a confused noob to SLRs

Hello one and all,

I have to say that after lurking here in the SLR section for a while I am thoroughly confused.

I am in the market for an upgrade from my s3is to SLR technology. Not today. but soon. I also have a budget (no surprise).

Except for a tripod and a DIY lightbox, I have no photographic equipment per se.

That said, my confusion stems from other threads where people ask for advice about various camera bodies. Some people hold the opinion that one should buy the cheapest body (e.g. xti vs 40d) and spend the most money on lenses. It makes sense. But in other threads, the same people speak about how they feel that they wasted their money on getting cheaper equipment in the beginning of their photgraphic career and recommend the upgrade (to whomever they are answering). This fear of wasting money on a body is one I think, that is very common to newcomers to the SLR field (from other newbie threads that I have read).

Of course it depends on the field of photography one enters - macro vs. nature vs glamor vs sports (etcetcetc) but seeing as I and many of the newbies do not plan to make this a source of income (or if so, a minor one) - conflicting general statements abound.

I have to say that I have myself been bouncing back and forth between the benefit of the xti vs 40d and the 5d. I have some time to wait, so in the meantime I will continue to read the various sources that are out there - but I must say that it is truly confusing.

For me, if I do sports - it will be solely as a fan a doctor or a father. I love nature and macros. I like shooting people (hehehe) and I have fantsized about taking even a course (maybe even an MFA) to get better and do studio work (way way way in the future). But being realistic, I have the hours of a hobby to offer to "photography" and not more. So i jump back and forth. The xti has a good sensor (same as the 40d) but the 40 d has 14 bit raw and digic III and a few other nice toys. The 5d is ff and can offer some advantages for the nature side - but it is relatively "slow" (other people's assessments - not mine) and because of the lack of crop factor the lenses won't have the same "reach".

Does digic III vs digic II offer any benefit?
Does the fact that the 5d have a pixel at 8.2 micrometer and the xti at 5.7 micrometer (as the 40d) mean anything in IQ or otherwise important?

Etc etc etc etc

sorry for the long post and thanks for your patience

ceriltheblade,
You really have to make your own decision
I personally believe any of the current Canon DSLR's will be a good improvement.
Of the three you mention I personally would take the 40D over the others, but thats me

I agree with John_B here. I think that any of the current Canon DSLR products you pick you will be happy with. Yes, there are differences from the lowest model to the top model. Are they differences you need to be concerned with? If you are shooting strictly hobby then probably not. The reason people say not to worry as much about the body as you should about the lens is because the technology in the bodies is still evolving at a fast rate. But lenses don't see the same growth in new technology. The idea is that you get the best glass and it is still the best you can get years later, but with bodies we see new ones that offer improvements every 6 months or so.

So what do you get for more money and a better body? You get a lot of incremental improvements in either performance or IQ or both. Sometimes these incremental improvements means the difference between selling the image or not, sometimes it means the difference of even being able to capture the image or not. So the age old answer to "What camera should I buy?" of "it depends" rings very true.

There are many situations where you could take the same shot with the same lens but with every different current Canon body available today and print out a 4x6 print from each of the images captured and no one could tell the difference from the cheapest to the most expensive body. Of course I am strictly talking IQ here not such things as crop factors, etc.

So why spend the money on better stuff? Well you may not need to. Sure, you can spend more and get 10 fps so you can have a better chance at shooting sports and getting something worth keeping. But can you get some great shots with the xti? Sure you can. You just may have more trial and error with the timing of the shots you take to get that peak action you are after. Many pros have been getting fantastic shots for years with slower cameras than 10 fps.

Will a larger pixel size on the sensor yield better IQ. More than likely. But will that improved IQ be scene on a 4x6 print, or on a web image? Maybe, but often not.

I shoot pro... weddings, portraits, seniors, sports, theater. And many times it is required that I deliver large prints. In large prints you now start to see a difference in IQ. When I get a 20x30 image and it still shows great detail and nice color I know it's because of the 12.8 MP ff sensor 5D and L-Glass that I used. But it's also because I knew how to take full advantage of all these elements. It will do no good to have the best and never nail the exposure, or use an aperture that does not help the image, or not know the first thing about compositions and what makes an image 'work'.

If you are really concerned about an apples-to-apples comparison of the different bodies you might want to look at dpreview. Or ask very specific questions, like you pixel size question, and we will throw our opinions at you.

There are many truths when buying a DSLR.

1. Looking at a product line like Canon (for example) all of the bodies are sound performers. Even the XTi is a very capable camera.

2. You should always buy the camera that has the features and quality that meet your needs and wants in pictures. For example, if you buy an XTi and do lots of sports shooting you might feel limited by the 3fps where a 40D can give you 6.5fps. If that was the primary use of the body I would recommend a 40D. Again, this is just an example.

3. It is best to not spend all your budget on a camera body. It is important to invest in quality lenses. If you have a pro body with poor quality lenses you will have poor quality pictures. Nothing can change that.

Now looking at a 40D over an XTi there are benefits which are discussed in this and other forums at length. I suggest looking around for some comparison threads. However, below is my list of benefits of a 40D over an XTi. (Keep in mind, I own both of these cameras.)

- 14bit processing which provides higher quality gradation between tonal areas. Yeah, I pixel peeped for that one.
- Improved high ISO performance and goes to ISO 3200.
- 6.5 fps, great for sports shooting.
- Live view, great for macro shooting.
- Larger brighter viewfinder.
- Improved and faster focusing, again great for sports shooting.
- Larger size, important to folks like me with large hands.

The above is a short list of the things I remember off the top of my head and honestly none of them alone is a reson to upgrade. For me it was the improved ISO performance and going to ISO 3200. There are other benefits as well, but these were the reason I bought the 40D.

Ultimately, you will have to make the choice. I recommend identifying what you will be shooting with the camera and then look at cameras that give you the features you need to do that and then some, as it is always nice to have room for growth. If you are shooting candid shots of the family during the holidays the XTi is a great option and given its small profile it is very easy to carry on vacation and the such.

I see you mentioned the 5D and that is a fantastic camera, perhaps I will own one one day. It shines in low light, has colors that sparkle, etc. but again, I would not buy it unless you knew it fit your need. If you shot a lot of weddings, the 5D would be the one for you, if you shoot sports I would get a 40D over a 5D any day.

Again, it comes down to buying the right camera for you. You have a tough decision ahead, best of luck.

The first thing you need to look at is budget. Sure, I'd love a 5D, but the budget simply is not there. There is no use in looking at a 5D if you plan to have a grand or two to spend on the hobby as that won't even buy the camera, much less the glass. And the 5D (all full frame sensor cameras for that matter) require more monetary investment in lenses as cheaper lenses really show their weaknesses on the bigger sensors, and you don't have the option of getting the nice cheaper lenses now coming out for 1.6 only like the Tamron 17-50 or Sigma 18-50. Also, Telephoto lenses are very pricey, and with no crop factor, if you want longer lenses you need to buy the really expensive, really long lenses on a 5D. Oh, and the 5D has no built-in flash, so if you don't want to carry an external flash, getting low-light shots may be really tough (although it is the best low-light camera out there)

After the money, you need to look at what you plan to shoot, and where and how you will shoot it. Gonna go birding outdoors? You may need the more rugged body of the 40D. Shooting sports? You will definately need the extra frames per second and larger buffer of the 40D. Want something small and light so you don't stick out? XTi is about as small as they come. Either of those two will make great pictures.

The way I see it, in a couple of years you are going to be replacing your camera body anyway (more than likely). Unless you have very specific needs, or plan to have very specific needs in the very near future, I'd spend as little as I could on the body while still getting all the functionality I need. If that means an XTi, then you have some more money for lenses. If it means spending a bit more for the 40D, so be it. As a true beginner, unless money means nothing, I'd stick with one of those two.

I think selecting a dSLR camera body is ones personal choice all depending on how much you want or have to spend and what you'll be doing with it.
Selecting the best lenses you can afford is what will give you the best results.
I've had my eye on a 1Ds MKII for years yet for me to put that kind of money into a camera would be completely foolish. Spending $1400+ on a lens used on my old 10D was a very wise decision because no matter which body I upgrade to at some point in the future, that lens will give best results as soon as I put it on any camera.

Don't underestimate the quality from 'outdated' or older model cameras. My 10D still shoots quality photos and will still get plenty of use even though I now also have a 5D. Different uses but each has their use.

Go with what you can afford but put the priority on the glass, IMHO! Glass that you can still probably use long after that first body has worn itself into the ground.

If I got a XTI or 40D (upgrading from my 10D/XT set-up) I would always wonder what I was missing in a 5D if I didn't at least try one. But that's just me...I'm thinking of renting or borrowing a 5D to see what's to like in addition to the picture-window viewfinder. If I did get the 5D I'd definitely keep the 10D for when I want to use that on board flash. If I get the 40D I might not keep the 10D (further reducing the 40D price by $300 of so) as the XT is a fair enough backup...
My recommendation is to get the XTI if you don't mind the size...or the XT if you do (at CC for $500 or so)...and keep it as travelling backup if you/when you decide you want to upgrade...I'd also recommend the 24-85mm Canon (the next step up lens grade) instead of the 18-55mm as the former is MUCH sharper...and you can pick up the latter (for the wider angle shots if you decide you need it) for half the price of new (I just happen to have one on the sell forum for $50, heh, heh..)

Lots of good advice here, and I mean lots. My advice, analyze your needs thoroughly, then buy the best camera and lens within you budget. I always recommend biasing your purchases toward glass (lenses), but when you're first starting out, the camera body forms the base of your new system, so you want to choose wisely.

Mark

I highly recommend holding the various bodies and trying them in the store to see which feels right in your hand. Having said that, if I were you I'd get a 40D with a better than kit starter lens - either Sigma 17-70 or Canon 17-85IS.

Well, I have to say that your answers here really made me happy to have asked the question (i was nervous that I would get flamed for yet another newbie question). I thank all of you for your opinions and i can tell you that I have searchjed these forums and others for similar questions. All of them had mixed messages (hence the title and the question). I will have to do some soul searching (and bank account management) to address all the counter questions posed here.

Thank you again.

No matter what you buy, nothing will have a bigger impact on your photos than learning about photography itself. If you buy a 5D with 5 grand worth of L grade lenses and a 580ex flash, but put the camera on full auto and just point and shoot, your pics might be a bit sharper than what you are used to, but not much better. While you are figuring out which setup to get, you should start really learning about just how a camera takes pictures if you haven't done so already. a great starter site is the Canon tutorial:

http://web.canon.jp/im​aging/enjoydslr/index.​html

This site teaches all the basics, and uses Canon's lingo for it. You don't need to have a camera to go through it as it has tons of pictures and examples, but with your s3is, you can actually try some stuff out as you go since it has manual mode.

Invest in the XTi, buy the glass and flash... Camera bodies depreciate pretty quickly but lenses will hold their value... If you decide you really have a passion for it, you can always upgrade your body... If money is not an issue, I'd say go for the 5D (unless you plan to shoot alot of action shots where fps is critical than consider a 30D or 40D)...