Hey everyone.

I´m soon going to purchase my first digital SLR, and I was pretty set on the 400D as I can get it on a good price with full size tripod, both the 19-55mm standard and 75-300mm lens, 2gb memory, case, filter and more, so it´s tempting.

But I saw an ad for a used 20D with battery grip and 18-55mm lens. Wich would be the more logical purchase for me?

Hard to say. I've never heard a bad word about the 20D, but I have for the 400D. Do a side by side comparo at dpreview.com and see what you think. If you can afford it, my unexpert opinion is to go with the 20D.

Quote - Hard to say. I've never heard a bad word about the 20D, but I have for the 400D. Do a side by side comparo at dpreview.com and see what you think. If you can afford it, my unexpert opinion is to go with the 20D.

Yeah, I thought so too. Been doing a little research, and seems like the 20D is the better choice. But still, share your thoughts on what you guys think :).

I have a 400D and cant say anything bad has come about owning this model.
Although I have no grounds for comparison I think the 400D would be the better choice purely for the (assuming it’s new) warranty. I don’t think you would find a 20D new retail these days.

I would also recommend getting the body only and spending the extra on a grip and nice bit of glass to get you started. Don’t get me wrong the 17-55 is fine but the 75-300 is crap IMHO.

Anyways, I think in the end you will be happy with what ever you get. Try them both out before you decide. Thats you best bet.

Michael.

I just read that, whereas the Canon 350D set the standards and was the model of choice in its category for some years, the Canon 400D has been surpassed in quality by the Nikon and even the Sony Alpha equivalent models (in the 10 megapixel prosumer class). But that does mean it's still one of the very best cameras around. I don't think you can go wrong with it. But, as Michael pointed out, the standard Canon (kit) lenses are not the best quality. Now wasn't that a fairly objective respons from an Olympus user..? ;o))

Thanks guys, I´ve been asking around here home too, and I think I might just go with the 400D. I´ll be getting a new camera, the 20D I was thinking of is used with around 7000 frames taken. And they´re very similar on paper too, so I think the 400D is the more logical purchase. One thing about the 20D that tempts me is the 1/8000 shutter speed compared to 1/4000 in the 400D. But isn´t 1/4000 plenty?

Thanks again!

Have you handled both cameras? If not, you should before you make any judgements. The 20D is still available new and it is a different category than the 400..

By chance I purchased my first digital slr on Monday,choose a canon 400D. I already was using a Canon rebel so it was logical to stay with a familiar layout.Also all my lenses fit so only needed the body and a memory card. It handles very well and I got used to the menus quickly.

The first shots were in very low light of birds on the nut feeder, results were good considering the iso was up at 1600 .
On Friday I took the camera flying and did a direct comparison with the rebel which was using 800asa film. Very pleased with results from the 400d, on a cloudy low light angle day, two cropped images are on my gallery, shot with the 75-300 Canon lens. That particular one cost me a bit more as it is the IS version. I dont use the IS on air photo work as I never shoot below 500th. It is an excellent crisp lens and fast to focus.

I cannot justify the greater cost of the top end pro Canon digitals because after about two years I expect to replace the 400  and other pros have said the differences are not huge especially if you are self employed and paying for your own equipment.
www.scotaviaimages.co.uk

Thanks for the answers guys, I think I'm leaning towards the 400D.

Sounds good. Just be sure to try and handle them both if possible. Sometimes that can make a major difference in you final decision. I assume you already have Canon lenses and that is why you narrowed it down to that brand?