Canon Digital Camera ? | FerrariChat

Canon Digital Camera ?

Discussion in 'Creative Arts' started by Scotty, Dec 3, 2004.

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, Skimlinks, and others.

  1. Scotty

    Scotty F1 Veteran
    Silver Subscribed

    Oct 31, 2003
    9,849
    Oregon
    Full Name:
    Scotty Ferrari
    I'm looking at getting my wife either a Digital Rebel or 20D camera body for Christmas. The cost difference (899 vs 1599) seems somewhat out of proportion to the increased features, even from somebody used to the "Ferrari Factor". Does anybody have any input.

    (FWIW, we have a number of compatible EOS lenses, a good 5 megapixel point and shoot, etc.--so the only consideration is Canon.)
     
  2. Billy10mm

    Billy10mm Formula Junior

    Nov 11, 2003
    664
    Westchester
    Full Name:
    Billy Ng
    The price is justified IMO. I currently have a DRebel and while the picture quality, especially in the noise department, is phenomenal ... there are some things I would change about the camera.

    The 2.5fps shutter speed is only good for 4 pictures, no matter if you're in RAW or the lowest quality JPEG. After that, your subsequent shots are determined by how fast the camera can write the buffer to your card. I have all Lexar 40x (or faster) cards and the write speed of the camera is horrible (granted, I shoot almost exclusively in RAW). I can't even begin to tell you how many shots I've missed while waiting for the buffer to clear.

    This "slowness" also comes into play when you're reviewing pictures you've taken, the difference between the review time on the DRebel and the 20D is night and day.

    So, if you're worried about speed, as in, you have kids that play sports or like to take multiple shots of a subject/scene using exposure bracketing, the DRebel isn't for you. If your just a snap shooter who doesn't rattle off shots quickly, the DRebel will work just fine.

    I've had some time behind a 20D and it is quite the camera, hopefully the wife will take my hints and surprise me for Christmas.

    Bill in Brooklyn
     
  3. ETW

    ETW Formula Junior

    Nov 3, 2003
    577
    MA
    I agree with bill. I used to own a Digital Rebel but now I have switched over to the 20D. The Rebel is an amazing camera, but the 20D just does everything better. It more of a professional camera (more adjustable, black magnesium alloy body etc.). Also, its so much faster it's not even funny. I have the 17-40mm f/4L USM and it really makes the camera so much better. If you have the money, go with the Canon "L" series lenses, the 17-40 is awesome for car pictures. You may want to consider an external flash as well. So... I would definatly go with the 20D. If you want more information, try www.dpreview.com
     
  4. Kboy007

    Kboy007 Formula Junior

    Oct 18, 2004
    344
    Allen
    Full Name:
    Mike Verinder
    I absolutely LOVE my Digital Rebel. The above threads about the speed shutter are accurate.. but i mean.. u really need to be taking photos of soccer games etc. for that to really matter... unless you are really really really really serious. To me the cost doesnt justify the need for a faster shutter speed.

    the D. rebel is awesome.. great pictures.

    Mike
     
  5. Scotty

    Scotty F1 Veteran
    Silver Subscribed

    Oct 31, 2003
    9,849
    Oregon
    Full Name:
    Scotty Ferrari
    I guess I should have asked this as well at the beginning--anyone have any experience with the image stabilized lenses?
     
  6. Billy10mm

    Billy10mm Formula Junior

    Nov 11, 2003
    664
    Westchester
    Full Name:
    Billy Ng
    Yes, and they too are well worth the price, especially for indoor applications. I've seen handheld shots taken at 1/15 shutter speed with a 75mm focal length that show absolutey no signs of shake .. truly amazing in my book. I bring 6 years of competitive handgun shooting to my photography hobby, so I know a thing or two about steadying my body and if I'm lucky I can produce a "usable" photo at 1/30th with a really short focal lengths and no image stabilization. On the flip side, the motors that run the IS draw current from the camera's battery and can eat up your battery life quickly if not kept in check. I'd recommend the BG-E1 battery grip extender for the DRebel (~$100) if you're going to get serious about IS.

    If you want some suggestions on lenses .. here are my pics.

    For a general walk-around, "I have no idea what I'll be shooting" lens, the 28-135 f/3.5-5.6 IS USM lens is great. It's light, has IS which it needs because it's a slow lens, and doesn't cost an arm and a leg.

    For good portrait work, I recommend the 50mm 1.8 and the 85mm 1.8. The 50 is only $75, is Canon's lightest lens, and being a prime ... it's tack sharp. The bang-for-the-buck value of this lens simply cannot be exhaggerated. Here's a handfull of shots I've taken with my 50: http://www.pbase.com/bill_in_brooklyn/portraits

    The 1.6x crop factor of the DRebel make the effective focal length of the 50 about 80mm which is just about right. For larger subjects (adults), I prefer the 85 for it's longer reach which tends to reduce the facial distortions associated with being too close to your subject. For the record, there is also a 50mm 1.4 that has USM but it costs ~$350 and the cost isn't justified IMO. There's also an 85mm 1.2 L that I'd really like to try but at over $1K, isn't within my non-professional budget.

    If you're looking for a cheap long-range lens, the 75-300 f/4-5.6 IS USM is a pretty good lens because of the IS and is only around $420 I believe. Personally, I'm fond of the Sigma 70-200 f/2.8 because of its speed. Canon has a 70-200 2.8 with or without IS, and a 70-200 F/4. Their 70-200 2.8 without IS (similar speed and features to my Sigma) costs twice as much.

    Someone mentioned the 17-40 f/4L lens ... it's a beautiful lens, fantastic photos, but I personally don't like it because of it's speed. f/4 is just too slow to justify its $$ IMO. My pick for a wide telephoto is the 16-35mm f/2.8 .. yes its pricey, but the extra speed is worth it for indoor shots, which is where I find myself using my wide angle lenses most often.

    My $0.02 YMMV.

    Bill in Brooklyn
     
  7. Z0RR0

    Z0RR0 F1 Rookie

    Apr 11, 2004
    3,470
    Montreal, Canada
    Full Name:
    Julien
    Canon and Sony make IMO the best quality pictures.
    As far as a price hike ebing justified or not, it depends on our abilities. I used a G5 for a while, and there were already way too many functions, and for the most part redundant with what I could do with Photoshop.
    I have had 2 small canon (not SLR sized) and they have not withstood the stress of time, so I got a Sony. No problems to date.
     
  8. ETW

    ETW Formula Junior

    Nov 3, 2003
    577
    MA
    Yes, it is slow but nothing I really notice TOO much when shooting indoors. For the money, Ide definatly go with it over the 16-35. I havent seen any low light pictures yet that are not of very high quality unless Im just messing around shooting randomly. It seems faster than it really is.

    Image stablized lenses are also very very good. It makes a world of difference. They are a must for sports games. I took my 70-300mm to a Patriots game and most of the pictures had a bit of blur. Im sure an IS lens would fix that in a second.

    Also, If you get the Rebel(or 20D) the battery grip is a great idea. The BG-E1 for the DR and BG-E2 for the 20D. I have pretty big hands, so it made the camera feel much better in my hands on the Rebel. The battery life is amazing too, due to it holding 2 batteries at once.

    Ive heard nothing but good stuff about that 50mm 1.8 too. Every one says it's a great portrait lens.

    Just go to the camera store and see what is better for you. You cant go wrong with either of them. If your not getting too many lenses (I dont know what you already have) I would recomend a wide/mid range, telephoto, and macro. Good luck finding something!
     
  9. Scotty

    Scotty F1 Veteran
    Silver Subscribed

    Oct 31, 2003
    9,849
    Oregon
    Full Name:
    Scotty Ferrari
    Guys--Thanks for all of the great advice. Lens wise, we have a standard 50mm, 50 and 100mm Macros, a 35-105, a 100-300 (all Canon) and a 28mm (Sigma). These lenses are all before USM were available. None (except maybe the Macros) are remarkable--but they all work.

    The info about the grips is especially useful. We are going to the store tomorrow to check out the Cameras--Thanks Again!
     
  10. ETW

    ETW Formula Junior

    Nov 3, 2003
    577
    MA
    No problem
     
  11. Brianjonesphoto

    Brianjonesphoto Formula Junior

    Dec 2, 2003
    268
    Seattle Wa
    Full Name:
    Brian Jones
    For the money you cant do better than a used 10D. It is what the 20d replaced. It uses the same chip as the Rebel but has 95% of the features of the 20D. Don't get too caught up in the mega Pixel game. 6.3 is plenty to do most things and the 8 of the 20d isn't going to give you much of a visible differenence unless you are going big (20x24 or more) and then it is a marginal difference. Used 10D's are going for around $900ish. check out www.fredmiranda.com there are a ton of used 10d for sale right now.

    As far as IS goes I personally dont care for it unless on using a long lens (400+) The money would be much better spent on a small tripod that you carry with you at all times.

    In regard to the 17-40 It's a great lens for the money. I don't think there is a lnes out there that can match the build or optical qualities at the same price point. I looked a a sigma(12-24 and 15-30) before buying my 17-40 and they were total crap compared (build quality, optics are pretty close) to the 17-40. Yes it is "only" an f4 but if you are shooting digital it pretty easy to up the ISO up a stop on the 10d noise isn't an issue until you get to 800 or higher and then it's still not too bad. Anyway with a lens in the 17-40 range you can hand hold down to at least a 40th on the long end. Remember minimum stable shutter speed is a result of focal length the general guide line is 1/focal length.

    Let me know if you have any more questions. I'm a pro shooter and have lots of time behind a camera.
     
  12. diablo roadster

    diablo roadster Formula Junior

    Jul 31, 2004
    758
    Mountain View
    Full Name:
    Martin
    I am going to pick up a 20d, but the main reason is that stock photo agencies sometimes have a minimal MP limit, and i dont want to be caught with a 6mp file when 8 would have got the image in.

    Both are great cameras. I dont think you can go wrong with either one.
     
  13. Billy10mm

    Billy10mm Formula Junior

    Nov 11, 2003
    664
    Westchester
    Full Name:
    Billy Ng
    Have you checked out the speed differences between the 10D and the 20D though ... night and day, and well worth the price of admission IMO.

    Bill in Brooklyn
     
  14. Billy10mm

    Billy10mm Formula Junior

    Nov 11, 2003
    664
    Westchester
    Full Name:
    Billy Ng
    The 1/focal length argument is correct .... up to a point. People just aren't that steady. If you had a lens with a 4mm focal length (I know they don't exist,just an example), you'd have blur trying to handhold for a quarter of a second.

    I know that long focal lengths exhaccerbate the problem, but anything slower than 1/60th is asking for trouble without a tripod, regardless of focal length. I've successfully handheld at 1/30th, but "successful" is a relative term ... an 8x10 of that shot was usable, but by no means perfect.

    I guess it also depends on what you're looking to achieve with the photo, what your clientelle expects, and what you're willing to accept.

    Bill in Brooklyn
     
  15. Brianjonesphoto

    Brianjonesphoto Formula Junior

    Dec 2, 2003
    268
    Seattle Wa
    Full Name:
    Brian Jones
    Just so you have and idea what the difference between 6.3 and 8.23 gives you
    10D: Approx. 6.30 megapixels (3088x2056)
    20D: Approx. 8.25 megapixels (3520x2344)

    That a difference of 14% you can easily up res 14% with out any trouble

    There's some samples the first is full frame the second is 100% at full res 3088x2056 and the second is upres'ed to 6144x4088(the native res of the 11mp 1Ds). These were shot at 400iso as well

    As to the speed of the 20d I do not have any experience with that camera.
     

Share This Page