snubbr.com

First DSLR: 40d vs. XSi
I am going to be purchasing my first DSLR in the near future, and I think I've narrowed it down to the following:.

1) Canon 40d, 17-85mm kit lens, and Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L USM.

2) Canon XSi body and Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM.

Both options would come in at about the same price (~$2k). I'm really having difficulty deciding between the two. Based on reviews I've read, the lens in the 2nd option is one of the best EF-S lenses available in terms of IQ, but the 40d is a better body than the XSi, and it would come with a very good 70-200. Decisions, decisions....

Any advice? I'm willing to go over $2k if you guys think neither of the above options are very good, but I'd like to keep it under $5k if possible...

Comments (8)

The body will have NO BEARING whatsoever on the quality of your images - they are both equally capable IQ wise - any difference will be minimal..

The question is, do you really want to limit yourself to only 17-55mm?.

Hookflash wrote:.

I am going to be purchasing my first DSLR in the near future, and Ithink I've narrowed it down to the following:.

1) Canon 40d, 17-85mm kit lens, and Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L USM.

2) Canon XSi body and Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM.

Both options would come in at about the same price (~$2k). I'm reallyhaving difficulty deciding between the two. Based on reviews I'veread, the lens in the 2nd option is one of the best EF-S lensesavailable in terms of IQ, but the 40d is a better body than the XSi,and it would come with a very good 70-200. Decisions, decisions....

Any advice? I'm willing to go over $2k if you guys think neither ofthe above options are very good, but I'd like to keep it under $5k ifpossible..

Some cool cats that can use your helphttp://www.wildlife-sanctuary.org.

Even if you can't donate, please help spread the word...

Comment #1

I'm new to this whole DLSR thing, so I'm really not sure how limiting the 2nd, single-lens option would be for me. Are there many scenarios where the 70-200 lens in the 1st option would come in handy? Also, what's your opinion of the Canon EF-S 17-85 lens, especially as compared to the 17-55 f/2.8?.

IMac, therefore iAm wrote:.

The body will have NO BEARING whatsoever on the quality of yourimages - they are both equally capable IQ wise - any difference willbe minimal..

The question is, do you really want to limit yourself to only 17-55mm?.

Hookflash wrote:.

I am going to be purchasing my first DSLR in the near future, and Ithink I've narrowed it down to the following:.

1) Canon 40d, 17-85mm kit lens, and Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L USM.

2) Canon XSi body and Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM.

Both options would come in at about the same price (~$2k). I'm reallyhaving difficulty deciding between the two. Based on reviews I'veread, the lens in the 2nd option is one of the best EF-S lensesavailable in terms of IQ, but the 40d is a better body than the XSi,and it would come with a very good 70-200. Decisions, decisions....

Any advice? I'm willing to go over $2k if you guys think neither ofthe above options are very good, but I'd like to keep it under $5k ifpossible..

Some cool cats that can use your helphttp://www.wildlife-sanctuary.org.

Even if you can't donate, please help spread the word...

Comment #2

Http://www.fredmiranda.com/...hp?product=303&sort=7&cat=27&page=3.

Might want to spend a little time here to flush that out.....

Comment #3

It all depends on what you shoot. For me a 17-55 lens is darn near useless. For others it's their workhorse..

Hookflash wrote:.

I'm new to this whole DLSR thing, so I'm really not sure how limitingthe 2nd, single-lens option would be for me. Are there many scenarioswhere the 70-200 lens in the 1st option would come in handy? Also,what's your opinion of the Canon EF-S 17-85 lens, especially ascompared to the 17-55 f/2.8?.

IMac, therefore iAm wrote:.

The body will have NO BEARING whatsoever on the quality of yourimages - they are both equally capable IQ wise - any difference willbe minimal..

The question is, do you really want to limit yourself to only 17-55mm?.

Hookflash wrote:.

I am going to be purchasing my first DSLR in the near future, and Ithink I've narrowed it down to the following:.

1) Canon 40d, 17-85mm kit lens, and Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L USM.

2) Canon XSi body and Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM.

Both options would come in at about the same price (~$2k). I'm reallyhaving difficulty deciding between the two. Based on reviews I'veread, the lens in the 2nd option is one of the best EF-S lensesavailable in terms of IQ, but the 40d is a better body than the XSi,and it would come with a very good 70-200. Decisions, decisions....

Any advice? I'm willing to go over $2k if you guys think neither ofthe above options are very good, but I'd like to keep it under $5k ifpossible..

Some cool cats that can use your helphttp://www.wildlife-sanctuary.org.

Even if you can't donate, please help spread the word..

Some cool cats that can use your helphttp://www.wildlife-sanctuary.org.

Even if you can't donate, please help spread the word...

Comment #4

I was new to DSLR (and photography for that matter) and started off with the 30D and 17-55 after much research etc. I love the 17-55, but do not have the 70-200 f4, so I don't have any experience with that lens but have heard rave reviews about it. I chose the 17-55 over the 70-200 f4 because I wanted a lens that I could use in low light situations. I use the 17-55 about 90% of the time for general shooting of mainly people, kids, and creative shots. It is sharp and it does a FANSTASTIC job in low light! I really didn't want to start out using flash (another "learning curve") so I intentionally chose the 17-55 for it's low light capabilities. By the way, it took me a couple of months just to get some "keepers" because I didn't know how to use the camera.



I chose the 30D because I wanted to shoot sports (basketball, football and baseball), and really liked the 5 fps that the 30D has. It has come in extremely handy for sports. I purchased the 85 1.8 for basketball and the 70-300 IS for daytime baseball/softball games. I'm saving up for the 70-200 f2.8 IS for football and other non-sport situations because that is what I need for what I like to shoot. I don't have any plans to upgrade from the 30D..

I considered buying an XSi for my yearbook class but have decided to look for another 30D instead..

Hope this helps in your decision.I have more time than moneyhttp://www.flickr.com/photos/yellowbrickroad29461..

Comment #5

Sounds like you have already narrowed your search, here my two cents anyway. I started with the Oly 500 2 lens kit and now have moved to the E-510. Just my opinion but for the price I sure don't see how you can go wrong with the E-510 two lens kit going for about $600. We can argue all day about which is the better camera but in fact all cameras at this level will perform well above any beginners ability. I truly love Canon products and swear by their printers, they would be my first or second choice in cameras all things being equal. My advice, read a little you won't go wrong with Canon but as I said some of the industry's top pros use Olympus so if you can get a good deal on an E-510 with two lenses don't pass it up..

Best of Luck..

Comment #6

Hookflash wrote:.

I am going to be purchasing my first DSLR in the near future, and Ithink I've narrowed it down to the following:.

1) Canon 40d, 17-85mm kit lens, and Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L USM.

2) Canon XSi body and Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM.

Why not the XSi with the first two lens options?.

Both options would come in at about the same price (~$2k). I'm reallyhaving difficulty deciding between the two. Based on reviews I'veread, the lens in the 2nd option is one of the best EF-S lensesavailable in terms of IQ, but the 40d is a better body than the XSi,and it would come with a very good 70-200. Decisions, decisions....

I doubt you'll see much difference between the two bodies, the lens choices really depend a lot on what you shoot and what your style or vision is like. I tend to shoot more telephoto than wide, so I'd go with the longer lens option first. If you need fast and wide, then the 17-55 is a good choice, but it'll be somewhat limiting if you want to shoot farther away or isolate subjects..

Any advice? I'm willing to go over $2k if you guys think neither ofthe above options are very good, but I'd like to keep it under $5k ifpossible..

Do you have a stocking dealer where you can try out the lens options nearby? Then you could compare them and see which views you'd prefer in your pictures..

Unless there's something in the 40D that you think you'll need soon, I'd go with the cheaper body (actually the XTi over the XSi) and look to upgrade in a couple of years when you've figured out what features are important to you- then you'll have a backup body that you didn't overspend on..

The XTi with an 18-55 kit lens is ~$620, saving about $270 over the XSi, that's half the difference between the IS and non-IS 70-200..

I'd also ignore the Olympus fanboy's unsolicited E-510 advice- the Canons have better dynamic range (at both the highlight *and* shadow ends of the spectrum) and detail in the DPR tests and less noise at high ISO..

Paulhttp://PaulDRobertson.imagekind.com..

Comment #7

I would go the Canon 40D. It's solid and build like a tank. You can build an entire system around it and use it for many years..

When I moved from film to digital, I made the mistake with starting with a Nikon D80. It's a good camera, but just not the level I was used to. I bought a D300 around 8 months later and can tell you, this camera has help to make me a better photographer..

If I were starting out with a Canon, I would choose the 40D for the same reason I should have started with a D200 level Nikon. The 40D is just a superb body..

Regardless of your choice, I'd stay away from the 18-55 non-IS model. The 18-70 would not be a choice either. Both have a reputation for poor build and soft optics..

Canon's 18-55 IS is a superb lens, but still not the best build quality, but it's only around $200 and is the kit for the new XSi. The 17-55 f2. 8 is also a great choice as well as the 70-200 f4. I'd spend a little more on the 70-200 f2.8 even if I had to save a little longer..

Just an opinion from a Nikon user...

Comment #8

Click Here to View All...

Sponsored Amazon Deals:

1. Get big savings on Amazon warehouse deals.
2. Save up to 70% on Amazon Products.


This question was taken from a support group/message board and re-posted here so others can learn from it.

 

Categories: Home | Diet & Weight Management | Vitamins & Supplements | Herbs & Cleansing |

Sexual Health | Medifast Support | Nutrisystem Support | Medifast Questions |

Web Hosting | Web Hosts | Website Hosting | Hosting |

Web Hosting | GoDaddy | Digital Cameras | Best WebHosts |

Web Hosting FAQ | Web Hosts FAQ | Hosting FAQ | Hosting Group |

Hosting Questions | Camera Tips | Best Cameras To Buy | Best Cameras This Year |

Camera Q-A | Digital Cameras Q-A | Camera Forum | Nov 2010 - Cameras |

Oct 2010 - Cameras | Oct 2010 - DSLRs | Oct 2010 - Camera Tips | Sep 2010 - Cameras |

Sep 2010 - DSLRS | Sep 2010 - Camera Tips | Aug 2010 - Cameras | Aug 2010 - DSLR Tips |

Aug 2010 - Camera Tips | July 2010 - Cameras | July 2010 - Nikon Cameras | July 2010 - Canon Cameras |

July 2010 - Pentax Cameras | Medifast Recipes | Medifast Recipes Tips | Medifast Recipes Strategies |

Medifast Recipes Experiences | Medifast Recipes Group | Medifast Recipes Forum | Medifast Support Strategies |

Medifast Support Experiences |

 

(C) Copyright 2010 All rights reserved.