It's the glass stupid.

[ProfDave]

Well after two weeks of experimentation and getting the Canon 50mm 1.4, working with settings, just trying different things and getting past the expectations I had about a DSLR I have decided to keep my new XT (it was within the return period and I just wasn't sure). But let me say - it's the glass stupid! Those beads of moisture on my cat's nose? They show up, and I was told set Unsharp Mask in Photoshop to Amount = 100-150, Radius = 3 and the other setting (!!) to 2 and that cleans things up. Yeah it does, but junk in junk out recall. I find myself using it in M mostly now, rarely do I use any presets. But that 50mm gives drop dead gorgeous images. I don't know if I'll buy another lens less than 2.8/f ever again (I have several other lenses too around 3.5 and 4.0 so I am covered), because that goes a long way taking care of the low kight issues with the XT people talk about. So, though I complained at first, I am settled now. My advicem FWIW: Get used the camera and don't cheap the glass (like in astronomy, don't cheap the eyepieces).

http://homepage.mac.com/platos_academy/PhotoAlbum15.html

You can see how the images got better over time becuse I got to know my canera. I am not a pro, please note. :) Now I just have to slow down buying lenses!

[rudgej]

I've found the reverse situation with my 350D. My photos have been getting better since getting the camera, and while I still intend on getting a 17-40 f/4 L lens, my kit lens has been giving me good results.

Prior to the 350D, I used a PowerShot S30 where the photos appeared fine and didn't need further post-processing. When I got the 350D, I was having to do far more PP to get the photos the way I wanted. Now though, if I adjust the camera settings just right, I often do not need to do much at all (perhaps just some levels), and quite often, I don't bother with USM.

I would love to be able to afford f2.8 lenses, but I can barely justify the f/4 equivalents, so I just compromise by tweaking a setting such as upping the ISO slightly.

[PaulB]

P&S = taking your 35mm film in for D&P.
DSLR + software = having your own film and print processing lab.

Simple really, we are all technicians now.

[rudgej]

P&S = taking your 35mm film in for D&P.
DSLR + software = having your own film and print processing lab.

Simple really, we are all technicians now.
I quite agree Paul, and I like doing the PP (rather than hoping the automated PP turns out). My point was simply that by taking a better photo in the first place, the amount of PP required is far less. ;)

[ProfDave]

I quite agree Paul, and I like doing the PP (rather than hoping the automated PP turns out). My point was simply that by taking a better photo in the first place, the amount of PP required is far less. ;)

Yep - junk in junk out my designer profs friends tell me. But my point was more a kind of confirmation of what others were saying - don't panic, get used to the camera, play with the settings, and check your expectations before saying it was an unwise purchase. But glass - yes, makes a difference. I hate to state the obvious...:) It took two weeks but now I am getting teh shots I want.

And again - if it was easy we wouldn't be here having fun, would we? :)

[gale]

Someone started a thread at dpreview forums about kit lens pics and some of the ones posted were simply gorgeous. For poor folks like me (I had to talk dh into buying the camera alone, and was careful not to mention having to ever buy lenses or other accessories or else I'm sure the deal would have been off) the kit lens option is great.

[::John::]

The kit lens is ok

This was taken with it. (http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=128134)