Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Canon EOS dSLR

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Jul 8, 2008, 6:28 PM   #1
Senior Member
 
deterpawson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 393
Default

Hello Canoneers
I am new to the canon forum as i used a panasonic fz20.
I would like to upgrade to a canon since i own a canon film slr 7e with a sigma 28-200mm lens.
Which would be a better choice and why????
The REBEL XSI or the EOS 40D??????
I plan to shhot a wide range....music ( morn,eve, nights ), flowers, scenery ( all hours), indoor parties and events like birthdays etc, and any occasion i am allowed to click.
Would apprecaite some advice from anyone in this forum.
Thanks in advance for your advice.
Pete
deterpawson is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Jul 8, 2008, 8:43 PM   #2
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 260
Default

Buy the one that feels most comfortable to you. The 40D might be too big to carry around or the XSI might have too small of a grip. If you would have said you shoot sports then that would've been a different thing, but both cameras perform uniformly for your needs.
KALEL33 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 8, 2008, 9:16 PM   #3
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 144
Default

I can sort of speak to your issue. I had an XTi for about 5 months, I then bought a 40D. Should have bought the 40D to begin with.
Reasons:
#1 for me, I shoot a lot of indoor sports, the 40D is superior
#2 for me, I have fairly large hands, the 40D fits my hand much better
#3 for me, it's easier for me, when shooting in manual mode, to easily move both the shutter speed and aperture.

n my opinion, the ergonomics are *so* much better on the 40D. The menu system is incredible. Love the wheel on the back, and on and on.

Joe
Kalispell, MT

Joe-1957 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 8, 2008, 10:15 PM   #4
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 260
Default

Yeah, but the ergonomics are so much better for "you", not for everyone else. With sports the high fps make the difference....the ISO with 1600 doesn't make a difference.
KALEL33 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 9, 2008, 12:05 AM   #5
Senior Member
 
deterpawson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 393
Default

Firstly

Thank you all kindly for your honest responses.

I am looking for a camera that i can grow with.

Since i presently use the Panasonic FZ20, the Rebel XSi is quite similar in feel.

But i also use a Canon SLR 7E which feels like the 40D.

And i am equally happy with the way both feel.

Low light is important because most cammeras can perform in well light areas.

In low light the lens and the camera go hand in hand, i presume.

Since i already have a Sigma 28-200mm lens and MF 50mm / f2.8 lens ( may buy the adaptor later ).

I was looking for info. on which way to go.

The 40D is about 200 bucks more than the XSi and 350 bucks more than the XTi.

Is the 40D worth the extra expense or should i be wiser to go XSi with a better lens like the 85mm/f1.8 or something close.

Thanks again in adavance.

Pete


deterpawson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 9, 2008, 2:36 AM   #6
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 260
Default

Low light capabilities on both are pretty equal. Anything you want to do with the 40D you can do with the XSI except shoot 6FPS. Bodies come and go, but a good lens will last a long time. Also, the price of the body goes down where you can get most of your money back from a lens if you decide to sell it.
KALEL33 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 9, 2008, 5:14 AM   #7
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 8,529
Default

KALEL33 wrote:
Quote:
Low light capabilities on both are pretty equal. Anything you want to do with the 40D you can do with the XSI except shoot 6FPS.
Well, close but not entirely accurate.

Some other differences:

40D provides ISO 3200 (albeit boost - but you can't produce the same results shooting JPEG with the XSi).

1/8000 vs. 1/4000 shutter speed. certainly not important to most shooters but bneficial to some.

better viewfinder (95% mag vs. 87%)

Better build quality

In conclusion there aren't many differences. To the sports shooter, the ISO 3200 1/8000 and 6.5 fps are a definite plus but not to most other people. However the differences in build and ergonomics can certainly push a customer one way or the other. Use both cameras in the store and see which feels better.
JohnG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 9, 2008, 9:41 AM   #8
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 278
Default

Is not true that the focusing system is better on the 40D compared to the Xsi? or is the 40D just marginally better, making very little difference.
garman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 9, 2008, 10:12 AM   #9
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 144
Default

If you notice, I put "in my opinion" in front of my ergonomics comment

As for ISO not making a difference, here's a scenario
-dark building, fast moving animals, f1.8 lens.
I don't care *how* high a fps you have. If you don't boost the ISO up as high as it'll go, all you'll get are blurry shots. I know, I've done it both ways.

Joe

KALEL33 wrote:
Quote:
Yeah, but the ergonomics are so much better for "you", not for everyone else. With sports the high fps make the difference....the ISO with 1600 doesn't make a difference.
Joe-1957 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 9, 2008, 5:16 PM   #10
Senior Member
 
deterpawson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 393
Default

thanks everyone for their kind words of advice

well now its time

decisions decisions decisions

oh well

enjoy the summer KLIKKING
deterpawson is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 9:49 AM.