Canon EOS 400D vs Nikon D40-X

[blueyonder]

I am considering returning to an SLR after using a Sony Cybershot for years and before that an Olympus OM20 film SLR (I know, a bit of an antique now...wonder how much this would fetch on ebay ).

I like the flexibility that modern Digital SLR's give you....especially the ability to shoot quickly....3 shots a second, review them instantly and not worrying about wasting a load of film!

Compacts are OK for certain situations but the delay between pressing the button and the camera taking the shot is frustrating...especially with flash photography!

So, I would be grateful for any opinions on the Canon EOS 400D and the Nikon D40-X as a camera to start me off into the world od Digital SLRs? Both look great cameras and in excess of 10 megapixels. Are there any negatives for either camera? I've heard that the Canon is only good for about 10,000 shots.

I notice there are quite a few on ebay....is it worth buying second hand?

Thanks for your help guys and gals

[RobDickinson]

Canon is good for 100,000 shots at least (or so).

400D is quite a step above the d40x IMO.

D40(x) is missing a body drive motor , limiting you to expensive zooms and one prime (with AF). Also missing 'proper' SLR stuff like bracketing etc.

The Canon will be significantly better at sports/motor shooting too, faster write/buffer/shooting/af, better meetering etc.

D40(x) is an OK cheap dSLR but with limited(af) lens range.

Dont worry about megapixels tho, IMO the 300d at 6mp is fine let alone 10mp. Mates just bougth a 400d and its a marginal improvement on my 350d.

[Podie]

I've got a 300D... and to be honest the greatest difference I've found is in the glass you have attached to it.

[jamieboy]

I've been looking at these two as well, and I've almost decided on the Nikon.

From the reviews I've read, there doesn't seem to be much in it - the kit lens supplied with the Nikon is apparently better than the one supplied with the Canon, but as Rob says the Nikon doesn't offer bracketing or depth of field preview.

I had a play with each of them over the weekend and felt more comfortable with the Nikon - the menu system etc. seemed easier to me.

The way I'm thinking at the moment is that the biggest limiting factor that will affect either of the cameras is me, and by the time (if ever) I get to the stage that the camera is the limit, then I'll have learned enough to make a more informed choice when it comes to replacing it.

Still be interested to hear more opinions, though.

[Podie]

From what I've read, Nikon are playing catch-up to Canon.

When I bought mine, I tried both Canon and Nikon, and preferred the former. YOU are the one who has to use it, go with what you are most comfortable with.

[Tuna]

Definitely try both of them in a shop and see how they feel to you. You've got to carry the thing and get your fingers to the right buttons, so it's important that if feels right in your hand.

Also, look at the sort of lens(es) you're likely to want for the photos you typically take. You can spend many times the price of the camera on glass, so it helps if you know you can get a lens or two that suits your needs at a fair price.

I've got a 350D and couldn't be more pleased with it.

[Zad]

With the D40/X you will be locked in to a specific sub-range of lenses though.

[tinman0]

400D owner here. Superb piece of kit.

If the Nikon really has features missing, then you can be sure those are the features you need in a couple of years (murphy's law).

[slinky]

he he he.. I figured you might go down this route after the last hoon

You're more than welcome to have a tinker with my 350D if you want to..

slinky
587racing.com

[blueyonder]

slinky said:

he he he.. I figured you might go down this route after the last hoon

You're more than welcome to have a tinker with my 350D if you want to..

slinky
587racing.com

Well spotted fella! Yep, I fancy having something decent for Le Mans, maybe Pistonfest (if I go) and other hoons/meets (pennies permitting). Yours seemed so easy to use....something the old film SLR's weren't and was impressed with the results! Have wanted to get back into photography for some time and as I will soon be a single fella I will have more time

Might take you up on your offer

It apears that I may not need 10 megapixels and that their isn't a great deal of difference between the now cheaper 350D and the 400D? Also the Nikon isn't AF lens friendly?

[jamieboy]

blueyonder said:

Also the Nikon isn't AF lens friendly?

I think the Nikon can use most Nikon lenses, but it'll only auto-focus with the newer AF-S lenses which I don't think is a huge problem for me at the moment.

I saw a pretty poor review of the D40x on digitalcamerainfo.com, so I'm swaying a bit. Then again, their review of the 400D mentioned (as most reviews have) that the kit lens wasn't great.

The 400D is a bit cheaper than the D40x, so one option would be to buy the 400D body and a different lens. I know that a bit of talent will make more difference than a better lens, but can anyone recommend a good general purpose lens for the 400D that wouldn't break the bank?

[slinky]

blueyonder said:

Might take you up on your offer

I'm at the track this weekend, but I'm free most evenings this week and next..

Drop me a line and we'll go out for a sortie..

[trackdemon]

www.bythom.com/d40review.htm

[blueyonder]

trackdemon said:

www.bythom.com/d40review.htm

Thanks for that trackdemon....I take it your a fan?

There doesn't seem to be great deal of difference between the Nikon and the Canon 400D so I suppose it's down to personal preference....and maybe price?

[drewtastic]

Hi

I have just bought a 400D. I am a complete amateur I must say, but here the results are fantastic. Very user friendly bit of kit









With 18-55mm lens on full auto mode.

Edited by drewtastic on Tuesday 1st May 14:00

[steil]

I made this choice a couple of weeks ago - the other I considered was the Olympus e400. I liked the size of the Olympus - but concerned that it may be a limited option in terms of lens etc availability as it uses 2/3rds. Leaving the D40X & Canon - I really fancied a Nikon, however in my hands it felt very large & unweildy compared to the 400D.

Bought the 400D, then spent the next two weeks wondering if I did the right thing - even considered returning it to get the D40X as a replacement...

However I've not done so - having taken 600+ pics in that time - some look quite good despite using the universally slated kit lens supplied - I'm more than happy to keep it, although I'll be buying a better/faster lens.

[poah]

not entirely sure what the point of the D40(x) cameras are about TBH

[blueyonder]

What's the difference between the 400D and the 400D Rebel XTi?

[Podie]

Quinny said:

blueyonder said:

What's the difference between the 400D and the 400D Rebel XTi?

Non

The rebel is the USA version of the same camera.

It could well be silver instead of black, but thats the only difference.

In the US Canon's Pro cameras are numbered (eg 20D, 1D) whereas the amateur cameras are given names (eg Rebel).

The UK (and Europe?) doesn't follow this convention and continues the Pro lineage in naming.

Jessops used to have the silver camera "exclusive" in the UK. Not sure if that's the case these days though

[blueyonder]

Where are the best prices to be had for digital SLR's these days? I am assuming online will be cheaper than going into a branch of Jessops for example.

Anyone bought either the Canon EOS 400D or Nikon D40-X from a website, if so which ones? Also has anyone bought one of these on ebay, there seems to be quite 'new' for sale....they seem to be as a bundle with an SD card e.t.c.?