Canon XTi or 40D??

[Zeeman]

The way live view works on a 40D is not worth it. Having used the viewfinder on my 400D, I prefer it well and above the 2.5 inch screen I had with the A640.

I'm actually working on a cheap viewfinder enlarger for my Ike housing, basically using a lens from a cheap magnifying glass and an aluminium tube that has small perforations to allow it to fill with water. This is more for allowing me to have my head back a little, as my reg gets in he way when taking shots... I'll post the results once I get it sorted. It can't be that hard!

 

[m.hamner]

"YOUR CAMERA IS ONLY GOOD AS YOUR GLASS"

GO FOR THE XTI. MUCH BETTER DEAL. more underwater housings to choose from. can get it for super cheap compared to what it sold at in the beginning. 40D was canon's newest offering until the xsi, so it's still gonna be expensive.

I own several canons... 20D, Xti, and 5D. Even though the 40D has a sturdier body, bigger screen, twice as fast shutter speed, better battery consumption, 2 live view modes, YADDA YADDA YADDA etc... you're paying almost twice as much for something you're going to have in an underwater housing, and won't really notice any difference underwater but the price.

you can find the xti for super cheap compared to the 40D, so save the money you'd spend on a 40D for some nice glass. After all, if you aint got nice glass, it doesnt matter how nice your camera is. Some of the best photographers in the world got their start using pawn shop bodies with high class glass. having the xti free's up some money to spend on a nice L series glass, the best glass in the business.

IF the 40D had a full frame sensor, then I'd say spend the extra money. that full frame sensor is worth the extra money. There's a HUGE difference in what my 24 mil XTI sensor picks up compared to what my full frame 35 mil 5D sensor picks up.

Remember. Megapixels isn't everything. Consider bit conversion and sensor size.

XTI is your camera. better bang for the buck.