[ray]

Well this is what i would like to know is as i see it the 30D is a better camera than my 400D, yet the 30D is 8mpx and my 400D is 10mpx so why is the 30D better im sure there is a simple answer that a simple bloke dont know about thanks my reason for wanting to know is i may get a 30D ...Ray

[Dabhand16]

Nothing to do with the sensor size, Ray - more about the controls, focusing, features like spot metering and build quality.

You can get 12MP compacts now. Would you say they were better than your 400D?

[ray]

Well no, so would the 30D be a good move, would i see the difference in my photo's graham

[Dabhand16]

Originally Posted by ray

Well no, so would the 30D be a good move, would i see the difference in my photo's graham

That is a tricky one Ray. I'd say probably not.

It's a bit like a car. You can buy a more upmarket car and it will not make you a better driver, but the driving experience will be better.

I saw Lord Litchfield on TV demonstrating you don't need state of the art gear to get a good portrait. He used a photo booth and got a cracking result. However, the photo booth has certain limitations, so any camera that can be carried around must have advantages over the photo booth.

So I think a lot depends on how you use your camera. If the facilities you most often use are easier to access with the 30D than the 400D, or if it has features that the 400D does not have, and you wish you did have, I'd say it would be a good buy.

But your pictures would not necessarily get better.

[Larne]

Ray - my first digital SLR was a 400D. I recently purchased a second-hand 10D. The 10D is 6.3MP compared with the 10.1MP of the 400D but guess which camera I use most?

You got it - the 10D. Despite the lower sensor resolution the sharpness and clarity of the image is massively superior to the 400D.

My brother has an orignal 1D that he uses for weddings. Although I haven't seen the pictures he assures me that it blows his 20D away despite the 1D only having 4MP.

It's all about the software and the sensors (focussing, metering, white balance etc) not the number of pixels.

Agree with Graham though - the 30D will give you better technical quality but it won't improve the composition of your images. It's a photographer that makes the picture, not the camera.

[ray]

Thank you graham i will leave it then for the moment and see how things go...Ray

[fionaB]

well i have a 400D which i love............ AND i upgraded to a 30D recently as well, and i have to say the versatility is so much more, the control, the solidity, all that goes into why I use the 30D and not the 400D unless its as a second body.
( my 11yr old has purloined the 400D most of the time now,)

so you may not notice the difference in the first images, but what u will notice is that the choice of what to do is so much more that you will notice eventually a big difference in the images, plus it will give you the added confidence to try things u may not have done before, especially considering the 5 fps compared to the 3 fps on the 400d

Fi

[ray]

Right thanks i will hang on a while unless i come across a bargain then i may buy

[brian wright22]

Originally Posted by ray

Right thanks i will hang on a while unless i come across a bargain then i may buy

Can't add much to what has been said Ray. I have a 350D. The real noticeable difference when I "played" with the 30D was less objectionable noise with the 30D. Needless to say I still have the 350D and its all a personal choice and the bank balance!!.
Brian