Canon Rebel XT or XTi??

TraumaRN

Diamond Member
Jun 5, 2005
6,893
63
91
So going to Australia in less than a month. I want a DSLR for the trip, my Powershot A710 isnt going to cut it for my whole trip. I don't want a Nikon as their entry level offerings leave something to be desired IMO, I've held the XT and XTi and it feels OK in my hand and only a little cramped.

But looking at things, am I REALLY going to notice a difference in image quality between the XT and XTi, I mean enough to the point of justifying the extra cost(about $130 more) of the XTi?

(FYI I'm looking at prices for camera + kit lens from BHphoto)
 
Jun 14, 2003
10,442
0
0
probably not

ones 8MP the others 10MP, not much of a difference. not worthy of paying an extra $130 for.

Im not 100% sure on the features of each, i'd imagine theyre both very similar in capability the XTi probably has a few more additions and tweaks to things like the AF system or whatever but if your like me and new to DSLR's then these additions and tweaks will probably go unoticed for a long time.

the XTi does have the better and larger TFT LCD screen mind, much better than the XT's and they did away with the additional LCD readout. some dont like that they got rid of this extra LCD screen (used to show ISO, aperture n what not) but for me, because of its position on the camera, i.e. directly above/below the main LCD screen it seemed pretty useless. If it was up top next to the control dial then it might of been a different story.

my friend has the XT and bar the better screen on my XTi, and the plastics feeling a little more on the quality side they seem to handle and operate very similarly.

the kit lens isnt great, that goes for both because its the same one, its not especially sharp or fast, and the way it focuses means it can get a little annoying when you want to use certain filters like a polariser because the end of the barrel rotates as it focuses!

might be worth getting a body only XT (350D here) and put the money saved toward a good lens. that would probably yield a better overall experience than paying extra for the XTi (400D) with its mostly minor updates and the kit lens
 

dug777

Lifer
Oct 13, 2004
24,778
4
0
Pick up a used D50.

You won't regret it...*shudders at 350/400D ergonomics and build quality, lack of spot metering*

If you've really set your heart on a Canon, unless you're planning on blowing the pics up plenty i don't think the difference between them is worth that much ;)

My bro has a D40, and i couldn't really tell the difference at the largest scenarios i'd usually use them in (up to 1600x1200 and 21", ie. my CRT), compared with the pics from my D80 ...

The 350/400D kit lens is also a giant pile of poo, from almost all the reviews i've read ;)

 

dug777

Lifer
Oct 13, 2004
24,778
4
0
Also, you'd better be coming to Perth.

Even if you do end up with a Canon, i'd still like to meet you ;)
 

TraumaRN

Diamond Member
Jun 5, 2005
6,893
63
91
Ok so you kind of explained what I was thinking but in better terms. So for a lens is there anything good that would be roughly 28-80/90ish? I dont need or want anything more than that. Maybe 130mm max. But that is also decently priced? I'm somewhat clueless on lens.
 

dug777

Lifer
Oct 13, 2004
24,778
4
0
Also, you'd better be coming to Perth.

Even if you do end up with a Canon, i'd still like to meet you ;)
 
Jun 14, 2003
10,442
0
0
it certainly is a turd dug:D

but it is useful for somethings, at the moment i dont have a wide angle, and was about to buy this older tokina 12-24mm lens, then i remember about the crop factor thingy and it turns out that it would made that lens 19.6mm or something on the widest end. since the kit lense is a digital lens, (EF-S) i think that means 18mm is 18mm. so its been useful for me when i needed something wider. of course i do plan to get a proper wide angle.

the build on my 400d isnt that bad, perhaps the nikon is better but for me at least the 400d is very solidly built. i have no idea what spot metering will do for me either so i dont know whether id miss it or not lol. of course the D40x came out a few weeks later.... i should of waited, but meh, in the grand scheme of things, with my skill level it would of been six and 2 threes.

the D80 was just too richmans for my liking :p
 

dug777

Lifer
Oct 13, 2004
24,778
4
0
Originally posted by: otispunkmeyer
it certainly is a turd dug:D

but it is useful for somethings, at the moment i dont have a wide angle, and was about to buy this older tokina 12-24mm lens, then i remember about the crop factor thingy and it turns out that it would made that lens 19.6mm or something on the widest end. since the kit lense is a digital lens, (EF-S) i think that means 18mm is 18mm. so its been useful for me when i needed something wider. of course i do plan to get a proper wide angle.

the build on my 400d isnt that bad, perhaps the nikon is better but for me at least the 400d is very solidly built. i have no idea what spot metering will do for me either so i dont know whether id miss it or not lol. of course the D40x came out a few weeks later.... i should of waited, but meh, in the grand scheme of things, with my skill level it would of been six and 2 threes.

the D80 was just too richmans for my liking :p

I'm sure you remember my endless dilemmas :eek:

I was torn between the Alpha and the K10D for a long time, then the D80 stormed in and stole my heart when i found a very awesome deal on a D80/18-135mm kit ;)

Really, anyone half decent could take fantastic photos on any of them, so it just comes down to what you like and what you plan to do in the future i guess...

Has the OP considered a K100D? Them's tasty eats ;)
 

TraumaRN

Diamond Member
Jun 5, 2005
6,893
63
91
Originally posted by: dug777
Also, you'd better be coming to Perth.

Even if you do end up with a Canon, i'd still like to meet you ;)

Sorry wish I was coming to Perth to meet ya, I'll be in Sydney, Coffs Harbour, Surfer's Paradise, Fraser Island, Rockhampton, The Whitsundays(specifically Long Island) and then Cairns :p


On that note if I find a used D50 from Amazon or whatnot, I already have a Nikon film SLR with a 28-80 Nikkor G series(i think) lens So I'd only need a body.
 

dug777

Lifer
Oct 13, 2004
24,778
4
0
Originally posted by: DeathBUA
Originally posted by: dug777
Also, you'd better be coming to Perth.

Even if you do end up with a Canon, i'd still like to meet you ;)

Sorry wish I was coming to Perth to meet ya, I'll be in Sydney, Coffs Harbour, Surfer's Paradise, Fraser Island, Rockhampton, The Whitsundays(specifically Long Island) and then Cairns :p


On that note if I find a used D50 from Amazon or whatnot, I already have a Nikon film SLR with a 28-80 Nikkor G series(i think) lens So I'd only need a body.

Ah well :(

Have an awesome time, you'll love that trip :beer:
 
Jun 14, 2003
10,442
0
0
Originally posted by: DeathBUA
Ok so you kind of explained what I was thinking but in better terms. So for a lens is there anything good that would be roughly 28-80/90ish? I dont need or want anything more than that. Maybe 130mm max. But that is also decently priced? I'm somewhat clueless on lens.

i honestly do not know about this, im not really in a position financially or otherwise to comment on what lenses are good or not.

if id of bought a nikon i might of been able to test out the cupboard full of lenses our photographer here at work has, but nevermind. he has a D70s...also a great camera to have.

i bought a 28-105 F3.5-4.5 USM MKI off ebay for like £60! the newer MKII goes for £190 online (not on ebay) and the difference between the two is negligable (MKII has a few more blades in its aperture)

its an EF not a digital EF-S lens so with the crop factor is more like 44.8mm - 168mm, but at least with the smaller APS sized sensors in these cameras it means that center (usually the best part of the lens) of the lens is used and most of your shots will be free from vignetting and abberations on edges of your shots. at least thats what i have found.

i have also found that the 28-105mm is really a bit of a lost cause.... theres many times where you find that its either not wide enough, or doesnt zoom enough....just kinda leaves you in limbo.

OdiN once mentioned to me that the Tamron 28-75mm (or maybe it was 85mm) F2.8 was a great "walk around" zoom lens.

18-200mm lenses seem to be quite the versatile choice, i get told i should have one of these alot because of the big range they offer....fairly wide at one end, and good zoom at the telephoto, but unfortunately it seems the only one worth buying is the Nikon one, the 18-200mm F3.5-5.6 (?) VR.
 
Jun 14, 2003
10,442
0
0
Originally posted by: dug777
Originally posted by: otispunkmeyer
it certainly is a turd dug:D

but it is useful for somethings, at the moment i dont have a wide angle, and was about to buy this older tokina 12-24mm lens, then i remember about the crop factor thingy and it turns out that it would made that lens 19.6mm or something on the widest end. since the kit lense is a digital lens, (EF-S) i think that means 18mm is 18mm. so its been useful for me when i needed something wider. of course i do plan to get a proper wide angle.

the build on my 400d isnt that bad, perhaps the nikon is better but for me at least the 400d is very solidly built. i have no idea what spot metering will do for me either so i dont know whether id miss it or not lol. of course the D40x came out a few weeks later.... i should of waited, but meh, in the grand scheme of things, with my skill level it would of been six and 2 threes.

the D80 was just too richmans for my liking :p

I'm sure you remember my endless dilemmas :eek:

I was torn between the Alpha and the K10D for a long time, then the D80 stormed in and stole my heart when i found a very awesome deal on a D80/18-135mm kit ;)

Really, anyone half decent could take fantastic photos on any of them, so it just comes down to what you like and what you plan to do in the future i guess...

Has the OP considered a K100D? Them's tasty eats ;)

that is true.... i dont thnk it matters too much if your just getting into DSLR, the limit will almost certainly rest on us the users! because we suck. theres also the K100D Super now...though it seems all they did was use the CCD's anti-shake motors to vibrate dust off of the sensor and a sticky pad to catch and retain the dust.

i ummed and ahhed over the D40, Alpha 100 and the 400D for a while. in the end i decided the sony was just a bit too clunky and didnt seem to have an abundance of cheap swag lying around on fleabay. plus the good carl ziess lenses are uber-expensive. i eventually dismissed the D40 over the fact that if i wanted auto focus i had to limit my lens selections to lenses with the AF motors in. i thought this may stop me from picking up cheaper but good lenses on ebay that didnt neccessarily have the AF motors.

which reminds me DeathBUA - the XTi features a CCD shaker to shake dust off the sensor, and a feature which finds stubborn specs of dust on the sensor and then remembers their positions so it can then delete the specs off of your photos. Cant say that i have used it yet though, but the XT does not have either.

though dust isnt really a problem unless your chopping and changing lenses like theres no tomorrow.

 

TraumaRN

Diamond Member
Jun 5, 2005
6,893
63
91
Originally posted by: otispunkmeyer
Originally posted by: dug777
Originally posted by: otispunkmeyer
it certainly is a turd dug:D

but it is useful for somethings, at the moment i dont have a wide angle, and was about to buy this older tokina 12-24mm lens, then i remember about the crop factor thingy and it turns out that it would made that lens 19.6mm or something on the widest end. since the kit lense is a digital lens, (EF-S) i think that means 18mm is 18mm. so its been useful for me when i needed something wider. of course i do plan to get a proper wide angle.

the build on my 400d isnt that bad, perhaps the nikon is better but for me at least the 400d is very solidly built. i have no idea what spot metering will do for me either so i dont know whether id miss it or not lol. of course the D40x came out a few weeks later.... i should of waited, but meh, in the grand scheme of things, with my skill level it would of been six and 2 threes.

the D80 was just too richmans for my liking :p

I'm sure you remember my endless dilemmas :eek:

I was torn between the Alpha and the K10D for a long time, then the D80 stormed in and stole my heart when i found a very awesome deal on a D80/18-135mm kit ;)

Really, anyone half decent could take fantastic photos on any of them, so it just comes down to what you like and what you plan to do in the future i guess...

Has the OP considered a K100D? Them's tasty eats ;)

that is true.... i dont thnk it matters too much if your just getting into DSLR, the limit will almost certainly rest on us the users! because we suck. theres also the K100D Super now...though it seems all they did was use the CCD's anti-shake motors to vibrate dust off of the sensor and a sticky pad to catch and retain the dust.

i ummed and ahhed over the D40, Alpha 100 and the 400D for a while. in the end i decided the sony was just a bit too clunky and didnt seem to have an abundance of cheap swag lying around on fleabay. plus the good carl ziess lenses are uber-expensive. i eventually dismissed the D40 over the fact that if i wanted auto focus i had to limit my lens selections to lenses with the AF motors in. i thought this may stop me from picking up cheaper but good lenses on ebay that didnt neccessarily have the AF motors.

which reminds me DeathBUA - the XTi features a CCD shaker to shake dust off the sensor, and a feature which finds stubborn specs of dust on the sensor and then remembers their positions so it can then delete the specs off of your photos. Cant say that i have used it yet though, but the XT does not have either.

though dust isnt really a problem unless your chopping and changing lenses like theres no tomorrow.

I wont be chopping out lens like mad. I'd prefer to find a good walking around and shooting lens for Australia and for everyday use and one lens for telephoto/zoom.
 
Jun 14, 2003
10,442
0
0
well the nikon 18-200mm VR (optical stabilisers) always gets mentioned if you have a nikon camera. D70s is probably a very good used buy for a body.

in that thread at the top, the guide to buying lenses for your canon or something, theres some very good suggestions in there so i would reccommend have a browse through that.

the tamron 28-75 F2.8 gets a lot of mention and then theres other similar lenses from the likes of canon, tamron and sigma. how much you wanting to spend like? you can usually save a bundle by going 2nd hand on camera bodies or buying slightly older models, but you will always pay through the nose for a good lens no matter what.
 

randomlinh

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
20,853
2
0
linh.wordpress.com
man, you guys are so harsh on the kit lens, it's not THAT bad, I've seen some good pics out of it :p

but yes, the XT/i sucks ergonomically. I don't see how people hold it. I tried to use my friend's, and conclusively decided to get the 30D when I can. Or switch to Nikon.. but I'm too lazy and like the canon lens line up.
 

essasin

Platinum Member
Mar 4, 2004
2,777
0
0
Originally posted by: DeathBUA
Originally posted by: otispunkmeyer
Originally posted by: dug777
Originally posted by: otispunkmeyer
it certainly is a turd dug:D

but it is useful for somethings, at the moment i dont have a wide angle, and was about to buy this older tokina 12-24mm lens, then i remember about the crop factor thingy and it turns out that it would made that lens 19.6mm or something on the widest end. since the kit lense is a digital lens, (EF-S) i think that means 18mm is 18mm. so its been useful for me when i needed something wider. of course i do plan to get a proper wide angle.

the build on my 400d isnt that bad, perhaps the nikon is better but for me at least the 400d is very solidly built. i have no idea what spot metering will do for me either so i dont know whether id miss it or not lol. of course the D40x came out a few weeks later.... i should of waited, but meh, in the grand scheme of things, with my skill level it would of been six and 2 threes.

the D80 was just too richmans for my liking :p

I'm sure you remember my endless dilemmas :eek:

I was torn between the Alpha and the K10D for a long time, then the D80 stormed in and stole my heart when i found a very awesome deal on a D80/18-135mm kit ;)

Really, anyone half decent could take fantastic photos on any of them, so it just comes down to what you like and what you plan to do in the future i guess...

Has the OP considered a K100D? Them's tasty eats ;)

that is true.... i dont thnk it matters too much if your just getting into DSLR, the limit will almost certainly rest on us the users! because we suck. theres also the K100D Super now...though it seems all they did was use the CCD's anti-shake motors to vibrate dust off of the sensor and a sticky pad to catch and retain the dust.

i ummed and ahhed over the D40, Alpha 100 and the 400D for a while. in the end i decided the sony was just a bit too clunky and didnt seem to have an abundance of cheap swag lying around on fleabay. plus the good carl ziess lenses are uber-expensive. i eventually dismissed the D40 over the fact that if i wanted auto focus i had to limit my lens selections to lenses with the AF motors in. i thought this may stop me from picking up cheaper but good lenses on ebay that didnt neccessarily have the AF motors.

which reminds me DeathBUA - the XTi features a CCD shaker to shake dust off the sensor, and a feature which finds stubborn specs of dust on the sensor and then remembers their positions so it can then delete the specs off of your photos. Cant say that i have used it yet though, but the XT does not have either.

though dust isnt really a problem unless your chopping and changing lenses like theres no tomorrow.

I wont be chopping out lens like mad. I'd prefer to find a good walking around and shooting lens for Australia and for everyday use and one lens for telephoto/zoom.

If I where you I would first decide what I want to shoot and then research your glass options. You should be investing more on your glass than your camera body. You will see better results, have more room to grow, and lenses tend to retain a good resale value if you choose to upgrade. To me there is no point in buying a dslr if you will only spend 90 bucks on glass. Its like building a super computer and only using it to surf the web, you gotta buy the games and software to use the beast. With this budget you basically have two choices a 50mm 1.8 prime which is a fantastic lens but not really a walk around lens because of the lack of zoom and the 18-55mm kit lens which is subpar at most.

I would look into buying a sharp used Tamron or Sigma in the 17/18-50mm range because you will most likely be using a 1.6x crop body which effectively gives you 28-80mm range. Then I would look into a used XT rebel with grip. You will have a solid walk around lens and a solid camera body that will allow you to grow, potentially take better shots, and leaves you will more options.
 

essasin

Platinum Member
Mar 4, 2004
2,777
0
0
Originally posted by: otispunkmeyer
well the nikon 18-200mm VR (optical stabilisers) always gets mentioned if you have a nikon camera. D70s is probably a very good used buy for a body.

in that thread at the top, the guide to buying lenses for your canon or something, theres some very good suggestions in there so i would reccommend have a browse through that.

the tamron 28-75 F2.8 gets a lot of mention and then theres other similar lenses from the likes of canon, tamron and sigma. how much you wanting to spend like? you can usually save a bundle by going 2nd hand on camera bodies or buying slightly older models, but you will always pay through the nose for a good lens no matter what.

The 28-75 is a very good lens but I think its a bit too long on 1.6x crop bodies like the XT and XTi. For a walk around lens I would prefer a 17-50 on a 1.6x crop which gives you the 28-75mm range.
 
Jun 14, 2003
10,442
0
0
Originally posted by: randomlinh
man, you guys are so harsh on the kit lens, it's not THAT bad, I've seen some good pics out of it :p

but yes, the XT/i sucks ergonomically. I don't see how people hold it. I tried to use my friend's, and conclusively decided to get the 30D when I can. Or switch to Nikon.. but I'm too lazy and like the canon lens line up.

it has its uses for sure.... i got some decent shots out of its wide end, well at least to me they are good. to some one like OdiN they probably look like a fisher price my first lens effort, but quality is always relative to the user...to me the kit lens has its moments of goodness.
 

essasin

Platinum Member
Mar 4, 2004
2,777
0
0
Originally posted by: otispunkmeyer
Originally posted by: randomlinh
man, you guys are so harsh on the kit lens, it's not THAT bad, I've seen some good pics out of it :p

but yes, the XT/i sucks ergonomically. I don't see how people hold it. I tried to use my friend's, and conclusively decided to get the 30D when I can. Or switch to Nikon.. but I'm too lazy and like the canon lens line up.

it has its uses for sure.... i got some decent shots out of its wide end, well at least to me they are good. to some one like OdiN they probably look like a fisher price my first lens effort, but quality is always relative to the user...to me the kit lens has its moments of goodness.

The kit lens is not bad if you know its limits but I wouldn't use it if I had the choice.
 

TraumaRN

Diamond Member
Jun 5, 2005
6,893
63
91
Originally posted by: essasin
Originally posted by: otispunkmeyer
Originally posted by: randomlinh
man, you guys are so harsh on the kit lens, it's not THAT bad, I've seen some good pics out of it :p

but yes, the XT/i sucks ergonomically. I don't see how people hold it. I tried to use my friend's, and conclusively decided to get the 30D when I can. Or switch to Nikon.. but I'm too lazy and like the canon lens line up.

it has its uses for sure.... i got some decent shots out of its wide end, well at least to me they are good. to some one like OdiN they probably look like a fisher price my first lens effort, but quality is always relative to the user...to me the kit lens has its moments of goodness.

The kit lens is not bad if you know its limits but I wouldn't use it if I had the choice.

I was actually looking and Canon makes another 18-55 lens that ISNT the kit lens that had decent reviews. I found some of those tamron and sigma lenses that were 17-50 but then :Q at the price. I was figuring to spend like $650-$700 total for everything. I can find an XT for $500-$550 if I look hard enough(I think bhphoto was like $500 for body only). And then about $150 on the lens. This might be difficult :p
 

AndrewR

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
11,157
0
0
Originally posted by: otispunkmeyer
Originally posted by: dug777
Originally posted by: otispunkmeyer
EDIT
EDIT

(redacted)

i ummed and ahhed over the D40, Alpha 100 and the 400D for a while. in the end i decided the sony was just a bit too clunky and didnt seem to have an abundance of cheap swag lying around on fleabay. plus the good carl ziess lenses are uber-expensive.

(redacted)
I just wanted to mention that there are PLENTY of used Minolta lenses on fleabay that go for very little, since the Maxxum mount goes back to 1985. Since Sony's Alpha mount is the Maxxum mount, any Maxxum lens will work on the A100.

The Carl Zeiss lenses are aimed at the professional level (at least the 85mm and 135mm ones) so are appropriately priced. The 16-80mm lens is ~$650, which while expensive, isn't uber-expensive when compared with any system's non-consumer grade lenses. The image quality out of that 16-80 is amazing -- wish I could afford one. I am turned off that it's a digital crop factor lens only though.

For the OP, you could get the Sony with the kit lens (not bad -- better than the Canon) and add a 70-210 f/4 for about $150-180 which would seem to suit your needs quite well. Both of them would be image stabilized, incidentally. Regardless of brand, I'd recommend grabbing a 50mm prime lens as well for <$100. No camera bag should be without one.

One other comment, on the Tamron 28-75 f/2.8: I have the Konica-Minolta version (KM ones were made by Tamron), and it's a great lens. It was actually my "kit" lens in a bundle from Adorama, and I've used it extensively with very good results overall. On the downside, I've heard that the Tamron branded lenses have variable quality (KM ones have universally good quality), and several people have reported finding poor copies. If you wind up buying a Tamron, you might want to test it out first so you aren't disappointed on your trip.
 

randomlinh

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
20,853
2
0
linh.wordpress.com
Originally posted by: DeathBUA
I was actually looking and Canon makes another 18-55 lens that ISNT the kit lens that had decent reviews. I found some of those tamron and sigma lenses that were 17-50 but then :Q at the price. I was figuring to spend like $650-$700 total for everything. I can find an XT for $500-$550 if I look hard enough(I think bhphoto was like $500 for body only). And then about $150 on the lens. This might be difficult :p

uhh.. you mean the canon 17-55 IS? or something else? cause that lens is 1k+ new.... heh

The tamron is nice, but buzzy as hell, it annoys the hell out of me :)

Originally posted by: kalster
xti with grip is perfect, ergonomically and for balancing large zoom lenses

wow, I don't think anyone has ever said that. w/o a grip, and just the 100mm canon macro, it felt so odd. I did not find it comfortable one bit. nor by itself or w/ a shorter lens. I thought a grip might help, but even then, it doesn't fix the issue that it seems far too "thin." I dunno, I can't see how people use it... heh
 

TraumaRN

Diamond Member
Jun 5, 2005
6,893
63
91
Originally posted by: randomlinh
Originally posted by: DeathBUA
I was actually looking and Canon makes another 18-55 lens that ISNT the kit lens that had decent reviews. I found some of those tamron and sigma lenses that were 17-50 but then :Q at the price. I was figuring to spend like $650-$700 total for everything. I can find an XT for $500-$550 if I look hard enough(I think bhphoto was like $500 for body only). And then about $150 on the lens. This might be difficult :p

uhh.. you mean the canon 17-55 IS? or something else? cause that lens is 1k+ new.... heh

The tamron is nice, but buzzy as hell, it annoys the hell out of me :)

Originally posted by: kalster
xti with grip is perfect, ergonomically and for balancing large zoom lenses

wow, I don't think anyone has ever said that. w/o a grip, and just the 100mm canon macro, it felt so odd. I did not find it comfortable one bit. nor by itself or w/ a shorter lens. I thought a grip might help, but even then, it doesn't fix the issue that it seems far too "thin." I dunno, I can't see how people use it... heh

All these lenses just confuse the hell out of me and the internet doesnt help as far as sorting things out.

Anyways I'm thinking I finally decided on the XT body, a Normal EF 50mm f/1.8 II Autofocus Lens(made by Canon its like 75 bucks). and Canon EF 28-90mm f/4-5.6 III

Sure with the 1.6x I'll lose some but I cant find a decent 18-55 for a decent price either.

Although another option was this deal from BHPhoto for the 2 sigma lenses for 200.

And actually Amazon has this deal for two tamron lens...
 

Kelvrick

Lifer
Feb 14, 2001
18,438
5
81
I think you should get a kit lens for now for your budget. It really isnt that bad. Post in the wanttobuy forum. I actually got my 20d for 525 with 2 batteries and a 1gb compact flash.

Or, get the canon 28-135mm. It has a decent range and IS.