40D+Canon17-85 VS 450D+Tamron17-50

[smn_va]

<p>Hi Guys,<br>

After a long time of reading and saving money finally I decided to buy a DSLR. Now I have these two options for almost the same price:</p>

<ul>

<li>Canon 40D + Canon 17-85mm f/4-5.6 IS USM </li>

<li>Canon 450D (Rebel XSi) + Tamron 17-50 f/2.8</li>

</ul>

<p>Please help me to choose one of them; I have to make my mind very fast because right now there is only one retailer in Canada that still has 40D and it is on sale.<br>

Thanks in advance,<br>

--Saman</p>

 

[paddler4]

<p>As someone who sold an XTi a few months ago to buy a 50D, I have to say: it simply depends on what you want.</p>

<p>The 40D and 50D feel completely unlike the Rebels: bigger and heavier, with much different ergonomics and controls. I much prefer the ergnomics and controls of the xxD to the rebels, but it is all a matter of taste, and the extra weight and size are factors for some people. You really should go try them out.</p>

<p>I have the 17-85, and while it gets a bad rap in some quarters, I find it a very useful lens. it does have some barrel distortion at the short end, but if it is noticeable, it is trivial to correct it in editing.</p>

<p>I don't have the Tamron 17-50. I do have the next longer one (28-75), and it is a superb lens for the price. If the 17-50 is comparable (I have not checked the reviews), it should be great, but you would loose some of the flexibility of the 17-85.</p>

[adam_griffith]

<p>i have a 50D and, just until a few days a go, had a rebel XS. The 50D/40D feels SOOOO much better in my hands than the rebel did, although that is subjective. If you have smaller hands and shorter fingers, the rebel may feel better. The only way to find out is just to go to a camera store and find out for yourself. The rebel is smaller and the controls are more simplistic, but it will do everything that a beginner needs and more. The primary advantage of the 40d is speed, heft, and more precise control. If you don't need these things, and the 40D does not feel significantly better than the rebel, why not go for the rebel. It truly is a fine camera and you will not see a noticable differance in image quality.</p>

[m._scott_clay1]

<p>Both good cameras and lenses for a 1st DSLR. Like the others said, it's a matter of how it fits in your hand that really counts. I feel the controls on the 40D are far better than the XSi. I had an XSi but sold it and got the 40d within a few weeks of its introduction and have not regretted it. I would always recommend the 40d over the XSi <strong>unless</strong> the XSi fits your hands better and/or you are looking for a smaller, lighter camera. <br>

As far as the lens is concerned, I have both and use the Tamron often on a 50d, but for your introduction into digital SLR world, I would say having the Image Stabilization and extra 35mm of the Canon 17-85 IS would more beneficial.<br>

For me, it wouldn't even be a question. I would choose the 40d + Canon 17-85.</p>

[sjluke]

<p>But the 7D is coming out soon...</p>

[smn_va]

<p>Thank you all,<br>

Actually I've tried both and I like 40D much more. My concern is about those lenses, I am sure that Tamron 17-50mm is a great lens, especially for portraits. I am wondering whether the Canon 17-85mm is useful for portrait to the same extend as Tamron or not? Can I compensate its slower aperture with a 50mm f/1.8 lens? Is Canon 17-85mm a "good enough" lens for 40D body?<br>

Thanks again<br>

p.s. I wish I had enough money to go for a 7D but it is waaaay out of my budget</p>

[a._n.k.]

<p>Buy the 40D body, and maybe buy a used 18-55 IS. Pracitice with that, see what you need and find what's important for you.</p>

<p>Personally, I prefer f/2.8 (17-50), <strong>especially for portraits</strong> . But you may want more reach with the 17-85. It all depends.</p>

<p>The 50mm f/1.8 will work well for portraits. (I own both the 17-50 f/2.8 and 50mm f/1.8, usually shoot with the 17-50 due to the zoom flexibility, and I take pictures of kids.... they are always moving)</p>

<p>Also, might want to read up on the Sigma 17-70.</p>

<p>As a side-note: Tamron will be releasing a 17-50 f/2.8-VC (Vibration Control/Image Stabilization), for about $650 USD. Not sure about CAD prices. Might want to use the 18-55IS and save to this new VC lens.</p>

[JDMvW]

<p>40D and the 17-85 is a wonderful combo. I'd much rather have that lens than a $1000 17-55. Only thing better would be the new 15-85 and it's rather more expensive too.</p>

[kari v]

<blockquote>

<p>I am wondering whether the Canon 17-85mm is useful for portrait to the same extend as Tamron or not?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I'd say not really, but it's not hideous or something and you may even prefer 85mm vs 50mm.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Can I compensate its slower aperture with a 50mm f/1.8 lens?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Sure. That's one important point of a slr system, ability to change lenses according to needs. ;)<br /> 50/1.8 is cheap (and absolutely horribly built) but optically sound and very good for portraits. For $100 you can't lose.</p>

<p>Edit:<br /> 40D offers more than just additional weight and controls. Better viewfinder (size and quality), pc-socket, more durable shutter, faster frame rate, better autofocus system, perceived and real "smooth and fast" operation... All differences are not that great and don't matter to everyone but it all adds up making 40D seriously good price/performance body at the moment.</p>

[janet_forsythe]

<p>is it a kit you are looking at? i have a 40d and the tamron and love them both so that would be my choice if you aren't. with the 2.8 you have the center diagonal focus points on the 40d.</p>

[JDMvW]

<blockquote>

<p>50/1.8 is cheap (and absolutely horribly built)</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Insofar as it matters, I'd say that this is a misstatement. It is not "horribly built", but <em><strong>cheaply</strong> </em> built. There's a big difference in this case, since it seems to be at least as durable as the more elite 50mm lenses offered by Canon.</p>

<p>It's so cheap, maybe no one reports problems with it, but on the whole I think we'd hear if they were falling apart in use. That does not seem to be the case, although I do recall one report that they dropped theirs down a stone stairway and it came apart into two pieces.....</p>

[smn_va]

<p>Thanks all of you guys for your great insights. Well actually today I went to that retailer which still has the 40D, and it turned out they don't have that kit anymore and its a mistake that still there is such a thing on their website! Sigh ....<br>

Now I am dealing with another delima, there are two opportunities to buy used Rebel XSi and Tamron lens. The guy who is selling his XSi body told me that its shutter has less than 2500 shots on it. I searched the web and I realized that there is a software to find out shutter count, <a href="http://astrojargon.net/EOSInfo.aspx?AspxAutoDetectCookieSupport=1">here</a> you can find that software. He is selling his XSi with its 18-55mm kit lens plus Canon 50mm f/1.8 prime lens plus two UV filters for them, asking for 180$ less then brand new set (without conuning two filters). Does it worth to take the risk and buy it?<br>

And there is another guy who is selling his Tamron 17-50mm, how can I test the lens and make sure that every thing is fine with it?<br>

Thanks again all of you guys.</p>