Jack wrote:
I looked at the Nikon D50 with it's kit lens and liked it, but I wonder if
the Canon Rebel XT is better. The prices are about the same. The Nikon is
a 6MP while the Canon is 8, but the results look about the same. What do
you people think? Nikon or Canon?

I think they are both good cameras and you should get good results from
either.

I would not place too much emphasis on the 6 vs 8MP issue. An extra 2MP
is a good thing, but the actual effect of it isn't that great. MP values
are an area thing, but resolution are usually thought of in linear
terms, such as 'dpi'. In those terms the Nikon is 3008 vs the Canon's
3456 (both long-side pixel count), meaning that the Canon is 15%
'better' (as opposed to 33% using area values). Hence, the net
difference is not that great.
Also, there are other factors which contribute to image quality, as well
as the number of pixels.
I know people with Nikon D50s and D70s and they are quite happy, and not
especially lusting after a Canon. :-)
I would suggest going to a shop and having a good play around with both
and see which one feels better, which one's controls make more sense, etc.

Re. kit lens, you don't actually have to buy that do you? Maybe you
could get a body and some other lens, if that suited you better?
I presume the kit is cheaper, but that's partly because they usually put
a fairly low-end lens in those kits (as I understand it). Maybe you coul
d spend a little more money a get a better lens. After all, it the lens
that makes the image, so it's worth having a good 'um.