XTI vs XT

Hi all,


Is there anywhere I can go to see a list in laymens terms the differences about the XTI vs XT? I went to a camera store and handled a bunch of cameras but was told the XTI doesn't have anything over the XT other than MegaPixels. I'd like to find out for sure. They also told me that neither of these cameras have a AF motor in the body. I thought they did.

Thanks a lot,

-Mike

For the most part, the XT and XTI are similar.
The XTI has picture styles that can be downloaded to the camera. The XT have to be set manually.
The AF motors are in the lens, not the camera.

Thanks for the reply. I realize this is a Canon forum, but I was comparing the Nikon d40 and d40x to the XTI and XT for awhile now. I thought I read somewhere that the Nikon's do not have a motor in the case for "something." Opposed to the Canons having it. Do you know what that is?

Thanks,

-Mike

They might of been referring to the USM in the Lenes.

Theres an overview of the improvements here:

http://www.dpreview.co​m …ws/CanonEOS400D​/page3.asp

I went for the 400D(XTi) mainly for the sensor cleaning system. Not sure how effective it really is but it can't hurt.

I imagine someone that knows a bit more will add to this/correct me but AFAIK with the all Canon EF/ EF-S lenses the AF motor is inside the lens. Older Nikon lenses do not have a motor inside and require a motor in the camera - which the new cameras do not have.

Both are great cameras, but I went for the XTi for its larger buffer, and megapixels, so I could crop more.

I had both the XT (6 months) and the XTi (10 months) and together for about 1 week before getting rid of the XT. The two cameras are quite similar and in my opinion there were a few things that were different enough to comment on. First, auto focus. The XTi focused quicker and more accurately. It also tracked better. Metering, the XT consistently overexposed 1/3 stop and the XTi consistently under exposed 1/3 stop. Very easy to adjust for in either case. 8meg to 10meg. I know it’s not a lot, but 20 pixels per mm is noticeable to pixel peepers like me. Other than that, everything else is pretty much the same. The back screen is nice, but still not nice enough to be able to really use it for other than a quick check of setting and such.

Get the XTi for the Autofocus improvements if nothing else. While the XT is a very capable camera (I had one for 2 years), the AF is probably its weakest attribute. The XTi remedies that shortcoming. As far as having an AF motor in the body, that is only applicable with older Nikon lenses, as they don't have AF motors in the lens. It is not an issue with any Canon camera, as all Canon EF lenses have the AF motor in the lens.

I'm another one who had an XT for a year before trading it in for an XTi. The improvements in auto-focus are well worth the price difference! Once I moved up to faster lenses, the XT's auto-focus became a continual source of frustration for me. The XTi's larger LCD is also a nice improvement.

Thank you all for the replies. I really appreciate it. I have another question in regards to the XTI. I've read it has exposure problems (under and over) is this still a problem or has it been fixed in newer cameras?

I realize some of that would be changed by the users skill but I've read some people were experts were experiencing this too.

I had one of the first production XTI's that underexposed--BADLY--1 1/3 to 1 2/3 stops according to a Sekonic 358 meter.

Canon sent me a pre paid shipping label--sent it off and in a little over a week it was back--and has worked flawlessly since.

So if you are buying a new one it is no problem--and it is a nice upgrade over the XT--If for nothing more that the AF upgrade it is well worth the extra $$.

Bohh wrote in post #3995768
Thanks for the reply. I realize this is a Canon forum, but I was comparing the Nikon d40 and d40x to the XTI and XT for awhile now. I thought I read somewhere that the Nikon's do not have a motor in the case for "something." Opposed to the Canons having it. Do you know what that is?

Canon and Nikon went different routs in the beginning of auto focus cameras. Canon decided to put the AF motor in the lens, whereas Nikon put it in the camera body. While Nikon has since added AF motors to some lenses (either to help the body AF motor or to do all the AF work), they have kept the motor in the camera body for all their SLR:s to ensure backward compatibility. The D40(x) does not have this in body motor and can thus only auto focus with a small subset of the Nikon lenses (those labeled AF-S I believe). So, If you want to use old Nikon lenses, the D40 will not auto focus with them.

For canons, all EF lenses will work equally on all eos-camera bodys.

Auto-exposure is programmed to set the overall brightness of a scene to 18% gray meaning it can easily be fooled by any scene with lots of whites or light colors or blacks or dark colors. As a consequence, experienced photographers are used to seeing under- and over-exposures, recognizing the conditions where this could be a problem and compensating for them. In my case, if the exposure of my XTi was off by some small amount, I'm not sure I'd even notice let alone find it to be much of a problem. The problem with this "exposure issue" is that those who are used to using completely automatic point-n-shoot cameras and who don't understand how auto-exposure works are apt to blame the camera so it is very difficult to judge the imporatance, if any, of this issue.

JackProton wrote in post #3998610
if the exposure of my XTi was off by some small amount, I'm not sure I'd even notice let alone find it to be much of a problem

I'm with this, I've not noticed any consistent exposure problem with my 400D; As with all cameras sometimes it gets it wrong in difficult situations, but then anyone using a DSLR level camera shouldn't depend on their camera to tell them how to take the shot... one of the beauties of digital is that even with very little experience you can correct for such difficulties yourself after taking a single shot.