Canon Rebel XTi vs Canon 30D

Just curious, been eyeing up digital and see that the 30D is more than the

XTi... yet, the 30D is an 8.2mp vs the 10.1mp XTi, and the XTi has that self

cleaning option to it....

 

I know I must be missing something....

 

Can anyone tell me why the 30D costs about $300 more and why it would be

chosen over top of the XTi?

 

I'm a student, or else I'd get the 5D...

 

Being a student I am also cheap (not by choice) so was looking at the XTi

pricewise, but if there is some reason why the 30D would be a better choice

I'd like to know... I'm a Graphic Design student, ending 1st yr and want a

camera that will last me many years, even when starting to work... again the

5D would be great... but... it's a bit out of my price range.

 

Thanks

Compare size and construction: the 30D is larger and has a magnesium alloy "skeleton." Plus the very useful Quick Control Dial.

 

It's mostly a case of superior interface (30D) vs. newer technology (XTi).

 

That the 30D wasn't superceded last month by a newer model (a la 40D) with the more current technologies found in the XTi is a source of chagrin and anguish for many Canon 10/20/30D and Digital Rebel (original/XT) owners.

The self cleaning option and higher resolution is about all the XTi has going for it on the 30D. Others will certainly disagree, saying that its better on little more than the fact that it is newer. If you compare the statistics of the two, you will see that the 30D is superior most capacities. As for the 30D compared to the XTi, it has a higher max shutter speed, faster frame rate, 1/3 stop ISO settings, larger buffer, faster flash sync, spot metering, longer battery life, better build, ISO 3200, and a few more minor features. You decide if thats worth an extra $300. To some, it is not, to others, it makes all the difference.

To continue with what Leopold started... The 30d has a dedicated status LCD, dedicated rear dial, larger and brighter viewfinder, better grip, better interface for most functions, and a few more minor features. It is lacking a relatively ineffective dust removal system, and an extra 2 megapixels.

 

The XTi is by no means a bad camera- you really need to hold and shoot with each camera to make your decision.

 

I owned a Rebel XT and have used an XTi, but you couldn't pry my 30d out of my hands.

XTI is just a plastic consumer grade camera that does not even have a glass pentaprism.

 

For the intended family / amateur use it is a fine camera.

Ronald got it in a nutshell -- the Rebel is intended for amateurs. That doesn't make it a bad camera at all, just one that many pros wouldn't be as interested in. The 30D, while certainly not on the level of the 1 series bodies, is more professional. It's studier built so it can be banged around a bit more, the mirror mechanism is designed to be fired a lot more, the controls allow for a lot more control to be done a lot more easily. The Rebel is intended more for Aunt Sally to get pictures of the kiddies during the family vacation to Disney World.

Once you press the shutter button, it doesn't make that much difference which camera body you get, they will both produce excellent images.

 

Before you press the shutter button is another matter. As others have mentioned, I much prefer the ergonomics of the 10D/20D/30D line. Having two dials/wheels (one on the back and the other by the shutter release) to control aperture and shutter speed (manual mode), and exposure compensation (aperture and shutter priority modes) is faster and more intuitive. In some situations, it can make the difference between getting and missing the shot.

 

If the price was the same, I would pick the 30D any day. Even with the price difference, I would still pick the 30D (or a used 20D).

 

Jim

I disagree about the XTi being labelled strictly an amateur camera ( who here is a pro, by the way? ).... I have had one since last fall when they came out and I am EXTREMELY pleased with the quality up to ISO 400. I am printing gorgeous 8x10's at home and having my 16x20's done by mpix. Amateur my ass, its a great camera. I cant talk to the 30D's quality, but I wouldnt hesitate to get the Xti. The costs involved on improving the quality ( outside of lens choice ) would not be worth it unless you are printing huge ( like 32 x 40 inch prints ). AH

I haven't used the 30D; I've been pretty satisfied with the XTi except for an unexpected degree of difficulty focusing manual-focus lenses in the small viewfinder. But for me, spending 3 times the price of a good 35mm SLR on a camera was a major undertaking, and adding another $300 was absolutely out of the question.

 

Or put another way, I have an extra $300 to put toward better lenses...

the Xti lacks a critical feature which you will soon wish you had as you get more interested in photography. It does not have spot metering ability. While there are workarounds (wandering the camera around for a reading, then locking it in) you will soon tire of waving the camera around in front of your face as if your middle ear had suddenly failed. Read this excellent netsite for some good info.

http://spotmetering.com/

I've gotten by for the last 30 years without spot metering, and the XTi's semi-spot meter is not bad. It would be nice to have a narrower angle spot, but I don't think it's a show stopper.

I campaigned long and hard for spotmeters on Canon cameras. I bought a EOS 5 just to get the spot meter.

 

When I went digital I couldn't afford a 1 series digital and at the time that meant I ended up with the 20D and no spotmeter. There are times when I would use a spotmeter if I had it but it is not critical.

 

The site you reference suggests:

 

"Due to its nature, spot metering is slow and in situations where one does not have the time to think, when one's life is in danger, or when the image content is more important than of the image quality (war photography), other metering modes that lend themselves to point-and-shoot must to be utilized."

 

In these situations I rarely miss a spot meter in the camera. You can use a handheld meter or simply use the histogram on the camera. I miss a spot meter when shooting quickly in very mixed lighting conditions like concerts. I want to dial in compensation, spotmeter off the face or arm, and shoot.

 

It is *not* a critical feature and there are plenty of cameras, like the Lecia M8, that lack a spot meter.

400D vs 30D get the 400D 18-55 50mm 1.8 and you set lenses for canon are more expensive if a student hard to get lenses you may be better off with nikon cheaper selection and option to use manual lenses on d200 - the 30d does have nicer colour but the 400d is sharper

I went from the 350D to the 400D and finally the 30D, i'm on my way to the 5D or higher is money will allow, Up until I got the 30D I was happy with the others, but the 30D is completely a different ball game, and the only thing that is worse, and that is not the right word, is the resolution on the 30D being just 8.2Mp, but saying this I have printed out to A3 and they are perfect, and more to the point I have sold photo's made with the 30D, never happened with the others. The feel of the 30D in the hand is so much better, the 350/400 are just toys, they are not pro, and some of the newer features found on the 30D are so good, and well worth the upgrade. as for the 400D being sharper, NO WAY, I can you the same lenses on both cameras and set them up the same using the same position and same focusing point and the 30D does always have the edge. There is a big price difference, and think about it! That is there for a reason, the 30D is a better camera than the 5D, it is almost the same as comparing the 5D to the 30D, after all, you get what you pay for.

I have a 400D but I borrow a 30 when I shoot sports.

 

5 FPS, ISO 3200. If you capture any sort of action or low light events you definitely want the 30D. And the viewfinder is a little bit better - the 400D feels a little bit cramped after using a 30D.

 

I like the bigger grip and the QCD, but appart from 5 FPS and ISO 3200 the two cameras are really equivalent.

Good stuff in this thread.

 

I think the bottom line is that the 30D is a better camera that is saddled with older sensor technology. Yes. . it is built better and handles better. But the sensor is the old 20D sensor, which is basically identical image-quality wise to the Rebel XT sensor.

 

Regarding the spot meter: Honestly, I have no need for it. Not on a dSLR. If I have a situation where I would need it. . .I am probably heading to photoshop anyway to recover shadow detail. If I have a situation where spot metering would be helpful. . . .I am more likely to "exposure bracket" the scene.

 

On a film camera, where every frame is precious, then I do see the value in spot metering.

 

Regarding the 1/3 ISO performance: Are you aware this is not a true sensor adjustment, but rather in-camera exposure manipulation? There have been threads on this in the past. On the 30D and 5D, they naturally have ISO 100, 200, 400, 800, 1600. The "H" iso (3200) and the 1/3 stop iso's are achieved via software manipulation of the native ISO settings.

 

Basically, this is nothing more than punching in "Exposure: +0.33" or whatever in your photoediting program.

 

To Jon's point above: I am one of those that was surprised that Canon did not upgrade the 30D sensor to the XTI's technology at the first opportunity. The 30D sales must not be critically weak at this point. . or they are planning to phase out that market segment.

You might be interested in reading these threads, too:<br /><br />

 

<a href="http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00IBOq">http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00IBOq</a><br />

<a href="http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00IUn4">http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00IUn4</a><br />

<a href="http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00JsjX">http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00JsjX</a><br />

<a href="http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00KKta">http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00KKta</a>

"I am one of those that was surprised that Canon did not upgrade the 30D sensor to the XTI's technology at the first opportunity."

 

I third that motion. I would have bet real money that Canon's PMA announcement would have been a 40D. Or a 5D upgrade, one of the two. It does seem odd that they aren't in much of a hurry to put the Rebel XTi bells and whistles into a 10/20/30D series body.

Wow.... never had that many replies that fast to a post before, my head is spinning. :)

 

Though the 1 main thing that I am still having the debate over, is the 30D's 8.2mp vs the XTi's 10.1mp. Construction and advanced speeds and such seem to stack in the 30D's favour, the self cleaning thing is cool on the XTi for sure...

 

But, at the end of the day, when taking photos in a studio, or macro shots up close with a tripod, isn't it better to have the 10.1mp?

2MP really doesn't make a significant difference. And really, unless you're going to blow up huge enlargements, anything above 6 MP should do you proud.

Ah that's good...

 

Being a student, again the 5D is ideal, but very tight budget, hence the BIG debate over the approx. $300 difference. I currently have a 35mm Rebel Ti, with the standard 28-90mm and a 75-300mm lens, EF mount so wanting a Canon so I can use the lens' on both cameras.

 

Being in Graphic Design, I may be shooting a still life of a bowl of fruit today, and tomorrow shooting cars racing by... so, hence the post, I'd hate to have bought one camera out of cheapness and ignorance, and a year from now realized had I have paid the extra $300, I'd have been able to have done more with it.

 

Figured best post, although learning from ones mistakes is a good way to learn, this way is a cheaper lesson. :)

 

Speaking of lessons, hoping the people at the local camera shops weren't just making a sale... but, the two lens' I have, both EF mounts, AF and MF focussing, and they have a red dot for lining up when switching lens'... I was told the red dot means it'll work on both 35mm and digital, whereas the white dot means 35mm only... that true?

 

Not the best len's at this point, but all I can afford for a while. :)

I have never heard of a 35mm-only lens. I have heard of digital only lenses, though; Canon designates them clearly as EF-S lenses and Nikon designates them as DX lenses (FYI, the "digital only" lenses don't work on all digital cameras, either, just the ones specially designated to take them).

 

Outside of the EF-S lenses, though, it's been my understanding that any Canon EF lens will work on any Canon EF-mount camera. That I could be mistaken about.

hmm, well... here's hoping the lens' I have will work if/when I get the Canon 30D...

 

If going for a used camera... if there one comparable? I saw mention of a 20D in the thread, as well as 350/450D's... I gather the lower the number the better the camera... ?

The white dot is small-format digital only - the 35mm lenses (red dot) will work on both.

The camera bodies also have the white and red markings on the lens mount.