For those who have been shooting a while

This could be extremely subjective but if you were to start over again given the line of cameras offered today (including the XSi), and money was limited, what camera would you buy?

To further clarify, would you just buy a cheaper camera or would you haved saved up a little longer and got something better?

what i am trying to get at is some people seem to upgrade just a few months after buying a new camera to another camera. I know some people just have to have something better but for most that really isnt neccessary or wise. But for others it might have been necessary and it could have saved some money in the long run if they patiently saved up some more money and just got the better body to begin with. So im interested in hearing the experiences of those who have shot for a while. How would you do it again?

1Dmk3. Best all round camera. 40D if money was an issue.
I would buy the best I could afford. To much money lost on cheap glass.

I brought a 5D just after it had been released now its worth half of what I paid. However the use and results have been worth it. I got a 1Dmk2 secondhand last yr. Cost me half of what the guy paid for it brand new. Cost me less than my 5D.

Money should be invested in glass not in the bodies. My 300F2.8 is worth more than my 2 bodys togather. Wonder what will still be with me in 10yrs

Yes I would love a 1DSmk3 can I justify the cost .......No. Love a 600F4 could I justify the cost hell yes

I mostly agree with weka, though, I have to say that you will find some frustrating limitations with some of the cheaper bodies the longer you shoot with them. The biggest problem I had with my Xt was low light focusing. The body itself has a fairly poor AF system compared to some of the other bodies. Even if you decide to use MF, the viewfinder is not very bright, so even that becomes difficult. But, always buy good glass. I've just purchased my first L lens, but I've owned some really crappy glass in the past, and nothing is more frustrating.

It really depends what you are going to shoot. If I was going to shoot landscape only, then I would focus manually, so a camera like the xt line would be fine. If I had a little more money, then a new or used 5d, but again this would be for landscape or portrait, not for action because the AF is slow. If you shoot indoors or sports and need autofocus and I was on a budget, I would get a used mk2.

Now if it were me and I had to start all over. I would save and buy the Mk3 because I do a lot of sports. My first lens would be 70-200 2.8 IS. I think in most cases, the glass is more important than the camera except in sports, action, indoor shooting where fast autofocus is reqired, then the camera is important.

If I had to start again today and money was limited?

I'd basically keep exactly what I'm shooting with at the moment. Couldn't be happier with the 5D and the prices right now are an absolute steal.

Some of these posts are pretty interesting in that alot of you would wait and get get semi-pro to pro models. And I tried to leave lenses out of this equation as it seems that you should always buy the best you can afford.

well for me the last 2&half years i been useing a 350d, witch i was happy with till i started photographing horses ie crosscountry and jumping so i just bought a 40d as its faster then the 5d .... so no not buying the most exspencive is good when it comes to bodys you buy what you need , and no i didnt have enoth for a 1dmk3s lol

as said the only thing to but the best of is glass

Having built a stable of three A1 bodies and a goodly selection of FD lens, flashes and drives, I held off until last year when I finally cracked, reckoning that digital had finally - almost - grown up. I sat down, analysed my needs, studied the market, then quit smoking at 61 to save 16 months for a 5D / 24-105 L / EX430 / 50mm 1.4. That's a start. Add a 200mm 2.8 L and a 1.4x Canon, and I'm happy as the proverbial swine in the fecal. It's better than I expected, and the package has raised my game. I love it.

this is what i think on lens- buy nice or buy twice,

Today i have the XTI. If i had to start all over again i would buy a 30d and not the 40d. With the money left over i would buy a good lens,battery grip, and a new canon flash.
The XTi is a good camera but today i just need more camera.

considering that when i got my first camera i didn't even know the basics, i'de still have gotten a rebel first. great learning camera, and when you max out the capabilities of the camera (for sports and other fast events in my case), then you'de go for something better (i decided on mkiii)

If I had the knowledge I had now instead of back then I think I would've gotten myself a 20D body and grip; I love my 350D, but it's so small! The AF sometimes has real difficulty in low-light, too, but I suppose back then I didn't think that far ahead. The glass I started off with (kit lens and Sigma 55-200) was perfect to begin with.

Either way, it's been a learning experience!

1D Mk.II

most probably a 40D - i need something not too basic (have outgrown them) yet not too high-end if funds do not permit. but between settling for a prosumer and getting a proper DSLR, i would certainly rather have a basic DSLR than an advanced compact/bridge cam. the body will always be the first initial investment, when it comes to lenses, that will entail saving up to get what i really want. but i'd rather settle for a cheap good prime than a cheap bad zoom.

I have been shooting for almost a year with my XTI and I have just now gotten really proficient with it. I now shoot in full manual almost 100% of the time and can get great exposures consistantly.

I'd say I have shot at the least 15000 frames with my XTI so far and climbing. I have to admit that now I would like to upgrade to a 40D, but if I went back to do it again I think I would still start with an XTI or probably now the XSI.

Even when I do upgrade I will carry my XTI on my motorsports adventures. It's small enough to fit in the tank bag. I just can't deal with a P&S anymore.