D40 or XTi - help me decide

[drucillica]

Hey guys,

I'm looking to buy an entry-level dslr and I've pretty much narrowed it down to Nikon d40 and Canon digital rebel XTi. Problem is, I can't seem to decide. I've asked around, read stuff online, but still can't make up my mind since I'm pretty much a noob when it comes to dslrs. If at all possible, I'm looking for unbiased opinions as I know there's a lot of fanboism when it comes to this type of stuff. :)

Help!!!

[TenzoR]

either is fine, get the cheapest

[VorteC]

I think the D40 is cheaper..

[tienm23]

I would suggest renting both and using them over a weekend and see which one you prefer. Most people would agree that "generally" Nikon has nicer ergonomics at the entry level and Canon has better "top-end" glass. The Xti also has lower noise at higher ISO. It's a tough choice though because once you get the bug, you can invest quite abit of money into either system.

[ryan_lau100]

its like asking do i choose a merc or a beamer... its all how it feels.

[bpopd]

I have the Rebel XTi and I find the shape hard to handle. My hands are small. Once I put a heavier lens on the camera, things became easier to handle, but still I find I have problems with grip.

The reason why I point this out is because when you take a photo, you want as much stability as possible, otherwise your picture will come out blurry. So in order to have high stability, you need to be able to grip the camera well!

People say canon's are for sports photography, and nikon is for everything else.
However, I say... if you practice a lot, and have a bit of talent, you can shoot with anything!

With this is in mind, I would recommend researching what length lens you want, before purchasing a dSLR body. One good reason is so that you can purchase a bundle and save cash! Another good reason is so that you are working with more information, and can ask around in the forums before making such a huge purchase.

Im using the Canon XTi + Tamron 17-50 F2.8 (APS-C) combo as my permanent equipment. With this combo I find that I dont get enough zoom. So if I were to do it again, I would probably get the Canon 17-85IS.

[craftsman]

I would suggest renting both and using them over a weekend and see which one you prefer. Most people would agree that "generally" Nikon has nicer ergonomics at the entry level and Canon has better "top-end" glass. The Xti also has lower noise at higher ISO. It's a tough choice though because once you get the bug, you can invest quite abit of money into either system.

When looking at an entry system such as a D40 or XTi, forget about the argument of top end glass if you are really an entry level photographer. What should concern you more is how is the glass that is included in the kit?

Generally, kit lenses are the low of the low from most manufacturers. After all, you don't have a choice of which lens since both the camera and the lens comes in the same box right?

Having said that most people generally agree that the Nikon kit lens is pretty good (maybe not the best lens that they make but better than most kit lenses). Combine that with the nicer ergonomics of the D40 - I believe the choice is clear.

But if you must talk about top end glass, Nikon over the years has made some of the best top end glass in the world....

[NiMSo]

I think the D40 can only autofocus with AF-S and AF-I lenses (those with built-in focus motors). So that can limit some of the lenses that can be used (such as the popular 50/1.8).

[jerryhung]

Me a D40 owner, a very happy D40 owner
got it back in May for $630+tax (from FS), got the case ($30 used from RFD), screen protector ($6 from DX), SB600 Flash ($300), UV Filter ($11 from BB), Sanyo 8-pack Eneloop ($17 from TSCC), boy, am I broke....

I did buy AF-S 55-200mm to try, but returned it b/c it's too inconvenient
Next goal is either 18-135mm (~$300), or 18-200mm VR (~$1000)

Had Canon SD200, SD300, S1 IS, S2 IS, S3 IS
wanted to try something non-Canon, and uses SD card

Now I am a Nikon fan, but still carries my SD300 as portable camera

[KorruptioN]

I think the D40 can only autofocus with AF-S and AF-I lenses (those with built-in focus motors). So that can limit some of the lenses that can be used (such as the popular 50/1.8).

This is significant.

If you don't plan on mounting different lenses on that D40 (the 18-135mm living on it 100% of the time, for example), you should be fine. Forget about Nikon's current primes and most of their higher-end arsenal.

I personally think the XTi is built like crap and feels likewise in my hands. Nikon's kit 18-55mm lens is better than Canon's, I say. SWM, better build, and sharp.

[drucillica]

I think the D40 can only autofocus with AF-S and AF-I lenses (those with built-in focus motors). So that can limit some of the lenses that can be used (such as the popular 50/1.8).

Yeah this was main my concern as well.

On the other hand, I played around with both at BestBuy and like the feel of the d40 much, MUCH better.

[CameraBill]

If you have to ask get the Canon.
(btw I have all nikon gear including a couple of nikon P&S's)

[rubberband]

D40 gets my vote. Yes, you can only use non AF-S lenses in MF mode. But if you're considering a D40 in the first place, you're probably not the kind of user who will be interested in expensive primes or vintage glass.

The D40 is better built, and (imo only of course) handles much better than the Canon equivalent. Screen is nicer, too. The Nikon 18-55 kit lens is miles better than the Canon POS 18-55.

I still maintain that the best bang for your buck for an entry level camera is a used D50 if you can find one, though.

One other thing to consider if whether you've got friends with cameras. Being able to borrow or try out lenses is a definite bonus.

[o0aZuMi0o]

I'm an XTi owner and I've actually been in this situation before.

It's true that Nikon feels better and have all the physical features. But if you plan on buying better lenses, want more features and more megapixel; then go for the XTi.

If you feel that it doesn't feel too well in your hands, just buy a battery grip.

[bpopd]

I'm an XTi owner and I've actually been in this situation before.

It's true that Nikon feels better and have all the physical features. But if you plan on buying better lenses, want more features and more megapixel; then go for the XTi.

If you feel that it doesn't feel too well in your hands, just buy a battery grip.

I've tried the battery grip. It doesnt feel any better for horizontal shooting, but it does feel better for vertical, since the grip size is much thicker for vertical shooting.

Another update to this topic, I've checked out the D40, and I dont think canon has anything that is that low interms of features.

So between D40 and Canon Rebel XTi. Rebel XTi gets the vote for me.
Go check out this site www.d p r e v i e w.com They have a lot of information in the discussion boards.

Also heres another website for you to check out photos from each camera and lens combo. They have a huge database of pictures there.

http://www. p b a s e. com/cameras

[2000fordfocus]

XTi get my vote...

[Rehan]

When looking at an entry system such as a D40 or XTi, forget about the argument of top end glass if you are really an entry level photographer. What should concern you more is how is the glass that is included in the kit?

Generally, kit lenses are the low of the low from most manufacturers. After all, you don't have a choice of which lens since both the camera and the lens comes in the same box right?

Having said that most people generally agree that the Nikon kit lens is pretty good (maybe not the best lens that they make but better than most kit lenses). Combine that with the nicer ergonomics of the D40 - I believe the choice is clear. That was exactly why I chose the D40 recently. I don't plan to get another lens anytime soon, so the quality of the kit lens was important. I read good things about the lens included with the D40 and some not so great things about the lens included with the XTi... So based on that, I got the D40 when Futureshop had it on sale.

[shervin2]

XTi, you just cant beat the low noise at high ISO, so what if it feels like crap, live with it!

[bpopd]

XTi, you just cant beat the low noise at high ISO, so what if it feels like crap, live with it!

it does not feel like crap...it just feels like crap when you touch a nikon.

[magical]

I own the Rebel XT, and have no problems with its size or build quality ... it feels fine in my hands ...

With that said, its hard to compare the D40 to the Rebel XTi, I guess only for the fact that the 'kit' lens is better, but quite frankly regardless of what lens they give you the F rating is way to high anyways to be of any good use .. and personally you aren't going to notice a 'huge landmark' diff between the canon XTi kit lens vs D40 Kit lens ... yeah the canon is personally a throw away, but what i'd do is get the XTi with kit lens, and when you have some more money, sell the kit lens on ebay for around $100 and get yourself a Tamron 24-75 or 17-50 f2.8... this is the lens to have!

The other reason not to get the D40 vs Rebel XTi, is 6mp vs 10mp .. this is a no brainer, you will sooner or later want more megapixels, and since you don't want to have to retake pictures that you already have, and cannot upgrade it without changing the entire camera this is a no-brainer ...

Also some of the more advanced features like the dust-off feature is very useful and isn't on the nikon...

So my vote is strictly for the canon..

[NiMSo]

If the "feel" of the camera is important to you, then try looking for a used 10/20/30D or D50/70/100. They are not current models, but they are still excellent.

[cy]

When looking at an entry system such as a D40 or XTi, forget about the argument of top end glass if you are really an entry level photographer. What should concern you more is how is the glass that is included in the kit?


Anyone knows about DSLR will disagree with you. A person can shoot better pictures with XTi + 24-105L, over a person with 5D + 18-55 Kit lens. A low end camera can definitely work well with high end glass.

I personally own a XTi, with the rest of the money spent on glass (probably around $3k of them, which is very little compare to some people) and other accessories. The kit lens stayed in the box ever since I've got it. First off, I'll declare myself as a Canon fan. I bought this solely because I like Canon. However after a while of using it, I think i've made the right choice. The lenses of Canon are of better quality, and also cheaper in price. Recently, I did another impulse buy of a Canon 40D and I am enjoying it! Lenses can be shared between two bodies.

Without going into too technical, basically as someone mentioned above, the D40/D40x from Nikon uses a in body autofocus module, so some of the lenses cannot even be used on it (well, they can, but with MF only), thus limiting your purchase option of your future bodies/lenses upgrade. I do not own Nikon, so I can't 100% verify the inconvenience of this could cause to the owners. However, Canon has a similar scenario where their EF-S mount lenses cannot be mounted onto the higher end cameras (5D, 1D - they take EF mount), but the lower end bodies (XT, XTi, 30D, 40D) do take EF-S and EF therefore will give the user the option of buying EF lenses if they dont' want to have trouble upgrading their bodies.

Bare in mind, bodies come and go but lenses stay forever. This would probably lead to another issue as to "why would you want to upgrade?" and one of the reason is that Canon has some full frame DSLR (5D, 1Ds), and a 1.3x (1D) crop camera that you might be interested down the road. However Nikon only offers 1.5x crop FOV bodies (for now, until D3 hits the shelf in 10 years later)......though the FOV is not the only reason to upgrade a body, but it's one of the big reason.

The story will just goes on and on, but the point is, it's more than "just see which one feels better". Do plenty of research before going for it.

[KorruptioN]

XTi, you just cant beat the low noise at high ISO, so what if it feels like crap, live with it!

Stronger noise reduction and less detail retention is what it is. I'm not a fan of the XTi's noise performance.

[goofball]

Without going into too technical, basically as someone mentioned above, the D40/D40x from Nikon uses a in body autofocus module, so some of the lenses cannot even be used on it (well, they can, but with MF only), thus limiting your purchase option of your future bodies/lenses upgrade.

I think you mean in-lens AF motor, not in body?
The target market that the D40/D40x is designed for, has good enough lenses that will AF on the camera It's basically meant as a low-end DSLR to bridge the gap between DSLR and P&S (upper $ category). It's still a very capable camera. Not everyone wants to buy a 70-200 f/2.8 VR for their D40.

[bpopd]

I think you mean in-lens AF motor, not in body?
The target market that the D40/D40x is designed for, has good enough lenses that will AF on the camera It's basically meant as a low-end DSLR to bridge the gap between DSLR and P&S (upper $ category). It's still a very capable camera. Not everyone wants to buy a 70-200 f/2.8 VR for their D40.

http://www.redflagdeals.com/forums/showthread.php?t=499404
In terms of quality of images, the D40 is right up there with the XTi.

D40X has 10MP, so if you print larger sizes, then that'll be beneficial.

You've already tried the Nikon D40, and you like how it feels, go with that one. Either way you go, you cannot go wrong.

[goofball]

http://www.redflagdeals.com/forums/showthread.php?t=499404
In terms of quality of images, the D40 is right up there with the XTi.


I didn't mean by low end that it didn't produce good images that would satisfy the masses. I mean that is why there are missing features like no in-body motor, only 3 AF points, slower flash sync-shutter speeds, no wireless commander, no DOF preview. It is still a very capable body.

[df329]

i've seen a guy using a 500 f/4 on his Xti so i'd pick an xti :D

[cy]

http://www.redflagdeals.com/forums/showthread.php?t=499404
In terms of quality of images, the D40 is right up there with the XTi.

D40X has 10MP, so if you print larger sizes, then that'll be beneficial.

You've already tried the Nikon D40, and you like how it feels, go with that one. Either way you go, you cannot go wrong.

Yes. My mistake =P



i've seen a guy using a 500 f/4 on his Xti so i'd pick an xti :D

I am not surprised :) A lot of professionals might actually have a XTI as back up because of the 1.6x crop factor (longer reach), and the small size of it.

[craftsman]

XTi, you just cant beat the low noise at high ISO, so what if it feels like crap, live with it!

The times that you would use the high ISO settings are few. Most of the time, people who are looking at the D40/XTi price range are looking at their first meaningful camera. They are moving from the point&shoot and want good solid performance during standard holiday/family snaps. Most of those snaps are taken with decent lighting so working well at a high ISO is really not a factor.

[goofball]

The times that you would use the high ISO settings are few. Most of the time, people who are looking at the D40/XTi price range are looking at their first meaningful camera. They are moving from the point&shoot and want good solid performance during standard holiday/family snaps. Most of those snaps are taken with decent lighting so working well at a high ISO is really not a factor.

Can't discount it though. High ISO performance is important, especially for kids school plays, sporting events indoors, museum trips, vacations, and all that. Even indoors, especially with Christmas around the corner, it is nice to not have to use flash to get good pictures.

I spent much of my last vacation in ISO1600. Wax museums just don't lend to good lighting and needed the high ISO so I could have blur-free handheld shots. Even with a large aperture lens (f/2), I still needed ISO 1600. I wish I didn't but that's the way it goes.

[craftsman]

The other reason not to get the D40 vs Rebel XTi, is 6mp vs 10mp .. this is a no brainer, you will sooner or later want more megapixels, and since you don't want to have to retake pictures that you already have, and cannot upgrade it without changing the entire camera this is a no-brainer ...


Additional megapixels are important if you want to have more details in the larger enlargements. If you are a 4x6 to an 8x10 type of guy or just want to post them on your website, having a couple of extra megapixels is really not too important... If it was important, those cheapy high megapixel no-name cameras would out shoot all of the DSLRs on the market... Don't get caught up in the pixel count for the shake of pixels!

Besides, if you look at the current trending for cameras, the camera body is getting replaced sooner rather than later. When SLRs (yes, non-digital DSLRs) came out, people used those bodies for years if not decades. Then we went to Autofocus, and a whole group of people upgraded first to AF then to the faster AF bodies - typical time between upgrades 4 to 6 years. We are going to see the same trending with DSLRs.

[KorruptioN]

Not everyone wants to buy a 70-200 f/2.8 VR for their D40.

You're forgetting that the 70-200mm f2.8G VR will work 100% with the D40 ;) It is lenses like the awesome 80-200mm f2.8D that won't autofocus with the D40.

[craftsman]

Anyone knows about DSLR will disagree with you. A person can shoot better pictures with XTi + 24-105L, over a person with 5D + 18-55 Kit lens. A low end camera can definitely work well with high end glass.



Having sold camera equipment to the public for over 12 years and owning a D200 with approx 7 to 8 thousand dollars in lenses as well as 4 to 5 thousand in professional lighting equipment, shot my share of professional events and has been published, I can honestly say that I might know something about DSLRs... However, this is not an argument on what you and I should buy. It is a discussion on what the average "Joe" user is going to get for their shots.

Sure - putting a better lens on the camera will get you a better image - heck, my 3 f/2.8 zooms tell me that every time I use them. Sure - getting a good collection of lenses will add to the enjoyment of the photographer as well as to the viewers - I've known that from when I purchased the 3 f/2.8 zooms and my 300mm f/2.8 as well as my 180mm f/2.8 macro over 12 years ago.

But let's have a look at the average user looking at the first DSLR:

1. Most users don't look at buying a "system" they are looking for a camera.
2. Most users will not buy a camera/lens kit and not use the lens from the beginning.
3. Most users will buy a basic body and pair it with the package that's offered. That's why kits have gotten so popular - one stop shopping. If you go back to film SLRs, you will find only the low end of each camera companies line up were in kits. Can you do better? Sure you can. Will most people pick that route? Sadly No.
4. Most users will pick what feels right in their hands - whether that be a camera, or a car...
5. Most users want to go in and buy it and not really think about it.
6. If a user wants to buy another lens (which is rare), they typically don't look at an upgrade in image quality from the lens they got from the kit. They will look at something that will get them closer (a moderate zoom, probably to 200mm or so). Or they might look at getting an "all-in-one" lens such as an 18 to 200mm.
7. If there is an image quality issue (ie their pictures aren't as good as their neighbours), users will generally blame the camera or the brand and change the camera or move to a different brand.
8. Most users don't know how to use 90% of the features in their camera.
9. Most users don't understand how photography works, they just know they want a picture.

Having said all of that, what's should the average "Joe" user look for?

A. Easy to use. Heck, we are in the world of point and click.
B. The LCD screen represents what the picture actually looks like.
C. Feels good in the hands - size, shape, and weight.
D. Pictures that are as good or better than what they remembered the scene to be.
E. Lightweight so that they don't have to carry too much when they are on holidays - after all, if the camera is too heavy to carry around, most users will leave it behind in the hotel room. And how can you take a picture of a colourful street vendor when your camera is back in the hotel room?

Remember this is a discussion about what the average user will buy - not you and me.

I'm happy that you enjoy your Canon equipment. For me, I'm enjoying my Nikon equipment.

[craftsman]

Can't discount it though. High ISO performance is important, especially for kids school plays, sporting events indoors, museum trips, vacations, and all that. Even indoors, especially with Christmas around the corner, it is nice to not have to use flash to get good pictures.

I spent much of my last vacation in ISO1600. Wax museums just don't lend to good lighting and needed the high ISO so I could have blur-free handheld shots. Even with a large aperture lens (f/2), I still needed ISO 1600. I wish I didn't but that's the way it goes.

For those stationary low-light shots, I use my 18-200 VR lens. Works great at 1/10 sec.

[KorruptioN]

Anyone knows about DSLR will disagree with you. A person can shoot better pictures with XTi + 24-105L, over a person with 5D + 18-55 Kit lens. A low end camera can definitely work well with high end glass.

1) Just because they have L glass, right?
2) The EF-S 18-55mm won't work on the 5D. At all.

[goofball]

You're forgetting that the 70-200mm f2.8G VR will work 100% with the D40 ;) It is lenses like the awesome 80-200mm f2.8D that won't autofocus with the D40.

Nope, not forgetting, I know but it's still a cost thing with many, plus the size/weight can also feel a bit awkward.

[cy]

1) Just because they have L glass, right?
2) The EF-S 18-55mm won't work on the 5D. At all.

1) No, that was something off the top of my head in terms of price wise comparsion.
2) Sorry, nice catch there. I wasn't thinking at all when I typed that. However, you should get my point.

L is good, but it's over hyped in some way. Gladly, I only own 1 L and didn't get taken over by their marketing.

[Neb]

I am kinda in a similar situation. But trying to decide between D40x vs XTI. So if i am reading the above posts right, the D40 can not use any of Nikons' faster prime lens? That will definitely affect my choice.

[craftsman]

I am kinda in a similar situation. But trying to decide between D40x vs XTI. So if i am reading the above posts right, the D40 can not use any of Nikons' faster prime lens? That will definitely affect my choice.

Actually, most of Nikon's larger/longer primes are compatible. Only, their shorter primes are the issue.

[Neb]

Actually, most of Nikon's larger/longer primes are compatible. Only, their shorter primes are the issue.

Is there a place to find out which one is? Hoping to pick up maybe a 50mm prime.

[TenzoR]

Is there a place to find out which one is? Hoping to pick up maybe a 50mm prime.

nikon.ca

look for AF-S

basically 200mm and up for prime and there's a 105mm macro lens

[bpopd]

After having visited the photography show that henrys camera hosted over this weekend...

I've come to the conclusion that the nikon D40 is inferior to the rebel xti...

Another conclusion that I've come to is... If you can get a Rebel XT...get one...cause they are superb, and are dirt cheap nowadays.

[KorruptioN]

I've come to the conclusion that the nikon D40 is inferior to the rebel xti...

Another conclusion that I've come to is... If you can get a Rebel XT...get one...cause they are superb, and are dirt cheap nowadays.

You provide absolutely no reasoning whatsoever. I really dislike the Rebel lineup.

[Neb]

After attending the show, I am leaning towards the D40x, however there are a few issues. I am not sure how important this would be for an amateur photographer.

I tried a 18-200 VR on the D40x, and really love it, but also reading good thigns about the Tamron 17-50. The Rebel XTI built quality is definitely inferior, esp the pop-up flash (very plasticky and has a bit of lateral play)


D40x
- has only 3 AF points.
- not compatible with wide prime lens

Where is the cheapest place to order a D40x body? US or Canada.

[craftsman]

After attending the show, I am leaning towards the D40x, however there are a few issues. I am not sure how important this would be for an amateur photographer.

I tried a 18-200 VR on the D40x, and really love it, but also reading good thigns about the Tamron 17-50. The Rebel XTI built quality is definitely inferior, esp the pop-up flash (very plasticky and has a bit of lateral play)


D40x
- has only 3 AF points.
- not compatible with wide prime lens

Where is the cheapest place to order a D40x body? US or Canada.

The build quality that you are referring to is normal for the Rebel series - been there since film days...

As for the D40x, you need to remember that it is an entry level product. And as you noted, the build quality is higher (hence part of the reason for the price difference between Canon and Nikon).

Multiple focusing points - I've found that I don't use too many focusing points (generally just one) on my D200. In my experience, I only use the centre focusing point - it's faster for me to focus lock it and recompose than to move the focusing point around....

Wide Prime lens - only on the lenses that don't have a built-in focusing motor. You can just manually focus the lens. Also, how many times will you use a wide prime lens? Why not a zoom like the Sigma 10 to 20?

[Stupidkidz]

I tried a 18-200 VR on the D40x, and really love it, but also reading good thigns about the Tamron 17-50.

I have both the D80 and D40, and I find myself using the 40 more and more. The 40 with 18-200VR combo is still unmatched in terms of compactness and versatility. You can't go wrong with that, or the 40 with kit 18-55. That's a small and light package that you can bring anywhere.

[goofball]

After attending the show, I am leaning towards the D40x, however there are a few issues. I am not sure how important this would be for an amateur photographer.

I tried a 18-200 VR on the D40x, and really love it, but also reading good thigns about the Tamron 17-50. The Rebel XTI built quality is definitely inferior, esp the pop-up flash (very plasticky and has a bit of lateral play)


D40x
- has only 3 AF points.
- not compatible with wide prime lens

Where is the cheapest place to order a D40x body? US or Canada.


It's also not AF compatible with the Tamron 17-50.

[Neb]

It's also not AF compatible with the Tamron 17-50.

Really? thought the 17-50 has a focusing motor.

[bpopd]

You provide absolutely no reasoning whatsoever. I really dislike the Rebel lineup.

The AF motor alone is worth it.

[goofball]

Really? thought the 17-50 has a focusing motor.

Tamron doesn't have any lens with a built-in motor that I am aware of.
Nikon's 17-55 does have an in-lens motor (AF-S)
Sigma also has some with HSM.

[shutout]

I tried both and did quite a bit of research online as well, end up bought XTi because of the PQ and lens selections. Also canon L lenses are much faster than anything else, just see what those reporters use for sports game.

Unless you're happy with just the AF-S lenses which is good enough for most people. However, if you're really getting into photography you'll find that D40 is too restrictive in term of lens choice. Auto mode seems to be better than XTi in low light though.

[CSAgent]

I tried both and did quite a bit of research online as well, end up bought XTi because of the PQ and lens selections. Also canon L lenses are much faster than anything else, just see what those reporters use for sports game.

Unless you're happy with just the AF-S lenses which is good enough for most people. However, if you're really getting into photography you'll find that D40 is too restrictive in term of lens choice. Auto mode seems to be better than XTi in low light though.

Nikon's colors are also better right out of the box, they have a Vivid mode in the menus whereas in the XTI you have to manually set it up via white balance shifting.

I'm a Canon user though.

[KorruptioN]

The AF motor alone is worth it.

The poorer ergonomics and build quality are not. It (the XTi) doesn't even have a spot meter!

[mrwinky]

I myself am going through this forum and trying to make the same decision, well sorta. I currently would like to take up photography. I use to use my Canon Rebel (10-12 years old now) but as I got older I lost touch with the hobby. Now I'm looking to get back in it (if the wife lets me) I'm really looking for a "system" for family portraits, wildlife, and my sons hockey games. But am really lost as to which one would suit me. And what lens to even begin to look for (plus on a budget for this) so not to hijack the thread but keep the comments coming and if anyone has any advice on the Nikon vs Canon as to my needs feel free express them


Winky

[goofball]

I myself am going through this forum and trying to make the same decision, well sorta. I currently would like to take up photography. I use to use my Canon Rebel (10-12 years old now) but as I got older I lost touch with the hobby. Now I'm looking to get back in it (if the wife lets me) I'm really looking for a "system" for family portraits, wildlife, and my sons hockey games. But am really lost as to which one would suit me. And what lens to even begin to look for (plus on a budget for this) so not to hijack the thread but keep the comments coming and if anyone has any advice on the Nikon vs Canon as to my needs feel free express them


Winky

My advice to you would be to go and try them out, see how they feel in your hands. Nikon feels better in my hands, I find the XT/XTi's to be very plasticky and small. The 30D is a nice feel in comparison to my D70s, very comparable imo.

Go to a camera store, let them mount on some of the better lenses like 70-200 f/2.8 or what not to see how they balance and how they feel. Play with the controls, see what settings you would change often and how quickly they can be changed.

System wise, you really can't go wrong with either Nikon/Canon, they both have very good lenses. Canon has some very good lenses with constant f/4, Nikon doesn't.

[mrwinky]

Anyone know off hand if my current Rebel (has a 18-55, the default lens that came with it 10 years ago) would work with the new XTI? I've heard bad things about the lens it comes with, so I could save a dollar by buying the body only.



winky out

[najibs]

Drucillica is looking for something simple. She has no intentions of buying a 70-200/2.8 or Tamron 17-50. She just wants something simple, easy to use, with a basic lens.

The D40 is a more solid camera than the Rebel. Better built. Nice pictures out of the box, and has a weaker AA filter, resulting in sharper photos out of the box.

I'm a Canon shooter, but for her, I recommend the Nikon D40, based on HER needs.

[KorruptioN]

Anyone know off hand if my current Rebel (has a 18-55, the default lens that came with it 10 years ago) would work with the new XTI? I've heard bad things about the lens it comes with, so I could save a dollar by buying the body only.



winky out

Is it the EF 28-90mm or something like that? It'll work with the Digital Rebel XTI... but it isn't much better than the EF-S 18-55mm.

[bpopd]

The poorer ergonomics and build quality are not. It (the XTi) doesn't even have a spot meter!

XTI's - 30D 9point fast AF is worth the difference
XTI's - ISO 1600 performance is worth the difference
CANON's LENS selection is worth the difference

[KorruptioN]

More points != faster AF. I find the D40/x autofocus is very good as it is (I only use the centre AF point anyway). The XTi can do ISO1600, sure, but have you not seen the results? There is offensive colour noise everywhere.

For the D40/x target market, I think it is a great choice.

[Sgt_Strider]

Me a D40 owner, a very happy D40 owner
got it back in May for $630+tax (from FS), got the case ($30 used from RFD), screen protector ($6 from DX), SB600 Flash ($300), UV Filter ($11 from BB), Sanyo 8-pack Eneloop ($17 from TSCC), boy, am I broke....

I did buy AF-S 55-200mm to try, but returned it b/c it's too inconvenient
Next goal is either 18-135mm (~$300), or 18-200mm VR (~$1000)

Had Canon SD200, SD300, S1 IS, S2 IS, S3 IS
wanted to try something non-Canon, and uses SD card

Now I am a Nikon fan, but still carries my SD300 as portable camera

Jerry, I'm curious why you went with the SB600 flash over the SB400? Wouldn't it have been better to purchase the SB400 and with a little bit more cash to get the 18-135mm lens?

[VT_A+]

The D40 gets my vote, because I bought one over the XTi although i could afford the XTi.

[goofball]

Jerry, I'm curious why you went with the SB600 flash over the SB400? Wouldn't it have been better to purchase the SB400 and with a little bit more cash to get the 18-135mm lens?

SB-600 has way more features than the 400. Ability to bounce from multiple angles (head swivels/rotates) in any orientation whereas the 400 only swivels up. More strength, has the awesome AF-Assist beam. Can also be a wireless slave though the D40 doesn't have wireless flash capability built-in so the SU-4 or SB-800 would be needed for control. Sits higher on the camera so it does reduce the red-eye effect when pointing right at the subject.

[Limbo]

XTi no contest.

[Sgt_Strider]

I notice that some people went out to buy a screen protector for the D40/D40X, but doesn't Nikon include a snap-on plastic screen protector? Or it sucks and that it would be better to get a screen protector?

[Sgt_Strider]

SB-600 has way more features than the 400. Ability to bounce from multiple angles (head swivels/rotates) in any orientation whereas the 400 only swivels up. More strength, has the awesome AF-Assist beam. Can also be a wireless slave though the D40 doesn't have wireless flash capability built-in so the SU-4 or SB-800 would be needed for control. Sits higher on the camera so it does reduce the red-eye effect when pointing right at the subject.

Thanks for the information!

[goofball]

I notice that some people went out to buy a screen protector for the D40/D40X, but doesn't Nikon include a snap-on plastic screen protector? Or it sucks and that it would be better to get a screen protector?

It doesn't include one.

[goofball]

Thanks for the information!

There's a market for the SB-400, and it is so small that it is nice but it does have considerable less power and is really not much more than a more powerful onboard flash with bounce (no side swivel) capability. There's no controls on the flash other than on/off.

[Sl300]

im a nikon user.. and i love the company to death, but get the XTI. The D40's lack of autofocus for primes is a big flaw

[KorruptioN]

im a nikon user.. and i love the company to death, but get the XTI. The D40's lack of autofocus for primes is a big flaw

The D40 isn't meant for users like yourself.

[bpopd]

I change my vote....

Dont get either of them...they both have some SERIOUS flaws...

Nikon no AF motor
Canon ...bad bad grip...

[blackhawk]

you should go to a store and try both out to get a feel for how they fit you, not a lot of difference in quality or features otw, both excellent products

I got a D50 nikon because it fit my larger than normal hands better than the canon.

[KorruptioN]

I change my vote....

Dont get either of them...they both have some SERIOUS flaws...

Nikon no AF motor
Canon ...bad bad grip...

:rolleyes:

Flaws? You're dishing out bad information. Telling people that they need to get a 40D minimum just because? Sure, the D40 limits you to AF-S lenses (not significant to its intended market), and the Rebels have terrible ergonomics (from an advanced-amateur or pro point-of-view). This doesn't mean you should tell people to spend more.

The Rebels improve greatly with the vertical grip, FYI.

[craftsman]

im a nikon user.. and i love the company to death, but get the XTI. The D40's lack of autofocus for primes is a big flaw

You could also say that since the XTi can't mount any of the old Canon FD mount primes or lenses that it also has a big flaw... Or that the point and shoots can't do the stuff that an SLR can which is a big flaw...

The biggest flaw happens when people buy something twice - once because of poor advice or poor reasoning and the second time because they got it right...

[Veteq]

I went down to Niagara falls today to test my new 40D, specifically the live-view for shooting close ups. Here is the result.
http://www.redcedarphotography.com/images/20071027192837_niagara-oct2007-1.jpg
http://www.redcedarphotography.com/images/20071027192826_niagara-oct2007-2.jpg
http://www.redcedarphotography.com/images/20071027192815_niagara-oct2007-3.jpg
http://www.redcedarphotography.com/images/20071027192803_niagara-oct2007-4.jpg
http://www.redcedarphotography.com/images/20071027192751_niagara-oct2007-5.jpg
http://www.redcedarphotography.com/images/20071027192742_niagara-oct2007-6.jpg
http://www.redcedarphotography.com/images/20071027192734_niagara-oct2007-7.jpg

[bpopd]

:rolleyes:

Flaws? You're dishing out bad information. Telling people that they need to get a 40D minimum just because? Sure, the D40 limits you to AF-S lenses (not significant to its intended market), and the Rebels have terrible ergonomics (from an advanced-amateur or pro point-of-view). This doesn't mean you should tell people to spend more.

The Rebels improve greatly with the vertical grip, FYI.

Umm...did you spew that out of your ass? In which part of my message did I say people need to get a 40D minimum?

You just ASSUMED that I implied it.... geezus... People could buy Pentax or Olympus!!!! FFS...you seem to hate me or something. Did I ever insult you or something...damn man... RELAX>

[KorruptioN]

Umm...did you spew that out of your ass? In which part of my message did I say people need to get a 40D minimum?

You just ASSUMED that I implied it.... geezus... People could buy pentax!!!! FFS...you seem to hate me or something.


I change my vote....

Dont get either of them...

It's right there infront of you ;)

Pentax's K10D is a great choice. They just don't have anything on the ultra-high-end. I'm just calling you out because you're making the Rebel-series out to be the terrible camera that it isn't. It's not my cup of tea either, but let the buyers decide for themselves instead of shoving opinions down their throat.

[bpopd]

It's right there infront of you ;)

Pentax's K10D is a great choice. They just don't have anything on the ultra-high-end. I'm just calling you out because you're making the Rebel-series out to be the terrible camera that it isn't. It's not my cup of tea either, but let the buyers decide for themselves instead of shoving opinions down their throat.

well its an opinion right?

They can try it out themselves, and looky touchy...
peace please.

[Sl300]

I said "im a nikon user.. and i love the company to death, but get the XTI. The D40's lack of autofocus for primes is a big flaw"


The D40 isn't meant for users like yourself.

Do you hate me? Even if I am a new comer, would you not want your camera to be able to 'grow' with you? relax, were just trying to help the OP :cool:

[KorruptioN]

I said "im a nikon user.. and i love the company to death, but get the XTI. The D40's lack of autofocus for primes is a big flaw"

Do you hate me? Even if I am a new comer, would you not want your camera to be able to 'grow' with you? relax, were just trying to help the OP :cool:

Not at all.

If the D40 did come with the AF motor that everybody seems to miss, what else would differentiate it from the better-equipped D80? It sounds like Nikon did it to keep the two models from cannibalizing each other, and it works for the most part. If you were looking to shoot with a lot of primes, would you consider the D40? Probably not. That was my original point.

[N_Raged]

lol, enthusiast photographers are just like audiophiles: snooty as heck :razz:

[Sl300]

Not at all.

If the D40 did come with the AF motor that everybody seems to miss, what else would differentiate it from the better-equipped D80? It sounds like Nikon did it to keep the two models from cannibalizing each other, and it works for the most part. If you were looking to shoot with a lot of primes, would you consider the D40? Probably not. That was my original point.

take it easy, its just a internet forum. at this price point that the op is shopping in, i'll lean for the rebel for its 'ability to grow'

*to the op: my sister just purchased her first dslr, and she found a used d50 and a d70 for about 400-480'ish cad, body only (just a suggestion)

[KorruptioN]

The D50 is an awesome entry-level body. AF motor, top status LCD, solid ergonomics, and reasonable noise-performance.

[TenzoR]

The D50 is an awesome entry-level body. AF motor, top status LCD, solid ergonomics, and reasonable noise-performance.

non-litted top status LCD, which kinda sucks for really dark areas. That's the only thing I hate about my D50.

[bpopd]

non-litted top status LCD, which kinda sucks for really dark areas. That's the only thing I hate about my D50.

Its funny how they remove these seemingly small features from cameras, to differentiate their products.

Yet in actuality what you are paying for are just FEATURES...
IQ seems to be relatively the same across the board for DSLR's these days...

[TenzoR]

Its funny how they remove these seemingly small features from cameras, to differentiate their products.

Yet in actuality what you are paying for are just FEATURES...
IQ seems to be relatively the same across the board for DSLR's these days...

You work with what you get. I don't see the point arguing over D40 vs. XTi.

[Sl300]

Not at all.

If the D40 did come with the AF motor that everybody seems to miss, what else would differentiate it from the better-equipped D80? It sounds like Nikon did it to keep the two models from cannibalizing each other, and it works for the most part. If you were looking to shoot with a lot of primes, would you consider the D40? Probably not. That was my original point.

Are you saying d80 - af motor = d40? :confused:

[goofball]

Are you saying d80 - af motor = d40? :confused:

I dont' think so but the main focus on the D40's "crippling", if you will, is the lack of in-body motor. There are other things that are missing obviously that I won't mention but Nikon did the D40 with the features it has deliberately to put it in the end of the market that it resides in.

[bpopd]

You work with what you get. I don't see the point arguing over D40 vs. XTi.

nono, im not making any sort of attacks or any arguments...you have me all wrong.....unlike some other guys on here.

Im just pointing out that nikon/canon whatever manufacturer, seems to do this in order to create different product markets..
its an obvious point but I didnt realize it till now.

[bpopd]

I dont' think so but the main focus on the D40's "crippling", if you will, is the lack of in-body motor. There are other things that are missing obviously that I won't mention but Nikon did the D40 with the features it has deliberately to put it in the end of the market that it resides in.

imagine if the d40 had an AF motor...I'd pay $100 more for an AF motor...

[goofball]

imagine if the d40 had an AF motor...I'd pay $100 more for an AF motor...

Again, that extra $100 would put them in a different price point for many. I believe when the D40 debuted, it was around the $700-749 mark. Another $100 puts that in a different market range, it's no longer at the lower end of the scale.

I personally find the D40 too small and missing a few features that I have taken for granted on my camera so I wouldn't buy it but I know many that have and are completely satisfied with it so it looks like Nikon has done something right.

[930929930]

hi,

im a noob looking for an entry level dslr as well....
but read quite a few reviews and found pentax k100d super is not bad as well...
although the effective pixels is not that high(6.1 million), but then in terms of features, control, lens and even price is quite acceptable for noobs.

might be OP you could have a look of this as well....

if anyone found my opinion being not relevant, sorry, as i said before, i m a noob as well...

cheers,

:)

[klam]

Any of the entry-level DSLRs these days will be more than enough for any newbie photographer. The question is, if you do pursue this hobby further, you'll eventually want to graduate to better equipment. Depending on how ambitious you are, you may find that some of the DSLR manufacturers do not have an extensive lineup of lenses, bodies, and accessories.

Additionally, some of the smaller players do not have wide support from third-party manufacturers, accessories may be scarce, and the user base may be small, making it hard to find support, fellow shooters to learn from, and/or places to rent/borrow/buy/try equipment.

However, if you're cool with just getting a good entry-level DSLR then I think any of the entry-level models these days (i.e. D40, Rebel XTI, K100D, E510, Alpha 100, etc.) will be more than adequate.

[Pourmeaguinness]

The second lens anyone with a dslr should buy is a fast portrait prime, say a 50 1.8 or 1.4.. guess what? It won't work on a d40..

What a waste.

[Pourmeaguinness]

And I should mention, Downtown Camera in Toronto is selling canon refurb xti's with the kit lens and a one year warranty for $675.

Cheers

[goofball]

The second lens anyone with a dslr should buy is a fast portrait prime, say a 50 1.8 or 1.4.. guess what? It won't work on a d40..

What a waste.

That's your opinion. Since when is AF essential for portraits?

[bpopd]

That's your opinion. Since when is AF essential for portraits?

Lol I was actually thinking of getting a nikon converter for my canon so i could use the older nikon lenses.

[Sgt_Strider]

Does the XTI have an autobracket mode? If so, can it shoot in RAW in that format?

[drucillica]

Ok, I think I decided to go with the D40 after much thought and convincing from Najibs ;)

Thanks guys!

[najibs]

Ok, I think I decided to go with the D40 after much thought and convincing from Najibs ;)

Thanks guys!

I always get my way with the ladies :twisted:

[blackhawk]

The second lens anyone with a dslr should buy is a fast portrait prime, say a 50 1.8 or 1.4.. guess what? It won't work on a d40..

What a waste.

I've never been interested in taking portraits, dont see a need for a prime for my uses and already own 2 lens for my D50.:confused:

[Sgt_Strider]

I spent the last 1.5 weeks doing my research and I'm leaning on a Canon 400D with 17-40mm "L" lens. This way should I ever dump the 400D in the future, I can still use my lens in a full frame setup. I'll also be getting a Canon 430EX flash for low light situations. The nice part is that I'll be able to reuse the flash on my Canon G9. I feel I have a somewhat versatile setup for my shooting needs.

I might pull the trigger on the setup in early December.

[tienm23]

Ok, I think I decided to go with the D40 after much thought and convincing from Najibs ;)

Thanks guys!

Awesome...finally ! haha...

All kidding aside, photography is about the photos...can't wait to see em !

[KorruptioN]

I spent the last 1.5 weeks doing my research and I'm leaning on a Canon 400D with 17-40mm "L" lens. This way should I ever dump the 400D in the future, I can still use my lens in a full frame setup. I'll also be getting a Canon 430EX flash for low light situations. The nice part is that I'll be able to reuse the flash on my Canon G9. I feel I have a somewhat versatile setup for my shooting needs.

I might pull the trigger on the setup in early December.

The 17-40L will be pretty darn wide on a full-frame body. The 24-70L is a lot nicer (imo) but a little constricting on cropped body.

[tienm23]

The 17-40L will be pretty darn wide on a full-frame body. The 24-70L is a lot nicer (imo) but a little constricting on cropped body.

That's what I ended up deciding...went with the Tamron 17-50 2.8 instead. Love the lens and if I ever do end up going ff, I'll just sell here :)

[Sgt_Strider]

The 17-40L will be pretty darn wide on a full-frame body. The 24-70L is a lot nicer (imo) but a little constricting on cropped body.

I was thinking of getting the 24-70mm L lens, but it's just way too expensive for what I intend to do. Not to mention that I need to save some money now in the event that I go to China next year. There's no point for me to blow away all my money now on camera gear and not able to travel around the country and take pictures.

I personally don't think 17mm is too wide. Besides, the XTI is using a 1.6x crop sensor so it's definitely not that wide. I might sell the lens later on, but the width would really help with landscape photography on a full frame camera. Hopefully the 5D's successor with a 24-105mm L IS lens would be under $3000 when it does come out since I can get a 5D+24-105mm "L" IS lens for under $3000.

[Ilovedeals]

Ok, I think I decided to go with the D40 after much thought and convincing from Najibs ;)

Thanks guys!


Congrats. I just got the D40X for Christmas and am thrilled with the quality of pictures. So clear and sharp. The ability to capture the exact instant you want with a DSLR is so nice - as opposed to point n shoots where you have to wait for the focus to grab and then you've missed it what you really wanted. Enjoy!

P.S. Got mine at Blacks - who price matched Aden Camera and gave me much better service than other stores I went to. Interesting also, they offer an extra one year warranty for $50 and it comes with a card for printing 200 digital images - worth about $50 in itself. Seemed worthwhile to me.