I recently upgraded from my trusty 300D to the 400D. I considered the D80 due to its positive reviews but considering I have a fair bit of Canon kit now the jump to Nikon didn’t make much sense. The 30D was the other primary contender, but other than a more professional construction (magnesium vs composite) and a few esoteric features which I probably wouldn’t use anyway, the price differential seemed difficult to justify.

I’ve snapped off a couple of hundred shots with the 400D and am very happy so far. It solves my biggest complaints with the somewhat long in the tooth 300D it replaces, namely the slow, unpredictable AF, noisy/streaky image sensor (at higher ISO speeds), and tiny input buffer.

The AF system is identical to the 30D and provides much faster response and follows a more logical AF point layout that obeys the rules of thirds. The CMOS image sensor is smooth and relatively noise free until you climb above 800, and even at that level it is still extremely smooth. In raw mode the camera can snap off roughly 10 shots over about 3 seconds before it buffers out (writing to a SanDisk UltraII 1GB card), then firing in 2-3 shot clusters in 1.5 second intervals thereafter; in fine JPG mode it shoots continuously until the CF card is filled.

The body is light and very compact, the grip itself might be a little too compact for some people with bigger hands although in my case it seems quite comfortable. As a newer camera, it is not fully supported by all the imaging software. Photoshop CS2 tends to crash more frequently when openin the 400D’s raw .CR2 files, a problem that will hopefully be addressed with a path in the near future.

Canon falls down on their kit lens which is definitely not on the same level as Nikon kit glass. The stock 18-55EF-S lens is about as cheap as they come and while it may be better than no lens it quickly shows it’a limits. In my case I already own a Sigma 18-50 EX DC which I am very happy with.

The Canon vs. Nikon holy war continues to rage with adherents in both camps. Personally both companies make excellent cameras and have strong legacies behind them. Canon’s L-series lenses are universally hailed as some of the best around, and may give a DSL-er some extra room to grow; however, in the end I suspect that if you are shopping the 400D/D80 an upgrade path to L-series glass is not a deciding factor. At the prosumer (my, how I hate that word) level the cameras have almost identical feature sets and the main factor (if you already don’t have an existing equipment alliance with either faction) in a purchasing decision should fall to which camera you like better from a usability perspective. I am familiar with ‘the Canon way’ and moving to the 400D required virtually no re-education. That said, I am still irked that Canon insists on using a single input wheel for all major settings, requiring an awkward thumb-index finger double touch to change aperture settings; Nikon wisely assigns different wheels for each function.

Here are some more reviews, aggregated by yet another review service called alatest.

http://alatest.com/Digital+SLR+Cameras/Canon+EOS+400D+—+Digital+Rebel+XTi/pro-reviews/

They seem to like the camera as well, basing the overall aggregated score on >200 reviews. Does that make any sense?

What service do you guys think is best?

Cheers