canon digital rebel xt vs nikon D40. which is better for first time DSLR buyer? TIA

I think you need to consider how you want to use your camera in the
future. Remember, with a DSLR, unless your a point and shoot guy,
your biggest expense will come in your lenses as you become more
comfortable with the camera and want to get more creative. As you buy
more and more lenses you being to build a system so when it comes time
to buy your next body, say either the Canon 30D or Nikon D200, this
will depend on the lenses you bought and the system you built. In
other words, your first DSLR usually determines the system you will be
using for years to come. Don't get me wrong, some people do switch
but it becomes much more expensive when you've invested $5000+ in
Nikon lenses and now you want to buy the new Canon Body ($900 for the
body and another $5,000+ for all new Canon lenses). Either way, both
are great systems so you can't really go wrong.

Consider the type of photography you want to do and then take a look
at what lenses are available for each system, because, trust me, you
will find yourself wanting a new lens quicker then you think.

Personally, I'm a Nikon user with no plans to switch.

 

It very probably doesn't matter a bit. Unless you get into buying the
$1000+ lenses very quickly, it just won't matter. Even for low-light
performance, it doesn't sound like the bottom-end Canon has much of
anything over the D40.

 

i don't really plan to buy new lenses. does d40 produce better quality
than the rebel xt with the kit lens?

 

The kit lenses are probably fine for some low light situations at the
widest focal length but remember, as you zoom with those kit lenses
your f-stop is going to be reduced, letting less light in, with
unfavorable results. This is when you start itching for that 1.4
lens. As for the quality, I believe you will be happy with either. I
suggest going on to Flickr.com and searching for photos by Camera
Type. See what you like.
You can also check out http://www.imaging-resource.com/IMCOMP/COMPS01.HTM
to compare results side-by-side.

Hope that helps and good luck.

 

Not planning to buy accessory lenses is up to you, of course, but the
main advantage of a DSLR, and a justification for the extra cost and
weight, is being able to change lenses.

The kit lenses for both Canon and Nikon are very good, though, and I
doubt you will see any difference between these and the expensive
lenses when viewing on a monitor or printing up to 8x10 inches. But
you do limit yourself in other ways, for instance speed (max aperture)
and no image stabilization.

KS

 

Depends on your needs. Try them out, compare their features, how they
fit in your hands, and compare the selection of lenses, then buy the
camera that best meets your needs. Both are excellent cameras.

 

The kit lens on the Canon is NOT as good as the kit kit lens on the
D40. Most reviews criticise the quality of the Canon kit lens & praise
the D40 one.

 

Yes

 

One disadvantage of the D40 is that it doesn't have an autofocus drive
pin. This means that in order to have autofocus you need to use lenses
that have their own focus drive (AF-S and AF-I lenses). AFAIK the
Canon doesn't have that restriction.

-Gniewko

 

That's because Canon AF lenses ALL have a motor in them. Which made
them more expensive than Nikon lenses, in the early years. Tradeoffs
change over the years, and for at least that camera Nikon seems to have
decided Canon was right.

 

I have a feeling that Nikon adpoted it because it make the body that
tiny bit cheaper to manufacture: no lens-motor and gearing required.
It also makes all of the new lenses slightly dearer to manufacture, now
they must have an inbuilt motor for AF to work on the new body.

 

While the savings are no doubt viewed favorably by Nikon, I think
that the motor was dropped primarily because the intention was to
produce a very small camera. Because of minor size differences,
I've thought that arguments that "changing from CF to SD cards
allows cameras to be smaller" to be almost silly, except for
possibly the smallest cameras. But the D40 is certainly much
smaller than the similar D50, so the elimination of the motor and
drive train probably was a big contributing factor. Although I'd
prefer the smaller size, I may get a D50 while they're still
available new, as I have several of Nikon's older lenses. The D50
and D40 have almost identical optical performance, but the D50
shares compatibility with the batteries used by several other Nikons
(D70, D80, etc.). So the new battery, or at least the clones will
probably be more expensive for a while. Additionally, its capacity
is much reduced, 1,000mAh for the new EN-EL9 vs. 1,400mAh for the
EN-EL3a. Battery life should still be pretty good for the D40 so
the reduced battery life may not be too important unless the flash
gets considerable use.

 

I hope this may helps:

Canon EOS 350D Digital Rebel XT Digital SLR – has an average expert rating of 89 (based on 28 expert sources)

http://www.smartratings.com/review/photography/digital_cameras/91

Nikon D40 SLR Digital Camera – has an average expert rating of 83 (based on 12 expert sources)

http://www.smartratings.com/review/photography/digital_cameras/162

Perhaps, Nikon D40 SLR Digital Camera Kit is better if it fits your budget.