Unfortunately, this deal is no longer valid
Canon EOS 4000D DSLR Kit with 18-55 III Lens - £199.99 eglobal central
410° Expired

Canon EOS 4000D DSLR Kit with 18-55 III Lens - £199.99 eglobal central

14
Posted 31st OctEdited by:"hitman2411"

This deal is expired. Here are some options that might interest you:

Great value on a beginner level DSLR.

2% topcashback too + £2.50 extra topcashback for today only if you opt in to their promo
Community Updates

Groups

14 Comments
I have this camera well worth the money
Voted hot
£150 off cracking deal
Brought this for £300 a couple months ago. Very good for the price!
I have this camera as well it has been a great camera and I have taken some lovely photos of my dog and won some competitions. Great find op heat added
Can't understand why anyone wouldn't spend the extra £34 on the 2000d, which is far better built and has a metal lens mount.
lee.sole31/10/2019 11:28

Can't understand why anyone wouldn't spend the extra £34 on the 2000d, …Can't understand why anyone wouldn't spend the extra £34 on the 2000d, which is far better built and has a metal lens mount.


2000 is better than 4000? (Not sarcasm genuine question, I’ve only just started looking and I’m so confused with these model numbers lol
shareef31/10/2019 11:26

Wouldnt the deal with the 75-300mm lens be a better buy for an extra …Wouldnt the deal with the 75-300mm lens be a better buy for an extra £90https://www.eglobalcentraluk.com/canon-eos-4000d-twin-kit-with-18-55-iii-and-ef-75-300mm-iii-lens-digital-slr-cameras.html


It is not a great lens, and doesn't have image stabilization, putting that money towards a EF-S 55-250mm IS STM would be a much better investment IMO.
0m4d31/10/2019 11:39

2000 is better than 4000? (Not sarcasm genuine question, I’ve only just s …2000 is better than 4000? (Not sarcasm genuine question, I’ve only just started looking and I’m so confused with these model numbers lol


Yes, at this level (4 digit model number), the numbers go down, rather than up. Then higher models go to three, and then two digits, they do higher numbers the better. Then as you get to single digit numbers, the lower the better. Hope that clears it up!

2000d has a much nicer feel to it, metal lens mount, rather than plastic (will last much longer of changing lenses), the buttons on the back have the symbols in-built rather than printed to the side (which are likely to wear off), and a seperate power switch.
lee.sole31/10/2019 12:08

Yes, at this level (4 digit model number), the numbers go down, rather …Yes, at this level (4 digit model number), the numbers go down, rather than up. Then higher models go to three, and then two digits, they do higher numbers the better. Then as you get to single digit numbers, the lower the better. Hope that clears it up! 2000d has a much nicer feel to it, metal lens mount, rather than plastic (will last much longer of changing lenses), the buttons on the back have the symbols in-built rather than printed to the side (which are likely to wear off), and a seperate power switch.


That’s crazy confusing but makes sense! Thanks
lee.sole31/10/2019 12:08

Yes, at this level (4 digit model number), the numbers go down, rather …Yes, at this level (4 digit model number), the numbers go down, rather than up. Then higher models go to three, and then two digits, they do higher numbers the better. Then as you get to single digit numbers, the lower the better. Hope that clears it up! 2000d has a much nicer feel to it, metal lens mount, rather than plastic (will last much longer of changing lenses), the buttons on the back have the symbols in-built rather than printed to the side (which are likely to wear off), and a seperate power switch.


The 2000D also has a much sharper screen 920k dots compared with a p*ss poor 230k dots on the 4000D. The 2000D also has dioptre adjustment for the viewfinder, pretty much essential for glasses wearers, a much more recent sensor with considerably higher resolution, greater colour depth and dynamic range. The sensor in the 4000D is 10 years old with an AF system to match.
If I was forced to buy a v.cheap DSLR I'd go for a Nikon D3500 or buy second hand.
toaster31/10/2019 12:40

The 2000D also has a much sharper screen 920k dots compared with a p*ss …The 2000D also has a much sharper screen 920k dots compared with a p*ss poor 230k dots on the 4000D. The 2000D also has dioptre adjustment for the viewfinder, pretty much essential for glasses wearers, a much more recent sensor with considerably higher resolution, greater colour depth and dynamic range. The sensor in the 4000D is 10 years old with an AF system to match.If I was forced to buy a v.cheap DSLR I'd go for a Nikon D3500 or buy second hand.


Blimey, I'd never noticed the lack of dioptre!

I'm a Canon user, but 100% agree, the D3500 is far superior, although you can sometimes get the older D5300 new for similar money.
lee.sole31/10/2019 12:45

Blimey, I'd never noticed the lack of dioptre!I'm a Canon user, but 100% …Blimey, I'd never noticed the lack of dioptre!I'm a Canon user, but 100% agree, the D3500 is far superior, although you can sometimes get the older D5300 new for similar money.


They have the d5600 kit for £348, another great price if folks want to spend a bit more

eglobalcentraluk.com/rHb…tml
Post a comment
Avatar
@
    Text