Question about these two images. 400d v 350d


Recommended Posts

I'm looking at buying my first DSLR and I think I'm going to chose between these two or possibly a Nikon D40. Anyway, the review over at dpreview.com shows these two images, the first being the 400d and the second the 350d.

http://a.img-dpreview.com/reviews/NikonD80...00d_iso0100.JPG

http://a.img-dpreview.com/reviews/NikonD80...50d_iso0100.JPG

To me, the 350d picture looks a lot better, the 400d looks kinda yellow to my eyes. Both cameras had the same settings and the review doesn't seem to make any mention of the difference though. Does anyone else agree and/or know why this is, or are my eyes playing tricks on me?

I see a minor yellow tint to the 400D image. Probably a difference in WB - the EXIF says the white balance was manual, so it could well be human error.

Yea, that is what I was thinking. It just seemed strange that there was no mention of it as it seems quite obvious in the pictures.

From first hand, I can tell you that there's really virtually not much difference in image quality between 350D and 400D.

If anything though, the 400D is a better camera though for its upgrades in the AF, LCD, and buffer.

Really? I have been eyeing the 350D and people have said it is better than the 400D. Should I go through the trouble of looking for a 350D (since it is cheaper at the moment) or should I wait for a possible price drop on the 400D? I heard that Canon is going to be releasing/has released a new camera, which will result in price drops...

Really? I have been eyeing the 350D and people have said it is better than the 400D. Should I go through the trouble of looking for a 350D (since it is cheaper at the moment) or should I wait for a possible price drop on the 400D? I heard that Canon is going to be releasing/has released a new camera, which will result in price drops...

Who told you that? :s

Who told you that? :s

One of my friends recently said something about a Canon 1000D. My coworkers also say to wait because it will soon be Canon's release cycle? Something to that effect. I'm not sure, I do not follow digital SLR news closely. I do know that the 400D is about $200 more expensive than the 350D which is my main concern right now. If the 350D offers the same as the 400D with exception of a few bells and whistles, then I would rather go for the 350D. But, I do know that you are a big digital SLR man around here, so I trust your advice/input if you have any. :p

I have the 350D and couldn't be more happy with it, an excellent camera (Y)

I can see the very slight yellow tint in the 400d pic also, it's nothing excessive though. If you can over look it for the other features of the 400D, I'd go with it.

One of my friends recently said something about a Canon 1000D. My coworkers also say to wait because it will soon be Canon's release cycle? Something to that effect. I'm not sure, I do not follow digital SLR news closely. I do know that the 400D is about $200 more expensive than the 350D which is my main concern right now. If the 350D offers the same as the 400D with exception of a few bells and whistles, then I would rather go for the 350D. But, I do know that you are a big digital SLR man around here, so I trust your advice/input if you have any. :p

1000D was released to compete with the D40--basically for P&S people wanting to migrate to a dslr. I'd say it's somewhat equal to a 350D though there are some differences (1.5FPS in RAW compared to 3fps on the 350D/400D, Live View vs none on 350D/450D)

I'd say 400D > 350D/1000D. Buy according to your budget--a good lens will make a better difference in IQ.

http://www.dpreview.com/previews/canon_1000d/page2.asp

1000D was released to compete with the D40--basically for P&S people wanting to migrate to a dslr. I'd say it's somewhat equal to a 350D though there are some differences (1.5FPS in RAW compared to 3fps on the 350D/400D, Live View vs none on 350D/450D)

I'd say 400D > 350D/1000D. Buy according to your budget--a good lens will make a better difference in IQ.

http://www.dpreview.com/previews/canon_1000d/page2.asp

With that it mind, would you not say that it is very possible there may be a price drop in the 400D? If there is, I may just go with the 400D since the 350D is currently being phased out as far as I understand. If not, then I will go out on more of a limb to find the 350D since it is fairly inexpensive.

With that it mind, would you not say that it is very possible there may be a price drop in the 400D? If there is, I may just go with the 400D since the 350D is currently being phased out as far as I understand. If not, then I will go out on more of a limb to find the 350D since it is fairly inexpensive.

350D has been phased out for some time. (at least Amazon or BH doesn't sell it anymore).

As for price drops, I'm not sure as Canon refreshed their entire Rebel line (450D and 1000D) and are going to concentrate on their Pro equipment this fall.

350D and 400D are both good. I owned the 350D for several months and bought my dad a 400D. Body wise they're very similar but of course the main upgrades were the AF, LCD, and buffer.

350D has been phased out for some time. (at least Amazon or BH doesn't sell it anymore).

As for price drops, I'm not sure as Canon refreshed their entire Rebel line (450D and 1000D) and are going to concentrate on their Pro equipment this fall.

350D and 400D are both good. I owned the 350D for several months and bought my dad a 400D. Body wise they're very similar but of course the main upgrades were the AF, LCD, and buffer.

Would you say the 450D is better than the 350D significantly in terms of image quality or are the difference relatively negligible? This will be my first digital SLR so I'm not really sure what to look for, to be honest.

Would you say the 450D is better than the 350D significantly in terms of image quality or are the difference relatively negligible? This will be my first digital SLR so I'm not really sure what to look for, to be honest.

It's certainly better at higher ISOs, but not night and day difference.

Remember, bodies come and ago--but lenses will stay with you forever. Glass is #1 in my books for getting good image quality. If you have a limited budget, spend less on the body and more on the lens.

ISO1600: http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews...era-Review.aspx

G9

Canon-EOS-XSi-Comparison-G9-1600.jpg

350D/400D

Canon-EOS-XSi-Comparison-XTi.jpg

450D

Canon-EOS-XSi-Comparison-XSi.jpg

40D

Canon-EOS-XSi-Comparison-40D.jpg

5D

Canon-EOS-XSi-Comparison-5D.jpg

-

Canon-EOS-Digital-SLR-Noise-Comparison-G9-1600.jpg

Canon-EOS-Digital-SLR-Noise-Comparison-XTi-1600.jpg

Canon-EOS-Digital-SLR-Noise-Comparison-XSi-1600.jpg

Canon-EOS-Digital-SLR-Noise-Comparison-40D-1600.jpg

Canon-EOS-Digital-SLR-Noise-Comparison-5D-1600.jpg

It's certainly better at higher ISOs, but not night and day difference.

Remember, bodies come and ago--but lenses will stay with you forever. Glass is #1 in my books for getting good image quality. If you have a limited budget, spend less on the body and more on the lens.

ISO1600: http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews...era-Review.aspx

[snip]

Thanks for that. I think I might go for the 350D then. They have it at a Walmart near me for $509 before taxes. Although I think I might think it over the next few days so I can also wait for my next paycheque.

Edited by russellc
With a lens?

I'm not sure. I think since it is Walmart, it comes with a lens. I might go down there and take a look... On second thought, maybe I won't go down there tonight. I'll just go on Wednesday when I actually intend to get it (after receiving my paycheque and thinking it over).

EDIT: The deal appears to be on their website too and it says that it comes with a lens.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • The quantum search for Time's origin had an equally mind-boggling conclusion by Sayan Sen Image by Steve Johnson via Pexels A theoretical study from researchers at the University of Surrey suggested that the direction of time may not be fundamentally fixed in certain quantum systems. The work, published in Scientific Reports, examined how the “arrow of time” could emerge from microscopic physics and found that time-reversal symmetry can remain intact even in models used to describe processes such as energy loss and thermalisation. The arrow of time refers to the observed one-way direction from past to future in everyday life. In macroscopic processes, this is easy to see. Spilled milk spreads across a table and does not gather back into a glass, and heat flows from hotter objects to colder ones. These processes shape the common sense idea that time moves in a single direction. However, at the level of fundamental physics, many equations do not prefer a direction of time. Time-reversal symmetry means that the same physical laws can describe a system whether time moves forward or backward. This has made it difficult to explain why irreversible behaviour appears in the large-scale world even when the underlying rules do not require it. Dr Andrea Rocco, Associate Professor in Physics and Mathematical Biology at the University of Surrey, described this contrast: "One way to explain this is when you look at a process like spilt milk spreading across a table, it's clear that time is moving forward. But if you were to play that in reverse, like a movie, you'd immediately know something was wrong – it would be hard to believe milk could just gather back into a glass. However, there are processes, such as the motion of a pendulum, that look just as believable in reverse. The puzzle is that, at the most fundamental level, the laws of physics resemble the pendulum; they do not account for irreversible processes. Our findings suggest that while our common experience tells us that time only moves one way, we are just unaware that the opposite direction would have been equally possible." The study focused on open quantum systems, which are quantum systems that interact with a surrounding environment. This environment, often described as a heat bath, can exchange energy and information with the system. The researchers used this framework to study how a direction of time might appear even when the underlying physics does not enforce one. A key part of the analysis involved the Markov approximation. This is a simplification used in many models where the system is assumed not to retain memory of its past states. The idea is that changes depend only on the current state, not on earlier history. This is commonly used when studying thermalisation, which is the process where a system settles into equilibrium with its environment. The study also used concepts such as master equations, including the Lindblad and Pauli equations, which describe how probabilities of different quantum states change over time. Another related model discussed was quantum Brownian motion, which describes the random-like movement of a quantum particle interacting continuously with its environment. In these descriptions, a “memory kernel” can appear, which is a mathematical term that accounts for how past states influence current behaviour. The researchers found that applying the Markov approximation did not break time-reversal symmetry. Even when the system interacted with an effectively infinite heat bath, the resulting equations of motion remained symmetric in time. This meant that the same mathematical description could, in principle, run forward or backward in time without contradiction. The study further showed that standard frameworks used in open quantum systems, including quantum Brownian motion and master equations like the Lindblad and Pauli forms, could be written in a time-symmetric way. These equations are typically used to describe processes that look irreversible, such as dissipation and thermalisation, but the results suggested they can also be interpreted as allowing evolution in both time directions. Thomas Guff, Research Fellow in Quantum Thermodynamics, said: "The surprising part of this project was that even after making the standard simplifying assumption to our equations describing open quantum systems, the equations still behaved the same way whether the system was moving forwards or backwards in time. When we carefully worked through the maths, we found that this behaviour had to be the case because a key part of the equation, the "memory kernel," is symmetrical in time. We also found a small but important detail which is usually overlooked – a time discontinuous factor emerged that kept the time-symmetry property intact. It’s unusual to see such a mathematical mechanism in a physics equation because it's not continuous, and it was very surprising to see it appear so naturally." The researchers also noted that deriving a one-way arrow of time from time-reversal symmetric microscopic dynamics remains an open problem across fields such as thermodynamics, statistical mechanics, particle physics, and cosmology. Their results suggested that some standard descriptions of irreversible behaviour in open quantum systems may be better understood using a time-symmetric formulation of Markovianity. According to the study, processes such as thermalisation, which are usually treated as irreversible, could in theory be described in a way that allows evolution in either time direction under the same rules. This does not imply that time reversal occurs in everyday life, but rather that the underlying equations do not strictly enforce a single direction. Overall, the findings suggested that the perceived direction of time may emerge from how physical systems are modelled and approximated, rather than from a fundamental asymmetry in the laws themselves. The researchers noted that this perspective could have implications for ongoing work in quantum mechanics, thermodynamics, and cosmology on the origin of time’s arrow. Source: University of Surrey, Nature This article was generated with some help from AI and reviewed by an editor. Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, this material is used for the purpose of news reporting. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing
    • A bit premature... 100% Marketing. Bizarre.
    • A $300 price hike is insane! No one is going to want to pay that much!
    • Since the 1st one flopped, there is really no reason to make another one. It's just losing money left and right.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Reacting Well
      BizSAR earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • First Post
      AndreaB earned a badge
      First Post
    • Week One Done
      Huge Trailer earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      Classifyskilleducation earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Month Later
      eurospharma62 earned a badge
      One Month Later
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      579
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      182
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      74
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      71
    5. 5
      neufuse
      64
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!