Camera below Canon Rebel Digital?

James Romeyn · « **on:** 2 Dec 2003, 03:50 am »

I am considering the Canon Rebel Digital SLR, aprox $900 US discounted. Before I purchase, would appreciate your vote for the single best new, currently available camera one tier below it. Is your vote based on first hand experience or second hand reports? I have an outside source for reviews, but specific insights are appreciated. Thanks for your time.
Jim R.

Juan R · « **Reply #1 on:** 2 Dec 2003, 03:05 pm »

I have the sony 777 for over a year , without any problems , small , easy to handle , high pixel, macro , and you can change the lens.

Andrikos · « **Reply #2 on:** 2 Dec 2003, 03:46 pm »

Voting for the rebel.
My manager got it and it's awesome. A total stud.
Need to mention that will all accessories, it cost him over $2k.

PhilNYC · « **Reply #3 on:** 2 Dec 2003, 04:12 pm »

I'm a big fan of the Canon G5, but whether you'd get the Digital Rebel vs. a G5 depends on how serious a photographer you are and what kind of pictures you think you'll be taking. The lens options alone on the Digital Rebel will make it worthwhile if you are a serious photographer...while the G5 has a decent one, it is (a) not interchangeable, and (b) clearly not as good as Canon's EOS lenses. Same can be said for the Sony F717 (which is the camera I'd go for if the G5 wasn't available).

This opinion is based on personal experience with the G5 and second-hand opinions of the Digital Rebel (a friend has one, and I have played with it but not spent serious time with it). I do have a lot of experience with Canon SLR film cameras (own an EOS Elan, but it's collecting dust...which is one of the reasons I'm not looking at the Digital Rebel; I find the convenience/size of the non-SLR cameras more than makes up for the fewer features given that I'm more of a casual photographer these days).

Carlman · « **Reply #4 on:** 2 Dec 2003, 04:25 pm »

I would like to seriously consider the Canon Rebel Digital but, there are 2... the basic and the advanced. The advanced has must-have options like a 'bulb setting' for timed exposures... that the basic one does not. I can't afford either so, I too, am looking at other options to see what's available. To date, the best I've used is an Olympus Camedia 4000. The image quality and other capabilities make it useable. It has a normal flash sync that I would use.

I have yet to use a digital camera that has a good shutter response. Of about 10 I've actually used takes too long. I press the shutter.......and then..... a little later.... the photo is taken. That's the single most annoying thing about digital photography for me. I miss a lot of shots because of this. I don't even attempt a lot of shots any more.

The Rebel supposedly has the shutter right. For this alone I may wait until I can afford it. So, it's all or none for me... or possibly a camera that's in the $300-500 range to make do for a while.

navi · « **Reply #5 on:** 3 Dec 2003, 01:38 pm »

Jim R-

go for the rebel if you are used to using canon 35mm film cameras & if you want to use different lenses.

if you do go for the rebel- see if you can get a battery grip for it. I use one for the 10D and i have shot for 3 full days before i have to recharge the batteries

I don't know what you are going to use the camera for but for me i could never carry a canon G5 or Olympus Camedia 4000 to any photoshoots- it would just look unprofessional

navi

Carlman · « **Reply #6 on:** 3 Dec 2003, 03:15 pm »

Quote from: navi

I don't know what you are going to use the camera for but for me i could never carry a canon G5 or Olympus Camedia 4000 to any photoshoots- it would just look unprofessional
navi

I guess that's the thing with the new digital Rebel... It's a pro camera. An 'entry level' pro camera but, not in the same league as 'the next tier down'... which is pretty much every consumer camera with close to 5Meg image capturing.

mojoman · « **Reply #7 on:** 3 Dec 2003, 06:30 pm »

I have a Canon S-50 that I like a lot. It has all the flexibility of my film based slr; aperture/shutter priority, full manual mode, exposure comp, auto bracketing and is a 5 megapixel camera. Carlman, you'll find shutter lag on this one still annoying as hell. You can also put it on full program control so it becomes a good point and shoot that even my wife can use.

I'm currently trying to decide on the Digital Rebel or the D-10. As much as I like the S-50, it ain't no SLR and I can't use any of my expensive lenses with it.

navi · « **Reply #8 on:** 5 Dec 2003, 12:25 pm »

jim R,
if you ever get the rebel also get your hands on a copy of
Phaseone- captureOne DSLR software it is fantastic for product photography (i use it whenever I have to photograph products like cosmetics, chrome, furniture)- it's the exposure & contrast compensation tool which is excellent.

also get a sandisk ultra type II CF card (you'll need a 256mb at least)....they are soooo fast!

+ another good thing about the rebel is that you can always upgrade to a better lense in the future, such as- 24-70mm 2.8 lens. it may be expensive... but it's damn good.

brad b · « **Reply #9 on:** 5 Dec 2003, 04:47 pm »

heck, go for it with the brand new Leica Digilux 2. True Leica lens, better software than my older Digilux 1, and built like a tank.

Jay S · « **Reply #10 on:** 10 Dec 2003, 01:41 pm »

Just got an EOS Digital Rebel (called 300D here in Asia) yesterday! Well, my wife picked it up from the store. Will get to play with it this weekend. Have buy a couple of 512 meg CF cards, extra battery, a UV filter, lens hood, bag, etc this weekend. Got the 18-55mm "kit" zoom lens. Will play with it for a while before deciding whether or not to get a higher quality lens. I am pretty sure that the "L" series lenses are better but I wonder how the non-L lenses compare.

Guan · « **Reply #11 on:** 30 Dec 2003, 05:39 am »

Jay, we must compare notes. I've been using a 300D for the past couple of months. The first thing that struck me was that it is a lot larger than my Canon digital IXUS. And when the salesperson told me that I had no choice but to use the manual viewfinder, I really thought he was joking

Takes good pics though and the Photoshop software is amazing!

drphoto · « **Reply #12 on:** 31 Dec 2003, 08:03 pm »

I think Canon has moved to the head of the digital class. I just got the 1Ds. It absolutely kills my beloved Nikon D1x. The images look like drum scanned 2 1/4 film. It has much more headroom on highlights than the "X". Of course, at nearly twice the price, the 1Ds should be better, but I've been very impressed at what I've seen of Canon's lower priced offerings, especially those little PowerShot buggers.

Jay S · « **Reply #13 on:** 6 Jan 2004, 07:21 am »

Guan,

Yes, we must compare notes! I took over 300 photos over the holidays (indoors as well as at the beach), using both the "kit" 18-55 mm lens as well as a Canon 75-300mm IS zoom. Also have a Speedlite 430ex flash as well as a UV filter. Managed to get a good deal on SanDisk Ultra II 512 meg CF cards (about HK$1,100 each).

So far, image quality is clearly head and shoulders above various compact digital cameras (Canon, Fuji, Pentax), even with the kit lens. A friend (who reco'd the 300D, he has the 10D) has the 17-55mm "L" series lens. That's said to be a seriously great lens but it costs more than the body of the camera! What lenses are you using?

Btw, my previous digital camera was a Canon IXUS!

Obviously, great minds think alike.

Cheers,

- Jay

Guan · « **Reply #14 on:** 6 Jan 2004, 09:19 am »

Jay wrote:

Quote

Yes, we must compare notes! I took over 300 photos over the holidays (indoors as well as at the beach), using both the "kit" 18-55 mm lens as well as a Canon 75-300mm IS zoom. Also have a Speedlite 430ex flash as well as a UV filter. Managed to get a good deal on SanDisk Ultra II 512 meg CF cards (about HK$1,100 each).

Wow! Jay, you certainly stocked up on the accessories. I only use the kit 18-55mm lens, one 512meg card and a lens protector. What would be a logical lens upgrade?

Guess what? I have already crashed tested my 300D over Christmas. After a few glasses of wine too many, I knocked the camera right off the restaurant dining table onto a hard tiled floor. Surprisingly only the battery door clasp was damaged. So now it's being held shut by 3M tape

Hope you had a great holiday back home with Shy. Happy New Year!

Jay S · « **Reply #15 on:** 6 Jan 2004, 09:57 am »

Guan,

Happy new year to you, Peng and Nicole!

Ah, I forgot to mention that the 75-300mm IS zoom lens was lent to me.. will need it for our upcoming trip to Capetown and Botswana (where I expect we will be eaten alive, perhaps by lions but definitely by mosquitos)... I got 2 512 meg CF cards (as well as a 2nd battery) so that I would have a backup in case one of them failed during the trip.

By lens protector are you referring to a UV filter? That is a good idea since it protects the lens and is optically tranparent (well, apart from filtering out UV rays and making pictures very slightly warmer).

In terms of lenses, I was not sure at the onset so I decided to go with the kits lens which is said to be pretty darn good for the money (though lens snobs say bad things about it). I would say it is equivalent to a typical mid-range Canon EF lenses (which makes it a great bargain!).

I have a couple of friends who have become travel + photo junkies. Here is their site: http://www.snapshotasia.com.

Anyway, they recommend the Canon EF 28mm-105mm zoom lens. It is about the same size as our kit lens but has double the zoom and may have slightly better optics. More zoom is certainly useful. At the beach the 55mm of the kit lens was not enough and I sometimes wanted more than 300mm from the big zoom lens I borrowed! The 28mm-105mm lens is extremely versatile in a compact package. It does give up some wide-angle, though vs the 18-55mm. It is a bit "faster" than our kit lens, which would be useful in low-light situations esp if you don't want to use a flash.

Further up in performance (and massively so in price) are the Canon EF "L" series lenses. The 17mm-40mm was named lens of the year by Digital Photography magazine and is said to be an extremely clear and "contrasty" lens... but it costs over US$1,000! It may not have as much of a zoom but for indoor and moderate-distance photos I'm sure it will produce great shots. I would like to compare it with the kits lens. The guy who lent me the 75-300mm zoom has the 17-40mm "L" lens so maybe I'll do a quick comparison sometime.

Have you done much retouching on Photoshop? I have not at all, though I have read that you may be better off spending some time on Photoshop rather than spending on very expensive lenses.

Cheers,

- Jay

Guan · « **Reply #16 on:** 6 Jan 2004, 10:25 am »

I only have a transparent lens protector that screws in front of the lens. I need to get a UV filter like the one you have for outdoor shots.

Thanks for explaning the choice of lenses available. I use the 300D mainly for close-ups with Nicole indoors and for moderate range shots. I find that the kit lens doesn't frame the subject too well at close quarters compared to the IXUS. Too much wide angle? From your description the Canon "L" series lens seems to be a good option, except for the price

I'd be interested in your opinion if you get a chance to use the L series.

By the way, do you find that the batteries don't last very long? I had to buy a spare one just in case.

Photoshop is remarkable. Under or overexposed shots are a thing of the past with the click of the 'fill flash' or background lighting options. But my photography is bad enough that even PS is not able to salvage some of my handiwork

Jay S · « **Reply #17 on:** 6 Jan 2004, 12:43 pm »

If you do a lot of closeups you may want to get a 50mm prime lens (or maybe slightly wider). Optical quality tends to be better on fixed-length prime lenses compared to zoom lenses. You can find lots of lens reviews at:

www.photo.net

And, many consumer reviews at: www.photographyreview.com

There seem to be many good Canon lenses for much less than the cost of an "L" lens. If you want a prime lens for not much money, the EF 50mm f/1.8 II which is under $200 (even under $100 mail order in the U.S.). One of the reviewers of this lens uses it on a Canon 10D.

My battery seems to last pretty long -- more than enough to shoot an entire 512 meg CF card or maybe as much as 2 cards (though I do use an external flash). I bought a non-Canon 2nd battery... it seems to work as well as the Canon and it was much cheaper.

I have only tried PS a couple of times... it can do magic. I should sit down an try it seriously on the photos I really like... but which I managed to botch!

Cheers,

- Jay

navi · « **Reply #18 on:** 7 Jan 2004, 12:34 am »

I know a photographer who got the 50mm 1.8 lens on loan from canon and he ended up shooting a whole wedding with it- he liked it that much!

with 'L' series lenses you really need to be a working photographer to justify buying one. I own a 28-70 2.8 and use a 70-200 2.8 from work they are fantastic lenses but at $2500 for the 28-70 and $3000 for the 70-200 (aust. dollars) it's out of the price range for most people.

you guys should try a tamron or someother brand

I also have a 17-30mm sigma lense that i REALLY hate now - because i can't put my polarising filter on it.i wanna sell it and get the canon 17-40mm- which is about the same price as the sigma

Jay S · « **Reply #19 on:** 7 Jan 2004, 02:08 am »

The Canon EF 50mm 1.8 lens seems like a screaming bargain (esp if under us$100). I may pick one up to play with. The 50mm 1.4 is said to be better but it is 3-4x the price!

I agree that it is hard to justify spending huge amounts of money on a lens... unless of course photography becomes as much of an obsession as audio!

Functionally, a 17-40mm "L" lens won't offer much different functionality from the 18-55mm EF-S lens I currently have (a bit less zoom but slightly faster).