The Sigma 17-70 is a good lens on the Canon 400D, a friend has one on his and likes it a lot..
Forget the antidust thing though, reports suggest it doesn't really work anyway. I read one survey online but don't have a link. I just think choosing a camera on such a feature is a bit strange to be honest - rather like choosing a car on the basis of how easy it is to change a wheel. An air blower will get rid of any dust on the sensor 90% of the time..
All three are fine cameras, but if you like the Nikon, then get that. As long as you have handled all three, that's the main thing..
The 18-135 is good kit lens, better optically than the 18-200VR I think..
Link: if you have enaugh of money, go for 30D or D80. 40D is low-ended model. In our country EOS 30D and 400D has the same single kit lens. really difficult..Why does he do it?..
I echo Alex's comments..
The 30D comes with the same 18-55 lens as the 400D in some countries and you are right in your opinion of that lens. It is very poor (unlike more pricey Canon lenses). The Canon EF-S 17-85mm f/4-5.6 USM IS is only a little better but is good enough..
The Nikon 18-135 lens is pretty decent:.
The humble Nikon 18-55 is slightly better at the wide end than the 18-135..
You will not go wrong with either the D80 or 30D BUT if buying th 30D means being stuck with the 18-55 lens go with the D80..
*Nikon* D Eighty + Fifty - Other equipment in Profile.
Re>The cheapest is the 400d but I know that it has a crappy kit lens,<.
Really? That's the one I used last Thursday for a photo that will run in the largest newspaper in Canada..
Seems fine to me..
That aside, what do you intend to do with your pictures? People around here blow up the center parts really really big on computer screens, and whine..
Photographers, however, make prints and give them top freinds or get them framed and hang them ont he wall or put them on a desk, or provide them to editors and art directors who use them in publications..
I just packed up a bunch of 4x6, 5x7, and one 8x10 print, all taken with the Canon 18-55 elCheapo lens, to deliver to a client..
I have no qualms about using this lens, properly, for prints up to 11x14..
That said, I think the 18-135mm Nikon is probably a good idea, and if I was on a medium budget, a D80 with that lens would be a fine digital camera for a vast number of photographjic situations..
While dust shaking isn't a deal breaker, to me, the Nikon D40 and D40x three-point autofocus is a deal breaker, compared to Canon or the D80..
There's also nonsense posted already in this thread about the Rebel XTi / D400, plus, I think, a typo confusing the 40D and 400D/Rebel XTi..
The 400D is a wonderful camera, and a true bargain, and a camera that was much, much better value than a 30D..
Now that the 30D is discontinued, perhaps the price has dropped where you live, and it makes more sense to buy one..
In late 2007, the lowest priced digital SLR camera from any major manufacturer is much, much better than the vast majority of people using them, so have no fear whatever you buy the quality of pictures will not depend on the body..
It will depend on you..
As for lenses, decision making is both easy and hard; again, there are no crappy lenses anymore..
LEnses have specifications, and prices, and the challenge and it's a real challenge is matching the specifications to your needs, at an acceptable price..
The cheapest kit lens from Canon or Nikon gives you a pretty good wide angle field of view and a half-decent head and shoulder portrait, when the light is good..
After that, it's just a question of more width to the shot, less width in the shot, and lower light and easier focussing, all within your budget..
A Canon 400D/XTi plus a Sigma 18-50mm f2.8 lens could be a wise starting point for a price comparison..
This will let you work under more demanding circumstances than a 30D and the 17-85mm lens, perhaps /probably for less money. But it doesn't get you as close, so to speak..
BOTTOM LINE? Flip[ a coin between the 400D/XTi and the D40x, if you like the limited autofocus points in the Nikon..
Then buy the cheapest kit lens for the Canon, or the 18-135 for the Nikon, get a 1GB memory card, and find out where in your neighborhood you can get good prints made at a reasonable price.I do think that computer processing is important, and for that, Photoshop Elements can't be beat..
Thank's for all the answers, I set my mind & heart on the D80 it looks much sturdier than the rebel xti, was on a trip with some friends and one had the rebel the other a d80.i plan on using it for a long time (translation: until it bites the dust).As soon as I get it ill start flooding the forums with lens questions ).
10x for the help...
I do think that computer processing is important, and for that, Photoshop >Elements can't be beat..
Generally I agree that Elements provides good PP facilities at a reasonable price but for a Nikon user Nikon Capture NX costs just a little more (street prices) and provides a better solution for most such users. I came to it from other software (Shot Olympus DSLR for 7 years). My initial view was annoyance at the prospect of paying for software that should be included with the cam but the innovative nature of some facilities and the gradual improvement in useability has convinced me that it is worth paying for. (Would still prefer a lower price though!).
P.S. We share the same view of the D40x. I recommended it with 18-135 to my son as a quantum leap up from his P & S. He is delighted. Personally I would find 3 focus points too limiting. But for him it is near perfect..
P.P.S. It is easier to get the best out of a poor lens (Canon 18-55) if you know what you are doing as, I am sure, you do. And, in your case, I am sure you have a bagfull of other lenses for when the going gets tough! In my view that lens is by far the weakest link in the Canon line up and there is no affordable Canon alternative. Canon need to play catch up with Nikon here. (The Sigmas are the best affordable alternative)..
*Nikon* D Eighty + Fifty - Other equipment in Profile.