Canon 400D Digital Rebel XTi SLR Review Released

ShaolinTiger posted this at 9:47 pm on Wednesday, September 6, 2006 —

Camera Labs has been extremely quick in getting out the first look Canon 400D (Rebel XTi) review out.

Canon 400d

Image from Camera Labs

It looks like a decent upgrade from the 350D although surprisingly the 350D seems to perform better in some areas, I don’t think it’s worth an upgrade from the 350D but if you are still using a 300D (The first Digital Rebel) I think it’s definatley worth it!

I haven’t gotten my hands on one of these yet but I do plan to and snap some pics.

Ultimately the Canon EOS 400D / Rebel XTi is a great entry-level digital SLR which improves on its predecessor in many respects. It has higher resolution without compromising noise levels, a wide variety of anti-dust features, a bigger screen which doubles-up for detailed shooting information, the AF system of its bigger brother and fast overall handling.

The only thing that’s missing is a cheap lens bundle with Image Stabilisation. This will undoubtedly have potential buyers carefully weighing it up against the Sony Alpha A100 which costs much the same, while those looking for a tougher product may be tempted by the Nikon D80.

But this aside, it’s hard to fault the EOS 400D / Rebel XTi. Canon already had a great product with the 350D / XT, but rather than resting on its laurels has upped the ante and delivered a worthy successor. The new 400D / Rebel XTi is a great camera to use, produces excellent image quality and is one of the best budget digital SLRs to date. It may have very tough rivals, but still comes Highly Recommended.

Read the full review here.

It’s a valid point about dust reduction and I did mention I’d love to see Nikon come out with that in their future versions!

Not sure about in body image stabilisation though, I don’t think Nikon or Canon will go down that route with all the money they’ve invested in ‘IS’ and ‘VR’ lenses.

I’m still all for the D80! But next time I buy I’ll be hoping to buy something around D200 level rather than the (slightly above) entry level SLR I’m using now.

Apologies for the posts about products at the moment, but I’m in Dubai now and Flickr is totally banned here so I can’t really upload/post pics till I get back home.

Tags: , , , , , , ,

5,874 views - Filed under: Canon,Equipment

Related Posts:
- Canon EOS 400D – 10.1mp Digital Rebel XTi SLR Camera
- Sony dSLR Alpha A100 Reviews and Discussion vs Nikon D80 and Canon 400D
- New Canon Entry Level dSLR – EOS 500D / Rebel T1i – 15 Megapixels
- Sony Announces New Entry Level dSLR – Alpha A200 – 10 Megapixels
- Canon EOS 7D – High End 18mp APS-C Crop Sensor Camera

13 Comments »

590

Comment by Silencers

September 7, 2006 @ 2:31 pm


Would this mean that the low-pass filter can be removed from the CMOS? Because that would make it more sensitive to IR, and I’m currently in the craze for shooting in IR, lol.

593

Comment by ShaolinTiger

September 7, 2006 @ 3:12 pm


Silencers: Hmm yeah but that’d be permanent I guesss..or at least hard to put back. Better just to use a filter like the screw on Hoya R72 IR filter. Or use a cheap camera and rip the filter off like Albert has :)

601

Comment by Albert Ng

September 9, 2006 @ 1:59 am


Actually, what I’m figuring is that I’d rather have an entry-level dSLR on a nice lens. I don’t need the faster frame rate anyway… although the Canon 5D’s noise is alluring.

A Canon video clip somewhere shows the anti-dust being two clips that hold the low-pass filter in front of the sensor. It looks like you could easily slide out the low-pass filter, gaining IR sensitivity at the cost of anti-dust. I haven’t looked around for external low-pass filters, but I’d rather have an IR camera with a external low-pass to shoot normally, than have a normal camera exposing 250x longer through the R72.

608

Comment by ShaolinTiger

September 10, 2006 @ 2:17 pm


Albert: Yah lenses are for life, bodies come and go, that’s why when you go SLR you go for a system not a camera. The 5D is nice, but I’m not really into full frame yet, I prefer the extra focal length a 1.5x or 1.6x cropped sensor gives. Ah didn’t watch the video, youtube is banned here..Of course the former is preferable, but the latter is often more practical.

616

Comment by Silencers

September 11, 2006 @ 6:10 pm


I agree with bodies coming and going. I’m abit concerned about the mounts though. I think some lenses have mounts specifically only for the Rebel and Digital Rebel mounts and won’t fit on other Canon bodies.

Can anyone confirm this? I don’t own an SLR system yet so I’d like to know these things before I start investing in them.

617

Comment by ShaolinTiger

September 11, 2006 @ 7:14 pm


Silencers: No that’s not true, Canon mounts are universal as are Nikon, the other main contender is the 4/3rds system. Some news lenses are digital only, this means they will fit on old cameras, as they are standard mounts, but the autofocus isn’t backwards compatible. But old lenses fit on new digital bodies, again mostly with manual focus. There is no such thing as a model specific lens, that’d be silly for the manufacturer to limit themselves so much.

626

Comment by Silencers

September 12, 2006 @ 6:00 pm


Oooh, that clears up a lot of things. Thanks!

Comment by help-please

August 14, 2007 @ 10:59 am


would like to know how to see somthing other than the sun with a IR (R72) FILTER, 18-55mm, and an xti.
Are there settings to change to make the CMOS more sensitive so i’ll be able to see somthing other than black

Comment by ShaolinTiger

August 15, 2007 @ 3:25 pm


Help-Please: You need to make a much longer exposure to compensate for the light lost by using the IR filter. Try using M (Manual) mode and experiment with exposures like f/8 at 15 seconds. Reduce or increase shutter speed to adjust exposure.

Comment by Markus

November 14, 2007 @ 8:19 am


On the discussion of IR filters, I have a 400D I use for astronomy and normal use. I’m aware having the internal IR filter removed would improve the astronomy shots greatly but will make normal day shot very red. One option that was mentioned earlier was to put on an external IR filter, my question is, will an external IR filter affect the normal use photo quality due to differences in the specs of the original internal IR filter and the after market external IR filter. Assuming that the internal processing of the 400D had been tuned to its standard hardware (including the original internal filter)?

Thanks.

Comment by scape

April 25, 2008 @ 4:23 am


to keep this post going :)
possibly, but i’d guess that ir wavelengths are the same everywhere, find the exact cut offs and it should be well within reason (though thickness will vary). a professional ir filter will outperform that in camera lens anyways. it’s sad that one has to even do this, it should be an external lens filter :P

Comment by John

January 6, 2012 @ 9:06 am


Hey friend i like your blog well done!

Comment by John

January 6, 2012 @ 9:02 pm


Hey friend i praise your blog well done!

Leave a comment

XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>