinet so no fungus issues etc.

Cheers,
Colin

 

[megaweb]

hmm...i must think hard whether to buy 400D (extra $240) or use the money to buy 50mm f1.8 lense with 350D

50mm f1.8 is a good lens to start off whether you get 350D or 400D.

If you have budget issue, get used DSLR and spend more $ on better lens.

 

[kelvgoh]

Like photofreek my wife finally allowed me to upgrade my old 500N to a digital camera. I tested the 400D and 350D before finally settling for the 350D. My main conerns were:

1. The 400D appeared more "noisy" at ISO400 and above as compared to the 350D, probably due to the increase of 2 mega pix on the same sized CMOS;
2. Though the 400D gave a large LCD screen, the info display on the 350D was a bit more organised;
3. The 9 point focus was a distraction instead of a help;

I think the saving should go to buying better lenses etc. Juz my 2 cents worth.

Cheers

Kelvin

 

[photofreek]

Like photofreek my wife finally allowed me to upgrade my old 500N to a digital camera. I tested the 400D and 350D before finally settling for the 350D. My main conerns were:

1. The 400D appeared more "noisy" at ISO400 and above as compared to the 350D, probably due to the increase of 2 mega pix on the same sized CMOS;
2. Though the 400D gave a large LCD screen, the info display on the 350D was a bit more organised;
3. The 9 point focus was a distraction instead of a help;

I think the saving should go to buying better lenses etc. Juz my 2 cents worth.

Cheers

Kelvin

Initially i wanted to buy 350D or Nikon D50.
After having many useful input from other CSers, i changed my mind with 400D. It is very good camera, absorbs good features from 30D. It captures pleasing images with high ISO. I tried to snap my son using kit lens with ISO 800 and so happy with that. I also used ISO 400 and didn't notice noise as you mentioned above.
I will never regret for buying this great camera and planning to buy a cheap but good lens 50mm 1/8.

PS: I will post the pics when I'm ready for it. There are so many pro in this forum. I don't want to malu myself ... :bsmilie:

 

[MikeW]

if money is an issue then go with the 350D. it's a great cam. the 9 point AF on the 400d might not be a big issue depending on your usage. most of the time i just use the centre point anyway, so 9 point AF is irrelevant for me.
i also prefer the small info lcd on the 350d, i dont really like having to keep looking at the big lcd on the 400d for shooting settings (although the larger lcd will definitely help in reviewing your photos for sharpness).

And for what it's worth, the 400d is about 1/3 stop less sensitive compared to 350d. And I dont mean the metering is 1/3 less, the actual sensitivity of the CCD is less. (in other words, if you take 2 photos using the exact same aperature, shutter and ISO then the 400d photo will come out darker compared to 350d).

 

[xtn32]

Initially i wanted to buy 350D or Nikon D50.
After having many useful input from other CSers, i changed my mind with 400D. It is very good camera, absorbs good features from 30D. It captures pleasing images with high ISO. I tried to snap my son using kit lens with ISO 800 and so happy with that. I also used ISO 400 and didn't notice noise as you mentioned above.
I will never regret for buying this great camera and planning to buy a cheap but good lens 50mm 1/8.

PS: I will post the pics when I'm ready for it. There are so many pro in this forum. I don't want to malu myself ... :bsmilie:

do join this 400D users' thread . . . we can all learn together

http://forums.clubsnap.org/showthread.php?t=224318

cheers!

 

[Isaiahfortythirtyone]

if you're not intending to use large aperture lenses with thin DOF, then the centre AF point is good enough. for me, the 85mm/1.8 is fast becoming my main and favourite lens (i like to snipe and take candids) and so the other AF points are very important. using the focus-recompose method usually throws my subject's eyes OOF.

what i miss most in the 350D is the diamond AF pattern which restricts me in terms of following and using the rule of thirds. plus, the AF in 350D fails quite miserably in dark situations, which is unlike the 30D i tried (which has the same AF system as 400D).

so if you're planning to use more large aperture lenses, the 400D is the way to go IMHO