Canon 400D (Rebel Xti, Kiss X)

[folieadeux]

I had a hard time with this decision also, but I eventually went with the XT as it wasn't enough of an upgrade to warrant buying the XTi (for me). However just the other day I discovered the XTi has "picture styles" presets you can apply to RAW images I think....I have no idea if that feature is worth it or all that useful, but it made me a little disappointed it wasn't included in my camera.

Overall though, I still don't really think the XTi has that much more advantage over the XT.

 

[jann1033]

I had a hard time with this decision also, but I eventually went with the XT as it wasn't enough of an upgrade to warrant buying the XTi (for me). However just the other day I discovered the XTi has "picture styles" presets you can apply to RAW images I think....I have no idea if that feature is worth it or all that useful, but it made me a little disappointed it wasn't included in my camera.

Overall though, I still don't really think the XTi has that much more advantage over the XT.

i'm not sure but from what i have read, you could probably tweak and save your custom feature settings to be similar...ie up the saturation and sharpness for landscape or what ever..i think the canon website tells what each feature actually is so you could set the few you think you'd use most with similar settings on your xt. i also think digital photo pro has those same settings if you want to do it pp

 

[Shasta]

Thank you all for your help. the 30 and 40d's are out of my price range. The XTi is as far as I can go now.

After posting I realized I should have asked my questions in a better way. I should have asked;

How often do you use the LCD and would moving from a 1.8" to a 2.5" be important?

I don't think the megapixel issue is an issue because I don't print out large formats, that is, if my assumption is correct. Am I correct in thinking that an original 10.1 mp picture rezised to 640X480 would be a better quality image than a 8.1 mp picture resized to 640X480? I know this is stepping back to elementary school for you guys but it helps me out a lot!

If that is the case, I could always have the extra quality there even though I'm rezising my pictures.

Another note; I like the self cleaning idea. I do change lens sizes often at a place like Disney and the feature would be nice. I didn't know until now that the XT didn't have that feature. Thank you!

As far as IR is concerned, I wouldn't want to get into my camera and make it IR only so I'd use filters or software. A filter that dark will force me to use a tripod and have few moving items in my image due to the slow shutter. I have Photoshop CS2 that I seldom use. It may have the ability to creat IR effects. That's the fun part I'll can figure out later. Thank you for the advice!

You guys are great and I really appreciate you taking the time to help me and teach me a few things. I am getting excited about buying my new camera and learning it's possibilities before our Jan 1-7 trip1

 

[ericamcl]

for what it's worth, i really like my Xti..it's my first slr, and i'm just learning the more advanced photo stuff...and i have found the cleaning system to be quite useful so far

 

[JR6ooo4]

I thought I remember reading that cramming more pixels into the same size sensor was not the best route for quality. It added noise???

If the XTI had spot metering it would be a "no brainer".

sorry that does not help, hehhehehehee

I am sticking with my three year old XT

Mikeeee

 

[JR6ooo4]

for what it's worth, i really like my Xti..it's my first slr, and i'm just learning the more advanced photo stuff...and i have found the cleaning system to be quite useful so far

I did notice three big blotches on the sensor on day two of a trip once...
the cleaner fluid is not allowed on planes so I was stuck. Self cleaning ight have fixed it.

Mikeeee

 

[mikamah]

I have the xti and it is my first slr, so I don't have anything to compare it to, but I do like the larger lcd to review pics and zoom in to see the quality when I am using different settings, and learning what I like better. But I am very much a beginner.

I also have a sony cybershot dsc-p92, which I loved, and keep in my purse, but absolutely love the speed and quality of the xti now.

I have the 28-135 for a zoom, and with the 10 mps, I have been able to take some good pics of my nephew playing football, and really crop it pretty tight, and it still looks good. I would guess that with 8 mps you'd do well with that too.

Good luck in your decision.

 

[folieadeux]

i'm not sure but from what i have read, you could probably tweak and save your custom feature settings to be similar...ie up the saturation and sharpness for landscape or what ever..i think the canon website tells what each feature actually is so you could set the few you think you'd use most with similar settings on your xt. i also think digital photo pro has those same settings if you want to do it pp

Hey thanks for that! I never really thought about tweaking it on my own. Hmm.

How often do you use the LCD and would moving from a 1.8" to a 2.5" be important?

I've always loved bigger screens for point and shoots, but mainly because it's so great to take the picture that way. With just using it for menus/reviewing/histograms etc, I haven't noticed a disadvantage with the 1.8 screen to make me wistful for a bigger one....yet.

 

[tyedye]

I'm considering buying a new camera. I think I've narrowed it down to these: Canon S5IS, Canon XTi, or Panasonic FZ18. I currently own a Panasonic FZ20 (12x optical zoom, 5 mp). I have kinda ruled the S5 out as it's not really an upgrade for me.

What are the pro's and cons if I purchase the XTi with the 18-55mm lens and also a 75-300mm lens vs the FZ18 which has an 18x optical zoom other than the obvious.

I just don't know if I'm up for the learning curve of a dSLR so I'd probably be using it as a point and shoot. I'm trying to learn but it seems that the auto feature or scene selection takes better pics than when I try to set things. So if using the auto feature alot would the dSLR give me better photo's than any p&s?

 

[Master Mason]

The increased sensor size will give you better performance in low light conditions. The reaction speeds will typically be better on a dSLR as well, but you need to check specifics to be sure on the second statement.

So, to answer your question, yes I think that a dSLR will give you an advantage, but it will be very slight if your not willing to learn a few things to be able to take advantage of the benifits of an SLR.

I think that the real question should be though is why are you concidering getting a new camera, what is it that your trying to shoot that you can't do with your current equipment. The answer to that question is really what should be driving your decision.

 

[Groucho]

The XTi's sensor is approximately 15 times larger than the one in the Panasonic. Overall image quality and especially low-light quality will be clearly superior.

If you're thinking DSLR, there are at least eight models worth consideration for the cost of the XTi... alphabetically, there's the Canon XT, Canon XTi, Nikon D40, Nikon D40X, Olympus E410, Pentax K100D Super, Pentax K10D, Sony A100... all in that ~$750 or cheaper category.

 

[tyedye]

I would like to get better pics in different lighting situations and of my kids playing youth sports. I'm probably not using my current camera to it's fullest potential. It's just that we just returned from a 4 day DCL and I have many pics where my boys are so dark that you can't see their faces but the background is bright and these were taken at midday in lots of sunshine. And then on the soccer field, it seems like I miss too many pics as I press the shutter and there's a lag time. I've had my camera since 2004 so in technology terms it is old and digital cameras have improved since then I think.

 

[tyedye]

The XTi's sensor is approximately 15 times larger than the one in the Panasonic. Overall image quality and especially low-light quality will be clearly superior.

If you're thinking DSLR, there are at least eight models worth consideration for the cost of the XTi... alphabetically, there's the Canon XT, Canon XTi, Nikon D40, Nikon D40X, Olympus E410, Pentax K100D Super, Pentax K10D, Sony A100... all in that ~$750 or cheaper category.

One of the reasons I'm looking at the XTi is that my local warehouse club has a deal on this right now with the 2 lenses I mentioned above, carrying case, filter, and 2gb CF card. I think they have a 90 day return policy too so I would have plenty of time to try it out.

A very long time ago I used a film slr camera and it didn't have any auto focus or anything and everyone complained about how long I took to manually focus the camera. When I bought my first digital, I bought a 3 mp p&s, and then upgraded to my current one.

 

[Anewman]

I would like to get better pics in different lighting situations and of my kids playing youth sports.

Well IMO DSLRs give an obvious advantage, BUT the improvement might not be night and day if you keep the camera in AUTO and use the lenses that you have mentioned. Do not get me wrong there will be an improvement in all areas but you are focusing on focal range(zoom) and that is not the only thing that comes into play when shooting sports and low light shots.

I would say keep using the camera that you currently have and go DSLR when you are ready to move past auto modes.

 

[Master Mason]

Without seeing your picture that you spoke about, I would guess that your kids were backlight, the sun was behind them. That would put their faces in shadow, hence bright background, dark kids.

I would tend to agree with Anewman, it sounds like what you really need are some basic photo instructions, rather than a new camera. The camera will help, but if you shoot a back light subject with a dSLR, your still going to end up with similar results, until you know how to correct for it.

As for shutter lag, any of the dslrs out there should correct that, some will allow you to go longer shooting continuously than others.

 

[tyedye]

No kids in this picture, but it was a bright sunny day yet to me the pic looks very dark.

 

[tyedye]

Here are a few examples of what I was talking about...

 

[Master Mason]

No kids in this picture, but it was a bright sunny day yet to me the pic looks very dark.

In this picture you had your camera set on spot metering, so to my eye dead center of the picture would be the bright white of the boat, so it decided everthing was very bright and therefore set the exposure based on that. If you had used evaluative metering it would have examined more of the picture and set up the exposure based on all of the items in the shot...

 

[Master Mason]

Here are a few examples of what I was talking about...

In both of these the subjects were backlighted, so there are shadows on their faces, you fix this by using fill flash (a low powered flash to elimate the shadows) or by turning the subjects so that their faces are not in the shadows. A new camera wouldn't have helped you in either of these pictures if you didn't use fill flash.

 

[tyedye]

Thank you for your comments. Part of the problem is that my kids don't want the sun in their eyes so almost all my pics have those shadows and are dark. From now on I'll have to just make them rough it for a few seconds.

I read Mark's post about metering and wish I had read that prior to our trip. I made mistakes, first being that I didn't understand metering. When taking pics of youth soccer, do you recommend the spot metering or evaluative? I will use cont auto focus and OIS #2. Also I'll check my camera but does anyone know if you use scene mode do any of these settings change to that scene default or are metering and focus set?

On the other hand here is a pic I took from one of the shows, again I used spot metering but in this case the pic came out ok.

And this one wasn't too bad...