its all about feeling.

overall the cameras are the same, if you buy within the same class.

which one do you feel more comfortable with?

do you have any lenses you could use on one of the brand (etc old canon lenses).

which specs match your needs.

you are the one to use the cam, so you should be the one to decide

Well for me,i would chose the Xsi due to cheaper canon glasses.

But tbh, i find live view quite valuable. People who despise it either haven't used it or it seems "noobish" because it acts the same way as a typical p&s with the screen as the viewfinder.

I use the live view function quite often when shooting from my tripod or doing macro work. When the camera is very close to the ground/ in awkward positions.. it's hard to look thru the viewfinder, that's when the live view function kicks in.

Also when doing macro work, i find it alot easier to MF when using live view magnifying the focus point to 10x then adjust the focus ring.

Live view also saves my butt when the view finder is very dark under certain conditions.

Just my 2cents.

thank you thank you!

I'd go Nikon d40. Nikon glass > Canon glass. More expensive for a reason. And in my humble opinion live view is mostly pointless.

I love my XSI, and the live view thing eek was talking about, I def use it when im doing products as it makes it so easy to focus on a small object if you want a certain thing in focus, tho at work I use Nikons.. to me it just goes down to what interface you like the best as their both good

Well, that's a pretty subjective thing, Both have there pluses and minuses. For example, i don't think Nikon has a good alternative to the 70-200 f/4L IS, also primes like 85 f/1.2L etc. I know Nikon has a spectacular 70-200 f/2.8 but Canon is coming out with the new 70-200 f/2.8L MK II.

And tbh, i shoot with viewfinder for like 98% of my shots. But for those other 2%, it's a godsend that live view is there when i do need it.

This post was edited by Eek on Feb 19 2010 08:25pm

Oh please. They all have an equivalent lens. The best thing about Nikon is that you have such a higher lens compatibly. True with the D40 that the AF only works with the newer lenses. BUT you can throw on ANY old nikon mount lens and shoot manually. The starter lens is better quality imo.


AF-S DX VR Zoom-Nikkor 55-200mm f/4-5.6G IF-ED (3.6x) Cheap, and fantastic quality. Larger focal range, but f/5.6 at 200mm.
AF-S NIKKOR 50mm f/1.4G Much better than the Canon nifty fifty.
AF Nikkor 85mm f/1.4D IF

Not to mention Nikon has much better wide angle glass. No question in that.

I won't question Nikon about their wide angle lenses because well.. Canon does blow in that department But the tokina 11-16 is a very solid contender.

Anyway, the Canon 55-250 f/4-5.6 IS (4stop IS) is also cheap and is the poor man's 70-200 f/2.8 yet with excellent optics and highly regarded.

The Canon 50 f/1.4 seems like a better match to the nikkor 50 f/1.4. The Canon is tack sharp, ultrafast focus but isn't as good as the siggy 50 f/1.4 EX DC in bokeh department.

I do admit Canon doesn't have a match for the Nikkor 85 f/1.4, though the Canon 85 f/1.8 is no slouch of a lens, and the f/1.2L is just "jizzzed".

Gah, this sounds like a fanboi argument. >_>

This post was edited by Eek on Feb 19 2010 09:38pm

I actually loved live view when I had my P&S - had no idea DSLR's had no live view (well some of them anyway) when I bought my camera :lol:. I missed it for a while, but honestly I just got used to not having it. It doesn't bother me to not have it now.

This post was edited by chantal7 on Feb 19 2010 10:57pm