What do you think about the Canon 450D?
Discussion
It is an excellent DSLR but I'm not convinced that it is enough of a step forward from the 400D to justify the price difference. You get live view, a few more (irrelevant) megapixels and a different memory card type. No doubt there are many other changes but I would either go for the 400D as a starter DSLR or save up a bit for the 40D if you are a bit more serious.
miniman said:
It is an excellent DSLR but I'm not convinced that it is enough of a step forward from the 400D to justify the price difference. You get live view, a few more (irrelevant) megapixels and a different memory card type. No doubt there are many other changes but I would either go for the 400D as a starter DSLR or save up a bit for the 40D if you are a bit more serious.
Agreed. I've heard that live-view isn't that great for the sensor, either...I quite fancied a camera with a live view but ended up buying the 400d and not waiting and, to be honest i don't think i made the wrong decision, i haven't needed the live view enough to justify paying the extra. The 400d is everything i have needed in a camera, when i need more i will save up for a 40d.
I have to say I really don't understand what the point of live view is. On compacts where the screen will fold out and swivel I can see that it would be handy to be able to hold the camera above your head and be able to see the screen, but as it's fixed, I would consider the normal viewfinder to be significantly more useful than the screen.
miniman said:
It is an excellent DSLR but I'm not convinced that it is enough of a step forward from the 400D to justify the price difference. You get live view, a few more (irrelevant) megapixels and a different memory card type. No doubt there are many other changes but I would either go for the 400D as a starter DSLR or save up a bit for the 40D if you are a bit more serious.
I have already bought and sold the 400d about 8 months ago. I sold it for many reasons and bought a canon powershot S5 IS. I just feel that it isnt quite enough and the quality is lacking compared to a dslr so i am again interested in an slr. Its a good little point and shoot for normal everyday shots but sometimes you need something a little extra. I found the 400D quite heavy to have around my neck, i believe the 450 is quite light compared to the 400d. I have found the 450D with 18-55, 70-300, 2GD mem card and a carry case for £625. I didnt think that was half bad!!!miniman said:
I have to say I really don't understand what the point of live view is.
Focussing. With massive telephone set-ups, or tiny DoF's you just can't get things accurate through the viewfinder at times. Switch LiveView on then zoom in with it 10 fold and you can get things spot on. It's not a thing you use every day, but in dark conditions at F(not a lot) it's invaluable.Live view is great for macro work,landscapes, realy shallow DoF issues (using zoom) and you can remote operate the camera using it too.
IMO the 450D , whilst not a big step up form the 400D, is the best performance for the money at that point.
I'd rather go for the 40D tho, especialy if you shoot any type of sport.
IMO the 450D , whilst not a big step up form the 400D, is the best performance for the money at that point.
I'd rather go for the 40D tho, especialy if you shoot any type of sport.
Having paid £438 for a 450D kit, the cheapest body only 40D at £597 seems a >lot< more money for not much more camera. Live View is fine for ticking the "gotta have feature" box in the magazine reviews, and will probably attract the compact users, but that's all really. Like the 40D, the 450D has the Digic III processor which produces 14 bit raw. Yes it has a plastic chassis, but quite honestly if you are in a situation where metal/plastic makes that much difference, then you aren't going to be taking any more photos that day anyway.
Comparing 12.2 to 10 MP may just be cock waving, but if I had a 40D, I would still have that niggling feeling that Canon held back a bit much for the money I was paying them.
So far as I can tell, the focus problem reported on the photo forums is because newcomers to SLRs are just sticking it on auto (perfectly understandable) and letting all 9 AF points do their thing. Usually the wrong thing. If you press the appropriate button and set it to the central AF point, all is well and totally predictable.
Comparing 12.2 to 10 MP may just be cock waving, but if I had a 40D, I would still have that niggling feeling that Canon held back a bit much for the money I was paying them.
So far as I can tell, the focus problem reported on the photo forums is because newcomers to SLRs are just sticking it on auto (perfectly understandable) and letting all 9 AF points do their thing. Usually the wrong thing. If you press the appropriate button and set it to the central AF point, all is well and totally predictable.
Zad said:
Having paid £438 for a 450D kit, the cheapest body only 40D at £597 seems a >lot< more money for not much more camera. Live View is fine for ticking the "gotta have feature" box in the magazine reviews, and will probably attract the compact users, but that's all really. Like the 40D, the 450D has the Digic III processor which produces 14 bit raw. Yes it has a plastic chassis, but quite honestly if you are in a situation where metal/plastic makes that much difference, then you aren't going to be taking any more photos that day anyway.
Comparing 12.2 to 10 MP may just be cock waving, but if I had a 40D, I would still have that niggling feeling that Canon held back a bit much for the money I was paying them.
40D had/has £100cash back, though the 450d has now £50 cb too.Comparing 12.2 to 10 MP may just be cock waving, but if I had a 40D, I would still have that niggling feeling that Canon held back a bit much for the money I was paying them.
Its the sensor that produces the 12 or 14bit of data, not DIGIC III, tho thats probably needed to process the data fast enough. As for MP - I'm fine with 8 and I'd rather a full frame a 12 than an APS-C.
450D is a cracking camera and it does make the decision between itself and a 40D tough - I had a similar chouce with the 350D vs 20D and picked the 350D due to its smaller size.
Interestingly I found the 350D a bit too small, although it might have been better with a battery grip. The 40D is in a different league in terms of construction, materials and overall feeling of quality. And the high-speed continuous shooting is epic!
If you have already had a 400D and weren't happy with it, I would absolutely hang on and get a 40D if you want to get back into DSLR kit. I just can't see how the difference to the 450D will mean you will keep it for any longer. Just IMHO of course.
If you have already had a 400D and weren't happy with it, I would absolutely hang on and get a 40D if you want to get back into DSLR kit. I just can't see how the difference to the 450D will mean you will keep it for any longer. Just IMHO of course.
Gassing Station | Photography & Video | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff