Help Me Choose.. Please! XSi or 40D

[dan_hall4]

Sell the Tamron and put the money towards the 40D.

[jo7hs2]

I'm actually struggling with the same decision for a supplement to my 3-year-old Rebel XT, which is starting to be a bit of a flake.

 

I personally think that you need to hold both cameras before making this decision. The technical similarities and prices are such that it really comes down to personal preferance, and no amount of advice and answer that one.

 

I'll probably go with the 40D myself. My biggest concerns being that the 40D is larger and easier for me to hold, has a better and bigger viewfinder (although even the XSi would be a treat compared to my XT), the tougher body construction (my XT has taken a beating), and the CF card storage (I'm keeping my XT, and interoperability is important to me).

[joey_conta]

>>> Brad "Heres One" (review: Steve's Digicams)

 

That Review was pretty useless, both pages were basically the specs of the camera, listed and in paragraph form, I would even suspect that Steve just paraphrased canons official press release or something like that.

 

Anyway to answer Bob's question, I would recommend the 40d, on the fact that its easier to change the settings 'on the fly' with dedicated buttons for Metering, Drive and ISO places more conveniently on the top, near the shutter finger. Also the weight of the 40d makes it easier to stabilize, and the 6.5fps is nice.

 

Though I guess the my 2nd and 3rd reasons for liking it are moot for you since your focus is landscapes. As everyone else has said by now, the IQ of both cameras should be comparable.

 

Maybe sell the tamron 18-200 lens and get an Ultra-wide zoom, Ef-s 10-22 or one of the tamron/tonkia Ultra-wides, since you do landscapes they would be more useful to you.

[peter_j2]

JOEY CONTA: "That Review was pretty useless,"

 

There is an alternative read here and the reviewer is specific and final about the verdict:

 

http://www.cameralabs.com/reviews/Canon_EOS_450D_Digital_Rebel_XSi/index.shtml

 

Moving along...

[david_wu6]

Bob, For small hands, Nikon's D40 or D60 is a good choice. For $875 +Tax, one can have a D60 with 18-55 VR, 55-250 VR kit. This is currently the best deal on the market.

[dan_hall4]

Joey says...

 

"Maybe sell the tamron 18-200 lens and get an Ultra-wide zoom, Ef-s 10-22"

 

That is exactly what I was thinking. The Canon 10-22 is one of my most valued possessions.

[gregcoad]

To me if you are looking to take a significant step up from the xti, you should be looking at the 5D. The 40D and the xsi are all minor steps up from the xti. But I also tend to agree with a lot of the other posters, who are saying spend the money on better glass. If you don't yet own an L series lens, you shouldn't spend another penny on another body until you have done that. The xti combined with a lens like the 24-70 f/2.8L lens will give you better image quality and getter capabilities than your current selection of lenses with either of the bodies you are considering.

[bob_huston]

Hello everyone, for what it's worth, I just came home from Best Buy with an XSi kit. Still havent a clue if it was the correct choice. Part of me thinks I'll get better pix with the 40D, cause it's bigger, considered a pro level camera, etc. But it's so darned heavy to take on a vacation to Puerto Vallarta, MX, and I've been told, and told, the images will probably be the same on each. I know, I know, .. "it's the glass, man, it's the glass". Having said the above, I have always liked ambient lighting pix, and had very poor results with a flash unit inside, so wonder how much the higher ISO I'll be missing on the 40D is gonna hurt me.

Well, to quote the Best Buy sales (kid) guy, "I've got 12 days to return it if I want". BTW, I paid 899 for the XSi (with kit lens) and the 40D was 1499.00, including the 28-135 IS lens as part of the kit. Bearing in mind that I already own that lens, that also steered my direction.

The bummer is, I wasn't able to shoot any trial pix with the XSi, they didn't have it powered up, .. so it's hard to compare shot for shot there. Boo Hiss!

[dogbert]

If you value faster frame rate, better viewfinder, more solid and heavier body, extra thumbwheel the the 40D is the obviousl choice. If on the other hand you favour a lighter body, extra megapixels, and a better implementation of live view, and can live without the fps and the thumbwheel the Xsi is a better choice.

 

There isn't too much else to think about. For my style of shooting the XSi makes more sense.

[dan_hall4]

I am sure you will enjoy your new camera. Get out and have some fun with it. As for the price on the 40D, you can get it for around $1,100. See the link below.

 

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/518207-REG/Canon_1901B004_EOS_40D_SLR_Digital.html

[peter_j2]

BOB HUSTON: "Still havent a clue if it was the correct choice."

 

Let's put it this way. When you decide to sell, you won't be losing much in comparison to the 40D. The other matter to ponder is how long will Canon continue to manufacture the APS-C sized sensor. According to Chuck Westfall, "Sony is a very strong competitor. Once you get past them, there are a lot of other companies in there." Full-frame sensors may become the mainstream sensor.

[dogbert]

" According to Chuck Westfall, "Sony is a very strong competitor. Once you get past them, there are a lot of other companies in there." Full-frame sensors may become the mainstream sensor."

 

Really? Was this just Chuck's way of dissin Nikon?

[peter_j2]

GEOFF FRANCIS: "Really? Was this just Chuck's way of dissin Nikon?"

 

Who knows. You can read the interview here: http://www.news.com/8301-13580_3-9865553-39.html

[aykut_acar]

The camera won't make much of a difference. I'd suggest you to get a new lens(es)

and a !circular polarizer filter! (B+W is the best option out there) if I were you I'd sell my

old lenses and get my self an EF 17-40mm f/4 L USM Lens (wide angle for landscape),

EF 50mm f/ 1.4 USM, 28-70mm f/2.8 L USM (perfect general purpose lens) and 70-

200mm f/4 L USM. you can't never go wrong with any one of these lenses and they

are relatively cheap for the result they deliver. Check this website out http://www.the-

digital-picture.com.

[digitmstr]

>>Was this just Chuck's way of dissin Nikon?<<

 

I think he was talking about digital P&S market. As he added the following regarding the SLR market"

 

" Between us and Nikon, we've got 90 percent of the SLR market. Sony is only in the 5 percent range so far."

[rick_gerbehy1]

I have an XT and I am considering an upgrade. I had a opportunity to handle the XSi this weekend. It seems lighter than the xt and the xti. It may have improved features, but I question the durability of the lighter body.

[jon_worth]

Bob (OP), as others have said, the biggest difference to your photos lies in the lens rather than the body.

 

Having said that, I do find that image quality can be adversely affected by the poor viewfinder in the Rebel series.

 

This is because, as great as Canon's AF systems are, if you have less-than-stellar eyesight (as I do) it is difficult to to check focus in the viewfinder or use selective/creative manual focusing.

 

I have not held an XSi in my hands, but I do think the 40D's viewfinder, while not as big and bright as that of a full-frame camera, is significantly better and easier on the eyes than that of the Rebels.

 

So a camera body can have a significant effect on image quality by giving you a better chance of getting what you want in focus (and the 40D allows interchangeable focusing screens, too).

 

--Jon

[frank g.]

I must tell that as a previous xti owner and a 40d owner, the 40 d is better. It is nice to have a pc sync built in, fast auto focus, faster shutter speed, iso 3200 wich looks like the xti's 1600. You have a flash sync of 1/250 and just a nicer overall package. There is nothing wrong with the xsi either I am sure it is a good camera.

[bob_huston]

I have found a local camera shop that says the 40D is a better upgrade from the XTi than the XSi. Maybe he wants to sell a camera, that I don't know. But he sells the 40D with a 17-85mm IS lens which he says is far better than the 28-135 IS. I'm still being tempted. He also says the 40 D is more likely to retain value, and give me far better low light shots with no flash than the XSi. My comeback: If it just wasn't so damm big and heavy! How can I drag that monster on a vacation? UGH!

[dogbert]

Having had an XT for 3 years now I should say that the plastic bodies tend to show quite a lot of wear. While mechnaically the XT seems to be going fine and the pics look as good as they ever did, a lot of the rubber texture on the grips has worn away, the plastic texture has worn and gone shiny in the areas where it is handled, and the rubber on the remote/USB cover has also worn. The XT plastic also seems to collect a lot of finger nail dust around the lens mount.

 

Of course this is all cosmetic and I have no reason to believe that it is mechanically less robust than the 40D.