Jump to content

Talk:Canon EOS 400D

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 67.184.109.172 (talk) at 18:35, 23 June 2008 (→Vibrate Cleaning System). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

400d is not the XLi

ok heres my input... the 400d IS NOT the XLi the differance is first noted in shutter speed.. 1/8000 versus 1/4000 is not even close to the same... period... why does everyone try to say the XLi IS THE 400D???24.167.161.62 (talk) 05:11, 21 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have a source for those different shutter speeds? As far as I know both 400D and XTi have the same shutter speed, 1/4000s. It's 40D which has 1/8000s.80.220.153.131 (talk) 01:55, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Vibrate Cleaning System

Could someone please explain how does the Vibrate Cleaning System works? Would it be worthy to create an article for it? --Pinnecco 21:20, 25 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

[1] a good video of how it works.

As far as I know the CMOS shakes itself clean, allowing the dust and camera gook to collect on what a Canon Sales rep in Chicago described (after I gave him a very confused look) as a "super-awesome flypaper". (67.184.109.172 (talk) 18:35, 23 June 2008 (UTC))[reply]

Could this article be free of galleries of "shots taken with...", like in other canon consumer cameras? just a link to commons or flickr could be satisfying.--Marc Lacoste 21:03, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi
Yes I will be creating a photo gallery with all the images that I have taken with the 400D. I'll be adding them sooner.
Someformofhuman 02:12, 25 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
No galleries please - Someformofhuman. It's completely pointless. Megapixie 03:59, 25 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I do take critisms but you don't have to be so rude in asnwering back. We're all aleast trying our best in helping. Please, A simple, helpful kind of reply would be appreciated. I think it's so much better with "horrible english" rather than a "horrible attitute".

Someformofhuman 04:55, 25 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A reason against the gallery would be a nice addition to this conversation. Would this gallery be only of photos with the kit lens? J.reed 01:11, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Because it's completely meaningless, a terrible photographer can take a terrible picture with a 10,000 USD camera at ISO 50. A great photographer can take a great picture with a 5 USD disposable camera at ISO 400. If the quality of the picture says nothing about the camera - then the information simply isn't encyclopedic. If we were talking about adding test information about dynamic range at different ISOs or a color space diagram - then that would be fine. But we aren't. Additionally once you start adding a gallery - it will quickly grow and grow as people say "ooooh" I've got that camera - I should add my picture of cat/dog that I took the other day - and what exact subjective criteria are you going to use to determine which picture of a dog is more encyclopedic ?
It's better to have no gallery at all rather than end up with an article that has dozens of meaningless unencylopedic pictures that doesn't actually tell the reader anything. Megapixie 01:03, 11 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It would be meaningless to add personal pictures to this article, but it could be helpful to link to the Flickr Camera Finder page for this camera. For those who want to take their research outside of Wikipedia (because good research shouldn't be done by only reading an encyclopedia) it could be a boon to a reader's research or interest. Gh5046 17:48, 24 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Photo of the Camera

The current photo of the camera itself has the (optional) battery pack/vertical grip/shutter release (BG-E3) on it. It might be better to use a photo without the grip if someone can provide one.

63.164.202.130 19:25, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Indeed. I think it's kind of useless with that. It's better to get the original state. That is what most digital camera companies do in their share.

Someformofhuman 00:17, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I third this opinion. While I pretty much never use my 350 without the battery grip in place, the reference shot should not include it. The main reason for this is that the presence of the battery grip changes the form factor to a double grip "Pro" DSLR, while the camera itself is specifically designed as a compact DSLR (indeed a selling point for many people). Additionally, it seems somewhat bizarre to show the camera with battery grip installed, (something) attached to the tripod mount, and flash extended, but with no lens or body cap. This looks more like a promotional shot for the grip itself...--220.29.92.4 11:21, 27 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If it is including the grip it should at least include a lens! Let me see what I can do using my point and shoot to get a photo of my XTi w/ the lens on and then one with the lens off. J.reed 01:09, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I own an XTi (silver, not black tho) and I could take a picture of it to put up here. I'll try and get one with lens, and one without a lens. Splamo 00:21, 11 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A similar shot to the existing one (no grip, flash up) with a 50 mm prime or the kit lense would be better than the existing image. Megapixie 01:05, 11 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I can supply a photo of a UK 400d without grip, but with 50mm or 18-55 if required. Might be a nice touch to have a 400d, and XTi and Kiss images. Nexus Icon 15:04, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Accessories

Can some expert also put in the list of accessories that are good to go with this camera...like the lens hoods, polarizers, etc. An external link would also be good.--Capri.prakash (talk) 17:55, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No, that has nothing to do with the camera, lens hood and polarizers are for lenses. --Krm500 (talk) 18:03, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Canon_EOS_400D&oldid=221250460"