Very ambivalent abt which EOS DSLR suits my needs

[kathleen_harbin]

<p>My situation: For about a month, I've been trying to decide whether to buy a Rebel XSi, a 40d or a 50d. I plan to buy a body only. I've read lots of reviews, but I'm still wavering and would appreciate any advice that you may have (even if you don't have time to read all of this long rant). Currently, I have an EOS Elan 7E and two EOS lenses, the 28-90 kit lens that came with my 7E and a 70-300 f/4 IS USM. My current digital camera is the extremely outdated G5. I don't want to buy another digital camera for 6 years (that is, I want this camera to outlast my G5).</p>

<p>Where I shoot: I like to shoot indoors in settings with low light (mosques and churches are frequent locations), and I sometimes shoot moving targets in low light conditions (e.g. animals in the jungle, pets and people in the house). I don't do a lot of sports/action photography, but sometimes the animals I shoot move quickly (e.g. monkeys, birds). I consider myself a sorta serious amateur who wants to get better at photography and to use digital more (right now, because of the limitations of the G5, I use film for all but casual snapshots). I've done some studio work (never with digital) and would like to do more.</p>

<p>Considerations I care about: I think that the features I that are most important for me are photo quality (most importantly lack of color fringe, which is a *huge* problem in the G5, and lack of noise), good low-light focusing (both in terms of speed and accuracy), and ability to crop in and still occasionally make larger prints (say, 11x14). I try to avoid using really high ISOs, so image quality at the very highest ISOs is not a serious issue for me (on the other hand, maybe if shots looked good at high ISO, I'd use it more...but with film I almost never go over 400 speed...I'm not a fan of grain). I want a good LCD so that I can review shots in the field, as I'm sometimes away from my computer for weeks at a time. I usually carry two cameras (one film, one digital), so it would be nice to have a lighter camera, but I'm willing to carry something heavier if it means better photos. I like the fact that the xxd systems use CF cards, because I already have them and could put off buying a big new memory card for a few months -- the fact that buying the XSi would force me to buy new memory right away narrows the price gap just a little.</p>

<p>Specific Questions/Concerns: (1) I'd like to be able to use auto ISO in Manual mode. I know that the XSi's auto ISO only goes up to 400 ISO in manual. Do the 40d and 50d improve on this significantly? (2) Is the improved burst rate of the xxds likely to be a significant benefit when shooting birds or other wildlife? (3) Is the vignetting correction on the 50d a significant consideration? (4) How can I tell whether I'll use Live View, so that I can determine whether differences between these models' Live View matter?</p>

<p>Money: My budget cap is $1,000, which means that with current sales/promotions I could just barely get the 50d. The 40d is about $170 less than that, and the XSi is another $170 less than that. Money is a bit of an issue (I'm a broke graduate student), but I've been saving for this and I'm willing to spend extra money to get a long-lasting camera that will continue to meet my needs for a long time. What I don't want to do is pay for extra features that I will never use.</p>

[sattler123]

<p>Have you held any of these cameras in your own hands? That would be my first advice. The XSI has a very different feel than the 40D or 50D. Given that you are using a pretty decent film camera I would suggest at least the 40D - the controls will come naturally to you - the layout is similar to your film camera. As to 40 vs 50D - that's a tough one. In terms of Image Quality they are probably very close. Life View is great for Macro on a tripod - I use it all the time for that purpose and ONLY for that! Given your financial constraints, I'd say get the 40D - it is agreat camera, good noise control (and yes, you will shoot at ISO1600, because now, you CAN!)</p>

[alan_bryant1]

<p>About how many pictures do you take per year? SLR shutters, like cars, have finite lifespans, measured primarily by the number of times they're used.<br>

Any DSLR will have much better low-light performance than the G5.<br>

Based on what you've said, I lean toward the XSi.</p>

[JohnMWright]

<p>Given the low light requirement I would say 5D or 5D2, but your budget won't allow it. Can you save longer and find a used 5D?<br>

Also given your lenses... if you want wide angle... the 28-90 isn't very wide on a crop-sensor body like the ones you listed. I think a 5D might make more sense here too.<br>

The 50D goes up to 3200 (really 12800 with the custom feature set, but the noise is likely too much for most of us). Compared to my 20D, I'm really impressed with the higher ISO ability, but the FF bodies are better in this regard.<br>

6+ fps vs 3 fps can be significant when you need it. Note that the 5D is 3 fps as well, the 40/50D win in this regard. Back in my film days I got by with 2 fps and 3.5 fps for a long time; I relied on timing. Having more fps improves your odds of a good frame.<br>

Vignetting correction can be done in software, post-process. Having it in body is nice but not required.<br>

I don't really use live view so I cannot comment.<br>

I prefer the body style/controls of the XXD series over the Rebels. Have you held them in your hands? If not, do so and see what fits you best.<br>

Take your lens and memory card to the store with you and try them, if you can. Try some high ISO shots and see how you like them.</p>

 

[JDMvW]

<p>The main advantage of the 24x36mm sensor bodies is that your lenses will keep the same effective range. On the other hand, any of these cameras with the 18-55mm IS kit lens is very inexpensive, so you can add a decent 18mm lens at a low cost as a kit. Also, for low light, whichever you get, consider getting the $80 50mm f/1.8 prime. It's cheap looking, but indications in general are that it's very durable in use.</p>

<p>I personally find the controls on the XxD cameras superior to those of the Rebels, especially if like me you use both on the same shoot, but then I was imprinted on the 20D and got my XTi as a backup in an emergency.</p>

<p>In the last month, I saw one 5D used body go on-line for a little over $700, but that was a fluke, and most are going for over your price limit, at least $1000, and often as high as $1500 US.</p>

[aubreyp]

<p>I've had my 5D for about 2 years. If another digital camera never came out, I wouldn't be sad.</p>

<p>Sure it doesn't do Live View, AUTO ISO, 5fps, auto sensor cleaning, ISO 256000 (or whatever), but it's an *excellent* camera. If you can spring for a few extra bucks and get a used one, I think you will be very happy.</p>

<p>You could also look into getting a 20D and a few primes. There's nothing in my mind that makes the 40D any better. Maybe the 50D is worth getting, but for my money the 5D is a better use of the money.</p>

[Brad_]

<p>>>> I know that the XSi's auto ISO only goes up to 400 ISO in manual.</p>

<p>No, there is no ISO restriction when in Manual mode. Also, the current XSi body-only price on amazon is $558.</p>

<p>I've been using my XSi for about 6 months; coming from an older 20D. Compared across the counter with a 40D and concluded the XSi was a much better cam for me. Smaller, lighter, and for me better ergonomics shooting one-handed. Have shot a ton of pix with it since then, <a href="http://www.citysnaps.net/blog/">here are a few.....</a></p>

[michael j hoffman]

<p>I've been considering the same three cameras as an upgrade to my 10D. Just today, I decided on the Rebel XSi. It is easiest on the wallet, and is supposed to have, albeit marginally, the best image quality among the three. If you know the limitations of the Rebel line-up and are comfortable with those limitations, I believe that is your best bet. Many reviews say the 50D has gone beyond the point of diminishing returns<em> </em>vis-a-vis upping the pixel count. The 40D is highly regarded, but according to the same reviews as previously mentioned (most notably at dpreview.com) the XSi edges it out in terms of absolute image quality.<br /><br />I hope you find the solution which best fits your needs. Happy New Year, and happy shopping!<br /><br />Michael J Hoffman</p>

[Brad_]

<p>>>> >>> I know that the XSi's auto ISO only goes up to 400 ISO in manual.<br>

 

<p >>> No, there is no ISO restriction when in Manual mode. </p>

<p > </p>

<p >I spoke too fast - not seeing the "auto" ISO.... You're right...</p>

</p>

[songtsen]

<p><i>"I plan to buy a body only."</i></p>

 

<p>I would suggest that you replace your EF 28-90 lens. The 18-55 kit lens has an equivalent (28-90) angle of view on a crop body, image stabilization and better IQ.</p>

[kathleen_harbin]

<p>Thank you so much for the helpful replies! Several people have asked whether I've actually held and used these cameras, and the answer is no. I'll go somewhere to look at them tomorrow; I know that 'feel' is a consideration.</p>

<p>Some suggest waiting. Are prices likely to drop if I do? I could wait a few months, but I cannot save any more money; I need to start saving for an airline ticket that I have to buy for the summer. I'm concerned that if I wait, the post-Christmas specials and rebates will end and prices will be a bit higher than they are now. This is why I don't think I can go for the 5d...the used 5ds I've seen have been in the $1500 range, and I assume they're not going to drop to $1000 very soon.</p>

<p>As for lenses, I recognize that the 28-90 4-5.6 USM is pretty limiting. However, I started out in photography on a 50-135 lens and I did alright, so I think that I can deal with it for a while and get a new lens later. I don't take lots of wide angle shots. Is the 28-90 worth anything? Could I sell it and use the money to help defray the cost of a faster, wider lens?</p>

<p>Again, thanks for the advice and happy new year!</p>

[mvw photo]

<p>Kathleen,</p>

<p>My advice. FWIW. (Background: I teach photography and cameras, and Iown a Rebel, a 5D and a 1D3). In fact I agree ith most of what was said above. If I were to paraphrase, and to tell you in a few words what I think, it would be, in this order of importance:</p>

 

<ol>

<li>Over time, spend more on lenses than on cameras. I would rather have an XT with a 16-35 2.8L lens than a 1D MkIII with the Rebel's kit lens, for instance.</li>

<li>Get the camera that feels best for you.</li>

<li>Look at durability, water-resitance, build quality. </li>

<li>All that being said, get the best you can afford</li>

<li>Consider a used 5D</li>

<li>Whetever camera you buy: Get a 50mm f/1.8 lens. This is a very cheap (sub-$100 in teh US) lens that is very fast and very sharp, and it is a great portrait lens on these crop cameras.</li>

</ol>

<p>While I usually use the 1D MkIII, I do some studio shots with a Rebel XT (and the 50mm lens) and they are just fine.</p>

<p>Regardless of what you decide, you will have fun. Enjoy!</p>

<p>Michael<br>

PS I am very wise because I am very old. I turned 50 today.</p>

<p> </p>

[jim_larson1]

<p>I own a 40D. I have regular access to, and have taken a number of photos with a XTi. I have occassionally used a XSi.<br>

I agree with much of what is posted above. The Rebels are physically smaller than the X0D's. This is an important factor, and you should select based upon which camera feels better in your hand.<br>

Having post processed images from both the 40D and XTi, I can tell you that the biggest factors in regards to image quality is<br>

(1) Setup of the shot (i.e. subjects not in shadow, composition, etc)<br>

(2) Knowledge on use of the camera (i.e. "Oh, I guess I can't photograph basketball with a 1/20th shutter time)<br>

(3) lens quality.<br>

(4) (distant 4th) The bells and whistles of the camera body (6fps vs 3fps; iso3200 capability. .. etc)</p>

<p>The differences in image quality and features of these cameras is trivial.<br>

Not sure I would trust auto-iso on any of these bodies. 95% of my photos use "one shot" and "center focus point". Maybe half the remainder are on a tripod with 2 second timer and mirror lockup. I tried live view once on the 40D. . and was so unimpressed I never looked at that feature again.<br>

If the XSi feels the best in your hand. . .buy it and don't look back. Use the money you saved to buy a better lens than the 28-90. Trust me. Get the 18-55/IS as a starting point.<br>

If the 40D vs 50D is the choice. . I can't help you. I was frankly shocked at the dpReview article, where high iso noise on the 50D was poorly controlled. That would make me lean to the 40D.<br>

One word of caution: If you still intend to use film (what's that again?), don't buy any EF-S lenses other than the 18-55/IS kit lens.</p>

 

[bob_osullivan]

<p>I'd also vote for the 40D with 18-55 IS kit lens. Keep your 28-90 as a backup or put in on the Elan 7E. You won't get anythihg for it on Ebay.</p>

[arie_vandervelden1]

<p><em>Is the 28-90 worth anything</em> - nope, sorry.</p>

<p>Any of the camera bodies you're considering will suit your needs. All of them perform very well at 400 iso. 3 frames per second is plenty for most folks. If you're looking for a light travel camera, consider a 400D or 450D. The 40D and 50D are heavier but offer slightly higher performance.</p>

<p>I agree with the others that you'll need a lens. Have a look at Tamron 17-50/2.8. Very sharp lens, reasonable weight, f/2.8 all the way which is great for low-light shooting. Runs about $400. I love mine. Combined with a 40D you'll be slightly over budget, but you should be able to get close to budget with a 400D or 450D.</p>

<p>The 70-300 will be just fine for your critter shots. </p>