Hi,

I've been contemplating buying an SLR for a while now. Been doing the research and have narrowed down my choices to 2 cameras Canon Rebel XTI -OR- Nikon D40X ??

I can't make up my mind.

I pretty much want the best quality picture with out so many complicating features that most likely I'll never use. I also would like to take portraits and landscape outdoor pictures too.

Which one do you recommend??

ok so by far between the XTi and the D40x, the D40x has 10X better image quality,, especially if you buy a kit lense like an 18-55mm, if you buy the XTi your gonna need to buy an expensive lense for good quality photo's,, but they still wont be as good and the D40X's. And you say that you dont want many complications,,, so the D40x will be a perfect choice becasue if you want to get good pictures from the XTi your gonna need to tweak it, meaning that you basically need press a bunch of buttons and change a lot of settings,, and with the D40x you just need to point and shoot

hope this helps

Hi Kuanaco, see if this link is of any help :> http://www.dpnotes.com/canon-eos-4 [...] ikon-d40x/

In a nutshell, the D40x works extremely well with Nikon's new "consumer" (read: cheap) zoom lenses which give extremely high levels of image quality. But it can't autofocus with older lenses, only Nikon AF-S and Sigma's HSM lenses.

The Canon gives you much more choice when it comes to lenses (say, if you want to shoot macros), but its cheaper lenses don't fare as well in terms of image quality.

Hope this helps!

It is obvious from his post above that Waser has no clue what he is talking about -- ABSURDLY laughable statements such as the Nikon D40x having "10x better image quality" demonstrate that he is totally uninformed and has not spent even 1 minute researching the cameras in question.

If you're looking for a camera, as the ill-informed Waser states above, where, "you just need to point and shoot", a DSLR is a waste of money. Purchase instead one of the many high quality pro-sumer point and shoot cameras.

However, if you're wanting to learn and enjoy photography, and not be impeded by the limitations of a non-SLR camera, as I assume is the case from your willingness and interest in researching your future camera purchase, then you're headed in the right direction.

As I am sure you are aware after having researched both cameras, the Nikon D40x is Nikon's direct competition to the Rebel Xti. The D40 was lacking several key features in comparison to the Xti and the Sony Alpha, and the D80 was a significant price jump for an already expensive entry-level DSLR category.

Prior to its release, Nikon's only real competitor to the popular Rebel Xti, based upon features (color depth, ISO settings, CCD sensitivity, price, additional features), was the (at the time) more expensive D80.

First, picture quality on both cameras are both top-notch and nearly identical, with various minor nuances varying between them. One camera may ever-so-slightly outperform the other in one specific shooting scenario, but the other will ever-so-slightly outperform the other in a different shooting scenario. It is impossible to tell them apart even when viewing extremely large print outs. The picture quality is not going to be a deciding factor between the two to be honest.

The Rebel Xti offers the anti-dust shake system, which is also offered by Pentax, and should prove invaluable over time when dust is trying to build up on your camera's "eye", which can ruin shots until cleaned. Many choose to have their cameras professionally cleaned rather than risk damaging the sensitive internals. That is going to affect the long-term cost. The less often your camera needs to be cleaned, the less chance of damage, and the less cost.

The Nikon D40x offers a special HI-1 setting to achieve ISO 3200, for very low-light scenarios. However, the trade-off is extremely high noise levels in the captured image.

The Rebel Xti offers an 11-point auto-focus system, compared to the D40x's 3-points.

The Nikon D40x offers better shutter delay options over the Rebel Xti - both 2, 5, 10 and 20 second shutter delays. The Rebel Xti offers only 10 second delay without a remote (2 second with one of the optional remotes).

A short shutter delay is invaluable when shooting delicate shots where the camera shake caused by the shutter button press can be detected in the image capture (macro, low-light, night photography). The 2 second delay is just long enough to allow the camera to stop shaking after the button press. With the Rebel Xti, the only way to get a 2 second shutter delay is with an optional remote. In my opinion, this is a flaw that Canon needs to remedy. This should be a standard feature on any DSLR, period.

The Nikon D40x does not have the lens motor built into the body -- therefore every lens you buy for it must have a built-in motor if you want it to auto-focus. This means you will only have auto-focus when using the more expensive AF-S and AF-I lens models. This drastically reduces the number of lenses available. You'll have no choice but to manually focus if you choose to use any of the AF, AF-D, AF-G, or AF-N lenses.

BOTTOM-LINE:

As you can see, when it comes down to it, for the most part, there are only minor differences between the two cameras.

My advice to you is to get your hands on both cameras. That's the advise I got when trying to decide on my DSLR. It was good advice I'm passing on.

Go to a camera shop and try them both out. How do they feel in your hand when shooting? This is very important -- you're going to spend lots of time with the camera in your hand, with heavy attachments and lenses on it.

What do you think of their menu system?

Take some test shots, get a feel for each camera.

Which do you prefer?

Do you have any friends that already own a certain brand equipment, who would be willing to loan you lenses, etc.? If so, this can save you both tons of money -- this may weigh heavily on your decision.

Actually, at the higher ISO settings the XTi CMOS sensor holds an advantage over the D80/D40x CCD sensors --- but only if you shoot RAW. The more accurate description (for me) would be: XTi sensor is more efficient than Nikon's. However, D40x/D80 JPEG noise reduction algorithms is more efficient than Canon's. The RAW data accumulated on the XTi CMOS sensor retains a noticeably better detail-to-noise ratio. However, Nikon's in-camera JPEG processor is much more efficient than Canon's. So much so that with in-camera JPEGs, the D40x/D80 images look more pleasing than Canon's. Less detail, but also less noise.

However, for people that *don't* use in-camera JPEGs, the XTi is ahead of Nikon's cameras. Shooting RAW and processing them through a program like NeatImage or Noise Ninja, the XTi images holds up much better. I've seen ACR conversions of D80 and XTi RAW files, and the XTi @ ISO 1600 look only a little worse than D80 @ ISO 800. But this would only matter for people that shoot RAW.

All the "ISO 3200 HI" and "ISO 3200 BOOST" features found in the D40x, D80, D200, 20D, 30D, and even 5D are completely useless. The sensor itself doesn't reach beyond ISO 1600. All the camera is doing is artificially pushing up the brightness of an underexposed ISO 1600 photo by one stop. You can do it yourself in RAW mode with DPP. Only the most recent cameras (D300, D3, 1Dmk3, 1Dsmk3) have "real" ISO 3200. All the other ones are just simulated ISO 3200.[/quotemsg]

XTi doesn't have this problem because they have a mirror lock-up feature not present in the D40x/D80 cameras.

In the XTi, activating the Mirror Lock Up and Self Timer together will give you a 2-second delay. It's not documented, but it's an extremely useful feature.

Canon has recently introduced a pair of budget lenses. The 18-55 IS, which improves upon the old kit lens by adding an aspherical element and image stabilization. There's also the 55-250 IS lens, which has fairly impressive MTF numbers.

If I was advising a newbie starting from scratch, the following would be my suggestions for a great budget kit:

XTi
EF-S 18-55 IS
EF-S 55-250 IS
EF 50 f1.8

D40x
Nikkor 18-200 VR

I would agree with many that you can't go wrong with either the Canon or Nikon. When I started out a number of month ago, I was switching from a fairly extensive Nikon film system, so I'm biased toward Nikon, but I looked hard at both. It's only between Nikon and Canon, IMO, because you're not just buying a camera, but a system and only those two brands offer a large system of equipment that's easy to find.

Like I said, I'm biased, but I went to the camera store and tried a Canon with the basic kit lens 18-55 lens and was so surprised when I couldn't get it sharp. I thought that the lens might just be a bad sample or broken because of so much use in a box store display. I went to another store and the same thing. I thought it might be the diopter settings or my tired old eyes, but the Nikon kit lens was so sharp comparibly. Finally, I went to a local camera store, and the salesman told me that I should consider that Canon 18-55 a throwaway lens. I agree. Nikon is an optics company first. They don't make copying machines or printers. They make glass, and it's good glass. Even their cheapo kit lenses are pretty sharp. I ended up with a Nikon D80 and the kit 18-135 zoom and I'm going to say that it's freaky sharp. This kit is around $1300 USD, though and possibly out of your range.

Canon's L series are excellent lenses too, from what I understand and they have more lenses with image stabalization, which is very good when you don't have a tripod. (Nikon VR = Canon IS image stabalization) I think that in-lens IS like Nikon and Canon is much better than in-camera IS like Olympus and Pentax.

My advise, if it's worth anything, would be to buy the Nikon D40 or D40x and the 18-200 VR zoom. It will do 95% of anything you wish with image stabalization and lots of zoom range. I actually like the little D40 as well or better though it is only 6 megapixels. It has cleaner low level performance and better dynamic range. Unless you blow your images up to huge sizes you won't notice the megapixel hit.

On the Canon side, I'm not as versed, but I do know I wouldn't have that kit 18-55 lens. I'd get the body and buy the lens separate. Unfortunately, Canon doesn't make a lens that compares to Nikon's do-anything 18-200 VR, but they do have some good, high-quality choices. I would advise the 17-85 IS if you can get it in a bundle with the camera. It has a fair amount of distortion at the widest settings but is pretty sharp throughout. It's a nice light-weight walk-around lens.

Just my 2 cents. Good luck.

Gonna stick my oar in here and say go for the D40X AFTER trying them both. any shop worth it's salt will let you try both cameras before buying.

I have a D40X, and have never found a problem with it. I did try Canons it the shop, but the grips tend to be a bit squarer than Nikons, so not quite as comfortable. Nikon definitely has the cheaper lenses, but Canons can use a greater range (for the moment)

Your best option is to try both, and decide which from that.

I own the D40x as well. I was originally going to purchase the XTi, but I am glad I didn't. I couldn't imagine going to any other entry level digital SLR. Simply amazing camera.