Canon Digital Rebel - XT or XTi?

[prime]

I've been looking into getting an SLR, and it seems like the Digital Rebel is the way to go for me - a nice and cheap entry level DSLR. The only thing is, should I go for the XT now or save up some more money and get the XTi in April? Lots of reviews say the screen on the XT (visibility wise) is pretty bad, but I could probably get over that. Dust most likely won't be a big problem, and I don't have much photography experience so the 2 megapixels won't really matter.

PS. One thing that is pushing me towards Canon is the fact that my mom had an original (film) Rebel and two lenses: a 35-135mm f/4-5.6 USM lens and a 75-300mm f/4-5.6, both EF lenses. I can't find much info on them since they are from the early 90's. Are these lenses good enough that they should these lenses sway my decision? Also, with the XT or XTi I'll probably use these lenses and get a Canon 50mm f/1.8 II in a couple weeks and then either a 17-85mm f/4-5.6 IS or a 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS in April depending on what I take photos of most.

So, XT now or XTi in April? Thanks in advance

[rsimmons]

For a true comparison, go to

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/comp...s400d&show=all

This will give you the side by side of both cameras and they both have links to very indepth reviews.

[dante]

I had the same decision and went with the XTi for the increased screen size and better AF system. the extra MP is good, but more of a "future proof" thing than any benefit now. (yes I know that in another 2 years any camera purchased now will be HORRIBLY out of date...)

before deciding on either, be sure to check them out in a store to see if you like the feel. they've got a small body, so if your hands are big they may be too small for you to use comfortably.

about lenses, the Canon consumer bodies have a 1.6x crop factor, so any focal length you have with a film lens will be multiplied by 1.6 when you put it on your rebel (or D20/30/etc). So your 35-135 will act like a 56-216mm lens. You might want to look into something like the 17-70 Sigma, 17-50mm Tamron or the 17-85 you mentioned instead of the 28-135 so you can get more wide-angle coverage.

oh yeah, and the 50mm 1.8 kicks ass. two big thumbs up for that little thing.

[prime]

Thanks Dante. I have been out to a store to check out both cameras, and I liked the smaller feel of the cameras. My hands aren't very big, so the small size isn't be much of a problem.

I was leaning towards the 17-85 because of the crop factor. That would give me a larger range of wide angle to telephoto than the 28-135. And everything I've heard about the 50mm says its a great value lens

EDIT: I am currently favoring the XT slightly because of the fact that I will probably upgrade in 2-3 years anyway and it will take me that long to master all the stuff on any digital SLR. Also, I will likely be ticked off when the inevitable Digital Rebel XT plus/extra/super edition comes out in 6 months to a year because I didn't wait the extra two months and pay more for the XTi!

[prime]

Even though I'm not 100% sure which camera I want yet, I've started looking at some Canon lenses:

Original Lenses:

-Old 70-300mm lens and 35-135mm USM lens.

First Lens:

-EF 50mm f/1.8 II: Everyone says it's great, and for that price, why not?

Second Lens:

-EF-S 17-85mm f/4-5.6 IS USM: I think it would be better to get this over the 28-135mm, since I can use the 35-135 for that range. Wide angle might be useful for me sometimes. Only downer is that it's EF-S and not EF.
***Could be swapped for the 28-135mm

Third Lens:

-EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro USM: Seems like a nice macro lens. This one is subject to change if anyone knows of a better macro.

Last Lens:

-A telephoto lens. This one is tricky because of the higher cost of telephoto lenses (I'd like to keep all the lenses around or below $500), but the EF 70-200mm f/4L USM gets a lot of praise. Seems like it wouldn't be worth getting a telephoto lens w/o IS since I've already got the 70-300mm, but I'm sure that lens would be way better as it's L series. There is the 100-300mm IS lens, but it seems a bit cheap. I think my best bet is to cross my fingers for one of those DO lenses like the one out now but half the price. I love how it's so small and has IS. As I won't be looking into telephoto lenses for a year or two (gotta save money and use it on the other lenses!), a cheaper DO lens could happen.

Oh yeah, for a flash, the Speedlite 580EX looks like the only way to go.

So, any better, similarly priced alternatives to the lenses I listed? Thanks