Thread: 20D vs 400D
View Single Post
  #5  
Old 21-03-07, 11:03
postcardcv's Avatar
postcardcv postcardcv is offline
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Norfolk
Age: 48
Posts: 1,856
Default

I totally agree about the extra 2mp... a couple of years back I changed from a 300D (6mp) to a 350D (8mp) and never noticed the difference, I recently added a 400D (10mp) and don't notice any sigificant difference.

Having never owned a 20D I can't comment on the difference in controls, but personally find the 350/400D very easy to use. I guess it's because I've used them for a while, but I can change most settings without taking my eye from the view finder. My only grumble with the 400D is the lack of a seperate display for camera settings.. but that's probably just me.

It's interesting to hear that you felt that the slower frame rate wasn't a big issue. I've only ever had 3fps and feel it does the job fine, though 5fps has always been a bit tempting... the 10fps of the new 1D mk III sounds a bit over the top to me. A couple of those in a hide together and it will sound like a warzone.
Reply With Quote