Any real benefit from XT vs XTi

[Brotage]

I looked through dpreview and compared them side by side and this is the only stuff I found

- .2 fps better
- and 3.1 more MP
- Bigger LCD and twice the LCD pixels...

I really don't think this justifies the extra 150$ for the XTi. Is there something im missing or are these things really that important? Ill be shooting a lot of skateboarding but I don't really think .2 fps will do much...

 

[photogincollege]

honestly, you would never notice the difference in pictures. Id say save your money, the .2 fps would barely do anything if anything at all.

 

[JCorwin]

btw.... Amazon has the Rebel XT for $464.

I was saving for the XTi, but am seriously tempted....

 

[Brotage]

honestly, you would never notice the difference in pictures. Id say save your money, the .2 fps would barely do anything if anything at all.

Yeah and come to think of it I could use the extra 150$ on that diamond studded camera bag and a nice chrome spinner lens cap (only kidding)

went and held the XTi at sams club (I don't like people talking to me when I'm thinking about buying something) and really liked it (High-five for pansy hands!), unfortunately no XT, but i Imagine it won't be terribly different

 

[Iron Flatline]

Same camera, a few marketing bells, the bigger LCD is nice, I guess... I don't look at the images on the back of the monitor anyway unless I'm shooting landscape or architecture (or something static) because other shots can't be re-created anyway...

 

[Lapsed]

Are you guys serious? The extra 150 dollars is totally worth it. The rebel xt has been out for over 30 months, its bound to be discontinued soon. Yeah, sure the extra .2 fps or the 2 more mp isnt that much, but the cleaning system for the sensor larger lcd and more features are so worth an extra 150 dollars. I was going to get the xt. but after much research I opted for the xti. if your spending that much money, might as well spend a little more and not have buyers remorse later on. Not everyone will agree with me, but c'mon, it only makes sense.

 

[Alex_B]

Well, my only concern would be over the improved sensor. everything else, including dust removal, is secondary.

I do not know, however, how much improved sensor technology got between those two models since I never shot with any of them.

 

[nossie]

It always amazes me that people think "it's basically the same thing", not just with this camera but from CS2 to CS3, Windows XP to Vista (don't start hi jacking).

The biggest thing about the XTi is that it's 3 years newer. To me this means that they've reviewed the XT for major faults and drawbacks and cleaned them away. The same for the suppliers of their part in the camera. The electronics as newer and we know that 3 years in the electronics industry is a whole generation or even two. It's a bit like taking a camera from 50 years ago and saying well they both take a picture and put it on paper at the end of the day -pffffft! :thumbdown:

In simple terms 10mp equals 25% more resolution. The 3fps can be handy in certain situations and the XTi will fire for a 27 shot burst Vs 14, this suggests that it's got a bigger buffer or/and writing to cards a lot faster and can most likely handle the newer and faster memory cards. Likely to be more to that behind the scenes too.
9 point AF system Vs old 7 point is a little something extra. The bigger screen is a little somthing extra too. And before long you're getting a lot extra I'd say.

I vote XTi.

 

[GwagDesigns]

I agree as well, i used an XT at school for a whole year, and bought myself an XTi in the summer, i find that the XTi can get less noisy shots at higher ISO's than the XT, which would have been a big help at a basket ball game i had to shoot with the XT. the newer screen that eliminates the monochrome screen on the XT is nice. sensor cleaning feature, greater FPS, its all pluses for me when it comes to the XTi, great camera, and im glad i bought it.

I found this little comparison over at the Canon Forums, thought id share...
read the whole thing here http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=247482


XTI---

1) New 10.1 effective Megapixel CMOS sensor (versus 8.0 on the Rebel XT)
>> so we've already determined it's not a big difference

2) New dust reduction system
>> sounds like a good thing to have, does dust affect the life of the camera or just the image quality? (ie. spots on the picture) And how would you clean the dust without this feature?

3) Large 2.5" LCD display (versus 1.8" on the XT)
>> this seems like a nice feature, being able to see things a little more clearly

No more LCD info display (the main LCD is used instead)
>> well this creates room for a bigger LCD, anyone who's experienced both types of info displays, does this make it easier to use?

4) 9-point autofocus system (versus 7-point)
>> this one I don't know anything about

can someone explain what exactly this means, and if 2 more points makes much of a difference?

5) Can now take more shots in a row in burst mode (27 vs 14 JPEG, 10 vs 6 RAW)
>> always been interested in having this feature on a camera, it nearly has double the amount of pictures in a row

6) New Picture Styles feature, first seen on the EOS-5D and 30D
>> I guess this makes it a little more user friendly for someone who doesn't know the best manual settings for landscape, portrait etc

7) Battery life is 10% lower than on the XT
>> I think I read this is due to the larger LCD, 10% doesn't sound like a lot but when actually using it do you notice it more? Also read the battery grip adds more battery life.


----------And a rebuttal------------

I have both the XT and XTi. Bottom line is the XTi is worth the extra money...

1) New 10.1 effective Megapixel CMOS sensor (versus 8.0 on the Rebel XT)

Not a big difference but if printing you gain about an 1 inch on an 8 inch print or so.

2) New dust reduction system

Works fine...doesn’t hurt to have it. One less hassle to deal with.

3) Large 2.5" LCD display (versus 1.8" on the XT)

The number one reason to get the Xti... Super fast image review and camera settings much, much easier and fast to select. Also easier to read menu.

4) 9-point autofocus system (versus 7-point)

Number two reason to get the Xti...I shot sports with the Xti and not the XT so I can’t compare...all I can say is when shooting sports with the Xti and 70-200 f2.8 IS lens, 99% of all images are in focus and scary sharp.

If shooting in low light the Xti would probably be a better than the XT....but my XT does an admiral job.

5) Can now take more shots in a row in burst mode (27 vs 14 JPEG, 10 vs 6 RAW)

Every little bit helps!

7) Battery life is 10% lower than on the XT

It’s really not an issue. The Xti’s LCD will suck the life out of the batteries fairly quickly...but I set mine to off and can shoot all day on one battery.

 

[aphelion]

I own an XT, my brother the XTi. For most shooters, the quality of the shots won't vary much, but the camera is just an all-around better machine. The improved sensor, the better autofocus system, the dust cleaning system, the dust mapping software (one of the toolkit add-ons IIRC), and new image adjustments tools to play with in the menu make for a nice experience. I find that the larger LCD makes a much bigger difference in person than it might sound like if you were just reading the dimensions on a page.

Although I don't recommend it, if you decide you want to have the camera take live black & white shots, my impression is that the XTi does a much better job doing this natively than the XT does.

The only practical downside I've experienced with the XTi is the shorter battery life. Get yourself an add-on battery grip and add a second battery and it'll last forever.