wjmeyer wrote:
This is of course assuming you do not need high ISO I actually thought of buying a 400D as a backup until I saw it's limited ISO capabilities, no doubt implemented by Canon to set apart the 30D, etc.
erm... the 30D only actually has ISO 1600, just like the 400D.
I haven't seen any direct comparisons between these two cameras at any ISO, so I don't know how they actually compare. But if they compare well, you aren't actually loosing anything (ISO wise) by getting a 400D.
Mark Shaxted wrote:
erm... the 30D only actually has ISO 1600, just like the 400D.
The 10D, 20D and 30D can all be boosted to H, which is the equivalent of ISO 3200. And with Canon being modest, All ISO settings are (too) conservative by about a third of a stop, so ISO H (3200) setting actually has the sensitivity of ISO 4000.
ISO 3200 on a 20/30D is simply ISO1600 underexposed by 1 stop - then pushed back up a stop in software. It's not a real ISO, that's why it's hidden in the menu.
You can get exactly the same effect using a 350/400D. Just remember to underexpose (ISO 1600) by 1 stop, then push back up in DPP or whatever else you convert your raws with.
Mark Shaxted wrote:
Unfortuantely it doesn't quite work like that.
ISO 3200 on a 20/30D is simply ISO1600 underexposed by 1 stop - then pushed back up a stop in software. It's not a real ISO, that's why it's hidden in the menu.
You can get exactly the same effect using a 350/400D. Just remember to underexpose (ISO 1600) by 1 stop, then push back up in DPP or whatever else you convert your raws with.
I wrote stuff about the 400D including the observations that it [would provide] "the features I really need..."
To which someone replied: "This is of course assuming you do not need high ISO I actually thought of buying a 400D as a backup until I saw it's limited ISO..."
Like I said... "while providing the features I really need..." 1600 ISO is high enough for me, and I can push in PS if I need to, not that I have so far - with my 350D. :-)
"Why do people buy a 400D? Most of them because of the low price, no doubt."
That is only half of the equation. Many people buy the 400D (and, like me, bought the 350D) because of the value it provides at the low price. My 350D creates images of the same quality that I would get on a 30D at a lower price, while providing the features I really need, and allowing me to use (four, including three L zooms) high quality Canon lenses. Not all 350D/400D users limit themselves to kit lenses.
What do you think, how many 400D buyers also buy 3 L zooms? My bet: less than 1%. More than 50% may buy the kit lens (and nothing else) because its "value" may look much better than the 17-55 with a more than 10 times higher price.
The costly EF-S lenses need a higher quality camera to match their level. I'm quite sure there will be 30D successors for the next 5 years at least.
danmitchell wrote:
I wrote stuff about the 400D including the observations that it [would provide] "the features I really need..."
To which someone replied: "This is of course assuming you do not need high ISO I actually thought of buying a 400D as a backup until I saw it's limited ISO..."
Like I said... "while providing the features I really need..." 1600 ISO is high enough for me, and I can push in PS if I need to, not that I have so far - with my 350D. :-)
Take care,
Dan
Hi Dan, I merely meant my reply in jest realizing that you probably do not need 3200, most don't, but it comes in handy for me on many occasions.
Taff Reardon wrote:
Well I for one cant wait. I bought my tickets to photokina today and am going on the 27th Sep
Just sold my 20D, 70-200 and some other stuff and now have £2000 burning a hole in my pocket waiting for any news on new bodies etc.
for once in my life i have the money ready and im only a few hours away from the biggest photographic show in europe.
Only trouble is, ill probably spend the money on beer and fags (cigarettes for the non brits!!) then hammer the credit card for a new body!!!!!!!!
One slight flaw is that i dont have a camera to take any pictures of the show!! Doh!!!...Show more →
Ehm, I don't want to dissapoint you, but I don't think you can actually buy stuff at the photokina... If I got you right, that's your plan. But it's a tradeshow for the big guys of the business...
The companies don't sell any gear, it's just for show
If I remember correctly, the Canon rep also said in the full interview that they will let the market/consumers dictate the ultimate direction they'll go. The same thing was said about in-camera stabilisation.
thw2 wrote:
If I remember correctly, the Canon rep also said in the full interview that they will let the market/consumers dictate the ultimate direction they'll go. The same thing was said about in-camera stabilisation.
Hence, the print button, right? The trick is to discover which consumers they're listening to, isn't it?
RDKirk wrote:
Hence, the print button, right? The trick is to discover which consumers they're listening to, isn't it?
Yes the print button and perhaps the "EOS Integrated Cleaning System". I'm not excited about having any new complexities put inbetween the lens and sensor or any unintended consequences this introduces.
I just noticed the new Powershots..... a 10mp and a 7 mp IS.
I am debating which one to get... IS or no IS? 3x or 4x
But more importantly, it made me look at the sensor.
10mp CCD sensor which DPreview says is 7.18mm x 5.32mm.
if this is the case, then:
in a 5D or 1Ds format this is 225 mp.
in a 1D this is 142mp
in a 30d this is 88mp.
I think it is safe to say that canon has some spare pixel capacity in its quiver and is holding out on us...or as I have always thought the bottleneck is that they can't move the data fast enough...
KIDERAL wrote:
I just noticed the new Powershots..... a 10mp and a 7 mp IS.
I am debating which one to get... IS or no IS? 3x or 4x
But more importantly, it made me look at the sensor.
10mp CCD sensor which DPreview says is 7.18mm x 5.32mm.
if this is the case, then:
in a 5D or 1Ds format this is 225 mp.
in a 1D this is 142mp
in a 30d this is 88mp.
I think it is safe to say that canon has some spare pixel capacity in its quiver and is holding out on us...or as I have always thought the bottleneck is that they can't move the data fast enough... ...Show more →
I thought these ccd's would probably be sony sensors.
KIDERAL wrote:
I just noticed the new Powershots..... a 10mp and a 7 mp IS.
I am debating which one to get... IS or no IS? 3x or 4x
But more importantly, it made me look at the sensor.
10mp CCD sensor which DPreview says is 7.18mm x 5.32mm.
if this is the case, then:
in a 5D or 1Ds format this is 225 mp.
in a 1D this is 142mp
in a 30d this is 88mp.
I think it is safe to say that canon has some spare pixel capacity in its quiver and is holding out on us...or as I have always thought the bottleneck is that they can't move the data fast enough... ...Show more →
Enjoy the noise on those sensors!
Regards,
DaveMart
Rusty1 wrote:
Yes the print button and perhaps the "EOS Integrated Cleaning System". I'm not excited about having any new complexities put inbetween the lens and sensor or any unintended consequences this introduces.
As it stands now, I would not worry about the new ultrasonic vibrating thingy. The point is that the piezo electric cells make the existing AA filter shake, there is no additional sheet/layer between sensor and lens, compared to previous systems. If I understood that correctly that is.
Even if there was a new layer introduced, that does not have to affect the image quality per sé. The 2 to 3 mm thick high-pass filter doesn't seem to harm image quality either, does it? That's there to improve image quality by blocking IR wavelengths.
I actually thought of buying a 400D as a backup until I saw it's limited ISO capabilities, no doubt implemented by Canon to set apart the 30D, etc.
? 3x or 4x