Mixing
Two cameras are equivalent but the second one is going out of market soon: is there any risk in buying a camera which is going out of market soon?
Clash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP
.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty margin-bottom:0;
up vote
7
down vote
favorite
The Canon EOS 4000D and the Canon EOS 1300D seem to me to have the same specs and mount the same lenses, but the second one is cheaper. Is there any risk in buying a camera which is going to go out of market soon? Since you can mount the lenses of the new one, I can't see any risk. What am I missing?
equipment-recommendation camera-recommendation
asked Aug 6 at 14:44
DeltaIV
1505
add a comment |Â
up vote
7
down vote
favorite
The Canon EOS 4000D and the Canon EOS 1300D seem to me to have the same specs and mount the same lenses, but the second one is cheaper. Is there any risk in buying a camera which is going to go out of market soon? Since you can mount the lenses of the new one, I can't see any risk. What am I missing?
equipment-recommendation camera-recommendation
asked Aug 6 at 14:44
DeltaIV
1505
add a comment |Â
up vote
7
down vote
favorite
up vote
7
down vote
favorite
The Canon EOS 4000D and the Canon EOS 1300D seem to me to have the same specs and mount the same lenses, but the second one is cheaper. Is there any risk in buying a camera which is going to go out of market soon? Since you can mount the lenses of the new one, I can't see any risk. What am I missing?
equipment-recommendation camera-recommendation
asked Aug 6 at 14:44
DeltaIV
1505
The Canon EOS 4000D and the Canon EOS 1300D seem to me to have the same specs and mount the same lenses, but the second one is cheaper. Is there any risk in buying a camera which is going to go out of market soon? Since you can mount the lenses of the new one, I can't see any risk. What am I missing?
equipment-recommendation camera-recommendation
asked Aug 6 at 14:44
DeltaIV
1505
asked Aug 6 at 14:44
DeltaIV
1505
asked Aug 6 at 14:44
DeltaIV
1505
asked Aug 6 at 14:44
DeltaIV
1505
1505
add a comment |Â
add a comment |Â
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
up vote
9
down vote
accepted
TL;DR: There is no risk in buying older generation Canon body.
Canon is known for the consistency of lens mounts and compatibility. They have 3 mounts for photography right now, 2+1 actually.
- Oldest EF mount for fullframe.
- Younger EF-S mount for crops.
- Youngest EF-M mount for mirrorless.
EF lenses can be used on EF-S bodies directly, not vice versa! Other combinations are possible with proper adapters.
Both your bodies use EF-S mounts so there is no risk at all by using the older body. If I read the Canon designations right, the second one should be higher tier body (when same generations are compared) which compensates the differences in running-in and running-out bodies (when same tier is compared).
In other words, new EOS 1xxxD should be slightly better than EOS 4xxxD. It is possible, that the 4000D is slighty modified 1300D design, therefore the same specs.
Actually, old Canon FD mount lenses are directly mountable to EF and EF-S mount with only one drawback - there are no pins co connect to the body and camera thinks there is no lens mounted. It will work, but in all-manual mode (the lenses also lack motorised focus and apperture settings)
answered Aug 6 at 15:00
Crowley
1,479411
1
EF-M lenses can be used on EF cameras with an adapter that ignores the EF-S pin which prevents EF-S lenses from going into EF bodies. EF-S can also be used in EF bodies if you remove the pin: photo.stackexchange.com/questions/34235/…
– JonathanReez
Aug 6 at 18:05
@JonathanReez, You surely mean "EF-S lenses..."
– bogl
Aug 7 at 6:53
@bogl nope, EF-M too
– JonathanReez
Aug 7 at 7:02
@JonathanReez EF-S lenses can go deeper in the body than EF does because they are designed for smaller mirrors. The last thing you want is mirror hitting the inmost part of the lens...
– Crowley
Aug 7 at 7:03
1
Negative, @JonathanReez. A mechanical adapter cannot reduce the flange distance of the EF mount. See photo.stackexchange.com/questions/49522/… .
– bogl
Aug 7 at 21:09
 |Â
show 4 more comments
up vote
4
down vote
In the past what you could have missed would have been significant technological progress: better AF, better sensor, support for video, WiFi, Bluetooth, ... But progress is leveling off and there are less differences between camera generations now. To some extent cameras reach their end-of-marketing-life when they are at the lowest prices that their manufacturer is willing to sell them for, so they are a bargain at that point.
answered Aug 6 at 21:38
xenoid
844210
add a comment |Â
up vote
4
down vote
The Canon 4000D has lower specs, and perhaps worst of all, a PLASTIC lens mounting interface, rather than metal. I assume their expectation is that the vast majority of users will leave the kit lens on at all times. If you expect to use multiple lenses, the plastic mount will not have the same longevity.
answered Aug 7 at 19:05
Byron Jones
1411
Although useful to someone considering purchase, I feel this doesn't quite answer the question. The main question being "is there a risk to buying the older version?", with the secondary question "Why the older version be cheaper if it's the same spec, unless there is some risk?". The older cheaper version being better spec just compounds the secondary question.
– AndyT
Aug 8 at 9:10
It extends the question in a very useful way. Why criticise? SE is here to serve us...
– Laurence Payne
Aug 9 at 13:03
As others had already explained, Canon does support their discontinued models. I was raising an important issue that the OP might not have factored into his decision; namely, that the older camera has significantly better specifications, particularly in regard to the lens mount.
– Byron Jones
Aug 9 at 13:18
add a comment |Â
up vote
2
down vote
As far as I can tell, the only difference between the two is that the 4000D has a slightly smaller screen than the 1300D, which makes it slightly lighter. As the weight difference is insignificant, this to me means that the 1300D is better.
What am I missing?
At a complete guess, if Canon are indeed replacing the 1300D with the 4000D, then they're trying to make their bottom of the range camera less appealing, in order to encourage more consumers to stump up the extra cash for the next level camera.
So buying the older 1300D while it is still available seems like the better option.
answered Aug 7 at 13:42
AndyT
13410
add a comment |Â
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
9
down vote
accepted
TL;DR: There is no risk in buying older generation Canon body.
Canon is known for the consistency of lens mounts and compatibility. They have 3 mounts for photography right now, 2+1 actually.
- Oldest EF mount for fullframe.
- Younger EF-S mount for crops.
- Youngest EF-M mount for mirrorless.
EF lenses can be used on EF-S bodies directly, not vice versa! Other combinations are possible with proper adapters.
Both your bodies use EF-S mounts so there is no risk at all by using the older body. If I read the Canon designations right, the second one should be higher tier body (when same generations are compared) which compensates the differences in running-in and running-out bodies (when same tier is compared).
In other words, new EOS 1xxxD should be slightly better than EOS 4xxxD. It is possible, that the 4000D is slighty modified 1300D design, therefore the same specs.
Actually, old Canon FD mount lenses are directly mountable to EF and EF-S mount with only one drawback - there are no pins co connect to the body and camera thinks there is no lens mounted. It will work, but in all-manual mode (the lenses also lack motorised focus and apperture settings)
answered Aug 6 at 15:00
Crowley
1,479411
1
EF-M lenses can be used on EF cameras with an adapter that ignores the EF-S pin which prevents EF-S lenses from going into EF bodies. EF-S can also be used in EF bodies if you remove the pin: photo.stackexchange.com/questions/34235/…
– JonathanReez
Aug 6 at 18:05
@JonathanReez, You surely mean "EF-S lenses..."
– bogl
Aug 7 at 6:53
@bogl nope, EF-M too
– JonathanReez
Aug 7 at 7:02
@JonathanReez EF-S lenses can go deeper in the body than EF does because they are designed for smaller mirrors. The last thing you want is mirror hitting the inmost part of the lens...
– Crowley
Aug 7 at 7:03
1
Negative, @JonathanReez. A mechanical adapter cannot reduce the flange distance of the EF mount. See photo.stackexchange.com/questions/49522/… .
– bogl
Aug 7 at 21:09
 |Â
show 4 more comments
up vote
9
down vote
accepted
TL;DR: There is no risk in buying older generation Canon body.
Canon is known for the consistency of lens mounts and compatibility. They have 3 mounts for photography right now, 2+1 actually.
- Oldest EF mount for fullframe.
- Younger EF-S mount for crops.
- Youngest EF-M mount for mirrorless.
EF lenses can be used on EF-S bodies directly, not vice versa! Other combinations are possible with proper adapters.
Both your bodies use EF-S mounts so there is no risk at all by using the older body. If I read the Canon designations right, the second one should be higher tier body (when same generations are compared) which compensates the differences in running-in and running-out bodies (when same tier is compared).
In other words, new EOS 1xxxD should be slightly better than EOS 4xxxD. It is possible, that the 4000D is slighty modified 1300D design, therefore the same specs.
Actually, old Canon FD mount lenses are directly mountable to EF and EF-S mount with only one drawback - there are no pins co connect to the body and camera thinks there is no lens mounted. It will work, but in all-manual mode (the lenses also lack motorised focus and apperture settings)
answered Aug 6 at 15:00
Crowley
1,479411
1
EF-M lenses can be used on EF cameras with an adapter that ignores the EF-S pin which prevents EF-S lenses from going into EF bodies. EF-S can also be used in EF bodies if you remove the pin: photo.stackexchange.com/questions/34235/…
– JonathanReez
Aug 6 at 18:05
@JonathanReez, You surely mean "EF-S lenses..."
– bogl
Aug 7 at 6:53
@bogl nope, EF-M too
– JonathanReez
Aug 7 at 7:02
@JonathanReez EF-S lenses can go deeper in the body than EF does because they are designed for smaller mirrors. The last thing you want is mirror hitting the inmost part of the lens...
– Crowley
Aug 7 at 7:03
1
Negative, @JonathanReez. A mechanical adapter cannot reduce the flange distance of the EF mount. See photo.stackexchange.com/questions/49522/… .
– bogl
Aug 7 at 21:09
 |Â
show 4 more comments
up vote
9
down vote
accepted
up vote
9
down vote
accepted
TL;DR: There is no risk in buying older generation Canon body.
Canon is known for the consistency of lens mounts and compatibility. They have 3 mounts for photography right now, 2+1 actually.
- Oldest EF mount for fullframe.
- Younger EF-S mount for crops.
- Youngest EF-M mount for mirrorless.
EF lenses can be used on EF-S bodies directly, not vice versa! Other combinations are possible with proper adapters.
Both your bodies use EF-S mounts so there is no risk at all by using the older body. If I read the Canon designations right, the second one should be higher tier body (when same generations are compared) which compensates the differences in running-in and running-out bodies (when same tier is compared).
In other words, new EOS 1xxxD should be slightly better than EOS 4xxxD. It is possible, that the 4000D is slighty modified 1300D design, therefore the same specs.
Actually, old Canon FD mount lenses are directly mountable to EF and EF-S mount with only one drawback - there are no pins co connect to the body and camera thinks there is no lens mounted. It will work, but in all-manual mode (the lenses also lack motorised focus and apperture settings)
answered Aug 6 at 15:00
Crowley
1,479411
TL;DR: There is no risk in buying older generation Canon body.
Canon is known for the consistency of lens mounts and compatibility. They have 3 mounts for photography right now, 2+1 actually.
- Oldest EF mount for fullframe.
- Younger EF-S mount for crops.
- Youngest EF-M mount for mirrorless.
EF lenses can be used on EF-S bodies directly, not vice versa! Other combinations are possible with proper adapters.
Both your bodies use EF-S mounts so there is no risk at all by using the older body. If I read the Canon designations right, the second one should be higher tier body (when same generations are compared) which compensates the differences in running-in and running-out bodies (when same tier is compared).
In other words, new EOS 1xxxD should be slightly better than EOS 4xxxD. It is possible, that the 4000D is slighty modified 1300D design, therefore the same specs.
Actually, old Canon FD mount lenses are directly mountable to EF and EF-S mount with only one drawback - there are no pins co connect to the body and camera thinks there is no lens mounted. It will work, but in all-manual mode (the lenses also lack motorised focus and apperture settings)
answered Aug 6 at 15:00
Crowley
1,479411
edited Aug 7 at 7:14
answered Aug 6 at 15:00
Crowley
1,479411
answered Aug 6 at 15:00
Crowley
1,479411
answered Aug 6 at 15:00
Crowley
1,479411
1,479411
1
EF-M lenses can be used on EF cameras with an adapter that ignores the EF-S pin which prevents EF-S lenses from going into EF bodies. EF-S can also be used in EF bodies if you remove the pin: photo.stackexchange.com/questions/34235/…
– JonathanReez
Aug 6 at 18:05
@JonathanReez, You surely mean "EF-S lenses..."
– bogl
Aug 7 at 6:53
@bogl nope, EF-M too
– JonathanReez
Aug 7 at 7:02
@JonathanReez EF-S lenses can go deeper in the body than EF does because they are designed for smaller mirrors. The last thing you want is mirror hitting the inmost part of the lens...
– Crowley
Aug 7 at 7:03
1
Negative, @JonathanReez. A mechanical adapter cannot reduce the flange distance of the EF mount. See photo.stackexchange.com/questions/49522/… .
– bogl
Aug 7 at 21:09
 |Â
show 4 more comments
1
EF-M lenses can be used on EF cameras with an adapter that ignores the EF-S pin which prevents EF-S lenses from going into EF bodies. EF-S can also be used in EF bodies if you remove the pin: photo.stackexchange.com/questions/34235/…
– JonathanReez
Aug 6 at 18:05
@JonathanReez, You surely mean "EF-S lenses..."
– bogl
Aug 7 at 6:53
@bogl nope, EF-M too
– JonathanReez
Aug 7 at 7:02
@JonathanReez EF-S lenses can go deeper in the body than EF does because they are designed for smaller mirrors. The last thing you want is mirror hitting the inmost part of the lens...
– Crowley
Aug 7 at 7:03
1
Negative, @JonathanReez. A mechanical adapter cannot reduce the flange distance of the EF mount. See photo.stackexchange.com/questions/49522/… .
– bogl
Aug 7 at 21:09
1
1
EF-M lenses can be used on EF cameras with an adapter that ignores the EF-S pin which prevents EF-S lenses from going into EF bodies. EF-S can also be used in EF bodies if you remove the pin: photo.stackexchange.com/questions/34235/…
– JonathanReez
Aug 6 at 18:05
EF-M lenses can be used on EF cameras with an adapter that ignores the EF-S pin which prevents EF-S lenses from going into EF bodies. EF-S can also be used in EF bodies if you remove the pin: photo.stackexchange.com/questions/34235/…
– JonathanReez
Aug 6 at 18:05
@JonathanReez, You surely mean "EF-S lenses..."
– bogl
Aug 7 at 6:53
@JonathanReez, You surely mean "EF-S lenses..."
– bogl
Aug 7 at 6:53
@bogl nope, EF-M too
– JonathanReez
Aug 7 at 7:02
@bogl nope, EF-M too
– JonathanReez
Aug 7 at 7:02
@JonathanReez EF-S lenses can go deeper in the body than EF does because they are designed for smaller mirrors. The last thing you want is mirror hitting the inmost part of the lens...
– Crowley
Aug 7 at 7:03
@JonathanReez EF-S lenses can go deeper in the body than EF does because they are designed for smaller mirrors. The last thing you want is mirror hitting the inmost part of the lens...
– Crowley
Aug 7 at 7:03
1
1
Negative, @JonathanReez. A mechanical adapter cannot reduce the flange distance of the EF mount. See photo.stackexchange.com/questions/49522/… .
– bogl
Aug 7 at 21:09
Negative, @JonathanReez. A mechanical adapter cannot reduce the flange distance of the EF mount. See photo.stackexchange.com/questions/49522/… .
– bogl
Aug 7 at 21:09
 |Â
show 4 more comments
up vote
4
down vote
In the past what you could have missed would have been significant technological progress: better AF, better sensor, support for video, WiFi, Bluetooth, ... But progress is leveling off and there are less differences between camera generations now. To some extent cameras reach their end-of-marketing-life when they are at the lowest prices that their manufacturer is willing to sell them for, so they are a bargain at that point.
answered Aug 6 at 21:38
xenoid
844210
add a comment |Â
up vote
4
down vote
In the past what you could have missed would have been significant technological progress: better AF, better sensor, support for video, WiFi, Bluetooth, ... But progress is leveling off and there are less differences between camera generations now. To some extent cameras reach their end-of-marketing-life when they are at the lowest prices that their manufacturer is willing to sell them for, so they are a bargain at that point.
answered Aug 6 at 21:38
xenoid
844210
add a comment |Â
up vote
4
down vote
up vote
4
down vote
In the past what you could have missed would have been significant technological progress: better AF, better sensor, support for video, WiFi, Bluetooth, ... But progress is leveling off and there are less differences between camera generations now. To some extent cameras reach their end-of-marketing-life when they are at the lowest prices that their manufacturer is willing to sell them for, so they are a bargain at that point.
answered Aug 6 at 21:38
xenoid
844210
In the past what you could have missed would have been significant technological progress: better AF, better sensor, support for video, WiFi, Bluetooth, ... But progress is leveling off and there are less differences between camera generations now. To some extent cameras reach their end-of-marketing-life when they are at the lowest prices that their manufacturer is willing to sell them for, so they are a bargain at that point.
answered Aug 6 at 21:38
xenoid
844210
answered Aug 6 at 21:38
xenoid
844210
answered Aug 6 at 21:38
xenoid
844210
answered Aug 6 at 21:38
xenoid
844210
844210
add a comment |Â
add a comment |Â
up vote
4
down vote
The Canon 4000D has lower specs, and perhaps worst of all, a PLASTIC lens mounting interface, rather than metal. I assume their expectation is that the vast majority of users will leave the kit lens on at all times. If you expect to use multiple lenses, the plastic mount will not have the same longevity.
answered Aug 7 at 19:05
Byron Jones
1411
Although useful to someone considering purchase, I feel this doesn't quite answer the question. The main question being "is there a risk to buying the older version?", with the secondary question "Why the older version be cheaper if it's the same spec, unless there is some risk?". The older cheaper version being better spec just compounds the secondary question.
– AndyT
Aug 8 at 9:10
It extends the question in a very useful way. Why criticise? SE is here to serve us...
– Laurence Payne
Aug 9 at 13:03
As others had already explained, Canon does support their discontinued models. I was raising an important issue that the OP might not have factored into his decision; namely, that the older camera has significantly better specifications, particularly in regard to the lens mount.
– Byron Jones
Aug 9 at 13:18
add a comment |Â
up vote
4
down vote
The Canon 4000D has lower specs, and perhaps worst of all, a PLASTIC lens mounting interface, rather than metal. I assume their expectation is that the vast majority of users will leave the kit lens on at all times. If you expect to use multiple lenses, the plastic mount will not have the same longevity.
answered Aug 7 at 19:05
Byron Jones
1411
Although useful to someone considering purchase, I feel this doesn't quite answer the question. The main question being "is there a risk to buying the older version?", with the secondary question "Why the older version be cheaper if it's the same spec, unless there is some risk?". The older cheaper version being better spec just compounds the secondary question.
– AndyT
Aug 8 at 9:10
It extends the question in a very useful way. Why criticise? SE is here to serve us...
– Laurence Payne
Aug 9 at 13:03
As others had already explained, Canon does support their discontinued models. I was raising an important issue that the OP might not have factored into his decision; namely, that the older camera has significantly better specifications, particularly in regard to the lens mount.
– Byron Jones
Aug 9 at 13:18
add a comment |Â
up vote
4
down vote
up vote
4
down vote
The Canon 4000D has lower specs, and perhaps worst of all, a PLASTIC lens mounting interface, rather than metal. I assume their expectation is that the vast majority of users will leave the kit lens on at all times. If you expect to use multiple lenses, the plastic mount will not have the same longevity.
answered Aug 7 at 19:05
Byron Jones
1411
The Canon 4000D has lower specs, and perhaps worst of all, a PLASTIC lens mounting interface, rather than metal. I assume their expectation is that the vast majority of users will leave the kit lens on at all times. If you expect to use multiple lenses, the plastic mount will not have the same longevity.
answered Aug 7 at 19:05
Byron Jones
1411
answered Aug 7 at 19:05
Byron Jones
1411
answered Aug 7 at 19:05
Byron Jones
1411
answered Aug 7 at 19:05
Byron Jones
1411
1411
Although useful to someone considering purchase, I feel this doesn't quite answer the question. The main question being "is there a risk to buying the older version?", with the secondary question "Why the older version be cheaper if it's the same spec, unless there is some risk?". The older cheaper version being better spec just compounds the secondary question.
– AndyT
Aug 8 at 9:10
It extends the question in a very useful way. Why criticise? SE is here to serve us...
– Laurence Payne
Aug 9 at 13:03
As others had already explained, Canon does support their discontinued models. I was raising an important issue that the OP might not have factored into his decision; namely, that the older camera has significantly better specifications, particularly in regard to the lens mount.
– Byron Jones
Aug 9 at 13:18
add a comment |Â
Although useful to someone considering purchase, I feel this doesn't quite answer the question. The main question being "is there a risk to buying the older version?", with the secondary question "Why the older version be cheaper if it's the same spec, unless there is some risk?". The older cheaper version being better spec just compounds the secondary question.
– AndyT
Aug 8 at 9:10
It extends the question in a very useful way. Why criticise? SE is here to serve us...
– Laurence Payne
Aug 9 at 13:03
As others had already explained, Canon does support their discontinued models. I was raising an important issue that the OP might not have factored into his decision; namely, that the older camera has significantly better specifications, particularly in regard to the lens mount.
– Byron Jones
Aug 9 at 13:18
Although useful to someone considering purchase, I feel this doesn't quite answer the question. The main question being "is there a risk to buying the older version?", with the secondary question "Why the older version be cheaper if it's the same spec, unless there is some risk?". The older cheaper version being better spec just compounds the secondary question.
– AndyT
Aug 8 at 9:10
Although useful to someone considering purchase, I feel this doesn't quite answer the question. The main question being "is there a risk to buying the older version?", with the secondary question "Why the older version be cheaper if it's the same spec, unless there is some risk?". The older cheaper version being better spec just compounds the secondary question.
– AndyT
Aug 8 at 9:10
It extends the question in a very useful way. Why criticise? SE is here to serve us...
– Laurence Payne
Aug 9 at 13:03
It extends the question in a very useful way. Why criticise? SE is here to serve us...
– Laurence Payne
Aug 9 at 13:03
As others had already explained, Canon does support their discontinued models. I was raising an important issue that the OP might not have factored into his decision; namely, that the older camera has significantly better specifications, particularly in regard to the lens mount.
– Byron Jones
Aug 9 at 13:18
As others had already explained, Canon does support their discontinued models. I was raising an important issue that the OP might not have factored into his decision; namely, that the older camera has significantly better specifications, particularly in regard to the lens mount.
– Byron Jones
Aug 9 at 13:18
add a comment |Â
up vote
2
down vote
As far as I can tell, the only difference between the two is that the 4000D has a slightly smaller screen than the 1300D, which makes it slightly lighter. As the weight difference is insignificant, this to me means that the 1300D is better.
What am I missing?
At a complete guess, if Canon are indeed replacing the 1300D with the 4000D, then they're trying to make their bottom of the range camera less appealing, in order to encourage more consumers to stump up the extra cash for the next level camera.
So buying the older 1300D while it is still available seems like the better option.
answered Aug 7 at 13:42
AndyT
13410
add a comment |Â
up vote
2
down vote
As far as I can tell, the only difference between the two is that the 4000D has a slightly smaller screen than the 1300D, which makes it slightly lighter. As the weight difference is insignificant, this to me means that the 1300D is better.
What am I missing?
At a complete guess, if Canon are indeed replacing the 1300D with the 4000D, then they're trying to make their bottom of the range camera less appealing, in order to encourage more consumers to stump up the extra cash for the next level camera.
So buying the older 1300D while it is still available seems like the better option.
answered Aug 7 at 13:42
AndyT
13410
add a comment |Â
up vote
2
down vote
up vote
2
down vote
As far as I can tell, the only difference between the two is that the 4000D has a slightly smaller screen than the 1300D, which makes it slightly lighter. As the weight difference is insignificant, this to me means that the 1300D is better.
What am I missing?
At a complete guess, if Canon are indeed replacing the 1300D with the 4000D, then they're trying to make their bottom of the range camera less appealing, in order to encourage more consumers to stump up the extra cash for the next level camera.
So buying the older 1300D while it is still available seems like the better option.
answered Aug 7 at 13:42
AndyT
13410
As far as I can tell, the only difference between the two is that the 4000D has a slightly smaller screen than the 1300D, which makes it slightly lighter. As the weight difference is insignificant, this to me means that the 1300D is better.
What am I missing?
At a complete guess, if Canon are indeed replacing the 1300D with the 4000D, then they're trying to make their bottom of the range camera less appealing, in order to encourage more consumers to stump up the extra cash for the next level camera.
So buying the older 1300D while it is still available seems like the better option.
answered Aug 7 at 13:42
AndyT
13410
answered Aug 7 at 13:42
AndyT
13410
answered Aug 7 at 13:42
AndyT
13410
answered Aug 7 at 13:42
AndyT
13410
13410
add a comment |Â
add a comment |Â
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fphoto.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f100553%2ftwo-cameras-are-equivalent-but-the-second-one-is-going-out-of-market-soon-is-th%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
