XSI or 40D - worth the extra $$

To make this short...I have an opportunity to get both. XSI for $380 or the 40D for $470. I do only landscape, so the FPS don't really matter to me. I have a 300D now so each is going to be a big step up. I don't like the small size of the xsi so I would be quickly adding a grip. I think the 40D is a good size so I probably would just leave it as is. So I guess you can say my XSI purchase would be more like $430 with the grip added. Which puts the xsi just $40 cheaper.

Also on a side note: how much of a difference in real world visual impact is the difference in screen between the xsi or the 40D to the T1i. I know the screen size is the same but resolution is approx 3x more on the t1i...is it that much better?

Thanks!!!

40D for $470? Now that's insane, they usually go for $550-$600 nowadays.

REAL WORLD? You can get the XSI, slap on a GOOD lens, and get just as sharp and high quality images as the 40D or T1i, especially for Landscapes.

Matter of fact, you could do it with the 300d.


That 40D though, I'd scoop that for the price.

I would get the 40D. You might say you only do landscapes but when you do need the better AF and FPS you'll be happy with the 40D.

The T1i's LCD is much superior than the 40D but when you upload them to your computer or print it out it's not going to matter.

The LCD is there to see if you photo is exposed or in focus. Determining the color contrast, etc on the camera's LCD screen is not a great way to see the out come of the photo. You don't want a picture that's great on your camera's LCD screen and not on your computer or print.

Syntaxxor wrote in post #10614663
REAL WORLD? You can get the XSI, slap on a GOOD lens, and get just as sharp and high quality images as the 40D or T1i, especially for Landscapes.

Matter of fact, you could do it with the 300d.


That 40D though, I'd scoop that for the price.

Yeah I know what you are saying regarding the the fact that I can take good pictures with the 300D. I have been for several years and make pretty good extra spending $$$ every month from the sale of my prints. I don't like the fact that it is hard to see with the tiny screen, the RAW buffer rate, and sometimes the lack of MP gets in the way of my cropping. I am thinking I could sell it for $60 or so (it only has 6k clicks) and be into an xsi or this 40D for pretty cheap considering.

I'd go with the 40D for the faster AF and responsive shutter action. I have an XSi and 50D and it is more fun shooting with the 50D. I also used the 40D shortly and it was as good as the 50D.

If you're into using manual mode, the 40D will be easier to work. Also, the top LCD is handy for monitoring or making settings. Picture quality will be very close. If you are accustomed to the small LCD, the 3 inch screen, regardless of resolution, will be a nice step up.

oldvultureface wrote in post #10615019
If you're into using manual mode, the 40D will be easier to work. Also, the top LCD is handy for monitoring or making settings. Picture quality will be very close. If you are accustomed to the small LCD, the 3 inch screen, regardless of resolution, will be a nice step up.

I dont really shoot in full manual to much, AV and TV. I was thinking any kind of a screen that's bigger than my postage stamp sized screen is going to be a +.


Thank you all for your input.

40D because its not built from plastic. That may sound silly, but it feels much more like a camera compared to the xsi (both size and weight). Also I believe the 40D is more usable at high ISO. You would also live the dial controls. Makes life much more easier.