http://www.usa.canon.com/templatedata/pressrelease/20060824_rebelxti.html

CANON'S NEW EOS DIGITAL REBEL XTi SLR RAISES RESOLUTION, INCREASES EASE, LOWERS COST AND LEAVES OTHER DIGITAL SLRS IN THE DUST

LAKE SUCCESS, N.Y., Aug 24, 2006 – Canon's EOS Digital Rebel XT model – the camera that set all time sales records for digital SLRs of any persuasion (supplanting the original Digital Rebel's claim to that title) - now takes its place alongside of the newest member of the irrepressible Rebel clan: the 10.1 megapixel EOS Digital Rebel XTi SLR camera. For 16 years, the Rebel brand has stood for advanced, sophisticated and easy-to-use. The new Canon EOS Digital Rebel XTi camera continues that legacy, taking discriminating photo hobbyists, enthusiasts, advanced amateurs and SLR aficionados to places digital dreams are made of...and more economically than ever before.

Product Page:
http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/controller?act=ModelDetailAct&fcategoryid=139&modelid=14256

I didn't realize they upped it to 10mb from 8. That's awesome. However, the 8mb XT is killing my hard drive already, so I'm not going to be tempted. Other than image size and larger LCD screen, I'm not sure the actual specs have changed that much?

For once, I seem to be immune to upgrade-itis!! Great choice for first SLR purchase, though.

Dirk

MPs aren't all they're cracked up to be. for most people, 4MP is more than sufficient as far as I'm concerned.

really, it's just a matter of adding a few pixels on each dimension and all of a sudden, you've jumped another MP.

it's not a compelling argument to pay more for a camera if you ask me. although if it's priced around the earlier models, then great.

MPs aren't all they're cracked up to be. for most people, 4MP is more than sufficient as far as I'm concerned.

I disagree. Well, I partially disagree. I agree that after a certain point, you are not getting much as you add more megapixels. However, I think the magic number is around 7 megapixels. You most certainly can tell the difference between 4 and 7 when you print large prints like 8x10s. Not many people print digital pictures bigger than 8x10 because of the form factor of their personal printer. 7 to 10 is not nearly as noticible as the jump from 4 to 7, unless you are printing poster size images.

i was going based on 5x7 max really. i wasn't aware people print 8x10s often, but i guess it's a possibility, especially if doing it at home.

looking around my office, i only have 1 8x10 i've done, my portrait of the statue of liberty ( http://bradk.smugmug.com/gallery/582242/2/24378300 ). i believe it was done by my fujifilm which was 5MP if I'm not mistaken. all things considered, the print (by alkit) looks great.

i have taken a 4MP photo and had it blown to poster size by cafepress.com and the quality really isn't that bad.

i have taken a 4MP photo and had it blown to poster size by cafepress.com and the quality really isn't that bad.

Sure, it is not bad, but it is noticeable. The other main reason to have more MPs is so that if you crop out a portion of a picture, you can still blow up that portion to 5x7 or 8x10 and have it look good. This is one area where new photographers make a lot of mistakes, especially when doing macro photography. Typically, they zoom in on their subject to fill almost the entire frame. Most of the time, you will be much better off if you center your subject within the middle box of an imaginary 3x3 grid and don't let it reach past the midpoint of any of the perimeter boxes. (In other words, don't use the final 15-20% around the edges.) If you do this, and then crop the image in post-processing, you will end up with a final image that is roughly 50-60% of your overall camera resolution. 50% of 7 MP is 3.5MP, so it is still good. I guess what I am saying is that more MPs gives you more post processing options.

I understand that if you want a photo published, it needs to be 8mp minimum (aren't most pro cameras around 16?), otherwise the most benefit I've gotten out of the extra MPs is the oppoprtunity correct my crappy composition or make up for too short of a lens. All very useful - but a new decent telephoto lens is 1/2 the price of a new SLR (and learning from my composition mistakes is priceless)!

Dirk

(and learning from my composition mistakes is priceless)!

Ding! I cannot agree more.