Canon 40D, Xsi or just keep my XT?

Discussion in 'Canon' started by Tom from WI, Apr 18, 2008.

  1. Tom from WI

    Tom from WI Guest

    I currently own a Canon Rebel XT with an 18-55mm lens and a 100-300mm lens
    (a Canon cheapie). I am an amateur photographer taking sports pictures and
    travel pictures. I am looking for ways to help the economy grow by spending
    my "stimulus" check when it comes next month. The 40D looks inviting with
    its 3" LCD screen (with Live View) and 6 fps burst mode. However, I like the
    Xsi price better.

    Should I indulge in a new camera? Which one? Or just keep my XT and buy a
    lot of beer?

    Tom
     
    Tom from WI, Apr 18, 2008
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. Tom from WI

    Troy Piggins Guest

    No. Keep the camera and get some faster, quality glass, and some
    beer. Why spend thousand or more on "good" body with just kit
    lenses on it?
     
    Troy Piggins, Apr 18, 2008
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. Tom from WI

    Tom from WI Guest

    I use the 100-300 zoom the most, do you have a recommendation for a high
    quality lens in that zoom range, hopefully within the camera price range?
    Tom
     
    Tom from WI, Apr 18, 2008
    #3
  4. Tom from WI

    Troy Piggins Guest

    Depends. I'm no expert, but these are some of the common
    considerations I've come across that helped me and may help you.

    - Assume you use the 18-55 for travel pictures and are happy with
    that?
    - Want to spend the money on a telephoto zoom?
    - What sort of sports are you shooting with the 100-300?
    - Indoor/outdoor?
    - Night, daytime?
    - What focal length are you using the most, the 100 end, 300 end,
    or all of it?
    - Is the 300 long enough or do you find you want to get more
    reach?
    - What is your budget?
    - Do you use a tripod or handheld?
     
    Troy Piggins, Apr 18, 2008
    #4
  5. Tom from WI

    Tom from WI Guest

    I am reasonably happy with the 18-55, so the money could just go for the
    zoom.

    The 100-300 (I think it is more like a 400mm after the adjustments for the
    digital camera?) is all I need. I am using the 300 end most of the time. The
    sports are mostly 7 grandsons playing football, baseball, soccer, so there
    is plenty of light. On the travel side, I am shooting animals (bears in
    Yellowstone/Yosemite), birds, etc. I don't normally use a tripod and so far,
    haven't had a "shaking" problem, although I am getting awfully close to 70,
    so the shakes are probably coming soon :-(
    It would be nice to get something under $700, but I probably could go a
    little higher.

    Thanks for your thoughts.
    Tom
     
    Tom from WI, Apr 18, 2008
    #5
  6. Tom from WI

    Troy Piggins Guest

    Anyone else can feel free to chime in now :)

    I just got the Canon 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS. It's great for
    wildlife, zoos, birds, but I'm still learning. It has image
    stabilising. Not sure it's as fast as most would recommend for
    sports - maybe f/2.8? It's probably a little over your budget
    US$1400 or so.

    For indoor sports I see the 70-200 f/2.8L IS recommended a bit.
    It's definitely over your budget. In that focal length and
    budget the 70-200 f/4L is reputed to be one of Canon's sharpest
    and best bang for buck tele-zooms at US$600. No IS, and sounds
    like it's a little short for you.

    Don't know if you'd entertain the idea of a prime lens instead of
    zoom. 400 f/5.6L is cheaper than the 100-400 at US$1100 or so.
    Another great one for birding/wildlife. Not as fast. If you
    keep your 100-300 you won't be losing much range.

    You might also look into Sigma, Tamron, and Tokina with Canon
    mounts. Probably cheaper. I've only had a go with Sigma 105
    macro lens and it's just as good or better than the Canon
    equivalent but cheaper. Don't know if this translates to their
    other telephoto lenses in terms of quality.

    They're just my thoughts, hopefully others can improve on them.
     
    Troy Piggins, Apr 18, 2008
    #6
  7. Tom from WI

    Tom from WI Guest

    Thanks very much for your help.
    Tom
     
    Tom from WI, Apr 18, 2008
    #7
  8. Tom from WI

    flaming-o Guest

    You might want to look into the Sigma 80-400 which has image stabilization.
    Canon and Nikon still do not offer in-camera image stabilization although
    both are likely to because of market pressure, probably Canon before Nikon.
    The most significant upgrade you can make, unless you are already
    proficient, is to hone your raw image processing skills in Photoshop. If you
    are not using CS3 then I would strongly recommend you invest your money in
    software and software training rather than adding more cameras or glass.
    For most amateur uses one's images will benefit far more from improvements
    in image processing than buying a newer, more expensive lens. Despite what
    you read in camera magazines and these newsgroups the quality differences
    among modern lenses are not all that significant for the purposes for which
    they will be used by most amateurs and many professionals. An example of
    that is the older Canon 18-55 with which you are happy: this lens is the
    poster child for demonstrating chromatic aberration.
     
    flaming-o, Apr 18, 2008
    #8
  9. Tom from WI

    Paul Furman Guest

    This makes sense.
     
    Paul Furman, Apr 18, 2008
    #9
  10. I have both an XTi and 40D. While value and satisfaction are subjective, I
    really, really feel the 40D is worth the higher price. Just my feeling.
    Sometimes I think about digital cameras just 5 years ago, and am so amazed
    by what we have today.
     
    Richard J Kinch, Apr 18, 2008
    #10
  11. Tom from WI

    Tom from WI Guest

    I retired 11 years ago and bought an HP Photosmart digital camera to start
    my retirement. I would say my XT is a smidgen better than that first HP
    camera :)

    Digital photography has been perfect for me. I started programming IBM
    mainframes in 1961 and stayed in the computer business for over 30 years. I
    also had a darkroom for processing color and B&W prints. My first color use
    in my home darkroom was Cibachrome. I had to install a fan in order to
    protect my lungs from the fumes when neutralizing the cibachrome chemicals.
    It is so nice to be able to sit at my PC and do what I did in my old
    darkroom, and so much faster.
    Tom
     
    Tom from WI, Apr 18, 2008
    #11
  12. However, with in-body stabilisation, the image shown in the viewfinder is
    /not/ stabilised, and this makes it noticeably more difficult to use
    longer lenses hand-held. I don't think you will see Canon or Nikon
    dropping IS/VR from their telephoto range any time soon. In-body IS is a
    poor substitute.

    David
     
    David J Taylor, Apr 18, 2008
    #12
  13. Tom from WI

    Bob G Guest

    By all means get the most expensive camera you can afford. First of
    all, you don't want your friends to laugh at you and your miserably
    cheap old camera. And, secondly, there's the pride of ownership and
    the placebo effect: your pictures will be much better because you'll
    think your new camera is much better.
     
    Bob G, Apr 18, 2008
    #13
  14. Tom from WI

    Alienjones Guest

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    Hash: SHA1

    Tom from WI wrote:
    | I retired 11 years ago and bought an HP Photosmart digital camera to
    start
    | my retirement. I would say my XT is a smidgen better than that first HP
    | camera :)
    |
    | Digital photography has been perfect for me. I started programming IBM
    | mainframes in 1961 and stayed in the computer business for over 30
    years. I
    | also had a darkroom for processing color and B&W prints. My first
    color use
    | in my home darkroom was Cibachrome. I had to install a fan in order to
    | protect my lungs from the fumes when neutralizing the cibachrome
    chemicals.
    | It is so nice to be able to sit at my PC and do what I did in my old
    | darkroom, and so much faster.
    | Tom
    |
    | |> Tom from WI writes:
    |>
    |>> The 40D looks inviting with
    |>> its 3" LCD screen (with Live View) and 6 fps burst mode.
    |> I have both an XTi and 40D. While value and satisfaction are
    subjective,
    |> I
    |> really, really feel the 40D is worth the higher price. Just my feeling.
    |> Sometimes I think about digital cameras just 5 years ago, and am so
    amazed
    |> by what we have today.
    |
    |

    Better glass is not going to address the image quality issue Rebel's
    (XTi) had which newer Canon cameras have overcome. The Kit lens is
    vastly under rated. Using a lens fix program like DxO Optics Pro may
    seem like overkill the fix the flaws in a $80 lens but when the results
    make it's pictures look like they came from a $1200 "L" series lens,
    it's time to take notice.

    I am no longer a Canon user. I sold out and went back to Nikon but
    before I did, I looked closely at the 40D. It has something us old farts
    need... A soft mirror slap.

    It avoids fuzzy pictures when we have trouble with mirror slap at low
    shutter speeds. Quite apart from the 40D being a small sensor 5D
    knock-off. It produced significantly better images than your XTi. I
    would personally advise you to buy the camera. Put your pocket money
    towards DxO Optics Pro software and stay with entry level (Canon brand)
    lenses.

    The use you would have had for fast glass can be overcome now by using
    the high ISO ability of the 40D and DxO. Maybe not at pedantic
    perfectionist level of ultimate quality but only you will ever know that!

    - --

    from Douglas,
    If my PGP key is missing, the
    post is a forgery. Ignore it.
    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (MingW32)

    iD8DBQFICEfshuxzk5D6V14RApLKAKCAl/bdsf5qEpFaXPKuPWo7lgXIrwCfXVL3
    hbteLM3gZwQkIqgStP56ODg=
    =7gcH
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
     
    Alienjones, Apr 18, 2008
    #14
  15. Tom from WI

    Tony Polson Guest


    Buying a Canon 40D/Rebel XSi will help the Japanese or Chinese economy
    more than the US economy. Was that your intention?

    If you buy beer instead, avoid Asahi/Tsingtao brands and buy American!
     
    Tony Polson, Apr 18, 2008
    #15
  16. Tom from WI

    Peter Guest

    I currently own a Canon Rebel XT with an 18-55mm lens and a 100-300mm lens
    As a Wisconsinite Tom should be buying local microbreweries stuff like
    Leinies or Berghoff!
     
    Peter, Apr 18, 2008
    #16
  17. Tony Polson wrote:
    []
    Why? Buy what meets /your/ needs or taste, not what some politician tells
    you. <G>

    If everything else is equal, then your argument certainly has merit.
    Unfortunately, I see no Scottish DSLR makers ....

    David
     
    David J Taylor, Apr 18, 2008
    #17
  18. Tom from WI

    Tony Polson Guest

    "David J Taylor"

    Well, our (Scottish) UK Prime Minister and former Chancellor only ever
    raises taxes, so a rebate is not something we have available to spend
    anyway. :-(
     
    Tony Polson, Apr 18, 2008
    #18
  19. Tom from WI

    Bill Guest

    Tom,

    I recently upgraded from the Canon 75-300 to the Canon 70-300 IS and
    am extremely happy with the difference. The lens can be had for about
    $550 at B&H and others.

    Bill
     
    Bill, Apr 18, 2008
    #19
  20. Tom from WI

    DaveS Guest

    I have a 20D, and I'll be spending mine on the 40D. Because I want to.

    Have fun,
    Dave

    PS: ...and the wife said I could! :O)
     
    DaveS, Apr 18, 2008
    #20
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.