Canon Rebel XSi vs. 40D

TheCheesehead

Hi,

New here. I'm looking to upgrade from my 12.2mp Rebel XSi...I have been looking at the 50D, but I'm also seeing alot of 40D's out there for sale...Is the 10mp 40D a step up fron the Rebel XSi? Seems I can pick up a used 40D body for around $600. My lenses are the F4L 70-200,the 2.8L 24-70, and a 50mm 1.4. Thanks! Glad I found this place!

Scott_Quier

TheCheesehead wrote:

Hi,

New here. I'm looking to upgrade from my 12.2mp Rebel XSi...I have been looking at the 50D, but I'm also seeing alot of 40D's out there for sale...Is the 10mp 40D a step up fron the Rebel XSi? Seems I can pick up a used 40D body for around $600. My lenses are the F4L 70-200,the 2.8L 24-70, and a 50mm 1.4. Thanks! Glad I found this place!

First things first - Welcome to the Party!!!

Resolution in a camera is not all there is. As you say, the XSi is a 12.2MP sensor. The 40D is a 10.1MP. But, remember what I said, resolution isn't everything.

Without taking anything away from the XSi, the 40D is a larger camera in terms of weight, size, and build. Functionally, it's faster and easier to use and is marketed as a "pro-summer" camera whereas the XSi is a "amateur" camera.

The 50D is a small step up from the 40D, in terms of resolution and features. Some say the 50D doesn't handle low-light, high-ISO quite as well as the 40D. I'm not so sure about those arguments; I used to have a pair of 50D bodies and used to shoot in the same environment with a lady with a 40D and so I have seen images from both bodies taken side-by-side.

According to Steve's Digicam Review, the 40D and the XSi share the same processor, the DIGIC III. The 50D has the DIGIC IV (or is it DIGIC 4) processor. I'll leave it as an exercise to the student to determine the real differences between these processors.

Something else to consider. Moving from the XSi to either the 40D or the 50D will require you to change from SD memory cards to CF memory cards and also get new batteries (the XSi uses LP-E5 and the 40D/50D uses BP-511A batteries).

But, none of that really matters when it comes to deciding to upgrade. What really matters (or should only matter) is what is it you shoot and in what way is your current camera limiting your creativity and/or work. If there's a feature you need on an upgrade camera that you don't have on your current body, that's a good reason to consider upgrade.

puzzledpaul

<< If there's a feature you need on an upgrade camera that you don't have on your current body, that's a good reason to consider upgrade. >>

One important (imo) difference being that the xxD bodies have separate controls for the 2 main functions - especially useful if you intend using manual mode.

They (xxD) also use a prism rather than a mirror in the viewfinder light path - brighter vf image.

pp

TheCheesehead

Thanks!
Thanks for the replies! I also have noticed sometimes my Xsi stuggles focusing with the 50mm. I have heard that the xsi may have autofocus issues. I have used MF while in live view, and can get tack sharp photos, but not the same in AF. Has anyone used the warranty service? Is it fast? I hate to think about being camera-less for weeks! Thanks!

ziggy53

TheCheesehead wrote:

Thanks for the replies! I also have noticed sometimes my Xsi stuggles focusing with the 50mm. ...

Which 50mm lens do you have?

TheCheesehead

xsi

ziggy53 wrote:

Which 50mm lens do you have?

Hi, I have the 1.4

ziggy53

TheCheesehead wrote:

Hi, I have the 1.4

The Canon EF 50mm, f1.4 USM is a pretty good lens and should be fairly reliable to focus on any camera body.

What focus program were you using? (Multi-point, single point, single center point?)

What is your AF technique? (Focus and recompose for example?)

At what aperture setting?

TheCheesehead

ziggy53 wrote:

The Canon EF 50mm, f1.4 USM is a pretty good lens and should be fairly reliable to focus on any camera body.

What focus program were you using? (Multi-point, single point, single center point?)

What is your AF technique? (Focus and recompose for example?)

At what aperture setting?

I generally use the center point to focus, sometimes locking and recomposing. It seems that the lens is a bit soft wide open, which after a bit of research seems about the norm...pretty sharp at 2.0 and smaller. It still seems that I can get a sharper focus using live view and manual focus, but that me be the case for any camera? Who knows, I've been at this about 6 months, and there definitly is a learning curve! Maybe I'll send it back for an adjustment...I just hate to be without it for a month or whatever it takes!

Scott_Quier

Focus and re-compose is a good receipe for OOF shots. This effect is magnified as the subject-camera distance gets shorter and, obviously, as your aperture gets smaller.

Assuming you have adequate light, a better practice would be to compose your shot, select the single focus point closest to that part of your subject you want most in focus, focus, move the camera as little as possbile to re-compose, and shoot.

TheCheesehead

Thanks!

Scott_Quier wrote:

Focus and re-compose is a good receipe for OOF shots. This effect is magnified as the subject-camera distance gets shorter and, obviously, as your aperture gets smaller.

Assuming you have adequate light, a better practice would be to compose your shot, select the single focus point closest to that part of your subject you want most in focus, focus, move the camera as little as possbile to re-compose, and shoot.

Thanks!

divamum

I've been shooting (happily) wiht an xsi for the last 18 months, and just added a 50d to my gearbag (Scott Q's 50d, in fact).

They're both great cameras. Handling is better on the XXd series if only because of dedicated controls for shutter/ap, meaning it's WAY easier to adjust quickly in manual; if you're shooting Av or Tv, it's not such a big deal, but when you're all-manual, it can be the difference between getting the shot and not.

The AF on the 50d is definitely faster, most noticeable on the non-center points; I can' shoot with one of the "other" points on the 50d and be sure it will focus accurately first time, which I can't always with the xsi.

Compared to the xsi without a grip the 50d feels like a brick; compared to a gripped xsi, however, the 50d is light and compact.

More custom functions on the 50d (I haven't even begun to explore them all yet - I've only had it for a little over a week!), and the LCD screen is a tad nicer, even though the screen on the xsi is no slouch.

I really like them both for different reasons - both can produce excellent images!

NeilL

Re MP difference between 40D/50D, I don't think it's actually real in real life. I mean, as I understand it, there is a threshold to the amount of MP difference before practically it makes any difference to resolution. It's in the math describing the whole sensor, not in the bare MP count. There is a real difference in resolution between the 40D and the 7D because the MP difference is big enough.

There is a kind of snobbery, unintended and almost automatic, I'm sure, which accrues to anything new which puts earlier versions of gear in a suspicious light. I am always delighted when real advances are made, but I remain unimpressed by the solely market massaging which we are asked to believe is advancement. So, as far as I am concerned there has been nothing better than the 40D until the 7D.

You are not surprised that I have the 40D, I guess. I've had it for 2 years. It's a very competent camera. It has a lot of depth. I haven't yet learned how to take full advantage of what it can do, and I am always very pleasantly shocked by how obligingly it gives impressive results when I speak its language. So, I am saying a lot of the success you have with a camera depends on you, and in the 40D there is a camera with which you can be guaranteed success, and not a lesser success, depending on you. The 7D is the only stepup at this camera level which makes sense. You have good lenses to increase your chances of success even more.

When buying used, take every precaution that you know exactly what you are getting.

Neil

TheCheesehead

Thanks
Thanks Diva and Neil. Diva, my XSi is also gripped, and yes, it's a beast with that grip on...pretty much a toy without.

Rhuarc

I have the 40D as well and love it. The one thing I can say is that at higher ISOs make sure that you expose correctly! At 1600 and 3200 (H on the 40D) images can get pretty noisy if you underexpose. I am going to be really interested to see how the noise reduction algorithm on the upcoming LR3 handles the 40D.

NeilL

Rhuarc wrote:

I have the 40D as well and love it. The one thing I can say is that at higher ISOs make sure that you expose correctly! At 1600 and 3200 (H on the 40D) images can get pretty noisy if you underexpose. I am going to be really interested to see how the noise reduction algorithm on the upcoming LR3 handles the 40D.

Agree

I took my new lightmeter to the mall last night for the first time. I had the 100mm f2.8 Macro IS USM on the 40D. I metered ambient light and set the camera accordingly. The exposures were excellent, down to a speed of 1/30 at f2.8 and ISO 800, with very minor color noise visible in mid-low tones and shadows, and virtually none anywhere else, at 100%. I processed with the default (very conservative) NR setting in CaptureOne5Pro and the converted image was clean at 100%.

Neil

craig_d

TheCheesehead wrote:

It seems that the lens is a bit soft wide open, which after a bit of research seems about the norm...pretty sharp at 2.0 and smaller.

The EF 50mm f/1.4 USM is actually sharp in the center even wide open (at least, mine is) but DOF can be quite shallow (so forget about focus-and-recompose) and contrast isn't as good as it is stopped down to f/2 or below.