Canon 400D (Rebel Xti, Kiss X)

[MICKEY88]

Coming from a lifetime Canon shooter, the Sony A100 would be my choice for countless reasons.

But as Master Mason mentioned Anti-shake(IS) does not help when taking sports photos, unless you are shooting a sport where the athlete stands completely motionless.


Well yes and most pro level lenses without IS also cost more than currently available IS-equipped DSLR bodies, since most IS lenses today are PRO LEVEL it is not really a surprise.

Since this thread is about Sony vs Canon I would like to point out that in MOST CASES the Canon PRO LEVEL IS lenses are still less expensive than the PRO LEVEL Sony/Minolta counter parts.

some popular examples

Sony 70-200mm f/2.8 = $ 2,299.95
Canon 70-200mm f/2.8L IS = $ 1,599.00

Sony 300mm f/2.8 = $ 5,699.95
Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS = $ 3,899.95

with careful shopping one can find the
minolta 70-200 2.8
and the minolta 300 2.8


for $1000-$1500

 

[Groucho]

Here is a question for you, do you use your SLR's more than a point and shoot camera, lets say at WDW?

At this point, I never use a point-n-shoot unless I have absolutely no other choice. (Like if I didn't bring along my camera, since my wife carries her compact PnS in her purse.) Once you get accustomed to the features, performance, and quality, it's very difficult to go back.

Does this make me an SLR snob? Well, that's a question for another thread. Not everyone needs or wants the extra weight and complication of a DSLR, but for me, it's a must-have.

 

[MICKEY88]

you probably will find you want more lenses than you think, for example to match the zoom of say a 12x P&s , you'd probably need at least 2 or 3 lenses( even if you get a 18-55kit lens, you'll need at least one more to get 70-200 or 300mm or so and might want something for lower light as well ie night time shots).

another option is to boost the iso, just as you suggest for non-stabilization compensation


it's always interesting to see the trends on the boards, having been around forever, I can see how the proliferation of zoom lenses has changed photography, I remember the days of the 50mm 1.7 being the standard lens that came with an slr, then you'd ad a 135, or maybe a 100 portrait lens.., then a long telephoto if you did sports or wildlife...

a lot of amateurs never owned a second lens and they were quite happy with the pictures they got..

 

[YEKCIM]

I remember the days of the 50mm 1.7 being the standard lens that came with an slr, then you'd ad a 135, or maybe a 100 portrait lens..

That's a big ten-four, good buddy!

~YEKCIM

 

[MICKEY88]

At this point, I never use a point-n-shoot unless I have absolutely no other choice. (Like if I didn't bring along my camera, since my wife carries her compact PnS in her purse.) Once you get accustomed to the features, performance, and quality, it's very difficult to go back.

Does this make me an SLR snob? Well, that's a question for another thread. Not everyone needs or wants the extra weight and complication of a DSLR, but for me, it's a must-have.

3 years ago, after 20 years of carrying 2 slrs and lenses with me on shoots, I decided it was time to go digital, and I also decided it was time to stop carrying so much stuff, no more changing lenses etc.

so I bought the Minolta A2 an excellent and award winning bridge camera.. it served me well for 2 years, it worked well for 90% of my shooting, but I always felt something was missing.. I needed/wanted a DSLR. the passion was reborn

So I eventually bought my 7D, I now have the largest camera bag I've ever owned, more lenses than ever and I'm planning on buying my second dslr body, so I can carry 2 once again..

the A2 hasn't been used in over a year

 

[handicap18]

As for the focusing were you playing around at all with the different auto focus area's. I think the 30D has 11 different positions you can focus on in the view finder. It can be kind of difficult to get used to. The XTi has them as well but not as many, maybe only 7 or 9.

How is the size of the 30D and the XTi compared to your film slr. Any dSLR is going to be bigger than the S2. I used the Nikon N70 for about 8 years, then went to a Canon S30 PnS digital for about 3 years. The N70 is HUGE compared to that. When I went with the Nikon D50 I thought it was big, but its still smaller than the N70 film camera. When I hold the XT or XTi now, they feel like little toys because they are small for dSLR's.

I think the Canon 30D and the Nikon D80 are more similar to the size the film SLR's were.

Also re: the view finder of the XTi. For those that have it and have compared it to the 30D, how is it for size? This is the one thing I really don't like about my D50. The view finder is tiny. When I compare it to my N70 I feel like I could crawl right through the viewfinder on the N70. I know they made the viewfinder on the D80 bigger. Thats also something to start comparing. Might not be a deal breaker, but its something to take notice of.

The extra dials IMO are better to have, same for the top LCD status screen. I use the one on mine ALL the time. I've found it very much a pain when looking at the XT (and the Nikon D40) that there is no top screen. Having the 2 command dials and other buttons makes it very easy when switching modes such as ISO, Shutter speed and aperture among a few other things.

Thats all I got so far...

 

[Anewman]

with careful shopping one can find the
minolta 70-200 2.8
and the minolta 300 2.8


for $1000-$1500

Yup I noticed since I am still considering swapping over to Sony if the next Canon xxD model does not impress me, but I didnt think comparing used vs new was a fair comparison.

I was kinda surprised that prices depreciate that much, it seldom happens on the Canon side.

 

[Anewman]

Here is a question for you, do you use your SLR's more than a point and shoot camera, lets say at WDW?

Well I dont own a P&S anymore but I do use the wifes or kids very often.

Depending on lighting, subject and final print size IMO sometimes they can yield photos almost identical to DSLRs.

But sometimes I wont even attempt a shot with a point and shoot, because I would not be satisfied with the results. While you do see others taking the same exact shot with a camera phone. So I guess it could depend on ones individual standards.

 

[MICKEY88]

Yup I noticed since I am still considering swapping over to Sony if the next Canon xxD model does not impress me, but I didnt think comparing used vs new was a fair comparison.

I was kinda surprised that prices depreciate that much, it seldom happens on the Canon side.

it's not neccessarily all depreciation, since they are used lenses, they sold for less originally years ago, plus since a lot of people are still hesitant to buy sony, the market brings a lower price..

I wouldn't hesitate to buy the used minoltas my experience has been that people who have these expensive lenses, take good care of them, or some bought them then decided they were to heavy to carry around...

 

[MarkBarbieri]

Also re: the view finder of the XTi. For those that have it and have compared it to the 30D, how is it for size? This is the one thing I really don't like about my D50. The view finder is tiny. When I compare it to my N70 I feel like I could crawl right through the viewfinder on the N70. I know they made the viewfinder on the D80 bigger. Thats also something to start comparing. Might not be a deal breaker, but its something to take notice of.

As a general rule, larger sensors gather more light and since the viewfinder uses the same light gathering, larger sensor (or film) cameras have larger, brighter viewfinders.

You'll also find that on cheaper cameras, they use a pentamirror instead of a pentaprism. A pentaprism gives a brighter, clearer image. The XTi has a pentamirror and the 30D has a pentaprism. I'm not sure about the Nikon lineup.

 

[handicap18]

As a general rule, larger sensors gather more light and since the viewfinder uses the same light gathering, larger sensor (or film) cameras have larger, brighter viewfinders.

You'll also find that on cheaper cameras, they use a pentamirror instead of a pentaprism. A pentaprism gives a brighter, clearer image. The XTi has a pentamirror and the 30D has a pentaprism. I'm not sure about the Nikon lineup.

The D50 has an approx 95% frame coverage with a .75x penta-dach-mirror type and the D80 also has approx 95% frame coverage, but has a .94x pentaprism viewfinder, same as the D200. That is a HUGE difference. My Nikon N70 has 92% frame coverage, but has the pentaprism viewfinder.

I guess your correct about the pentaprism because the N70 is only .78x, but I tell you when I look through the viewfinder I think I'm going to fall into it.

 

[Groucho]

Pentaprism vs pentamirror is true in theory but not always true in execution. I remember doing some research on it when I bought my current DSLR as viewfinder brightness is important to me due to my taste for manual focus.

From Steve's Digicams: The use of a lower-cost pentamirror versus the *ist DS2's pentaprism did not noticeably diminish the viewfinder's brightness or clarity.
Certainly a pentaprism is ideal, but a mirror arrangement can still work quite well.

 

[photo_chick]

Well, I didn't buy a camera yet, but I did go look at them at Best Buy. Well, I was amazed at how much I DIDN'T really like the 30D. I was bummed about this for a few reasons:

1. The focus never focused on what I wanted to take a pic of. I wish I had brought my CF card with me so that I could tell if this was really true, but the red lights were showing focus just about everywhere BUT what I wanted to focus on. Is this normal?

Andy

ON the focus.... I have found that it does take a little time to get used to a new camera's AF system. Each model seems to be slightly different to me. I was a bit frustrated with the AF at first on my Rebel XT. I never really used AF with my Rebel G because it only had 3 points and well, that ended up being a bit pointless to me. I did feel at first that my older p&s did a better job with the AF, but I think it was just because I was used to it. I am finally starting to use the AF more on my DSLR. It is something I have had to practice with to get the feel of.

I do find the Rebel line much more comfortable to me than the 30D for me, but I have freakishly small hands. My Rebel XT is actually a little smaller than my 35mm Rebel G, though it is a tad heavier from all the new electronics in it.

 

[jann1033]

As a general rule, larger sensors gather more light and since the viewfinder uses the same light gathering, larger sensor (or film) cameras have larger, brighter viewfinders.

You'll also find that on cheaper cameras, they use a pentamirror instead of a pentaprism. A pentaprism gives a brighter, clearer image. The XTi has a pentamirror and the 30D has a pentaprism. I'm not sure about the Nikon lineup.

well thanks mark, evidently you have solved my "30d looks better ?"

Andy, i've seen a few articles comparing the 30d and xti and as far as features go they are not that much difference( ie not really worth upgrading from xti to 30d) so i'd go with the xti if that feels good to you. in a few yrs after you get the hang of it who knows what will be out by then you might want to sink even more money into I bought the xt and it feels good but now the 30d doesn't feel that much different to me so it's all relative

 

[jann1033]

.........
Here is a question for you, do you use your SLR's more than a point and shoot camera, lets say at WDW?

Thanks again for all the great responses!!!

i don't own a point and shot but didn't own one before i went digital either so i guess i am more used to just taking a slr/dslr...kind of just think of it like lugging little kids and all their paraphernalia, a necessary evil

as far as the IS qualms i have, i have read a few articles where is has been a problem( in general, not related to any particular manufacturer) so imo i'd rather have a lens that breaks down than the body. at least i can continue to use the body with another lens. i just think the hype has gone way past it's usefulness. not saying it isn't useful at all, just saying it's not a cure for every problem anyone has. now they are starting on the facial focus thing, it's marketing to make you think you NEED that. ( hey i have a blurry photo, i need "fill in the blank")

as far as my comment about needing lenses, i am not saying she needs an arsenal but i was trying to make the point she probably will want a few even though at the moment she felt she might not. i had 2 lenses with my old slr and got by fine....but now i want more( never said i was immune to advertising either )

 

[AndrewWG]

Ok, so it looks like the XTi again, but who knows?

I am very thankful to all who have answered my questions here. I am thinking this through, probably too much, but want the best bang for my buck here and trying to weigh that with the future. Tough thing to do, that's for sure.

Again, thanks to all who have partiipated in this thread. You make it easier to make the "right" decision for me with all your helpful advice.

One question I have that still remains (at least for this moment) is why does the XTi price drop by lile $35 if you want a silver body versus a black body? That makes little or no sense to me. I personally like the looks of the black better, but is that the only reason???

Andy

 

[Master Mason]

Some folks feel that a "camera" must be black, and that a silver body makes it look like a toy. So the demand for the black body is a bit higher, and therefore the difference in price.

when I bought my XT it was close to 100 cheaper for the silver, and for that I could definately deal with the silver myself.

 

[jann1033]

Ok, so it looks like the XTi again, but who knows?

I am very thankful to all who have answered my questions here. I am thinking this through, probably too much, but want the best bang for my buck here and trying to weigh that with the future. Tough thing to do, that's for sure.

Again, thanks to all who have partiipated in this thread. You make it easier to make the "right" decision for me with all your helpful advice.

One question I have that still remains (at least for this moment) is why does the XTi price drop by lile $35 if you want a silver body versus a black body? That makes little or no sense to me. I personally like the looks of the black better, but is that the only reason???

Andy

i have to say i spent the extra 50 or so to get the black, i thought with cream lenses the silver would just kind of clash

 

[photo_chick]

One question I have that still remains (at least for this moment) is why does the XTi price drop by lile $35 if you want a silver body versus a black body? That makes little or no sense to me. I personally like the looks of the black better, but is that the only reason???

Andy

Because they can charge more and people will pay it.

 

[AndrewWG]

Ok, so here is the newest twist in my ever confusing saga of trying to figure out which camera to purchase. I contacted Sigma and found out that neither my 75-300 nor my 90mm macro will work with the XTi (or digital rebels in general). They suggested that I look into their "trade in" policy where you get a discount on lenses when you trade in older ones. Has anyone done this? Is it worth it? Sounds a little like a bad deal to me, depending on the discount (which he said depended on the lens I want in return and the lens that I trade in, etc). On one hand, I have a fully functional Rebel film camera with a few nice lenses that I would like to keep but the reality is that it will most likely never ever be used again. Do camera stores (Ritz, etc.) give good trade in prices? I would rather trade the whole camera and lenses and be done with it. I do not want to deal with ebay because I don't want the hassle of haveing someone not like the quality of the camera or something like that.

I am begining to hate all of this shopping around.

Andy