Canon EOS 400D- is it good?

[James11]

Why is it that everything I get into is so expensive. They should have packaged deals, spend so much money on reef keeping and get a awesome slr package. In my dreams right....I guess thats where its all going to stay, in my dreams.

 

[Phyxius]

James11,
The kit lens is not a bad lens to start with. I just bought the XTi kit and love it and my 13yr old son has taken some awesome pics with it. I just ordered a 50 mm 1/4 lens to try on it for some macro shots. The step into SLR is a big one but play with the camera a bunch and read the books and it all makes sense after awhile. I have probably shot 500 pics just playing with another setting but of the same subject just to see how it affects the picture. Its my first SLR but I`m glad I took the jump.

Here are a few pics my 13 yr old took the day I got it. He misted the flowers with water and then took the pic with the kit lens. It does a good job in good light but under low light it does need supplemental lighting. School issued him a 30D to take yearbook pictures with after seeing some of his home shots

 

[10" Red Devil]

These guys have the absolute best legitimate price on camera gear of any online dealers I have come across. They have excellent customer service to boot!

$593.00 for the XTI body only

http://www.beachcamera.com/shop/product.aspx?sku=CNDRXTIB

 

[bureau13]

That's a great price.

For macro photography, I got the Canon EF-S 60mm macro, and while its a quality lens, I can't do what Blazer did up top with his 150mm Sigma. I want that lens! The key there is that the coral was NOT right up against the glass. I can't get macro shots like that unless I get the lens much closer to the coral.

jds

 

[bubbletip2]

I had the original Rebel XTand upgraded to the XTi. I have to say that my original XT took cleaner pics. Havign to shoot at ISO 400 to ISO 800 is proof of this . I notice considerable noise luminance and color noise fromthe XTi as opposed to the XT. The 30D is the camera of choice in the lower price range in my opinion. My girlfriend ownsthis camer and I ahve sampled it and it is fantastic. Performs very well.

I typically shoot my 5D(which is obviously in a different caliber) and use my XTi when I am not worried about quality.

Check these guys out - ask for Pat Norman(tell him Jim from Chicago recommended them adn he will know who that is especially $15000 later) - I have bought all of my cameras and lenses from them and they have all been spot on - also they have great prices...

30D -

http://www.normancamera.com/product-exec/product_id/926/nm/CANON_EOS_30D_DIGITAL_CAMERA_BODY

original XT -

http://www.normancamera.com/product-exec/product_id/778/nm/CANON_EOS_DIGITAL_REBEL_XT_BLACK_BODY

 

[bureau13]

Interesting...I haven't noticed this phenomena but I upgraded from the original Digital Rebel. Has anyone checked out the specs on the cameras? Do they bear this out? If not, maybe there is something wrong with your XTi?

jds

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=10879802#post10879802 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by bubbletip2
I had the original Rebel XTand upgraded to the XTi. I have to say that my original XT took cleaner pics. Havign to shoot at ISO 400 to ISO 800 is proof of this . I notice considerable noise luminance and color noise fromthe XTi as opposed to the XT. The 30D is the camera of choice in the lower price range in my opinion. My girlfriend ownsthis camer and I ahve sampled it and it is fantastic. Performs very well.

I typically shoot my 5D(which is obviously in a different caliber) and use my XTi when I am not worried about quality.

Check these guys out - ask for Pat Norman(tell him Jim from Chicago recommended them adn he will know who that is especially $15000 later) - I have bought all of my cameras and lenses from them and they have all been spot on - also they have great prices...

30D -

http://www.normancamera.com/product-exec/product_id/926/nm/CANON_EOS_30D_DIGITAL_CAMERA_BODY

original XT -

http://www.normancamera.com/product-exec/product_id/778/nm/CANON_EOS_DIGITAL_REBEL_XT_BLACK_BODY

 

[bubbletip2]

Doubtful their is somehting wrong with the camera - and these are my observations after hundreds of hours of editing RAW files from both the XTi and XT.

Figure it this way - the XT was 8 megapixels and the XTi is 10 megapixels.

All 10 megapixels fit onto the same size sensor meaning smaller pixels in the same space which in turn results into more noise. Now Canon knew this coming into engineering the camera. They actually implemented new noise reduction algorithyms to alleviate this inherent problem. I woudl say they did a pretty good job, but like I said, the original XT does much better at ISO 800. At ISO 400 their is less of a difference. It was my biggest worry when purchasing it and after reading enough reviews of people complementing Canon on fitting these pixels into their sensor, I took the plunge.

Overall their are other pluses to the XTi of course including the most importan to me whihc is 9 point auto focus, however it is no where near the same league as the 30D or the 5D in terms of ISO 800 noise reduction. Sorry but it is the truth.

 

[bureau13]

I've never used the 30D or 5D so I can't compare...I just hadn't noticed a problem but I usually shoot at ISO 400, so that may be why.

jds