Nikon D40x vs Canon XTi

[leopardforest]

I currently taking a B&W film photography class and I am really enjoying it, but when it is over I will no longer have access to a darkroom. So I am looking for a DSLR. The main two that I am torn between is the Canon XTi and Nikon D40x. I am also considering the Canon XT and Nikon D40 but considering both the Canon and Nikon have have about the same jump in performance for the XTi vs XT and same for Nikon I am assuming the only difference is in resolution and few other features.

Here is what I know so far:
Canon: They seem to have a larger selection of lenses. The XT and XTi offer the self cleaning sensor. They are a well trusted name and popular.

Nikon: For some reason it seems a little more appealing to the eye to me. The Nikon seems to have more built in functions.

But as far I can tell the two cameras the D40x vs XTi and D40 vs XT seem to be the same camera so I am having a hard time deciding. So please help me out with your opinions!!

Thanks!!

P.S. Is the iso on a film the same as digital?

 

[Garbz]

Not quite. At this low end of the spectrum the XT/i will out perform the D40/x. They are quite staggered meaning the D80 will out perform the 350D/400D too.

The D40/x is a good little beginners camera. I just have trouble recomending it because of a lack of autofocus motor. This means it can not use the vast majority of AF Nikkor lenses out there and are limited to newer and more expensive AF-S lenses only. This will change at some point and more AF-S lenses will be released but currently there are some very basic important lenses missing from the lineup like some fast primes (50mm f/1.4, or 38mm f/1.8)

ISO is the same, and so is all light readings and conversion and unfortunately noise.

Ignore the "self cleaning sensor" it is a marketing ploy which rarely works. There are plenty of products to clean sensors.

Have you considered other cameras like the Pentax K10D, the Sony Alpha, or the Olympus E-410? They are also reasonably popular.

 

[leopardforest]

Thank you for the reply. So this is my next question: Is either the Canon or the Nikon worth the extra $200 for the higher resolution and the lower iso (100 vs 200 I do like to do night photos)? I am a beginner photographer and will not be making poster size photos, so I am wondering if i should just settle for the xt or d40 or something similar?

 

[Don Simon]

Is it worth paying $200 just for higher resolution? I would say no. Especially in the case of the D40x - the D40 has fairly cut-down features and the D40x is simply a D40 with more pixels stuffed in. If you were going to spend the extra I would stretch that bit further and go for a D80 instead - or save your money and get a D40, D50, D70. With Canon the XT or XTi are both good, and like Garbz said there are other alternatives too... but whatever brand you go for, remember that the lens (or rather lenses) is all-important. And saving $200 on a camera body means you have another $200 to spend on lenses. And the camera body may depreciate in value at a fairly alarming rate. The lenses won't.