Beginner here..Buying a new EOS Xti. Need Advice

[adriancendana]

Hi! Im a beginner in photography planning to buy a DSLR.. Im choosing beetwwen

Rebel xti and Nikon D40.. I heard that Xti has more advantage though its much

expensive than d40.. I dont knw which camera to start on being me as a

newbie..Im interested in shooting macro, night sceneries, people and perhaps

landscape. I need suggestions to what primary lenses should I be having for my

chosen types..A kit of rebel xti has 18-55mm? WOuld this be useful enough?Tnx :)

[joshroot]

Either camera will be fine for a beginner. You won't notice a real difference in camera bodies until you have gotten more used to the camera and begun to decide on what kind of photography you like to do.

 

The kit lens will be fine as a start. But if you have extra money, any f/2.8 (or faster) will bring you a significant level of improvement in low light photography.

[f72]

THE XTI COMPARE TO THE D40X AND THE D40 COMPARE TO THE XT AL THOUGH THE XT PACKS 8MP AND D40 THE IS 6MP .THIS IS WHAT I DO I TRY THEM BOTH YOU CAN DO THAT IN ANY CAMERA STORE AND READ FEW REVEWS ABOUT THEM AND MAKE MY DECISION BASE ON THAT.AND ABOUT THE KIT LENS IT WILL FINE AS START LENS...GOOD LUCK

[jaycai]

I just got a Pentax K100D super w/ kit lens, which has more features and a lower price for a starter dSLR. The Pentax system accepts more older lenses (lower price used). The only shortcoming I would say with the Pentax system is in long telephoto/fast lenses, unless you're into professional fast action indoor sports photography, it won't be a problem. Everything else is excellent and good value for the money. The Kit lens is ok except when you're shooting in low light, then you need a f/2.8/2.0/1.4 without using flash.

[gerrymorgan]

Whichever you choose, I'd recommend that you get a lens with image stabilization. It will be much easier to hand-hold. I don't think either Canon or Nikon offers their respective 18-55mm image-stabilized lenses in a kit yet, so I'd recommend buying the body and lens separately (even if you end up spending a little more). The <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Canon-EF-S-18-55mm-3-5-5-6-Lens/dp/B000V5K3FG/ref=pd_bbs_1?ie=UTF8&s=photo&qid=1196967595&sr=1-1">Canon 18-55mm IS lens</a> is available now. The <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Nikon-18-55mm-3-5-5-6G-AF-S-Nikkor/dp/B000ZMCILW/photonet">equivalent Nikon lens</a> will be available in January 2008.

[gerrymorgan]

If you go with the Pentax, of course, you have image stabilization in the camera body, so all your lenses are effectively stabilized.

[gdanmitchell]

Frankly, this is a great time for people buying entry level cameras - there are fine cameras

available from Canon, Nikon, Pentax, and Sony in this category, and you are not likely to

go very wrong with any of them.

 

Of course, that doesn't make your decision process any clearer. :-)

 

Note - Canon isn't including it with the XTi yet, but they have introduced an apparently

excellent image stabilized version of the 18-55mm kit lens.

 

Also, the OP is asking about the XTi (not the XT). The XTi has a 10 MP sensor. Given the

pricing of these cameras today and the prevalence of 10MP sensors, I'd probably go

ahead and get one of those rather than a 6 MP older Nikon version. I know there is

another side to this argument, but I'd get something in the 8MP-10MP range, though I

wouldn't rule out a camera that might have more.

[kari v]

Pentax K100D Super is cheap and very capable.

 

If you want to spend a little more the K10D with the kit lens sells for $749.95 at B&H which is about $100 more than the XTi - I'd consider that almost the best $100 ever spent. You'd get a nice sturdy semi-pro body with weather sealing, image stabilization and a good bright viewfinder.

 

Nikon D40 is good, small and the viewfinder is surprisingly good. Just make sure you understand how much choosing this body will limit your lense options. Of course the situation improves all the time but at the moment it's not so good... or let's say not so cheap if you want quality.

[alan_myers]

I'd have to agree with Faleh...

 

Comparing entry-level Canon with Nikon:

 

Canon XT (8MP, CMOS) = Nikon D40 (6MP, CCD)

 

Canon XTi (10MP, CMOS) = Nikon D40x (10MP, CCD)

 

Apples-to-apples comparisons may help make your choices easier.

 

Jay is right, too. At the entry level, there are certainly a lot of other cameras you might consider as well: Pentax, Oly, Sony, etc.

 

Look at each manufacturers systems of lenses and accessories, compare prices and features on items you expect to buy and use, now or in the future. Consider other camera models you might want to upgrade to in the future.

 

You might even wan to consider the corporate status and background of the company whose products you will be buying. Are they are fully committed and financially likely to be in the business in 5 or 10 years? Are they are innovative trend setters and do they have well funded research and development, etc.?

 

In the end, what Faleh wrote is the best advice... Go to a local camera store and handle the various models, to see which feel most comfortable to you. You might first want to buy the Magic Lantern Guide Book for any particular model (or two or three finalists) to best understand the camera's functions, while getting the feel of them in the store.

[freelance]

You probably wanted to say that the XTi is much cheaper that the D40. If you are a beginner (like me), even the XTi is going to be more that enough for you. I don't know if which continent you live, but I would buy the XTi. I have both and I cannot take advantages of all the possibilities of the D40. The pictures quality are similar as I do not need extreme situations. But I would no buy the normal kit 18-55 that comes with the camera. There is another 18-55, the Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS that is reported to be better than much more expensive lenses. Read:

 

http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/lenses/canon_1855_3556is/index.htm

 

specially the Verdict that is at the end.

 

I have asked one at www.bhphotovideo.com and comes tomorrow with other lenses. It cost 175 US $. And I am going to use it with the D40 and with the XTi, that now I am respecting more. I bought the body only because I heard that the 17-85 that came with the camera was not very good. Anyway, the D40 is an excellent camera, but I continue using the XTi or my sister's XT. I am in Spain and Bh is in USA.

[freelance]

And don't forget to buy a 50 mm 1.8

 

It is an excellent lens that cost 75 $

[freelance]

XTi and D40 are both 10 MP (10,1 the d40)

[rogerdaltx]

I shoot both Canon and Pentax and if you're just starting out with no lenses and price is the major factor; I also suggest looking at the Pentax K100d or K100d super.

 

Canon by far has the better system as a whole, but for value you just can't beat the Pentax. Mail ordered the K100D is under $500 with the kit lens. The kit lens is quite decent with a better build quality than the Nikon / Canon kit lenses. Latter add the very compact 50-200mm and maybe the 50mm f/1.4 for about $200 each and you've got a great system to learn with.

 

And has been mentioned the built in body "Shake Reduction" will give you 1.5 to 2 stops of stabilization on any lens attached to the camera this is a wonderful feature that cost a lot more in Canon / Nikon.

 

You'll be happy with the Canon or Nikon and there is no danger of ever outgrowing either system, but on value Pentax is very hard to beat. It's a great camera to learn with and the system offers more than most people will ever need.

 

/Roger

[f72]

Antonio Flores

 

 

the d40 is 6.1mp not 10mp .the d40x is 10mp......

[freelance]

Sorry, Faleh, I thought you meant Canon 40D not Nikon D40. All the time I have been talking of the Canon 40D

[sean07]

I am also a beginner. I was strongly considering the XTI but I ended up going with the XT. I decided I didn't really need the 10mp. I love this camera. I haven't taken many pictures because I just purchased it but so far I am very satisfied.

[gdanmitchell]

<p>Antonio wrote: "And don't forget to buy a 50 mm 1.8"

 

<p>No, please <I><b>do</b></i> forget to buy that lens for now! :-)

 

<p>In virtually all cases, "a beginner in photography planning to buy a DSLR" (to quote the OP) will <b>not be

well served</b> by this lens at first.

 

<p>The 50mm f/1.8 prime is an excellent little lens at a great price, but it is most likely not going to be a very

useful lens at all for a beginner. It is too long for most typical use - it is a so-called "portrait" length shot

telephoto lens. If you _know_ that you want to do a lot of that sort of work, then by all means pick one up. If you

aren't certain what lenses might be right for you, just get the kit lens (which also covers the 50mm length) and use

it for awhile.

 

<p>Note: A 50mm prime lens like this one used to be the first lens that people bought <i>back in the days of

35mm film SLR cameras.</i> On those cameras it was a so-called "normal" focal length.

 

<p>But the XTi is not a 35mm film camera - it is a crop sensor DSLR. As such, the equivalent of the old 50mm

prime <i> would be a 31mm lens on the XTi</i>. If you are convinced that you need a "normal prime" look at

something in the 28mm to 35mm range.

 

<p>But you <i>most likely do not want to start with a prime</i> these days for a whole bunch of reasons that I

won't list here at this point.

 

<p>Dan

[zigzag]

I'd agree that you should upgrade to the new, IS version of the kit lens if you can. If you want to invest more then invest your time and read as many books as you can to learn to get the most out of your camera before you buy any more lenses. Buy a cheap card reader and download Google's free Picasa, use Canon's free DPP and EOS Utility.

[zigzag]

... and for night you don't need any more lenses but buy a good tripod and maybe an XTi cable release (but you can use the timer). With a tripod, the cheapest, flimsiest ones are not good (not stable). If you can try one in the shop, press down on it when extended - it should not move. A reasonable tripod doesn't have to be expensive.

[freelance]

Dan, I have heard in this forum that a beginner should start with a prime (I am not going to discuss which) and learn moving the body instead of the zoom. If the 50mm you consider too long for a crop camera, you may choose the 28, but the price is going to be 3 times more. When I saw the difference of the 50 mm 1.8 metal mount (that I found in and old camera EOS 600) and the kit 18-55 of my XTi, I never used the second anymore. Later I started buying primes, even another 50 mm II for my sister (It has the same IQ), a 100 mm macro, a 28, a 15 mm fisheye, etc. Today I have received the new 18-55 IS, a 50 mm 1.4 and a 85 mm 1.8. The new kit is much better, but I bought it for certain occasions only. I have a sigma 12-24 but I use it only when I need extra wide angle. (I don't want to expend money in expensive EF-S lenses). Most of the times I use primes.

[gdanmitchell]

Antonio, you read lot's of things in these forums - but they aren't all good advice or at least not all universally accepted.

 

While understanding that there can be a difference of opinion about the value of starting with primes, I strongly disagree with that as general advice to typical

beginners.

 

That advice came from a time long ago when primes were really the only option for most photographers. The only zooms that were available were either extraordinarily

expensive (and not really all that great compared to today) or just plain awful. The advice to get a 50mm (or so) "normal" prime and shoot with it before getting a

bunch of other lenses was very good advice... in those days.

 

Today things are much different. The quality of available primes is plenty good for beginners - and some lenses (like the new 18-55 IS, from all reports) are

competitive with much more expensive lenses. While it is true that primes can still produce somewhat better results than zooms, the difference is often insignificant -

and, in any case, not significant for a true beginner who hasn't developed particular lens preferences yet. Notice that I'm not claiming that your primes cannot produce

better image quality than some zooms - just that the sort of differences we are talking about are really unimportant to the _typical_ sort of photographer we are talking

about here.

 

Some people still recommend a prime, I presume with the logic that "you must master composition and so forth with one focal length before you 'graduate' to others." I

beg to differ. When it comes to learning about lenses and how to use them, there is not penalty for using a zoom - and if one wants to stick to a single focal length it is

simple enough to adjust the lens to a set focal length and leave it there. However, a single focal length approach fails to allow the beginner to experience and learn

about some of the most important aspects of composition such as controlling the relationships between foreground and background objects by selecting the right focal

length or the way that this can affect DOF.

 

When it comes to restricting beginners to a single focal length there is much to lose and little to gain.

 

And why, even if the single focal length approach has value, would it be 50mm today? If the angle of view provided by a 50mm lens on a crop body were the "right"

angle of view for beginners, why wasn't everyone recommending that beginners start out with 80mm primes in the old days of 35mm film SLRs?

 

So, for a beginner today, I really can't see much reason to give up the flexibility and learning options of a zoom.

 

Don't get me wrong. The 50mm f/1.8 lens is apparently a fine lens and an amazing deal. It just isn't generally the right lens for a beginner. The wrong lens at a great

price is still the wrong lens.

 

Dan

 

(None of this is to be taken as an argument against primes. Primes are great and most people eventually include at least a few in their kit. I do.)

[bkromer]

Adrian, I am a beginner as well. I chose the xti, mostly because of the kit it came with. Except for the auto show pictures most of the photos in portfolio are shot with this camera. Most of the photos are reduced 1000 px on the largest side. I 've owned the camera for almost a year and don't feel the need to upgrade, yet.

[adriancendana]

I went to the mall today checked out Canon 400D kit..I didnt get to touch the body though. The good part is its on sale =) Anyway, Ill also visit the grey market perhaps its much cheaper.. Hopefully buy another lens as well.. Thank you guys for the advice =)

[jaycai]

Benefits of 50mm Prime in a nutshell:

 

1. 2 stops worth of light for low-light/fast shutter speed conditions.

 

2. Cheap, high quality.

 

3. Better bokeh (narrow DOF effects) for creative shooting.

 

I use my Pentax kit lens mostly as a wide angle and outdoor lens, the 50mm f1.4 prime is what I use for most indoor pictures these days. And sometimes outdoor since I can zoom with my legs in open areas.

 

50mm may not be the IDEAL prime, but for quality/performance per dollar, it's hard to beat.

[freelance]

Dan, I have to accept your reasoning as I cannot compare my short experience with your huge one. I bought an XTi, later my sister took it and left me her XT and I was comparing the pictures of both cameras with the pictures(normal, not artistic pictures) of the compact cameras and the Panasonic Z50. I left aside the XT and starting using the others. Later, I found a 50 mm and tried it, and the change was very big. A few days later I bought the 100 mm macro, the fish-eye, and some more things. I don't want expensive EF-S or heavy EF zooms and I bought primes. The reality is that everyday I put a Kodak Easyshare C875 in my attaché, use the Panasonic for holidays and now have a big lowepro full of gear and much more things that cannot fit in it. I have bought all of it because there are cheap with the dollar rate of exchange, including a new D40 and an old EOS 5 (35 mm,100 US $), 580EX, two manfrotto god tripods, waiting for a Peleng I bought in Russia, and awaiting the birth of the next 5D.

 

This has happened since I come to photo net. I cannot even believe what I am writing (I expect my wife did not read it) . I am becoming aware that I have to stop and learn a little more, before ordering more things I had planned. I was convinced that I needed all this things as I write articles and I am preparing a book. But the photos of the articles (newspapers, or technical magazines, not photo, architectural, design or art magazines) don?t need to be very good and the books become very expensive with many photos.

 

I think I have to plan my ''photographer'' life. I travel a lot, but I hate heavy luggage and very seldom take bags to check in. Only hand luggage.

 

I starting answering you and finally I have answered myself. Probably last night I drunk too much against my habits and this has turned me more clever. I am going to drink a coffee. I forgot do to that before checking the email.