Canon XT vs. XTI help
Mr. Wonderful
Registered Users Posts: 41 Big grins
Hello all!
I have been seriosly considering switching over from a point and shoot to a digital SLR camera. I have searched out and read all of the topics regarding the Canon XT and XTI cameras but still have not come across anything compelling to make me choose either camera. I know there is a change in MP and I do plan on blowing up and framing some of my new photos but can someone please give me their opinion on which to buy? I see that there are not too many differences in the two cameras. Also I am getting much more serious about my photography and was wondering if I should go with a standard kit or just buy the body and find lenses on my own. If you suggest lenses can you please include a link for me?
Thank you so much for taking the time to check out these concerns for me!:deal
I have been seriosly considering switching over from a point and shoot to a digital SLR camera. I have searched out and read all of the topics regarding the Canon XT and XTI cameras but still have not come across anything compelling to make me choose either camera. I know there is a change in MP and I do plan on blowing up and framing some of my new photos but can someone please give me their opinion on which to buy? I see that there are not too many differences in the two cameras. Also I am getting much more serious about my photography and was wondering if I should go with a standard kit or just buy the body and find lenses on my own. If you suggest lenses can you please include a link for me?
Thank you so much for taking the time to check out these concerns for me!:deal
0
Comments
Cody Weber Photography.
Gallery -- Journal
As far as lenses...it's hard to recommend any unless you mention what kind of shooting you want to do. I started with the XT body + 17-85 IS, but after realizing what I really like is shooting portraits in available light, I have moved on to the faster 17-55 IS f2.8 as my general lens. A wildlife, sports, or landscape photographer might need a completely different lens than that.
If you don't yet know what your focus is, maybe it would be good to start with the kit lens knowing that you'll move on later once you realize what you like to shoot. It might have been better for me to start that way, instead of initially buying a more expensive zoom I don't need as much now.
I just upgraded to the 30D because I found an insanely good deal and I wanted spot metering and better high ISO and AF performance because I shoot wildlife and birds. That said, I never considered a jump to the XTi and all of the XT shooters I know have not either.
ALL of the cameras in Canon and Nikon lineups are execellent. You really can not make a bad choice.
My photos
"The future is an illusion, but a damned handy one." - David Allen
Never loaded the dust delete software--was not worth the extra baggage that comes along with it.
Autofocus in lower light is faster--but not improved.
The Xt --at least our copy -- just takes better pictures. May be a problem with calibration as the XTI is @ canon service for an err99 repair as we speak. Low mileage Xt's are priced right at the moment.
We bought the "kit" and have used the lens that came with the camera very little. Pass on the bargain lenses and invest in good glass as that is where the image quality truly comes from. The best lens choices depend on what you intend to use them for.
I switched to the XTI from the XT because the announced the XTI right after I purchased the XT. It has it's ups and downs just like the XT did.
My XT had a dust problem. Not just on the pictures, but on the body from my fingers holding it. It seemed to turn whitish wherever my hands touched.
The dust clean feature on the XTi is great. Turn the camera on and off and it's done. The XT I was constantly blowing it out and complaining to my wife that I may have to take it to a service center to get cleaned. No such problem with the XTI.
The menu's are better on the XTI and it's easier to switch settings. The LCD is easier to use especially in low light when I seem to do my most shooting. The viewfinder is a little on the small side.
I knew within one week that the kit wasn't good for my kind of shooting.
Focus is faster with the XTi.
If it underexposes a smidge, it's fixable in post but frustrating nonetheless. All that said, you can't go wrong with either. Not having either of them, I would choose the XTi.
dak.smugmug.com
I guess my major issue with the cameras is why not pay a little bit more? I mean the XTI is only a couple hundred more and I would only need to save a little longer. I suppose I could always put new lenses on a wish list as my photography progresses right?
I guess the question is, what feature on XTi that XT lacks of, makes you want to 'pay a little bit more'? Both camera bodies are about the same, it is the lens that makes the difference. 10MP vs 8MP doesn't really makes much difference in terms of image resolution, if there is any. Theoratically it takes 4 times the MP to double the resolution. If you really want to take advantage of the camera body for special venue such like sports shooting, than that is where 1D series body really shine.
Eric
The XT without a doubt, has less noise at ISO 400 (I shoot at that ISO a lot) than the XTi. Is 10 MP a big thing? Yes and no. If you regularly have to crop a lot, the 10MP helps.
As others have said, the 2.5 screen is a big help for older eyes, and is really the reason that I upgraded to the XTi.
The anti-dust thing, I think it's hype. I didn't have any trouble with dust with my first D reb 300, or the XT.
The menu system on the XTi is easier to use. (IMO)
So, I'll bet that clears things up.
It all going to come down to you. Go out, hold each of them, run through the menus and such and see just what feels right to you.
As for the kit lens. I have 3. When I was buying my cameras it was like Canon was giving them away, so I ended up with a new one every time.
One of my kit lenses is way sharper than the other 2. Why? I don't know but it is. Lately I bought a Tamron 17-50 F2.8 lens. The kit lens hasn't been on the camera since.
Last thing. If you're looking to get into wildlife photography, start saving a ton a of money for long lenses. No matter how long of a lens you have, you'll wish you had more. A 70-200 lens, once again in my opinion, is worthless for wildlife. Nothing lets me get that close. A 70-300 is OK, but still a little short. 400mm lenses seem to be the lens of choice. They take a tele converter (1.4 times magnifier) pretty well, and for longer glass, it's the bargain length. To move to a 500mm lens, the price goes up 5 times.
Good luck.
Basking in the shadows of yesterday's triumphs'.
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/default.asp?view=alpha
Rebel XTi body only
or a rebel XT with cannon 50mm 1.8 a tripod nice bag and a polarising filter
because you would get those two choices for the same price.
id go for the XT and extra kit personally.
My www. place is www.belperphoto.co.uk
My smugmug galleries at http://stuarthill.smugmug.com
If you do not need a higher burst speed then do like others have suggested and get the XT plus something for the kit!
Smugmug site
Blog Portfolio
Facebook
EXACTLY what I did. I think you will be pleased with the decision.
My photos
"The future is an illusion, but a damned handy one." - David Allen
dak.smugmug.com
Being that I am contemplating similar decisions, I am interested to know if you have any comments a few months later if you purchased one.
Thanks
Pictures | Website | Blog | Twitter | Contact
First things I noticed were that the pictures looked the same, but the file sizes were (obviously) a bit bigger, so fewer fit on my memory card. I also noticed the battery life was a bit shorter. I had read enough reviews to know about those downsides, but they still came as a surprise for some reason.
The LCD screen on the XTi is MUCH better. Better viewing angle, bigger, brighter. Much easier to see the camera's current settings.
Never had a big dust problem with the XT. Had to clean it (with a rocket blower thingy) every few months. Haven't had to clean the XTi yet. But I don't really ever take the lens off. Maybe the sensor cleaner works or maybe I've just been lucky so far. Haven't bothered with the dust delete data function.
To me, there's no difference in the 10 vs 8 mp. Can't crop pictures any farther because they get blurry long before they get pixelated, if you know what I mean. Maybe I'd see the difference if I had a better lens... But for my purposes, small and light is as important as quality so the kit lens works for me.
Dave
SkydivingStills.com
Anyway, I am loving my xt, and love the pictures I am getting (so far)
BTW... what is this "grip" I hear about??? I need that, my hand gets tired (one of the cons on both cameras)
One thing to consider is that there is no 'status display' on the XTi.
It's the little black and white screen that shows the shutter speed, f-stop, metering mode, etc. and it's above the LCD display on the XT. I bought the XT because I'm not made of money. I considered upgrading to the XTi but the lack of that screen is the deal breaker.
They increased the size of the LCD display at the expense of that screen. It doesn't matter indoors or at night because the 2.5" LCD displays all that information....but in bright sunlight the display isn't too readable.
For that reason I'm saving up for a 30D and will not buy an XTi.
(As was said above, the 30D has spot metering and other goodies. Plus it has the big sreeen and a wheel in the back to adjust aperture)
If you want to stay sub $1000 buy an XT. If you have more cash, get the 30D.
Just my $.02
crop wise
I can still get a good 5 x 7.
but there's not much difference between the XT and XTi.
dak.smugmug.com
I agree. One of the primary reasons I got an XTi was because of the difficulty I had reading the LCD on the XT. I'm one of those folks who needs reading glasses to read certain things, well I don't need them for the XTi and that is a big advantage for me. One less thing to have to carry.
Smugmug site
Blog Portfolio
Facebook
There have been a number of comments in this thread recommending Sigma (and perhaps other third party) lenses. Sigma makes some fantastic glass, but two of the Canon EF-S 'normal' zooms are equipped with image stabilization, and the comparable Sigma lenses are not. I've owned both the EF-S 17-85mm and the excellent EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8, and the convenience of IS is HUGE. Also, most authorities agree that the 'kit' lens is not professional grade.
As far as XT versus XTi, the larger LCD alone is a big advantage in the XTi. The user interface in the XTi is quicker and more user friendly. Dust reduction technology is an important advance.
On the other hand, you can't go wrong with the XT. I've shot 17,000 frames with mine, and it's still going strong.
I used the kit lens only very briefly, until I picked up a 28-70 f/2.8 L. That glass is like crack, use it and you will never touch the cheap lens again. My kit lens was nicely sharp but I have seen versions that were not and that had other flaws. I would recommend something else; if money is an issue, pick up a 50mm prime rather than a zoom and go to a nice zoom when you can. The 50mm f/1.8 is a great buy.
Back to the bodies, there were two things about the XTi that I really didn't like. The most obvious is its form factor; so small that it is difficult to use with larger lenses. The battery pack helps a lot. And speaking of batteries, that's my other complaint. The battery capacity is significantly smaller than the XT and original Rebel. While the camera is itself more power efficient to the point where it's more or less the same, the lenses still draw the same power. If you're using a large stabilized lens you will really want the battery pack (love love love my 70-200 f/2.8 IS L).
I am a huge fan of cheap bodies and good glass, but the XTi didn't seem to be the sweet spot in Canon's line like the Rebel and XT before it.
The form facter really bothered me, and I'm not a fan of using the big LCD for a status display although I think they did a clever job with it, and agree with someone else here who noted that you don't have to hit the backlight button, which I can never find either.
The imager on the XTi is great but I didn't find a lot of benefit in going 6mp to 8mp and can't see that I'd get a lot of win out of 10mp either; they're all more than good enough for all but poster-size prints.
The focusing system is better than it was on previous models but the 30D has a lot more focusing points and you can get a microprism/split prism focusing screen that doesn't lose features versus the stock screen (shoot in low light and you NEED this in my opinion).
If there's one feature on the XTi that I really wish I had it's the self-cleaning sensor. I haven't had to do a lot of cleaning but it's a bother when dust gets in there.
In the end I decided that the 30D was money better spent than the XTi. Better form factor, the aforementioned focusing screen, much better battery system, and buffers so large that I have never even come close to stalling the camera (16 raw frames at 5fps before stall!). But I would have had a hard time justifying it as my first body.
If I were buying on a budget I would very seriously consider the XT instead of the XTi, with the savings spent on a better lens than the kit. That's a fine camera and the XTi's improvements are pretty minor in my opinion. All of these cameras benefit from better glass.
Then again if I were starting from scratch without lenses I'd buy a Nikon D80. I like its ergonomics a lot more than any of the Canon products and the color is superb. But with thousands of dollars in Canon glass I guess I'm a Canon customer for life :-).
jimf@frostbytes.com