help picking a camera!

[romeo26]

i need help picking out a camera, its ither xt,xti, or d40x! iam leaning towards the xti BUT i keep on hearing about underexposure. what is underexposure?(in non-photo oriented language) is it that bad?

my experence: only p&s, but want to get better photos.

reasons why i picked these three:
xt: price, light, duble screen, and first camera i was interested in!
xti: so i wont have to upgrade in a while, i like the 9 point focus, and the data for dust(might be usefull)!
d40x: 10mpx, more for beginners, and one friend keeps on telling me that it has the d80 sensor in it (i assume thats good)!

ive read the reviews on camera labs and they all seem like good choices! i also went into a local bestbuy and held all the cameras and cant really decide! i also have read half of the dpreviews(i get lost in all the terms).

and should i get the kit or body only?

ps. the only thing scaring me about getting the xti is all the underexposure talk, i dont know how to use anyphoto editor softwere, but iam very determined to learn how to use all that stuff.

can some one post a picture of what underexposure is and it corrected rite next to each other? thanks!

[euroshark]

Underexposure means that images will come out too dark, they may be overly noisy, and you can lose quality that p-shop won't be able to bring back.

I'd get the xti, I've read it's like the best bang for the buck. I've head that the d40 just doesn't have enough of the features of the d50 and d70 to make it worth the small amount you'd save.

[Rachel B]

I use a canon S3is I went from a compact point and shoot to this one its not a DSLR but tons of people recomended it, I had been looking for something a bit more sophisticated that gave me more options, you can still get extra lenses, and its fun to play with. next year once I mastered the s3is and all the technical terms I will hopefully be getting a DLSR

[BDSax]

whats a reasonable DC to shoot motion shots.

[Rachel B]

I like the continuous shoot mode on mine (metioned above) and I am sure it has some other good functions too, just not figured them all out yet :)

[lucky7]

i have an XTi. all i have is the kit lense, once you get familiar with it, its really easy to use IMO. i just posted some pics i took with it last weekend.

http://www.r3vlimited.com/board/showthread.php?t=88913

[CorvallisBMW]

I just ordered my XTi! It's by far the best camera for the price. In fact it has so many features, it's hardly worth upgrading to a Nikon D80 or Canon 30D. I have been researching this for the past 3 or 4 weeks, reading the forums, talking to a lot of photographers and even calling up the professors at the art dept at Oregon State U. The 18-55mm lense is pretty crappy, it's really the achilles heal of the package. Look in to the Canon 17-85mm IS lense. it's more expensive (about $500) but it's one of the best lenses for Canon DLSRs period. There is also a fairly good Sigma 18-200mm lense for about $350, if you don't want to have to switch lenses often; but it does not have IS. I would not worry about the underexposure, I have never heard of that being a real problem, it seemed like it had more to do with poor lenses and photographer skill. It's a great camera, I can't wait to get mine!!!

[Kristuphir]

I just ordered my XTi! It's by far the best camera for the price. In fact it has so many features, it's hardly worth upgrading to a Nikon D80 or Canon 30D. I have been researching this for the past 3 or 4 weeks, reading the forums, talking to a lot of photographers and even calling up the professors at the art dept at Oregon State U. The 18-55mm lense is pretty crappy, it's really the achilles heal of the package. Look in to the Canon 17-85mm IS lense. it's more expensive (about $500) but it's one of the best lenses for Canon DLSRs period. There is also a fairly good Sigma 18-200mm lense for about $350, if you don't want to have to switch lenses often; but it does not have IS. I would not worry about the underexposure, I have never heard of that being a real problem, it seemed like it had more to do with poor lenses and photographer skill. It's a great camera, I can't wait to get mine!!!

x1. I'd go Canon with this one (well, I'd go Canon with anything). Don't bother with the kit - as state above, shell out for something a little higher quality, it'll keep you happy well after you learn how to use the thing.

Go to fredmiranda.com to learn more than you ever wanted to, and see some badass photography as well.

[Digitalwave]

www.photography-on-the.net is much more user friendly and usefull than FredMiranda.

My honest advice is that if you don't know what underexposure is, you don't need a DSLR. Even if you are willing to learn and progress, you shouldn't need a DSLR for a long time if you are a complete beginner to photography.

my experence: only p&s, but want to get better photos.

You've probably heard it before, but its the photographer, not the camera that makes better photos. You can do some awesome stuff with point and shoots, and you won't see any visual difference unless you are doing prints above 8x10 on a regular basis. In fact, most point and shoot photos look better straight off the camera than a DSLR because DSLR photos NEED post processing to make them look good (sharpening, color correction, etc.) and point and shoots do that in-camera.

[lucky7]

^ that is very true. going from an old 2.1mp sony mavica, to an XTi, i was shocked how shoddy my pics were at first. then i got photoshop elements. its pretty bare bones, but it REALLY helped me bring my photos to life.

[Kristuphir]

yeah, T.J. brings up a good point. The only real reason to go with a DSLR at all is if you're seriously planning on really LEARNING photography and post-processing, like "taking a class or three" learning. Otherwise, chances are good you'll never get at all a DSLR has to offer. That said, if you DO plan on going that far....go Canon. :)

[romeo26]

yah i know post processing has to be done! i fully understand what underexposure is now. the thing about my point and shoot is it only has iso 400 and even that has so much noise that the pic is unusable. than the lower iso has such a long shutter speed that i need to allways use a tripod! but my mind has been made up iam getting the xti! i dont like the menu system of the d40x (you have to jump through hoops to chang iso and stuff). iam getting the kit for 754 shiped to my door (two day air) when my pay check comes in! iam also going to get the 50mm f1.8 lens (its only 80$).

also for the minor post processing stuff Lightroom can do it i think! have anyone of you guys used it? i also have noise ninja!

[Kristuphir]

That little 50 is a great little lens for the money - sharp, fast, and a cheap introduction to shooting with primes. Noise Ninja's pretty great too, for the most part. Dunno anything about Lightroom...I've been using Photoshop for what, almost 15 years now.

[CorvallisBMW]

iam also going to get the 50mm f1.8 lens (its only 80$).

I've never seen that lense, but it seems perfect for macro work. Do you have a link for it?

[Kristuphir]

http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/controller?act=ModelInfoAct&fcategoryid=152&modelid=7306