| Author | Message | ||
     Brineusaf |
http://www2.butterflyphoto.com/shop/product.aspx?sku=REBELXTIKIT&cm_mmc=CNET-_-C anon-_-Digital%20SLR-_-EOS400D%20Rebel%20XTi%20Black%20SLR%20Digital%20Camera%20 with%20EF-S%2018-55mm%20Lens Considering buying this item, could you please let me know if you think this is a good beginners dSLR and the pro's and con's of it. Please Note- this isn't a show and tell, I don't care if you have a 20k$ lense used to photograph NFL games. Just looking for honest opinions of people with some experience on the matter. TIA | ||
| Gentleman_jon |
Kyle, This is precisely the camera that I recommend the most, and incidentlally is the biggest selling Digital SLR. Canon is the leader in digital photography, and their cameras have consistently produced better images with less noise than any other. Even though Nikon has made hugh strides lately, I think that Canon is the way to go, unless one has a large investment in Nikon Lenses. The Canon lens range is also excellent with good lenses at the amateur and professional levels. Often an excellent value is a used camera of the series just before the latest one. In this case the Canon XT350 is also an outstanding camera, capable of making excellent 20x30" prints in the hands of someone who knows what they are doing, and can be purchased advantageously from the kind of chap that just has to have the latest and greatest even though he didn't use the camera he had very much. | ||
| Khollister |
I will avoid the Nikon vs Canon religious war and agree that the digital Rebel is certainly one of the better entry points into DSLR's. However, I would STRONGLY advise you to reconsider who you buy photo equipment from, especially in NYC. Many of the NYC based stores are not reputable places to deal with. The only 2 NY stores I would do business with are B&H Photo and Adorama. In addition, Norman Camera (in the midwest somewhere) is super as is Samy's in LA. Keith | ||
| Bcordb3 |
Great camera, I love mine. I would give Calumet photo a try. Lots of success with them. I would make sure that you not getting a gray market camera. (cameras that are not for the US market and virtually no warranty). | ||
| Court |
Even though Nikon has made hugh strides lately, I think that Canon is the way to go, unless one has a large investment in Nikon Lenses. Agreed. My Nikon choice was based on the fact that I am in New York City where you can get a Nikon repaired at 11:30PM on Sunday night. The Canon, when you are working at that level, is generally conceded to be superior...perhaps well beyond what the eye can see. New York has MOST the bad shops and nearly ALL the good. I'm sitting in the middle of "photo row"
When I was in Alkit rental (look it up) last week the dude in front of me had a $67,000+ rental bill. It's where the pros go to rent BIG equipment. I like it cause I can walk in, rent a Nikon Fish-eye, go shoot all afternoon and return it for $35. I need an F5 or a D2X for the afternoon, they have TONS. | ||
| Jackbequick |
Kyle, I've had the original model of that, the 300D for about two years now. It is a good camera. Most serious photographers will say, and rightly, that the 18-55mm lens that comes with comes up short in comparison to Canon's better quality lenses. But it is a good lens and a great one to get a feel for the camera with before you consider adding a better lens. I've been using mine with that lens for two years with no complaints. I've been thinking about buying the Canon EF-S 17-85MM F/4-5.6 IS USM, that is selling for around $400-$450 on eBay and at internet sellers. It is a very good lens and would give me a little more focal length which I think I would use and enjoy. Of course, I'd still like to have more lenses too but that's life... Jack | ||
| Brineusaf |
The problem I am having is I do not understand the numbers when talking of lenses, I have no idea. I intend to take a photo class in the summer, but just wanted to try to get into photography a little more. All I have now is a point and click Samsung A7 - a nice camera by any means, and it suits my needs nicely, but I have a desire for more. I appreciate all of the info and opinions. | ||
| Gentleman_jon |
Kyle, An excellent web site to learn everything about digital photography, is Digital Photo Review: http://www.dpreview.com/ The glossary section will answer most of your questions, and the camera reviews are sort of the industry standard. There are also forums that you might find very useful. (Message edited by gentleman_jon on October 14, 2006) | ||
| Slaughter |
I think Court meant Adorama - NOT Andromeda. I use Adorama all the time. If you are going mail order, check Samy's camera in the LA Area. Their pro department is run by a Buell racer! Jim Chaconas posts here once in a while as Chaconas. http://www.samys.com | ||
| Mainstreamer |
I got a Canon EOS A2E with a Canon 28-105 lens. I'm the original owner and have put less then 100 rolls of film through it. I'd like to sell it, PM me if your interested. | ||
| Reepicheep |
Lens numbers cheat sheet: Apature = F-Stop : Numbers like 1.7 up to like 32. Smaller numbers = bigger holes in the lens = less light needed to take pictures and shorter depth of field in focus. Bigger numbers = smaller hole in the lens = more light needed to take pictures and longer depth of field in focus. The more of a telescope your lens becomes, the harder it is to get smaller numbers (read: more expensive). A F2.3 50mm lens would be lousy. A F2.3 300mm lens would cost a fortune. That's what focal length is (like the 28-105 above). It's the degree to which the lens is a telescope. The bigger the number, the more zoom you have. Relatively speaking, this all works. It can get confusing going between image sensor size, and film size, and working out the absolute "zoom" amount. A 28mm lens on that Cannon would be the same as a 50mm lens on a 35mm film SLR would be the same as a 100mm lens on some of that large format above. So a 28mm lens on a digital camera would be "normal", while a 28mm on a film SLR would be "wide angle". There were two areas the point and shoot cameras simply "would not work", much to my frustration. The first was low light. Cannon has been doing well with it for a few years now on their SLR line, but it was $1000 and up and big cameras for carrying around. The second was wide angle. To get what is traditionally called "wide angle" on a digital SLR, you are looking at like an 18mm lens, which is getting into the scary expensive range, and thats just to attach to a very expensive camera body you already bought. The first problem (low light sensitivity) has been solved. The successor to my current camera (I have the fuji F10, the new one is the F30), you can shoot usable pictures up to 3200 ASA, which means you can work in very dim light. Phenominal for a point and shoot. You will get artifacts from the low light modes, but they are far less annoying then artifacts from non studio flash setups. The second problem (wide angle) will be a tough nut to crack until they can make large image sensors inexpensively and reliably. Thats gonna take some time. Most people don't appreciate or know how to use a wide angle lens as well, which will mean there is not a lot of consumer pressure either. Kodak has an interesting little "super wide" point and shoot... it actually has two image sensors and lenses, one built into a super wide angle fixed focus lens. Clever. If you could somehow combine the second lens of the Kodak with the Fuji F-30, you would have an incredibly useful little point and shoot. For reference, film with consumer processing is usable probably to about 800 ASA, but it has a very large "image sensor" area. So the digitals already have it beat with light sensitivty, they just need bigger sensors to let you use shorter lenses to get a real wide angle effect. (so much for simple  ) | ||
| Brineusaf |
This... I would usually have used a tripod for... but I didn't have it handy- so I set the camera on a trashcan for it's 7sec shutter.  The picture came out alright I think... I will post another in a moment of just how dark out it was. | ||
| Brineusaf |
how dark it really was...  I was just trying to get the moon on the mountain. | ||
| Brineusaf |
anyone do business with dbuy.com ??? All I have to do is talk someone into buying my 20gig JVC Camcorder... anyone? | ||
| Brineusaf |
 My samsung still takes some nice pics... don't get me wrong... I just want to enhance my "skills" some. I don't have the zoom capabilities or anything that I feel I would enjoy and put to good use while here in Europe. | ||
| Slaughter |
 Night, 45 second exposure, "light painted" with hand-held strobe (6 "pops" from 6 different positions to light the underside) - f22, 20mm lens, N70, TMax 100 film. This was taken here at Lancaster the night of 9/11/01 when all aircraft were grounded. It was being ferried to Kermit Weeks' museum after a concours restoration. I know the tower operators at the airport and they let me setup the shots. Digital and low light is still problematic - especially with color - but it's coming along with almost daily improvements. (Message edited by slaughter on October 14, 2006) | ||
| Brineusaf |
Nice. I will hopefully purchase the Rebel XTi within the next month or so. Do you think the lense included with the kit is acceptable, or would something else be better "all around"? | ||
| Brineusaf |
Ok, this is what I mean. The first picture is a picture I took of one of the Oldest Churches in Germany (Black Forest). The second picture is a picture my brother-in-law took for me of one of the gargoyles on the church with his dSLR.   This is what I would like to have the capabilities to do, among other things. | ||
| Bcordb3 |
check around for "kit" deals. I got a 18 - 55 and 75 - 300 mm lenses with my camera for less than $900.00. That was over a year ago. This is about 13 second exposure  This just a nice picture, about 5 second exposure  Horse Shoe Bend, Page Arizona  | ||
| Bads1 |
Kyle you'll find that the lense that comes on the XT is well..... ok. But you'll soon want some other lenses depending on what you are doing. I'm soon going after a wide angle lense. I just bought a 300 mm lense a month ago to really bring in the long shots. | ||
| Jackbequick |
Kyle, There is a learning curve on the lenses for the Canons too. Here is a review that describes the "shortcomings" of the EF-S 18-55mm lens that comes with the Rebels: http://tinyurl.com/ylrldd But it is not a "bad" lens. Listed below it, on that same page, are the EF-S lenses you want to consider for upgrading to. The one I mentioned earlier that I want to get is the EF-S 17-85mm IS USM. It would work like a 28-135mm lens on a film SLR. A good all around lens and of much better quality than the 18-55mm. On the better lenses, USM refers to a improved type of motor for the focusing mechanism, IS refers to Image Stabilization. The USM and USM IS lenses are quite a bit better. The "best" lenses for the Digital Rebels are arguably those in the EF-S family. The EF-S lenses are designed to project onto the 22 x 16mm CCD sensor used in the Rebels. The Canon EF lenses (intended for 35mm film cameras) can also be used. You *cannot* use a EF-S lens on a film camera though. The EF lenses are cheaper. I've not used one and don't know what the pros and cons of it are. Some of the other folks here have and maybe then can explain that. Are you using irfanview yet? It is hard to beat for quick cropping, resizing, rotating, etc. Most of the software that comes with cameras is junk at best. Many are intended to get you into the fold for buying upgraded versions of the same bad software and other accessories, printer, or printing supplies. Jack |
