File :-(, x, )
Anonymous
hey everyone, i'm considering getting a entry DSLR

should i get a nikon d40x or canon rebel xti?
EXIF data available. Clickhereto show/hide.
Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeCASIO COMPUTER CO.,LTDCamera ModelEX-Z750Camera Software1.02Maximum Lens Aperturef/2.8Focal Length (35mm Equiv)38 mmImage-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution72 dpiVertical Resolution72 dpiImage Created2007:03:08 20:06:04Exposure Time1/8 secF-Numberf/2.8Exposure ProgramNormal ProgramExposure Bias0 EVMetering ModePatternLight SourceUnknownFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryFocal Length7.90 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width3072Image Height2304RenderingNormalExposure ModeAutoWhite BalanceAutoScene Capture TypeStandardGain ControlLow Gain UpContrastNormalSaturationNormalSharpnessNormal
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
Of these, XTi, definitely.
The D40X has less functions, worse image quality at high ISOs and can't even use half of Nikon's own lenses. Or if you really want a Nikon, get a D40 and save money or get a D80 if you want a non-crippled camera.

Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeCanonCamera ModelCanon EOS 30DCamera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CS3 WindowsImage-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution72 dpiVertical Resolution72 dpiImage Created2007:07:08 11:29:45Exposure Time1/250 secF-Numberf/13.0Exposure ProgramManualISO Speed Rating100Lens Aperturef/13.0Exposure Bias0 EVMetering ModePatternFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryFocal Length60.00 mmColor Space InformationUncalibratedImage Width600Image Height495RenderingNormalExposure ModeManualWhite BalanceManualScene Capture TypeStandard
>> Anonymous
i'm leaning more towards the xti

thanks for the explanation!
>> Anonymous
D40, definitely.
>> Choamsky
D40.

>>68296
Doesn't know what he's talking about.
>> Anonymous
>>68305
Be more specific
>> Anonymous
>>68293
I'd have to agree with 97.
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
The problem with this question (which gets asked at least once a week, and usually more like twice daily) is that everyone will pretty much answer that you should go with the system that they themselves have gone with.

Fact of the matter is, the two cameras are both great and it all comes down to which you prefer. Go to a store that sells both of them and ask to fondle their floor models. Take a few pictures, get a bit of a feel for the camera, think about which you'd rather spend hours holding if you have to shoot an event of some sort.

Me, I'm a Rebel XTi owner, so I'm gonna say go with the XTi. Gives you the option of fast prime lenses (e.g., the extremely economical 50mm f/1.8), which the D40/D40x lacks (well, it can use 'em, it just can't autofocus them, and modern SLRs aren't set up to let you manually focus at wider than f/2.5 or so). Most of the shooting I prefer to do is indoors in less-than-ideal lighting conditions, so that's important to me. If you plan to shoot mostly outdoors with the sun giving you an assist, the D40x is just as good--although the D40x doesn't give you that much of an advantage over the D40 to justify its cost increase, so you'd be better off getting a D40 and spending the rest of the money on glass.

TLDR: Nikon sucks, fags. Get a Canon.
>> Anonymous
>>68308
>everyone will pretty much answer that you should go with the system that they themselves have gone with.
Because the differences between similarly priced offerings from the major camera makers are insignificant for a casual photographer, and only matter if you're into some really specific kinds of photography or already have some lenses you want to use with the new camera. For example, Nikons are worthless for astrophotography, but that only matters for like 0.01% of potential buyers.
>> Anonymous
>>Nikons are worthless for astrophotography

Care to explain why?
>> Anonymous
>>68332
I do believe its more that the Modified 20D is better. Costs an extra $1000 for it, but you pay out of your ass for anything astrophotography related.
>> Anonymous
>>68332
Hot pixel filtering at long exposures. It mistakes smallest stars for hot pixels and erases them, and Nikon didn't include an option to turn it off.

A proper way to get rid of hot pixels in this case, which is present in some other cameras, is dark frame subtraction, but that requires a second exposure as long as the first.
>> Anonymous
>>68335
I might add that it's not an issue if you just want to take pretty pictures of swirling nebulas; it's important only to those who are actually interested in those tiniest stars. That probably lowers the percentage of concerned users even more :D
>> Anonymous
Go to a store, Best Buy or something. Handle both, and shoot some with it in the store (go through the menu, or ask an employee to turn on the option to "shoot without CF card" if it's not already enabled).

They both are very close in performance and capability. At higher ISO, the Nikon edges out the Canon by just a little. But in noral daylight and 100 ISO, the Canon is better IMO.

Whichever you get, I would suggest getting the body only and buying a lens seperate. The kit ens with the XTi is good to start with, but (if you get the Canon) you should probably just go ahead and get something like the 17-85mm IS or 28-135mm IS, if you can swing it.
>> Anonymous
>>68293
Why not consider something less mainstream, like a Pentax 100d or Olympus E410/510? Often, you get more bang for the buck when you buy non-canon/nikon. Or for that matter, why not a second hand Canon 20d or d70s, which, while both reputedly excellent, shouldn't set you back much more than an entry camera.
>> Anonymous
>>68335

D200 has dark frame subtraction. So, it's unfair to generalize about entire brands. But this whole astrophotography thing is entirely OT, especially since OP will most decidedly not be shooting M42 through his schmidt-cassegrain.
>> Anonymous
Why not spend a bit more and get a Canon EOS 30D or a Nikon D80? What do you plan to use the camera for? You may want to look at a Fujifilm S5 Pro (based off of the Nikon D200 body) if you wish to use a lot of human models.

>>68343
Do you mean a Pentax K10D? I own one and love it. K100D/K100D Super seem to be ok, too. I think I'd go with a D80 if not for my camera. (I like the D200, but I'm far too invested in SD cards!)
>> Anonymous
>>68305
He's right about one thing though, rather the D40 than the D40X, save some money for more important extra equipment.

The D40 is nice and light, by the way, and only techfags with no real artistic skill complain about its quality. It rocks.
>> Anonymous
>>68463
>Why not spend a bit more and get a Canon EOS 30D or a Nikon D80?
IMO the 30D doesn't have that much of an advantage, for a beginner at least, to justify the price difference compared to the XT/XTi. But D80 vs. D40/D40X is probably worth it (but that may be because I like cheap used primes)
>> Anonymous
I'd avoid an "entry level" SLR unless you're under financial constraints. (If that's the case, I'd highly recommend looking at Cameta on Amazon or eBay.) Buy something that you can actually learn on instead of being stuck with the limitations of scene modes.

Most importantly, though, find something that fits well in your hands.
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>68906
...

This isn't 1992. All entry level digital SLRs offer manual controls.
>> heavyweather !4AIf7oXcbA
One cool thing about the D40 that I just learned about...

Although you won't get autofocus with a lot of lenses, the lack of that screw drive allows you to use ANY Nikon lens. Any of them, even non-AI lenses. That's pretty fukken cool, if you ask me, especially considering that there are millions of them out there gathering dust in pawn shops and used camera stores at ludicrously low prices for the quality of the optics you're getting.
>> Anonymous
>>68927
Incidentally, how does the D40 meter with classic glass? I may have been lied to but I was told they only do so with a subset of Nikon-fit lenses?
>> Anonymous
>>68949
Uhh, for clarification I meant to say that (for example) in aperture-priority mode on a canon you can attach practically anything to your lens mount (CPU-enabled or not) and autoexposure will still work. When you meter, the camera assumes that since it can't control the lens, the same amount of light will hit its sensor come shuttertime. Makes shooting pinholes, M42 mount and other obscure glass a dawdle.

I was lead to believe this isn't the same with the D40?
>> heavyweather !4AIf7oXcbA
>>68949
It doesn't meter. Only the pro bodies and the D200 will do that.

Reading a histogram isn't too hard though.
>> des
>>68949
>>68957
it is true, nikon gimps the bodies
this is carryover from their lower-end film bodies which didn't meter AI either. It's getting kind of ridiculous at this point considering, afaik, the D40 was designed 100% ground-up.

Even Pentax can do it, and they're not exactly making billions. Fuck Nikon for that.
>> Anonymous
i really love my nikon d50
>> Anonymous
>>68308
lolwut??? but iv just ordered a d40 as my first camera(cuz its cheap price for good quality). omg what do you mean you cant manual focus wider than f/2.5. wtf? nobody tells me this shit.
>> Anonymous
i just bought a nikon d40 for an entry level slr, its amazing. if you have the money then go with the d40x if not then go with the d40
>> Anonymous
I'm in love with my XTi
>> heavyweather !4AIf7oXcbA
>>68308
I disagree completely with the manual focus comment. With Canons and Olympuses, I might agree. That 1.6X crop and 2X crop are bitches, respectively, and make for smaller viewfinders. I can completely reliably focus down to f1.4, and though I haven't mounted a f1.2 lens yet, I can't see it being much more difficult.

Regardless, the OP would probably be better off with an XTi.
>> Anonymous
I've heard really good things about Cannon Rebels in the pro-sumer range. If you like doing long exposure night sky stuff, one of the older models can be modded.
>> heavyweather !4AIf7oXcbA
>>69016
...?

Anyways... Canons have the edge over Nikon in terms of features, pixels (which is largely irrelevant, but I digress), sensor noise, and at the high end, sensor size. Nikons have the edge over Canons in backwards compatibility, their flash system, and their legendary glass. Also, and this is just subjective, Nikons are ergonomically superior to Canons, no contest at all.

They both have their advantages, and the differences are largely unimportant unless you're a professional or aspire to be one.
>> Anonymous
>>68966
It's quite ironic that old (and good) Nikon lenses don't meter on Nikon bodies, but meter on my Olympus with a crude adapter ring... :D
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>68988
>>68997
The focusing screen in modern SLRs (I.e., SLRs from the era of autofocus) tend to look about the same in terms of depth of field from f/2.5 and wider. The lack of split rangefinder or microprisms or any of the nice manual focus aids from bygone eras means that manual focus at larger apertures than that is a bit of a crapshoot if you don't have an upgraded focusing screen or some other sort of manual focus aid.
>> Anonymous
¯\( o °)/¯ I dunno, lol
>> heavyweather !4AIf7oXcbA
I agree that split prism screens are easier to use, but I just have to disagree that things don't look different. My f2.8 lens is a lot different from my f1.8 lens which is different from the f1.4 I tried out. The DoF and point of focus in the viewfinder is accurate and reflects the final picture almost exactly. You should have your camera calibrated if this isn't the case for you.
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>69074
It's possible that this is only true with Canons and not Nikons, but I got the f/2.5 number from Ken Rockwell's site and he's mostly a Nikon guy.

And yeah, I know, Ken Rockwell, but a quick test with my Rebel XTi backed him up. Take your f/1.8, put your camera in aperture-priority mode at f/2.5 or wider, and hit the DoF preview button. You will see no difference in the viewfinder. Bump it up to f/2.8 or narrower and you will.

...

Actually, a quick google search just informed me that your D50 doesn't have a DoF preview button. What the hell, Nikon? But yeah, try it out with a camera that has it.
>> Anonymous
>>69075

I dunno, I think it might be a smart design conceit by Nikon. With a digital camera, it's just as fast and more accurate to just take the picture and see for yourself.

Bottom line is, if you're just starting out, get a cheap body and use the money you saved on an expensive lens. It's a better long-term investment if you ever decide that photography isn't for you. After a few years, you won't even be able to give that D40 away, but a 70-210mm 2.8 zoom in good to excellent condition should still retain at least half its value, and probably much more. A D80 with a Tamron will actually be worth less than this combo in a few years.
>> Anonymous
>>68927
is this really true??? in which case, im gonna go lens hunting for a good cheap Prime...
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>69083
>With a digital camera, it's just as fast and more accurate to just take the picture and see for yourself.
That's actually an extremely good point, but I've decided to choose to ignore it so that I can maintain my irrational belief that Canons are better than Nikons.
>> Anonymous
>>69084
Just bear in mind that you'll be limited to M mode without metering; having to guess the exposure by intuition or the histograms of test shots can be frustrating.
>> Anonymous
>>69089

Sunny 16 works. Meters are for chumps.
>> Anonymous
>>69092
gb2/1930/
>> des
>>69092
because digital cameras can take gross under or over exposure like print film, oh wait

If you're not used to eyeballing and aren't shooting static subjects/in a studio, invest in a light meter. They even make ones you can stick on the hotshoe, which would probably be very cute on the D40. :3
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>69099
On the other hand, digital cameras also have an LCD and histograms to give you immediate feedback as to the exposure, so it's not *that* bad.

Still think it's crazy that all but the top-end Nikons won't meter with old glass, though.
>> Anonymous
>>69102
A live histogram would be super cool for that...oh wait, all the SLRs with live histogram already work in A mode with Nikon glass lol.
>> heavyweather !4AIf7oXcbA
>>69102
Rub it in. :(

I've yet to hear a good reason as to why they don't allow even stop-down metering... sigh.
>> des
>>69102
I agree but you can't always rely on being able to reshoot something.
>>69105
nikon haet us D:
I have to wonder if the president is just insane and wants to learn how much he can abuse his customers. The Pentax line keeps looking better to me everytime I check it out.
>> Anonymous
>>69107
Nikon isn't the only one making ridiculous decisions like that. For example, you don't get neither IS nor focus confirmation when you put old Olympus glass on a new Olympus DSLR, but you get both when you use a Pentax DSLR with the same glass.
>> Anonymous
Maybe Nikon is trying to force its consumer base to subsidize the future AF-Servo lenses by making their new cameras incompatible with the old lenses. AF-S really is a better lens design, and Nikon doesn't make any money off of people buying old lenses.

And Sunny 16 or EV is actually a pretty advanced skill. It's all about previsualizing before you ever even touch the camera and thinking in terms of light. Every Brooks student gets a little EV chart to stick in their camera bag at the beginning of their freshman year, and for good reason.
>> Anonymous
>>69113
what's an EV chart? and Sunny 16? im noob at digital photography.
>> Anonymous
>>69130
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exposure_value
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sunny_16_rule
>> Choamsky
>>69130

Just these people trying to act like they know what they're talking about. I shoot photos 7 days a week and I haven't used a light metre once. The sunny 16 rule is bullshit anyway. If you're shooting manual, which most don't, you would be upping it to F11 most likely anyway as it gives you more depth and density in the photo.

>>And Sunny 16 or EV is actually a pretty advanced skill. It's all about previsualizing before you ever even touch the camera and thinking in terms of light. Every Brooks student gets a little EV chart to stick in their camera bag at the beginning of their freshman year, and for good reason.

Haha, yeah sure.

>>and for good reason.

Yeah, because heaven forbid they forget how the fucking camera works...

"So...it's cloudy today...do I use 22 or 5.6?...I better check my card..."
>> Anonymous
>>69206
Yeah, let's rely on technological crutches instead of learning how things work ourselves. If you're happy to let the camera make decisions for you without understanding what's actually going on, perhaps it's time to consider a point and shoot.

And there's no reason to brag about never having used a handheld meter. All that means is that you've never shot in a situation where spot-on exposure is key, like when you shoot slides for paying customers.
>> Vincent
>>69287
You only really need that light meter when shooting with film. On Digital you take the pic and then adjust the exposure compensation as needed. USusally its pretty easy to tell what the camera is thinking, or if you spot meter and then lock the EV Then thats almost doing the same thing.

I used a D80 for slide film and I find its extremely accurate with its matrix metering and spot metering, The few times I don't trust it, I end up taking over or underexposed pictures.
>> Butterfly !xlgRMYva6s
>>69292
Truth, when you dont have instant feedback using all avalible precautions to make sure the shots come out as near perfect as possible is important. Now with digital we see what we shot instantly and can ajust from that.

Also sony rule.