View Single Post
Old 01-10-2006, 11:15 AM
CometGuy's Avatar
Registered User

CometGuy is offline
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 942
Rick Krejci, a well known astrophotographer in the states has been testing a 400D and comparing it to a 350D. Despite the smaller pixels, improvements in the sensor means that has been no loss in low light sensitivity (in fact for long exposure astrophotography there may even be some slight improvement). Additionally, if the 400D is like the 350D the sensor does not heat up as much as the 20D/30D so in longer exposures it can actually have less noise.

Many people complained at the start that the 400D was less sensitive, but it became clear that the images out of the camera are processed differently to the 350D so as to preserve highlights.

For daylight use, the Ergonomics of the 350D/400D have recieved - very unfairly - a lot of criticism. The grip in particular is small and means your little finger floats loose, but it only takes a day or so to get used coming from a larger DSLRs (the camera is also very light). I also like the fact that all the controls are on the right hand side of the camera where they can be accessed by your right thumb (while your right hand holds the grip and the left hand supports the camera/lens). With a bit of practice you can compose a shot and not move the camera (or move your eye from the viewfinder) if you need to change a setting.

I would highly recommend the 400D.

Reply With Quote