# Canon EOS 450D/XSI vs EOS 40D. pls help me making up my mind!



## Hobbes (Jul 10, 2008)

Well I am planning on buying my first DSLR within a couple of months so I thought I better start checking out which camera suits my needs and after reading some reviews on DPreview and some limited real life experience with Canon DSLR I have decided for either Canon EOS 450D/XSI or Canon EOS 40D. I know 40D costs a bit more but has better viewfinder, autofocus and more solid outer body. What I really want to know is what it is like using either of them in the real life. From what I have heard 40D weighs quite a bit more than 450D (1.6lb vs 1.0lb) but is it that huge of difference in the real life too? and what is it like holding either of them in your hands? anyway I just need some advice from those of you who have or had both of the cameras or real life experiences using them. oh and I will probably use the new camera for landscape and animal and wildlife photography most of the time. Any comments or advice would be appreciated


----------



## Rogan (Jul 10, 2008)

if your thinking about getting serious with photography the 40D is a much better camera

the xsi is better if you want to take much better photographs but still want a small light camera to carry around

but if the weight and size isnt an issue and u can afford it defiantely go for the 40D


----------



## Hobbes (Jul 10, 2008)

I do travel quite a lot and I am planning on travel even more in the future so I want a camera that is not too heavy but at the same time also take high quality photos and is solid built but is 40D that much bigger than XSI? well what I really like about 40D is its viewfinder which has a magnification of 0.95x compared to only 0.87x on XSI and of course the metal outerbody of the 40D.. well lol I may will have to wait a month longer if I decide to buy 40D because of the higher price but it's not a problem for me


----------



## Rogan (Jul 10, 2008)

theres a 40d next to a 400d, (XTi which is very similar in size and shape to XSi)

if you travel alot although the 40d is bigger its much stronger so it might be a good thing on a damage side of it id go with the 40d


----------



## Hobbes (Jul 10, 2008)

Rogan said:


> theres a 40d next to a 400d, (XTi which is very similar in size and shape to XSi)
> 
> if you travel alot although the 40d is bigger its much stronger so it might be a good thing on a damage side of it id go with the 40d



holy crap! that's a huge size difference! hmm well I am not really into wildlife photography and I will try my best to avoid visiting "troubled" places and countries... so is a magnesium outerbody that much better than plastic? and thanks so much for the replies and the pic of both cameras so now I have an idea of the difference in size :thumbup:


----------



## RyanLilly (Jul 10, 2008)

The 40D body is much more comfortable in my hands, the extra weight is actually a good thing IMO.


----------



## Rogan (Jul 10, 2008)

agreed with ryan the extra weight helps me steady my hands and the bigger grip lets me spread out my hand over the control and causes less shake when using the controls

the wheel (40d) is also alot easier to use than the buttons (rebels) in my opinion


----------



## AverageJoe (Jul 10, 2008)

Goto Circuit City and play with both of them, then decide.  I started with a rebel XT and moved up to a 40D, I wouldn't have done it any other way, except I might have gone from the XT to a 5D...


----------



## Hobbes (Jul 11, 2008)

thanks for the replies everyone!
It seems that 40D is preferred by most people here so I guess it will be the first DSLR
I will buy ^^ well there is no Circuit City where I live now but I will check out a few nearby camera stores so hopefully they will have demo-products that I will be able to hold and test. I checked out an online store earlier and saw them selling a 40D with 17-85 mm f/4-5.6 IS USM lens for 1500 CAD and they also have a XSI/450D kit with the same lens for almost the same price which is really weird... 
so what I am kinda wondering is if this 17-85 mm f/4-5.6 IS USM lens is any good? and which kit lens should I get IF I decide to buy EOS 40D


----------



## wing352 (Jul 11, 2008)

The best kit lens for 40D is the 28-135 IS, IMO. It's a great walk around lens, i like it alot until i replaced it with the 24-70.


----------



## AverageJoe (Jul 11, 2008)

wing352 said:


> The best kit lens for 40D is the 28-135 IS, IMO. It's a great walk around lens, i like it alot until i replaced it with the 24-70.


 
I would probably trade my 28-135mm for the 17-85mm if I hadn't already bought the 10-22mm.  I tend to shoot on the wide side of all my lenses.


----------



## uplander (Jul 11, 2008)

I think in the long run you would be pleased with the 40D. My reasoning for this, not in order of importance but just good solid reasons

1 The build quality is better and will take more of a beating if you travel and / or want to take it into some rugged spots ( these could be urban as well as rural / the wilds.

2 If you would have been happy with the xsi then rest asured you probably will not out grow the 40D very soon, if ever.

3 Weight ! ... Chances are some of (if not most) your lenses will weigh more than the camera, most of mine do. So a half a pound is not going to matter much.

4 The 40D allows more creative control if you should evolve as a photographer. If not the basic modes still use the advantages of the 40D.
Such as the DIGIC III chip ( The X xsi may have this chip too but I am uncertain as I write this so don't jump on me if it is so:blushing:

5 The layout of the 40D's controls is very well done unless you have very petite hands. If so then by all means go for the xsi.


----------



## Hobbes (Jul 13, 2008)

well I found a review on dpreview for the 17-85 lens and this is what they say about it:

cons-


Poor performance at wideangle, with marked barrel disortion, high levels of light falloff, and intense green/magenta chromatic aberration
Slow maximum aperture
Very average close-up performance

pros-


Decent build quality - much better than any of Canon's 18-55mm kit lenses
Very useful focal length range, almost ideal for a walkaround lens
Highly effective image stabilisation
Excellent  autofocus and manual override
Consistently high image quality across almost all of  the range
I didnt find any review on the 28-135 lens but I have heard that it isn't wide enough for indoor photography. so I wonder if I should get 28-135 3.5/5.6 IS USM lens for outdoor photography and a cheap crappy 18-55 IS lens for indoor... as for the price, I think a kit with 17-85 lens will cost me around 1500 dollars while if I decide to go with 28-135 + 18-55 may will end up somewhere around 1700-1800 which is the most I am willing to pay -.-



uplander said:


> I think in the long run you would be pleased with the 40D. My reasoning for this, not in order of importance but just good solid reasons


 
hehe yeah I kinda agree with you and lmao no I don't really have very petite hands even though they aren't that big either  so EOS 40D seems to be the camera I definitely want to buy but I do hope in the future I will have enough money and knowledge to buy a full frame DSLR  
at first I thought the lower weight of the XSI and some other new features (such as the 450D instantly displays all the usual shooting information at the back of LCD and 12.2 Mpixel ccd) will outweigh the shortcomings  it has against EOS 40D but I guess after reading some reviews and thanks to you guys I think I have made up my mind. now I just hope Canon will not release eos 50D right after I have bought 40D xD


----------



## Hobbes (Jul 15, 2008)

ok an update. I have ordered Canon EOS 40D body only here in Sweden for almost 1500 US dollars which is the lowest price I could find on pricerunner.se because I just can't wait another two or three months to buy the camera in the US so now I will probably get a cheap and crappy lens here in Sweden as well probably an used one and save some money to buy a good lens later on   I just saw some guy selling an used Canon Zoom Lens EF 28-105mm 1:3.5-4.5 II USM so I wonder how good this lens is for my new camera


----------



## 250Gimp (Jul 15, 2008)

Congrats on ordering the 40D!! I'll bet your chomping at the bit for it to arrive!! 

I had the 28-105 lense for a while. It is not a bad lense and takes decent pictures, but it is a bit slow for low light, and not wide  enough for some shots. 

If you don't need the zoom, a nifty fifty may be a good start. Canon EF 50mm f1.8lense is pretty sharp, and very cheap for the big aperature. The build is cheap plastic, but you can't go wrong for the price, which is about $100 Canadian.

Check the reviews on this link for any lenses you are considering. I find them fairly helpful.

http://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/

Cheers


----------



## Hobbes (Jul 15, 2008)

hmm it says that Canon EF 50mm f1.8 is an indoor photography lens and I dont take whole a lot of photos indoors at least not during the summer so yes I do need zoom  but thanks anyway well if I won't be able to buy the 28-105 I may consider to buy the kit lens that comes with reble XTI/EOS 400D for around 100 US dollars  
oh and thanks for the link I will check it later since I do not think I can afford any of the higher end zoom lenses right now especially the L ones 

It just stinks that almost everything cost so much more here in Sweden compared to the States and Canada I could probably have bought EOS 40D + 28-135 IS USM lens and some accessories for 1500 dollars in North America but I am just so tired of using my old crappy HP 945 especially now in the summer when I really need a good camera for outdoor photography.


----------



## JustAnEngineer (Jul 15, 2008)

The EF 50mm f/1.8 is considered an indoor photography lens because its wide f/1.8 maximum aperture allows you to take photos in low light, which a slow f/5.6 kit lens is not going to be able to do.  At 50mm the f/1.8 lens is 3.3 f-stops faster than an f/5.6 lens, meaning that it gathers 10 times as much light, allowing you to use a shutter speed that is 10 times as fast.  This can be the difference between a nice photo and a blurry mess.

However, that definitely does not stop you from using the lens outdoors.

You might like this review:
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-50mm-f-1.8-II-Lens-Review.aspx


----------



## Hobbes (Jul 15, 2008)

yeah it does sound like a great and CHEAP lens I will probably buy it for indoor shots because I usually hate to use flash  thanks for the link! I wonder what it will look like on the "huge" EOS 40D body ^^

now I just have to wait around a week for the camera to be delivered and its the waiting I hate the most


----------



## Hobbes (Jul 22, 2008)

another update:

I have finally received the camera with 17-85 IS USM kit lens and my first impression was "holy crap! its huge and heavy!" with lens it feels like it weighs twice as much as a XTI/EOS 400D with 18-55 lens! but maybe its a good thing... lol I wonder what it will feel like once I have got a battery grip and larger lens  well I am going to try out my new camera in the next few days and may will upload some photos on here soon :greenpbl:


here is the link to the photos I took with my new camera:
http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/showthread.php?t=131679


----------



## 250Gimp (Jul 22, 2008)

Congrats!!


----------

