30d vs. XTi -- is the 30d really that much better?

I am really wanting a DSLR camera, but I am on a budget. =) Been looking at the 30d for sometime now, but am leaning towards the XTi for the price. So here is the question:

When just comparing picture quality, the 30d is definitely has better low light results. But as far as I have read, other than a 5fps option, that's about it. The only thing the XTi doesn't have that the 30d does is a light metering system. My question is how necessary is this metering system? What will I lose out on by not having it? Outside of that, I would imagine that given the same lenses used, a pic on an XTi is going to look just as good as a 30d no matter what print size you do? Agree?

(Please don't comment about how good the 30d feels in your hands - I already have experience with this and would probably agree with you. )

Trev

What do you plan to shoot mostly,and in what light? For sports 5 fps is much better than 3 fps. The 30d is worlds ahead of the XTi in the low light department. The XTi probably won't be replaced until next year, while there is speculation a 40D will be introuduced at PMA in March.

other than low light/high ISO situations, odds are you wouldnt be able to tell the difference between the tow pictures

Yeah, I wish the XTi performed as well in low light because I will probably be shooting mostly indoors where a flash is needed, but most times I wish I didn't have to use a flash because I'm taking pictures of my kids and whatnot. You know what I am talking about when you're in a situation where the room "looks" bright enough to your eyes, yet the camera is screaming for a flash to be used. (This in reference to using a standard consumer camera like a Canon 700IS)

One of the reasons I've wanted the 30d is because I have seen what that camera can do with the right lens in low light. But I would also think that if you have an equally good lens on an XTi, it might also be good?

Is the 30d low light performance WAAAAAAAAAAAAY better than the XTi, or just better? I guess what I am asking is if you use both cameras, how much would you notice the performance difference?

Trev

They serve different purpose.
Not a good idea to have both of them as the bottom and orientations are very different. If to have 2 bodies one as a back up, it is better to pair XT with XTi or 20D with 30D or 5D.

I don't think the difference between the 30D and XTi is dramatic IQ-wise.

I'm not sure about the low light / Hi ISO differences between the 2 is big either.

The biggest differences are 1) Size and build 2) Spot Metering 3) Price...

That said, the 30D is a nice handling camera. The controls are laid out better in my opinion. Overall oozes better built camera that's for sure...

photo_trev wrote in post #2566831
I am really wanting a DSLR camera, but I am on a budget. =) Been looking at the 30d for sometime now, but am leaning towards the XTi for the price. So here is the question:

When just comparing picture quality, the 30d is definitely has better low light results. But as far as I have read, other than a 5fps option, that's about it. The only thing the XTi doesn't have that the 30d does is a light metering system. My question is how necessary is this metering system? What will I lose out on by not having it? Outside of that, I would imagine that given the same lenses used, a pic on an XTi is going to look just as good as a 30d no matter what print size you do? Agree?

(Please don't comment about how good the 30d feels in your hands - I already have experience with this and would probably agree with you. )

Trev

How is the low light performance so much better on the 30D?

Are talking about it going up to 3200 ISO?

There really shouldn't be much difference in the low light performance. Not sure what you are going on about?

Check this out:

"Clean" is the word I'd use to describe the images taken at ISO 100, 200, and 400. The ISO 800 is still excellent, and a large size print will be no problem at that setting. At ISO 1600 your print sizes will drop a bit, but with some noise reduction software I see no reason why you couldn't make a large print at this setting as well."

from here on the XTi http://www.dcresource.​com …el_xti-review/index.shtml


"The shorter exposures in the the studio let the EOS-30D really show off. The images are very clean through ISO 800, and it's just a bit grainy at ISO 1600. With a little noise cleanup you should be able to get a midsized (or maybe larger) print out of the ISO 3200 shot. It's worth mentioning that there are many other ISO options between 100 and 1600 -- you can adjust the ISO in 1/3-step increments (new to the 30D)."

from here on the 30D
http://www.dcresource.​com/reviews/canon/eos_​30d-review/

While I know that the 30D is a step up from the XTi (with most people citing better ergonomics, better controls, higher ISO, spot metering, longer rated shutter, better build, etc.), there should be no reason that the 30D should have better low light performance. The focusing system is the same in both cameras and, because of that, the XTi is supposed to be much improved when focusing in low light with faster lenses (f/2.8 or faster.)

The higher ISO capability will allow you to shoot in lower light without a flash but the focusing ability should be the same.

Michael

they both have the same AF motor so focusing in low-light shouldn't be too different.

image quality wise the XTi MAY be a bit more noisy because of higher megapixel count, but shouldn't be THAT much worse than the 30D.

If you don't need the following you should probably just get the XTi and spend the rest on a good lens, which is more important to getting crisp and sharp images anyway:

- 5fps
- metal body
- quick command dial
- spot metering
- bigger size
- bigger viewfinder
- top LCD status screen
- ISO value in viewfinder (when changing)
- ISO 3200
- higher rated shutter life at 100,000 clicks
- ISO and expsure settings at 1/3 increments
- more customizable options
- faster access to certain settings (ISO, WB, FEV, etc...)
- 1/8000 shutterspeed

The quick command dial is really the biggest advantage I think, particuarly when you are in rapid paced shoot environments. If you're not, then I don't know that it's as big an advantage. I found the XT very unintuitive, but I wonder if you were coming from point and shoots if it would seem more natural.

I think the bottom line is that your results whether from a 30D or the XTi will be more similar than different.

Everything else is really mostly ergonimics...(aside from the spot metering the 30D has)

That said, when you hold the XTi then the 30D, you will definitely notice that the 30D is more substantial both in size and build. There is no disputing that.

The 5D is a step above but is built VERY similar to the 30D...the 30D is a fantastic camera in that respect.

Do both cameras use the histogram? On the low light thing, does that not depend on the lense used mostly? Not sure really, but thought I'd ask?

Bonjour43ma wrote in post #2567481
they both have the same AF motor so focusing in low-light shouldn't be too different.

The AF motors are integral to the lenses, not the camera. The cameras ability to use the AF motos speed and accuracy is not the same from camera to camera. This is what one should concern themselves with when considering AF performance when selecting a camera body.

So assuming that low light performance is comparable (obviously better with the 30d), I have ask a stupid question... well, maybe not that stupid...

What about the spot meter? I'm not too clear on what aspect of photography I would be missing out on by not having the spot meter on the XTi? Can someone explain. (Seems pretty odd that Canon didn't put a spot meter in the XTi, when so many other brands of cameras along the same line do)

Thanks,

Trev