EOS 30D vs 400D: A comparison

Updated 23.12.06.

Having come across many “Why-should-I-get-a-30D-when-the-400D-has-the-same-features-and-is-cheaper-too” questions on user forums, I thought I’d like to voice my personal opinion. But before I get into the topic, I’d like to quote a passage out of the white paper Canon has published about the 30D (emphasis my own):

Whereas the EOS 20D could reasonably have been described as the “big brother” of the 350D, the EOS 30D is truly the “little brother” of its higher-priced sibling, the EOS 5D. This makes the 30D a compelling proposition for a wide range of customers…

Having said that, it is pretty apparent the direction I am leaning in with this article. Note that this article isn’t about the two bodies in a feature-by-feature comparison, but more about the differences between the two classes of EOS bodies; the hundred-series class – of which my EOS 300D falls under, and includes also the 350D and 400D – is entry-level, while the ten-series class (EOS 10D, 20D, 30D) is semi-professional, with the one-series class as professional level.

I had naturally considered getting the 400D instead of the 30D, having briefly tested out a friend’s 400D before. Indeed, with a higher megapixel count (10Mpx versus 8Mpx), the presence of many identical features to the 30D (same 9-point AF), and a lower price, many potential buyers consider it the more attractive option. But I personally feel that potential buyers who are simply both bodies on a feature-by-feature basis – and who are clearly swayed by the megapixel count race – is missing the bigger picture.

As I put the 30D through the paces on an actual job the first night I got hold of it, my conclusion is that the two cameras – and their respective classes – are worlds apart. I had to use the camera only for 15 minutes to fully understood the class difference between the hundred- and the ten-series in Canon’s EOS camera product lineup.

For someone in my field of work, there is one factor that weighs above all others when it comes to choosing the right equipment for a job: operation efficiency, as I term it. How quickly a piece of equipment – be it a stills or video camera – allows me to access its many critical functions determines my purchasing decision. And, to me, it is operational efficiency alone that places the 30D a head above the 400D, even if the latter, being of a newer generation, does offer more bells and whistles.

Half a year ago, while I was covering behind-the-scenes on the set of a stills shoot in which there was a lot of fast-moving action, I quickly and painfully realized the limitations of an entry-level camera such as the 300D that I was using. Be it a long shutter lag, a small image buffer, a slow continuous drive or AF servo, I missed many good moments. That, plus the fact that I was progressively working my 300D harder as my shooting skills and reflexes improved, was the turning point in which I decided that I would eventually need a better camera.

As a recent switcher from a 300D to a 30D, here’s what I immediately like about the semi-pro body:

1. Faster continuous drive: Having being subject to the paltry 3fps of the 300D, the 5fps continuous drive of the 30D is, simply, mad. 2 extra frames per second is a hell lot of a difference. An aside: having once heard the 1D Mk II firing away at full burst on the aforementioned shoot, I can only imagine what its 8.5fps must be like.
2. Size and mass: Firstly, the hand grip of the 400D is simply too thin for my hands. The problem lies in that the grip is thin and not that it is short; adding a battery grip resolves the latter problem on any camera body that is short. Also, on a 400D, the space between grip and lens is cramped. It is also for this reason that I quickly eliminated the Sony Alpha A100 as a potential buy, seeing how Sony has stated it will not be designing a battery grip for the A100; the A100 is similarly short like the 400D. Secondly, I personally do like a little more heft on my camera body.
3. Spot metering: The 30D offers spot metering on top of partial, center-weighted and average (the 400D has only the latter three types of metering).
4. AF point selection with the multi-controller: I can directly select an AF point with the eight-direction multi-controller with my thumb. On both the 300D and 400D, I have to scroll through each AF point sequentially before the one I want is highlighted. I’ve read on forums that some users have trouble with the diagonal actions of the multi-controller and here is my tip: use the tip of your fingernail to ‘hook’ into the four raised nubs on the multi-controller. There is a reason why these four nubs are positioned at the diagonal axes of the multi-controller.
5. More dedicated buttons: I like how AF selection/White Balance, Drive selection/ISO, and Metering mode/FEC functions are paired to their respective buttons. Adjustment of either function on the same button are split to the two dials. While I struggled with this concept intially, it quickly becomes intuitive. By having more controls on the body, I can shoot faster.
6. Quick Control Dial: The big, round dial at the back of the camera – to the right of the LCD screen – is, to me, heaps better than the four buttons on the 400D. Operationally, on the 30D, aperture adjustments are made with the QCD while shutter speed adjustments are made with the dial behind the shutter. On the 400D (and 300D), both aperture and shutter speed adjustments are made with the one dial on the body, and I have to keep a button depressed to adjust the aperture. This finger combination impacts my response time to a changing scene.
7. Short shutter lag: For fast-moving scenes, the difference between a 128-millisecond shutter lag of the 300D to a 65-millisecond shutter lag of the 30D is like night and day.
8. Higher shutter speed: 1/8000, as versus 1/4000. Again, an advantage for shooting fast-moving subjects.
9. AA-sized battery option: This feature comes only with the optional BG-E2 battery grip. But for the way battery grips add longer battery life and height to the body, I recommend one as a must-have on every EOS camera.
10. Custom Function to separate AF lock and exposure: By default, both AF and AE Lock are activated when the shutter release is depressed halfway. With Custom Function F.04-1, these two functions are uncoupled; the * button triggers AF instead, while half-depressing the shutter release activates AE. This is useful for fast-changing scenes.

These advantages may not be important for every user, and are certainly not the kind that a potential buyer might spot while trying out cameras in the store. But the user who has proficiently used a hundred-series body before would love the way a ten-series body handles.

Yet, having said all that, there are some things about the 30D I have immediately come to dislike.

1. LCD illumination button: It is positioned almost immediately to the right of the on-camera flash, and, for my hand, is simply too far for my index finger to reach. Even as I can use my left hand to press this button, it becomes much harder when there is a Speedlite flash sitting on the hotshoe. On the 300D, this button is positioned on the rear of the body, within easy reach of my thumb.
2. Print button: The dedicated print button is, to me, simply a gimmick. How does this button figure in a typical workflow in which image post-processing is a given? Furthermore, this button cannot be reassigned. Someone please find a way to hack the firmware to allow reassigning a different function to this button. Update: After a month of use, I admit that this button has redeemed itself when it comes to file transfer from camera to laptop. Also, since this button acts as the trigger to magnify the view of the LCD in review mode, I suppose its existence is necessary. On an aside, there is no marking on the camera body to indicate that this Print button has to be depressed first before the LCD view can be magnified. Everything else about the 30D I understood intuitively without having to read the manual, but this I could not for my life figure out when looking at the rear of the body. Is that blue squiggly arrow below the printer icon suppose to clearly represent a zooming trigger? Not to me, it doesn’t.
3. Placement of the power switch: Why did Canon designers choose to place the power switch below the LCD screen? Single-handed operation is next to impossible with this placement. I much prefer how the power switch is located on the hundred-series EOS or Nikon bodies, in which the power switch is located, respectively, next to the program dial and shutter release. To overcome this awkward design misstep, I leave my 30D on all the time and letting it power down automatically.
4. Mirror Lockup buried deep within menu: One word: why?
5. Turning direction of the QCD in relation to indicator in viewfinder: In the viewfinder, the aperture indicator – and + is to the left and right respectively. However, to dial down the aperture with the QCD, you have to turn it clockwise (i.e., to the right), in the opposite direction to the indicator. I think it would help heaps if the turning direction of the QCD corresponded to the direction of the indicator. Hopefully this option can be implemented in a future firmware update.

In conclusion, I am thrilled to have upgraded to a 30D, and I cannot recommend the 30D enough over the 400D, especially for adventurous shooters who like to tackle all sorts of subjects. If you are one who takes your photography seriously, you will outgrow the 400D in no time, as I did with my old 300D; in this regard, the 30D makes for a better investment that just might last you long enough till you move up into the realms of full-frame bodies and L-series lenses. In time, when you are faced with challenging shooting conditions, you’d be glad you chose the 30D, because it is then you will realize you’ll get your shot by how fast you can adjust the controls on your camera and not by having an extra 2 million pixels.