Looking to upgrade my XTi

T

Tim Wardlaw

Limp Gawd
Joined
May 13, 2002
Messages
360
Hello all!

Well it looks as though I have caught a case of the shutter bug again and I am trying desperately to convince myself that I don't need to spend any more money on gear, but who am I kidding, right?

Anyway, what it comes down to is this... I don't know if I should fork out the cash for a new lens, or buy a new body and use the 2 lens's I have for now and buy a new lens at some later time...


So what I would like to know is what do you think is better to do... Should I upgrade my body from an XTi to a 40D or buy a Canon 70-200mm f/2.8L and keep my XTi?

I'm thinking that I should just upgrade my body since the kit lens isn't that bad and I have a EF 75 - 300 which works well for my needs. I do really want to get the 70 - 200, but I think that the features that I want (faster AF, faster fps for sports and action shots) will come more with the body then the lens.

The noise of the XTi is starting to catch my attention more now than it did before, and the painfully slow auto focus is costing me some shots when speed is of the essence. So maybe as I have been writing this I have already made up my mind that I will buy the 40D and not the lens for now, but I would still appreciate your input as I am sure this has been a problem for some of you as well.

Thanks a lot to all who reply, your input is greatly appreciated!
~Tim
 
You are going to be disappointed if you go to the 40D from the XTi with those desires IMO. The XTi internals are very similar to the 40D and the IQ can really be the same. Yes the 40D is slightly better, and miles better in the usability with the control layout and body design, but the results it can make can be rivaled easily by the XTi in the IQ department.

I would bet your AF speed issues are coming from the lenses you are using, the 75-300s are all super slow to focus and generally not the greatest. The kit lens is also fairly slow to focus. The 70-200s on the other hand have lightning fast AF as do many of the better lenses out there. The 40D AF is better than the XTis, but with those slow lenses you will not see much of a difference as you will be limited by the lens focus speed. You will see an improvement on the XTi from a faster focusing lens like the 70-200. I have a 30D which has pretty much the same AF as the XTi and it is very fast with a good lens.

Personally I would say go to a local camera store and see the difference in AF with the XTi w/70-200. It should be a major improvement on what you are used to. I just think you would not gain that much from going to the 40D for the reasons you listed, the main reasons IMO to switch would be the better body layout, liveview, etc....things that do not necessarily directly impact the IQ (though tools that can let you obtain closer to the potential IQ if you want them).
 
Last edited:
With those two lenses, there's no point in buying a 40D if you already have an XTi. The 18-55mm kit lens and the 75-300mm are your weak links, not the body. Spend the $1k you would have spent on the new body instead on a fast normal zoom like the Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 (Build is plasticky, buy if you're happy with the kit lens, it'll be better than that) or the Tokina 16-50mm f/2.8 and a fast telephoto zoom like the Canon 70-200mm f/4L.
 
skyline889 said:
With those two lenses, there's no point in buying a 40D if you already have an XTi. The 18-55mm kit lens and the 75-300mm are your weak links, not the body. Spend the $1k you would have spent on the new body instead on a fast normal zoom like the Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 (Build is plasticky, buy if you're happy with the kit lens, it'll be better than that) or the Tokina 16-50mm f/2.8 and a fast telephoto zoom like the Canon 70-200mm f/4L.
Click to expand...

I agree with ya, but that Tamron and Tokina are not speed demons in AF either...though most likely better than the kit lens.
 
The Tamron isn't lightning quick to focus (It is however, much cheaper than the Tokina and the similarly priced 17-40mm f/4L) however it focuses much faster than the kit lens. The Tokina on the other hand focuses very quickly, a handful of people have reported accuracy issues in terms of AF since the lens uses the older style screw AF instead of USM however the majority of owners have not.

I assume since the OP is shooting mostly sports, the telephoto will get the most use so I didn't want to recommend an $800-1000+ lens like the 17-40mm f/4L or the 16-35mm f/2.8L. I think the Tamron (The Tokina if he has money left over) and the Canon would be a good purchase for the OP but that's just me.
 
Upgrade your lens. The noise out of the 40D won't be a whole lot better than the XTi, and the 75-300 is a dog. The 70-200 will focus faster and will give you two stops at the long end, if you're shooting sports it'll be a great upgrade.
 
We can all speculate on what you should do but we really need to understand what you are trying to do with the gear that requires such a quick AF.. I am assuming either kids or some sort of sporting event. I agree with everyone else that your main problems lie in the lenses you are currently using, this was the reason why I went with a cheaper, older body and then picked my lenses that I wanted.

While the 70-200 f/4L is a great lens, if you plan on using it in low light situations you will have a hard time. The Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 (and for that matter Sigma 18-50 MACRO f/2.8) are both great lenses that have great IQ but at somewhat a cost of AF speed, however no where near are slow as your kit. I have found that while Tamrons are good lenses and produce a bit better IQ than Sigma, they also seem to suffer from a case of the "blahs" meaning their color rendition is a bit dull. But the Sigmas are much better. I was able to search my local craigslist and found a year old Tokina 19-35 (for wide stuff) that is a bit slow in low light but produces some AMAZING colors that just have that extra pop.

As I said before though, we really need to know what you are doing and plan to do with these items before we can make any good suggestions. Also, if you havent already, start skulking around the POTN forums (www.photography-on-the.net) and start learning, hell you might even be able to pick up a good deal on there!
 
You need a lens and a body if you want to do sports. What kind of sports are you interested in?

I think you could do well with 40D + 85 1.8 or 200 2.8 if you know your distances from subject.
 
70-200mm f/2.8L
Click to expand...

Buy that. No need to upgrade your body. Lots of folks still using a 300 or 350d - you don't gain much changing bodies. This lens is orders of magnitude better, sharper, faster, and nicer than the kit lens.

The kit lens really is that bad.
 
Went from the XTi to a barely used 5D, and would never ever ever ever go back to a Rebel series. Don't waste your time on a 40D, as has been said, it is far too similar to the XTi to warrant that particular upgrade. You're better off with glass for now.
 
JohnnyNapalm said:
Went from the XTi to a barely used 5D, and would never ever ever ever go back to a Rebel series. Don't waste your time on a 40D, as has been said, it is far too similar to the XTi to warrant that particular upgrade. You're better off with glass for now.
Click to expand...

This man speaks the truth :cool::D:p
 
gregnash said:
I have found that while Tamrons are good lenses and produce a bit better IQ than Sigma, they also seem to suffer from a case of the "blahs" meaning their color rendition is a bit dull.
Click to expand...
I agreed with pretty much everything you said up to this point. My Tammy 28-75mm f/2.8 is one of the best lenses I own in terms, including saturation and pop.

Plus, post-processing is where you get the majority of that effect with most non-L lenses anyways.

Very minimal processing on this ISO-1600 shot with the Tammy:
513787270_SZViM-M-2.jpg
 
I have a Rebel XTi, but I am currently waiting for the D60 to come out this fall. It's supposed to have video capability and a 15mp image sensor improved over the 50D.

I am really itching to try video with my new favorite lens the 17-55 f2.8!
 
Tim Wardlaw said:
Hello all!
So what I would like to know is what do you think is better to do... Should I upgrade my body from an XTi to a 40D or buy a Canon 70-200mm f/2.8L and keep my XTi?

I'm thinking that I should just upgrade my body since the kit lens isn't that bad and I have a EF 75 - 300 which works well for my needs. I do really want to get the 70 - 200, but I think that the features that I want (faster AF, faster fps for sports and action shots) will come more with the body then the lens.
Click to expand...

The noise issue is something that I only find myself noticing as the light starts to drop off.

DEFINITELY get a better lens over getting a new body! I have a 17-85mm IS lens that I have been using for the last two almost three years and I live it to death. I got myself a 17-55 f2.8 two months ago and I was AMAZED at the difference it made in the quality of the shots I was getting. It is a far cry from my 75-300mm and my 17-85.

I know the XTi is getting long in the tooth, but it is a great camera and it does have the cross high accuracy focus sensor in the center AF point that allows for high speed high precisions AF when used with a F2.8 lens. Being able to use this feature has breathed new life into my rig!

The 70-200is f2.8 is an awesome lens that I have had a chance to use on a dew occasions but it is pricey. It is definitely the next lens I will buy. (After I get a 60, but before if I start doing more outdoor long range stuff)
 
D60 is Nikon. Did you mean 60D?

Also, keep in mind the 70-200mm f/2.8 is not as sharp as the f/4 version.
 
JohnnyNapalm said:
Also, keep in mind the 70-200mm f/2.8 is not as sharp as the f/4 version.
Click to expand...

Near as I can tell the sharpness of the 2.8 lens come right back if you step it down to f4. Just gives you more flexibility. (At a much higher price)
 
I have the 40D and my g/f has the XTi. She was saying that my camera takes better shots. There's only 1 reason why my camera takes better shots and that's the 14bit photos instead of the 12bit. So I have a larger color range. Other then that, the XTi can take pretty much the exact same shot as the 40D (Other then high speed situations when you need 3200 ISO). In doing this, I popped on my lens, and my flash, and set her camera to the same settings as mine. I took the exact same shot as the one I did on my camera and compared them. She was shocked to see that they were identical. You will see your greatest improvements with newer and better glass then newer bodies unless it's a couple generations newer. That 70-200 2.8L is a tremendous lens. It's one of the best lenses for canons available. Or you could get the Sigma version ($659) which is very close in performance to the Canon version, and get a used 40D for $699 or something like that.
 
She was saying that my camera takes better shots.
Click to expand...

The camera doesn't take the pictures. The photographer does this with a tool known as a camera.

She was shocked to see that they were identical.
Click to expand...

Nice! You guys just caught the bug and realized how much money you are going to spend soon :)

You will see your greatest improvements with newer and better glass then newer bodies unless it's a couple generations newer. That 70-200 2.8L is a tremendous lens.
Click to expand...

Indeed. We rented one for a zoo trip not that long ago - its the non-IS version - a classic, and wow!

http://www.flickr.com/photos/nirvanaqween/3436505833/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/nirvanaqween/3394023346/

The noise of the XTi is starting to catch my attention more now than it did before, and the painfully slow auto focus is costing me some shots when speed is of the essence.
Click to expand...

With a faster lens - such as the 70-200l f/2.8 the autofocus is incredible and as its at least a stop faster, you can go down at least another stop in ISO.
 
An investment a great lense will greatly outlast a digital camera. I too recommend one of Canons 70-200mm L lenses. As far as upgrading cameras, the xti is great entry level camera and in order to really step up I recommend looking into a 5d or above. If you’re looking for speed and good low light capabilities. Look into Nikons line up such as the d300. It’s a whole new investment in lenses but before you start spending thousands on lenses make sure to consider all your options.
 
There is of course a danger in getting a higher end camera, and that's the fact that you will look down on anything less from that day forward. I can't describe how much I love using the 5D at ISO 1600 at f1/.8. It's like a dream.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top