Have a look at this.

Canon Direct

Where is says refurbished they aint, its all boxed as new. It just says that to keep Canon's high street dealers happy. I think this e.shop is Canon UK's way to combat the likes of Digital-Rev from improting direct from hong-kong.

Northy got his 350 + lens for £330

You can get a 30d plus lense for less than the 400d's are in the shops.

I had looked on there but did not want to get a refurb, i was looking at digitak-rev as they have the 400d + kit lens for £450 shipped from london so no problem with import duty etc.

But i will watch a few auctions and see what price i can get the 400d for.

Was Northy brand new but said refurb on the auction ?.

Yeah, brand new.
From what I can gather it's all new factory sealed stuff.
I suspect they just say it's refurbed to keep their dealers happy, that's why they say they do the no-quibble exchange thing, cos they know it's all really brand new.

It certainly looked absolutley brand spanking new. Didn't John Price get one too Jimmy?

G

Don't know about that, Andy shill got 3 of them, (300d) from the same place

refurbed can still be in sealed boxes

I 400d (body only) has just sold for £390 + £6 P&P on the Canon shop, or i can get a new one from Digital Rev for £415 delivered ?.

G's camera was absolutely perfect, not a finger mark or spec of dust. That's as near to brand new as I would want.

That Rev price is good however.

Ok i will keep a eye on there shop and see what i can get ;) thanks for all the info.

Got the 400d off the Canon Outlet store ;) and the 24-105 off A.J.Purdys ebay store, over £100 cheaper than anywhere else, i have been to purdys shop so i know they were ok.

Not had the chance to take any actions photos yet, but taken a few of the S4 for the website, some A3 paper on the dinning table using the onboard flash and the dinning room lights on, no fancy flash setup here lol.

I really needed more light as the depth of field is pretty narrow and i did not want to pump up the iso to much these were at iso 200 with +1 flash compensation to blow out the white a bit.

http://atomic-carbon.gforceimages.net/images/s4_4_s.jpg


http://atomic-carbon.gforceimages.net/images/s4_2_s.jpg

http://atomic-carbon.gforceimages.net/images/s4_1_s.jpg

Thanks for everyone's advice on the camera etc, as soon as i switched the 400d on it was like using a old friend, and the 24-105 is nice and the IS works well, i can hand hold down to around 1/20 which is good.

Good choice on the 400D, I ditched my 1DS in favour of the 400D the 1DS was total overkill, a big heavy brute! Funny thing is the 400D produces better images!

My lens of choice is the 17-40L, a great sharp and contrasty walkaround lens.

Colin

I have had a 1D and 1D mk2 i am sure the 400D will not be as good for action stuff, you cannot beat the rapid fire on the Mk2.

But the image's do look spot on just from the few shots i have taken, kiddy next weekend will be the test ;)

The widest canon lens I have is my 50 1.8 so I am looking for something like one of these two zooms one day (when I've sold enough stuff), either the 17-40 or 24-105. Wouldn't mind a look at that lens when I see you next jonathan.

Next time we are at the same meeting give me a shout, with it being a L spec lens its built like a tank, has the waterproof seals (handy for Telford) and is heavy but would give a nice balance on your 1D mk2.

OldTimer,

I never needed the rapid fire of 1Ds for my photography, I am a little to old to be lying in muddy puddles at RC meets to capture the action:)

Are you from Telford also?

I was into Motorsport photography before i got back in to R/C stuff so the 8 shots a second helped get some great photos, have a look here http://www.gforceimages.net and goto the gallery to have a look at some of my stuff. Not from Telford but the national there last year was very wet :D

I actually quite like them, it looks like you are trying to draw attention to a particular point on the car.
I've thought more depth = better for that type of shot, not sure now.

Looking at them again it does look like a bit of gaussian blur from photoshop ;), honest it was all done with the camera lol.

I am not sure if the 17-40 would suit be better as I have the 50 and 70-200 also - hard to know what those extra few mm at the low end would give me. I think the 17-40 is about half the price of the 24-105 is that right?

Have to have a look at both really to get an idea. Right now anything that is wide I tend to use the fisheye which is a bit mad.

The 17-40 is about £100 less than what i paid for the 24-105, if you did not have the 50mm then it would be a nice fit, but i think the 17-40 is the way to go for you, with the multipler of the sensor it will not be as wide as 17mm also.