The Canon 450D/XSi is here

[Internaut]

It looks like someone at dpreview is up early today/tomorrow. The Canon 450D is here. Lots of new this and that plus bigger and more pixels than the 400.

http://www.dpreview.com/news/0801/08012404canoneos450dhandson.asp

IMHO, nothing to get excited about but some nice (and some sensible), competitive incremental improvements in there (pretty much in line with everyone else) and IMO nothing to get recent 400D buyers crying into their beer.

[jdryan3]

Interesting. I see it is slightly larger than the 400D. If I remember correctly, weren't both the 350D (XT) and 400 (XTi) both smaller than the original 300D? That makes this one more the Digital Rebel's size then.

SD - not a bad idea for a consumer camera since it is the standard for P&S. I'm not sure 12+megapixels is such a good thing on a sensor this size. But I'm sure that is what the market wants!

[Internaut]

SD - not a bad idea for a consumer camera since it is the standard for P&S. I'm not sure 12+megapixels is such a good thing on a sensor this size. But I'm sure that is what the market wants!

I don't think an extra couple of megapixels will strain Canon's already very good noise management but I'm not sure I see the point of increasing this figure in the first place.

[evoryware]

anyone notice the direct print button also appears to be a white balance button now, not just a separate waste of space button?

[Nikolai]

Nice!
Well, I hope this means we'll be getting a whole new 6D (or 5DMkII) this Fall :-)

[Grainbelt]

Well, the K200D is even more attractive now. :dunno

[Tee Why]

I don't need it, but I think it's nice.
I like the way it looks the most.
I think 12MP is too much for the APS-C sensor, as they now have noise reduction selection and such to deal with the noise.

From what I've seen, looks like the Noise from RAW images of the 10MP CMOS of the 40D is noisier than the 30D or at best similar, but not better.

I'm not sure if noise control that improved that much that they can cram 12MP in there now and get similar noise levels. I guess we'll see when folks test it out.

[jdryan3]

Nice!
Well, I hope this means we'll be getting a whole new 6D (or 5DMkII) this Fall :-)

PMA still isn't until next week. Oh, wait. I already own a 5D :lust

[Glenn NK]

I don't need it, but I think it's nice.
I like the way it looks the most.
I think 12MP is too much for the APS-C sensor, as they now have noise reduction selection and such to deal with the noise.

From what I've seen, looks like the Noise from RAW images of the 10MP CMOS of the 40D is noisier than the 30D or at best similar, but not better.

I'm not sure if noise control that improved that much that they can cram 12MP in there now and get similar noise levels. I guess we'll see when folks test it out.

My suspicion is at least in part that 12 MP is a marketing ploy.

I've seen more than a few comparisons between the 400D (10 MP) and the 30D (8.2 MP), and the 30D seemingly gives better images.

Perhaps with DIGIC III, cramming more smaller pixels onto the same tiny sensor will achieve something.

[Tee Why]

My suspicion is at least in part that 12 MP is a marketing ploy.

I've seen more than a few comparisons between the 400D (10 MP) and the 30D (8.2 MP), and the 30D seemingly gives better images.

Perhaps with DIGIC III, cramming more smaller pixels onto the same tiny sensor will achieve something.

I have the 400D and a 30D and the 30D gives cleaner RAW images and less noise is introduced when processing the image. So I kind of shuddered when I heard 12MP. I too think it's more of marketing thing more than anything, but that's the way things go in a free market system. I guess we'll have to wait for some official testing to see.

[tsk1979]

So all those 400D owners who have 15-20GB of CF cards will have to get rid of those?
Thats like 200$ down the drain.
Not a smart move.
I wish camera makers innovate rather than cram in more megapixels and gimmicks

The K20D and K200D from pentax are actually a step forward, the 450D is just a gimmick to reclaim lost market share.

The funny thing is that the kit is not IS lens, to compete with the competition which have IS in body.

If the K20D can deliver the IQ of the canon in jpg too(unlike the K10 D which was lacking in post processing), it will become the best of the new breed.

[BigAl]

The funny thing is that the kit is not IS lens, to compete with the competition which have IS in body."The other major change to the specification is the inclusion of a different kit lens (which we'd expect most people to buy). The standard 450D kit will include a redesigned, image stabilized version of Canon's 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 lens which will help it compete with the increasing number of competitors offering in-body anti-shake systems." From DPreview's hands on (http://www.dpreview.com/news/0801/08012404canoneos450dhandson.asp)

If I hadn't bought the 40d last year, I might have bought this one, not because of the 12MP (which I think is a mistake), but rather the size. I like the size of the xxxD range.

[tsk1979]

My bad, I meant to say that the KIT is an IS lens.

40D is a better camera, but is it worth more than the K10D
When I bought the 350D, it offered significantly more than the competition
1. Amazing high ISO performance
2. Great dynamic range
3. Good IQ
4. Nice Egronomics

Whats to diffrentiate the 450D from the competition? Nothing
Pentax is bound to have equally good high ISO performance, and in feature space it beats the 450D hands down.

My prediction.
Fighting a diminishing market share, canon will offer in body IS in entry level cams just to stave of the competition.

[cmason]

I am just surprised at how close to 40D specs it has: Live view, larger view finder, spot meter, 14 bit DAC, ISO in viewfinder, 3" screen.

Wow, that is quite an upgrade. I have been considering the 40D for its spot meter, larger viewfinder, ISO in viewfinder, 3" screen, etc, and now I find it on the XSi... what is Canon doing here?

CF vs SD is no big deal anymore.. esp as SD card are so cheap...heck I have so many for all the P&S, MP3 and other devices around the house. Sure I have lots of CF too, but not really an issue.

What the heck would a 50D offer?

[swintonphoto]

I think the increased megapixels was a knee-jerk reaction to the increasing sales of all the other brands in the consumer dslr lines (all of which have less expensive offerings - nikon, olympus, pentax, etc). I just wish this megapixel race would stop. I still use an 8 mp dslr, and am perfectly satisfied with it. Now I'm gonna have relatives and friends of my clients at weddings saying "Well my camera has 12mp and yours has 8mp, aren't you the pro?" I also have lots of clients ask me "how many mp is your camera" when they come in for information. People seem to think more mp somehow means a better photographer. Now I may have to upgrade just to deal with this stupid mp race. I wish for the well being of the pros that this race would end. I made beautiful 16x20 prints with my old 6mp camera.

I would prefer cameras with 6-8mp that could do extremely high ISO's with better results personally.

I am sick of this people! ugh...

[Internaut]

So all those 400D owners who have 15-20GB of CF cards will have to get rid of those?
Thats like 200$ down the drain.
Not a smart move.
I wish camera makers innovate rather than cram in more megapixels and gimmicks


I think Canon would prefer 400D owners to upgrade to the 40D :).

[ziggy53]

... I just wish this megapixel race would stop. ...

I do too. In late 2006 I was approached by an engineer who saw me shooting with the 1D MKII and he wanted to know how many megapixels and what file sizes the camera produced. (He equated these two things to image quality?)

Fortunately, because he was also a very intelligent person and willing to learn, I was able to show him the qualitative and quantitative differences between 3 - 8 megapixel cameras:

Canon 1D MKII
Canon XT/350D
Minolta DiMage A2 digicam

The differences in perfect light were, frankly, not so much. The differences in poor light and the differences in shadow detail in poor light were very enlightening and clearly show the value of the image of the 1D MKII, even though that camera is now 4 years since it was introduced.

[claudermilk]

Hear! Hear!

Heck, I thought the 10MP sensors were a mistake. Now they've crammed another 2MP in the same area. Sigh. All that effort could have gone to making those 10 million pixels better pixels with less noise & wider dynamic range. Too many gimmicks, not enough core performance improvement--but that's not sexy on the brochure unfortunately. :cry

I am still perfectly happy with my ancient 8MP body and still intend to run it until it dies. Which seems to be a long way off. My intended upgrade? Another 8MP body, this one with a single-digit model name. :D

[Glenn NK]

1. So all those 400D owners who have 15-20GB of CF cards will have to get rid of those?
Thats like 200$ down the drain.
Not a smart move.

2. I wish camera makers innovate rather than cram in more megapixels and gimmicks

3. The K20D and K200D from pentax are actually a step forward, the 450D is just a gimmick to reclaim lost market share.

The funny thing is that the kit is not IS lens, to compete with the competition which have IS in body.

If the K20D can deliver the IQ of the canon in jpg too(unlike the K10 D which was lacking in post processing), it will become the best of the new breed.


1. I think the smart 400D owners won't buy the 450D, so it won't cost them anything.

2. Where else can innovations be made? I think the days of major improvements in the current sensor technology are over - the Bayer concept perhaps at or near it's limit. A very high percentage of buyers aren't knowledgeable about the limitations and problems with squeezing in more MP so they fall for it. It harkens to the somewhat analagous situation of continually increasing the horsepower of cars over last year's model - it's not needed at all, just costs more and lures in the buyers.

3. Pentax (and others) are bound to catch up because the sensors of the market leaders (Canon and Nikon) are approaching the limitations of the technology (see 2. above). This provides room for the others to advance, whereas Canon and Nikon have nowhere to go.

On the IS issue, I think Pentax is beating a dead horse - sure it will give you good stabilization at the shorter focal lengths, but where it's really needed (200 mm and higher), the movement required of the sensor is probably going to limit the effectiveness of body IS. Fortunately for them, a large segment of photographers don't go beyond this focal length, and many don't go beyond 100 mm (look at my list).

[colourbox]

The features of the 450D are probably not targeted at XX0D users (like me and my XT) but at point-and-shoot owners looking at their first dSLR. Canon would probably expect and prefer that a Canon XX0D owner move up to the X0D series. That's the case with me at least, my XT does the job for me and the next meaningful upgrade would not be a XX0D body but the 40D or whatever X0D body is available when I have the budget to do it. There just isn't enough of an improvement all around to pay $800 again to get a 450D to replace my 350D.

[evoryware]

Wow all this debate about an entry level DSLR.
Forget the memory, "upgrading" from a 400 to a 450 if you didn't buy your 400D yesterday is not a smart move. Maybe if you need an extra body for some reason...
Why would someone consider going from an entry Level DSLR to an entry level DSLR an "upgrade". Go to the next level, a 40D.

It's an entry level DSLR to get your feet wet!

This will be a tweak from the 400D and 350D, and a real upgrade from the 300 or P&S.

They did a slight upgrade from the 20D to the 30D and a lot of people were "disappointed" and upset cuz there was no jump in MP, etc, even on these forums.

You left out an "if" for "If the K20D and K200D from pentax are actually a step forward..."

We'll see soon enough...

[Tee Why]

Actually, entry level dslr's are the biggest sellers (among dslr's).

Canon consistently has the Rebel XT and the XTi as Nikon has the D40 and D40x consistently show up in the top ten dslr's sold each month per PopPhoto.com.

So in terms of dollars and cents, entry level dslrs are the bread and butter of Canon's dslr division, so they should actually pay as much attention to the entry level bodies and then work on retaining their customers as they upgrade/if they upgrade.

Canon's Rebel XTi is the 6th best seller of all digical cameras (including point and shoots) at Amazon, so this attests to how popular these entry level dslr's are in terms of sales.

As for me, most digicams use SD cards, so it probably makes it easier for a transition for a digicam user to upgrade to a dslr. I take it that's why every one else uses SD cards for their entry level body.

[jeffreaux2]

I am a 400D owner in need of a second body. I would consider the 30D or 40D to fill that need. I have weighed all the specs and prices, and feel that for price, the 30D is a bargain and that may very well be the direction I lean when I make my purchase. I absolutely cannot "see" a difference between 8 or 10 megapixels. If you compare to a 6 megapixel...I can sometimes tell a difference, but I think it has more to do with poor noise control at the time the 6 megapixel cameras where built.

I do mainly portraits, and very little action/ sports type shots. My limitations with the 400D have been no 3200 ISO, and a max shutter speed of 1/4000. The shutter speed limit gets bumped into when trying to use wide aperature daylight portraits. I would also benifit from spot metering.

The 40D would be okay too....and is surely a nice body, but for the price and feature comparison the 30D looks like the best bargain out there for me right now.
:dunno

[Dusty Sensiba]

I have a digital rebel XT and a 20D.

I think the screen on the XT is about as big as it can be without sacrificing ergonomics. The 20D could use a bigger screen, like the 30D. I will probably eventually get a 30D but I think that's about as big as that body should have.

Big screens are nice, but they break. With some of the stuff I get into with my camera bodies, I don't want such a big screen.

[djspinner2k]

the only part that I don't like is the fact that it doesn't take CF.

http://www.bobatkins.com/photography/digital/canon_eos_digital_rebel_xsi.html

[BBiggs]

It looks like a really nice camera. I wouldn't upgrade to it, but it is nice if you are getting your first dSLR.

[evoryware]

There's a thread on this already.
Too bad it doesn't use both CF and SD like the 1D's.

[Nikolai]

I have a digital rebel XT and a 20D.

I think the screen on the XT is about as big as it can be without sacrificing ergonomics. The 20D could use a bigger screen, like the 30D. I will probably eventually get a 30D but I think that's about as big as that body should have.

Big screens are nice, but they break. With some of the stuff I get into with my camera bodies, I don't want such a big screen.
Well here's an idea for you: make the WHOLE back of the camera a a screen (a la iPhone) and make all the rear controls virtual. :rofl
btw I love my 40D's 3" screens :wink

[Internaut]

Hmmmm.... the iphone style interface with the strong glass touch screen could be the trick here. I have the iPod Touch and its user interface really is amazing. The first camera manufacturer to adapt that concept is onto a winner and, as much as I dislike them, I'm betting Sony as they've already tried similar with their point and shoot cameras.

[scottV]

your nose would always be pushing the buttons though.

[Internaut]

your nose would always be pushing the buttons though.

Yeah..... Nothing like a reality check. I think something like this is coming though; if nothing else to cut the cost of moving parts...

[Nikolai]

your nose would always be pushing the buttons though. That's why it would have a proximity sensor to lock the surface when your eye (or nose:-) gets close :lol3

[ziggy53]

I combined two threads and changed the title to reflect the dual name of the camera, "450D/XSi".

Thanks,

[Nikolai]

I combined two threads and changed the title to reflect the dual name of the camera, "350D/XSi".

Thanks,
350? That was so last year :wink :rofl

[ziggy53]

350? That was so last year :wink :rofl

Thanks, fixed. :thumb (I'm old. That's not fixed.:dunno)

[Nikolai]

Thanks, fixed. :thumb (I'm old. That's not fixed.:dunno)
Yeah, tell me about it...:cry

[colourbox]

your nose would always be pushing the buttons though.
That's why it would have a proximity sensor to lock the surface when your eye (or nose:-) gets close :lol3

Yes, the XTi already has the proximity sensor that turns off the screen when your face is too close to the camera screen to read it.

I would not want a full-width touchscreen, though. One of the reasons the next step up from my XT is a 40D or better is because of the improved controls on the back, like the second wheel and the joystick. These tactile controls allow faster and more precise adjustments while looking through the viewfinder. A full-width touchscreen affords no tactile feedback, and will have the same disadvantage as the iPod touch: Because there is no hardware volume wheel like on the iPhone, if you want to change the volume on an iPod touch, you must remove it from your pocket and refer to the screen so you can figure out where the control is in the first place.

[Nikolai]

Yes, the XTi already has the proximity sensor that turns off the screen when your face is too close to the camera screen to read it.

I would not want a full-width touchscreen, though. One of the reasons the next step up from my XT is a 40D or better is because of the improved controls on the back, like the second wheel and the joystick. These tactile controls allow faster and more precise adjustments while looking through the viewfinder. A full-width touchscreen affords no tactile feedback, and will have the same disadvantage as the iPod touch: Because there is no hardware volume wheel like on the iPhone, if you want to change the volume on an iPod touch, you must remove it from your pocket and refer to the screen so you can figure out where the control is in the first place.

I'm sure they will provide tactile feedback on that:-):wink

[Remford]

Wow all this debate about an entry level DSLR.
Forget the memory, "upgrading" from a 400 to a 450 if you didn't buy your 400D yesterday is not a smart move. Maybe if you need an extra body for some reason...
Why would someone consider going from an entry Level DSLR to an entry level DSLR an "upgrade". Go to the next level, a 40D.

It's an entry level DSLR to get your feet wet!

This will be a tweak from the 400D and 350D, and a real upgrade from the 300 or P&S.

[edited for brevity]

We'll see soon enough...

Well, that's not necessarily entirely true, and it might be the case only from the very narrow perspective of a one-camera shooter with the 350/400/450 being their body of choice.

Along with the general feature set of each new camera can be specific feature(s) that can make a new model useful in ways that other current-generation bodies, even of a more advanced series cannot be. For example, the addition of liveview to the 40D and the wireless functionality the WFT-E3A affords makes it useful or better for certain purposes that the 5D. And the addition of contrast-based Live View AF, stands to make the XSi a better choice than the 40D or even a Mark III 1-Series body for some purposes.

Something as seemingly "frilly" as an articulated LCD can make the kind of quantum usability difference that could make a particular model exponentially better-suited for macro or low-level shooting than other models, regardless of any differences in sensor type or inherent potential output quality. Taken out of a vacuum and placed in the context of everyday use, even these "half-step" incremental feature revisions can make the difference between a given camera either being the best-suited alternative for a particular use or not even worth consideration.

One thing's certain though... we certainly WILL see soon.

[encosion]

I'm pretty confident right now, that I will be doing the upgrade from the 400D to the 450D... Here's my reasoning (as an avid non-pro photographer):

Larger viewfinder, larger LCD, live-view (articulated / wireless LCD would be even more preferable - one day maybe), re-worked ergonomic layout, same small form factor (the 40D is too big for me)... And the final reason - resale value of the 400D is only going to get worse as time progresses, digital bodies are the disposable part of the system, keep the glass, upgrade the body as and when necessary...

I'm certainly not upgrading because of the megapixel race, however I think most of the detractors here are suffering from the same "knee-jerk reaction" that they claim manufacturers are sucumbing to... Until we've seen evidence of regression in quality, why the fuss?