350d vs 450d vs 550d vs Nikon eqivalent small body DSLRs

C

clicktor

Messages
863
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi all,

Can someone help me? I own a Canon 350d and I am starting to think I have outgrown it a bit. I only care for small as possible light weight range camera bodies preferably around 500grams like the Canon 350d/450d/550d. I do not have experience with Nikon but am perfectly happy to try it...but see question 5. (only interested in Nikon and Canon)

1: I thought that the smallest most compact Canon bodies were meant to be X50d ? Why then is the 400d and 500d body very similar size and weight to the X50d range? Or have I got that wrong?

2: If I upgraded from 350d to 450d/550d/400d/500d, how much of an improvement in AF and ISO performance would there be?

3: How much better/important is the cross type extra accurate center focus point with f/2.8 glass on the 450d/550d bodies assuming I would use f/2.8 glass?

4: What in your opinion is the best compact/lightweight DSLR from Nikon or Canon in terms of AF and ISO performance?

5: If I switched to Nikon and ended up on a low end body in their range that does not support the Auto Focus on ALL of Nikon's lens range, would I be at a major disadvantage in selecting lenses? Is there an equivalent nifty fifty for Nikon and would it work with AF? Are the lenses for Nikon generally more expensive than canon?

6: Are the issues with 450d focusing something to worry about? Did Canon fix these issues or did we establish whether it was mostly first time users being the problem? Dodgey batch? Or was it that the supplied IS version of the kit lens was at fault? It seems a lot of people had issues.


Or do you think my 350d is still capable? I took a couple of shots with my friends 550d the other day and couldn't detect massive amounts of improvement with AF speed but it was slightly more accurate with higher hit rate. The 350d sensor showed it's age with the amount of detail captrued though and the scene on the 550d looked more natural and better lit. (same lens and conditions/setup obviously).


Thoughts much appreciated.

Oh and I shoot a lot of people photography and low light stuff. I am finding a lot of my shots at the moment come out soft and/or out of focus with bad noise when using 800 ISO on my 350d.

Regards
 
Last edited:
As a Nikon owner I will look at point 5

There are many affordable AF-S lenses in the Nikon range so you should not have a provlem there.The older lenses will work you just have to do what many photographers used to do, focus manually and understand depth of field.
 
PsiFox said:
As a Nikon owner I will look at point 5

There are many affordable AF-S lenses in the Nikon range so you should not have a provlem there.The older lenses will work you just have to do what many photographers used to do, focus manually and understand depth of field.
Click to expand...

I would require them to auto focus. :) So what is the equivalent nifty fifty for Nikon and is it the same plastic fantastic or not as sharp?
 
clicktor said:
I would require them to auto focus. :) So what is the equivalent nifty fifty for Nikon and is it the same plastic fantastic or not as sharp?
Click to expand...

The Nikon lens has better build quality than the Canon equivalent and is renowned for it's sharpness, however it won't af on any of the lower end bodies. If af is a prerequisite then you'd be better looking at the 35mm f/1.8, which not only has a motor but is a far more useable focal length on a crop body than a 50mm.
 
The X50D range is the same range as the X00D range. They go up in fifties.

The nikon D5000 might be worth looking at? IIRC it has a similar AF system to the heavier D90, but it's smaller and with no body focus motor.
The 500D and 550D are also very capable cameras.
They all perform very similar in terms of ISO performance. 1/3 of a stop seems to be the most difference you get between current bodies, which isn't enough in my book to make a huge difference.
Maybe worth going into a shop and trying some? You might find you really like the handling of some particular bodies, and those are the ones to go for.

What lenses do you own? Upgrading to USM lenses would improve your AF speed if you're using lower end lenses.
 
Last edited:
I currently own the Sigma 18-50mm f/2.8 EX DC Macro (canon fit obviously) and the 50mm f/1.8 mkII. I have previously owned a 300d and various other lenses, and have had access to other canon bodies. I am used to Canon yes. I am aware the 35mm would be good on a crop body so may eventually get another fast prime. I like the look of the 85mm f/1.8 and also 28-35mm range primes.
My current lenses I know are not the best performers in terms of AF. I have been looking at upgrading my Sigma 18-50mm to the new Sigma 17-50mm EX DC OS HSM which might make a difference.

I guess the main question is whether the 450d would be much better than my 350d with ISO and AF performance as per my questions in the op. What do you guys think?

Thanks, I did not know the X00 and X50 were the same range!

Also, I do not care for video at all so this would be a waste of money for me in a body. I would likely upgrade second hand too.
 
Last edited:
The 450D is miles better than the 350D so if you're worried it won't be much of an upgrade don't be because it is.
 
And the 550D is better than the 450D. I see the 550D as a 7D in plain clothes, especially if like me you use the centre focus spot the most. Iso 6400 is everyday useable on the 550D.

Canon and Nikon own the lions share of the market, and in reality there's very little in it. Where there are differences are in the glass - not in terms of outright quality, but in terms of great lenses at different focal lengths.

The Canon 1.2L's are unmatched; the 300 f/4 has IS; the 100-400L has USM rather than screw drive; the Canon big guns are significantly cheaper than the Nikon ones. The 24-105 f/4L is cheaper than the 24-120 f/4 Nikkor; same goes for the 24mm f/1.4L. Nikon don't have such a well-liked 135mm f/2, and Canon have a range of tilt/shift lenses Nikkor can only envy.

The Nikkor 14-24 is unmatched, the 300/4 is so rare it ever loses money [unless I sell it...], the 35mm f/1.8 is a lovely little lens with no Canon equivalent; the 105VR macro is a stonking lens; The 135mm F/2 Nikkor do is a specialist defocus lens, the modern Nikkor f/2.8 range is superb.

Make your choice based on where you want to go with glass in 5 years time; it's painful changing systems!
 
As per the OP only interested in Canon or Nikon. I think to be honest I might go for a 450d second hand. The more I read about it the more I think it will bea good upgrade for me. So who can comment on the focus problems with the 450d that are so well documented on the internet? Hearsay and newb camera owners or a genuine problem? Or a problem with the supplied kit lens IS version?
Cheers for the replies.
 
I started out with a 450D and then upgraded to a 550D. The metering system on the 550D is much, much better than the 450Ds (its the same one as the 7Ds). The image resolution is 50% higher on the 550D, so you will get more detailed pictures and also you will have much more scope for creative cropping. The high ISO performance on the 550D is also much better.

I think your choice will boil down to which of the two you can afford.
 
550d over budget really I think. I don't really like spending cash on the extra video capabilities when I won't use them. Thanks for all advice so far though.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top