EOS Digital Rebel vs 10D

[shafiq]

Saw the Canon EOS digital rebel today for the first time. Actually I went to my local store to pick up a Canon 10D, but when I got there the sales person showed me the digital Rebel with a price tag of $899. Suddenly I was confused...I was faced with a $600 price difference for what I was being told is the same internals (exception of buffer - smaller) and OK construction. I was also told that I would not notice any difference in image quality!!!

I decided to wait a day or 2 and thing over which to go for, but even as I am writing this post, I think I have made my mind up. It is going to be the 10D.

Any comments/opinions from forum members most welcome.

Regards
Shafiq

[AliasMoze]

Shafiq, I recently faced the same dilemma, and I have a Digital Rebel coming tomorrow (Friday, the 18th).

If you can afford the higher end camera, there's no reason to argue. But the image quality is indeed the same as the 10D's, and the differences in my case weren't worth the extra $500, plus more for a lens and wide angle lens. IMO, if the optics are the same the possibility to shoot all-manual is there, then the essential quality difference comes from the operator.

[robertwgross]

The sales person was doubly stupid.

When a customer comes in asking about one camera, then the sales person should not confuse him with another similar camera.

When the customer asks what the difference is between two cameras, then the sales person ought to tell him enough of the significant feature differences to explain the difference in price.

As long as you only shoot normal/typical shots, then the two cameras will perform with very similar results. However, real photographers are known for getting creative and using some unique feature in an innovative way, and that might produce a great result. If you just shoot normal/typical shots, then get the cheaper camera.

---Bob Gross---

[defordphoto]

I don't know the exact specs on the internals, but from what I have been reading from people that usually know what they are talking about, the internals are similar, but definitely not the same.

The sensor is similar, but not the same. Whatever the heck that means I don't know, but the 300D is NOT a 10D in a silver package. And again, that's what I have been reading here, Fred Miranda's and Rob Galbraith's, which between the three forums have the most knowledgable, and non-argumentative people discussing photography on the Internet.

[shafiq]

robertwgross wrote:
The sales person was doubly stupid.

When a customer comes in asking about one camera, then the sales person should not confuse him with another similar camera.

When the customer asks what the difference is between two cameras, then the sales person ought to tell him enough of the significant feature differences to explain the difference in price.

As long as you only shoot normal/typical shots, then the two cameras will perform with very similar results. However, real photographers are known for getting creative and using some unique feature in an innovative way, and that might produce a great result. If you just shoot normal/typical shots, then get the cheaper camera.

---Bob Gross---


Bob,

I have been striving to do "creative" photography with the resources I currently have (Sony S85). However, one of the major reasons why I am upgrading to the 10D was so that I can experiment more - have more control over the picture taking process.

When I asked the question "Who is the primary audience for this camera?". I was told it is sports moms...hate to think that after spending what still is a fare bit of change I would be labelled as holding a moms camera :(

Thanks for your comments

[ron chappel]

The 300d does indeed have 'nearly identical' image quality.
The sensor difference is in the way they are made-the 300d's is made in a different factory by a slightly different technique.

I say the salesman did the right thing .He told you about another choice you may genuinely want.
As for which one you want...I think you must really want that extra build quality,or the faster frame rate/buffer.There really are not many other reasons to go for the 10D...

[phidong]

A nice salesperson, yes. A smart one, no. I sell shoes. If someone came in asking for Jordans (180 dollars for the newest style), I wouldn't point them to some 40 dollar Nike's that offer the same comfort w/ lesser demand.. I'd sell them the super expensive shoes. :p

As for the 300D, if you're moving up from point and shoot, I'd say go for it, but get the one w/ a lens so you can learn more about the camera's fucntions and how to use it before you buy an expensive lens and regret it (I doubt you will). If you can spare the extra cash, though, I'd say go with the 10D as it offers more expansion... :)

[MrPogo]

phidong wrote:
A nice salesperson, yes. A smart one, no. I sell shoes. If someone came in asking for Jordans (180 dollars for the newest style), I wouldn't point them to some 40 dollar Nike's that offer the same comfort w/ lesser demand.. I'd sell them the super expensive shoes. :p


The worst salesman I've ever met worked at a computer store. We'd spent ages working out which computer we wanted, decided that was the best for the money, and came in and said "Hi, we want this" - he didn't need to sell us anything.
But instead, he decided he wanted to sell us a much more expensive computer. This is to be expected, but instead of pointing out how much better the more expensive computer was, he used the tactic of saying the one we wanted was no good at all. So he ended up talking himself out of a £800 sale, and we bought an almost identicle machine from the rival store accross the street ;)

[Hatem Eldoronki]

Dear Shafiq,
If you're gonna get into photography artistically, or want to reach higher levels of creativity, get the 10D.

Hatem Eldoronki

[askleme]

This is a little off the subject, however how do you like your 75-300 zoom, i'm thinking about purchasing one and would appreciate any input you have.. Thanx

[Hatem Eldoronki]

I like it in well-lit conditions. In low light, like maybe towards mid-sunset, it really sucks. I like doing outdoor portraits with it, since at full zoom, it completely blurs out the background, and blurs the foreground just a tad. I keep this lens on all the time. I wouldn't suggest the non-IS version.

[BobbyC]

Here's what I see is the most significant differences:

2.5 fps for 4 shots on Rebel vs. 3fps for 9 shots on 10D
No PC Terminal on Rebel
No ISO 3200 on Rebel
Less viewfinder info on Rebel
No internal flash exposure comp. on Rebel
No incremental white balance setting on Rebel
Darker viewfinder on Rebel
No mirror lock-up on Rebel

No custom functions on Rebel, notably:
SET button customizable
The ability to force tha camera not to fire without a CF card
AF point registration
2nd curtain sync
AE lock button customizable

None of these will keep a person from taking equally good photos with either camera but it could affect the types of pictures taken.

Hope this helps.

[NickSI]

One more thing - ergonomics. Digital Rebel lacks the rear command dial (replaced with four buttons), so in order to dial exposure compensation you have to depress some button and use main command dial - rather cumbersome if you want to do it while looking into viewfinder.

[PhilTarn]

BobbyC wrote:
Here's what I see is the most significant differences:

2.5 fps for 4 shots on Rebel vs. 3fps for 9 shots on 10D
No PC Terminal on Rebel
No ISO 3200 on Rebel
Less viewfinder info on Rebel
No internal flash exposure comp. on Rebel
No incremental white balance setting on Rebel
Darker viewfinder on Rebel
No mirror lock-up on Rebel

No custom functions on Rebel, notably:
SET button customizable
The ability to force tha camera not to fire without a CF card
AF point registration
2nd curtain sync
AE lock button customizable

None of these will keep a person from taking equally good photos with either camera but it could affect the types of pictures taken.

Hope this helps.



Thank you for this very clear comparison.
You wrote: "No internal flash exposure comp. on Rebel"
Does it suggest that external flash exposure comp. is possible ?

I have a 420EX flash and I did not see the possibility to modify anything on the flash unit.

[Hatem Eldoronki]

What is the purpose of firing without CF inside?

[BobbyC]

PhilTarn wrote:
Thank you for this very clear comparison.
You wrote: "No internal flash exposure comp. on Rebel"
Does it suggest that external flash exposure comp. is possible ?

I have a 420EX flash and I did not see the possibility to modify anything on the flash unit.


You can, I assume, with a 550EX since you can set it on the flash, but looking at the specs of the 420 it has no flash exposure comp. built into the flash.

MCouper wrote:
What is the purpose of firing without CF inside?

I can't think of a valid purpose other than just to be able to take a shot and look at it on the screen. Since you can't save it, it's seemingly useless

[vvizard]

MCouper wrote:
What is the purpose of firing without CF inside?

I just sold my cam (to afford a 10D). Sold it without a CF-card. When packing it, I thought.. Darn, I _have_ to fire one last shot with it as a tribute :) But I wasn't allowed since the CF was not in the compartment. Such a shame :/ But except that situation, I can't think of one single where I've wanted it.. Maybe if you just want to test that a flash works without really care about the picture maybe..

[polboss]

MCouper wrote:
What is the purpose of firing without CF inside?
Hi there, The other day I talked my friend (one who doesn't likes being photographed) into letting me photograph him. I took 16 pictures before realizing that the cf card was not inside the camera.

[shafiq]

BobbyC wrote:
Here's what I see is the most significant differences:

2.5 fps for 4 shots on Rebel vs. 3fps for 9 shots on 10D
No PC Terminal on Rebel
No ISO 3200 on Rebel
Less viewfinder info on Rebel
No internal flash exposure comp. on Rebel
No incremental white balance setting on Rebel
Darker viewfinder on Rebel
No mirror lock-up on Rebel

No custom functions on Rebel, notably:
SET button customizable
The ability to force tha camera not to fire without a CF card
AF point registration
2nd curtain sync
AE lock button customizable

None of these will keep a person from taking equally good photos with either camera but it could affect the types of pictures taken.

Hope this helps.



BobbyC,

Thanks for the detailed explanation of differences. This definately helps put things into perspective. I am sold on the 10D.

[shafiq]

MCouper wrote:
Dear Shafiq,
If you're gonna get into photography artistically, or want to reach higher levels of creativity, get the 10D.

Hatem Eldoronki

Hatem Eldoronki,

Thank you for responding. I will be getting the 10D next week. I would have purchased it this weekend as the local store has 2 in stck. However, I have ordered the lens from B&H (significantly cheaper for lens) and it will not arrive till mid next week. I do not think I could wait with just the camera body with no lens for the next 5 days :-)

[toddb]

MCouper wrote:
What is the purpose of firing without CF inside?

I just tried to confirm, you can use "RomoteCapture" (comes with the 10D) to take pictures without the CF in the camera and they end up right on your harddrive. Like for taking time lapse type stuff.

[Andy_T]

Hi,

the biggest PRICE difference IMHO is not the difference in the base price between 10D and 300D, but rather the difference in the $ 100 for the 18-55 lens in the kit as opposed to $ 900 for the 17-40 4.0 L.

Of course the 17-40 is (as an L lens) supposed to be a lot better, but the price difference is considerable.

Regards,
Andy

[puttick]

There is one major difference nobody has mentioned so far.

The Digital Rebel (300D here in UK) takes the new series of EF-S lenses as well as the EF (i.e.35mm format) EOS lenses. The 10D will not, and never will, take the EF-S as it doesn't have the mount.

Now don't think they are simply cheap and inferior - they are just smaller because they don't need to cover a full 36x24mm frame, only the CCD which is 2/3 that size. So they can have smaller elements in a smaller, lighter casing, and use a shorter backfocus. This requires a different mirror action (slides up and back), and a different mount. The design is in fact optimised for the digital, rather than 35mm, EOS body.

There are supposed to be a whole series of these EF-S lenses on the drawing board. None will fit on a 10D. However you can still fit the 35mm format lenses on a Rebel, such as the cheap and excellent 50/1.8 EF.

This is one of the reasons why I will probably be buying a 300D. As for creative photography, that is 30% imagination, 30% timing, 30% technique, 9% luck and 1% (or less) technology IMHO ;-)

[shafiq]

puttick wrote:
There is one major difference nobody has mentioned so far.

The Digital Rebel (300D here in UK) takes the new series of EF-S lenses as well as the EF (i.e.35mm format) EOS lenses. The 10D will not, and never will, take the EF-S as it doesn't have the mount.

Now don't think they are simply cheap and inferior - they are just smaller because they don't need to cover a full 36x24mm frame, only the CCD which is 2/3 that size. So they can have smaller elements in a smaller, lighter casing, and use a shorter backfocus. This requires a different mirror action (slides up and back), and a different mount. The design is in fact optimised for the digital, rather than 35mm, EOS body.

There are supposed to be a whole series of these EF-S lenses on the drawing board. None will fit on a 10D. However you can still fit the 35mm format lenses on a Rebel, such as the cheap and excellent 50/1.8 EF.

This is one of the reasons why I will probably be buying a 300D. As for creative photography, that is 30% imagination, 30% timing, 30% technique, 9% luck and 1% (or less) technology IMHO ;-)


Nigel,

Thanks for your comments. You definately put a different perspective on pro's and con's :)

[psk4363]

I would agree with Nigel 100% both re the 'future-proofing' of the 300D vs 10D concerning the EF-S lenses and hisaccurate assessment of creative photography.

Barry

[BobbyC]

I tend to think that full frame sensors will come to the masses before a full line of EF-S lenses, that's only my opinion though. Seems as though they would need to make some nice high quality EF-S L's to get more advanced ams or pros convinced to buy a 300D.

Of course if you ever think you'll upgrade to a 1Ds or something similar in the future or still want to use film, the EF-S will not help you any. I think it's a great idea though, and don't get me wrong, I'm not against the 300D, I think it's great to get more folks into a DSLR.

Cheers,
Bobby

[Andy_T]

BobbyC wrote:
ISeems as though they would need to make some nice high quality EF-S L's to get more advanced ams or pros convinced to buy a 300D.



Canon marketing definitely doesn't want pros (who can affort a 1Ds or 10D) to pick up the cheap 300D instead. That would not make much commercial sense. I'm not sure we'll see EF-S L lenses in the future. I'd rather expect more additions in the 28-200 (35 mm equivalent) zoom range targeted at 'holiday snappers'.

Regards,
Andy

[BobbyC]

What I was trying to point out is that the EF-S lense is not a big reason to by a 300D particularly since it limits you to that camera. Non-Pros (Notice I said amateurs and pros) upgrade cameras as well and pros that use a 10D could be very tempted to buy a 300D as a backup, I would if I didn't already have my D30 as a backup.

[Andy_T]

To me, the only available EF-S lens 18-55 is a major argument in favor of the 300D, as it brings down the price of a DSLR with wide angle lens from $ 2300 (rough estimate for 10D+17-40L) to $ 1000 (of course, at presumably different image quality). :)

When you upgrade to the 10D, you can continue use the 300D as a backup or sell it on as a bundle with the lens.

Of course, you could also use the 16mm manual Zenitar fisheye (125$) or the Sigma 15-30 (600$), 17-35 (400$), 18-35 (??) or Cosina/Tamron/Tokina... 19-.. (250$?) third party lenses. But the Canon EF-S is the cheapest - and most likely not the worst - way...

Regards,
Andy

[BobbyC]

You don't have to buy a 17-40L, but I'm not gonna get into it with you, I was just trying to help answer the orignal question. Go ahead and base your camera purchase on one cheap lense and ignore everything else, no skin off my back ;o)

[robertwgross]

Prior to purchasing my D60, I owned a Canon EOS film camera, so I had some EF lenses. Obviously, that helped make my decision to purchase a Canon digital camera that could use the same lenses.

However, if I were shopping for a Canon digital camera now, and if I were interested in the Digital Rebel, it would be a tough decision whether to purchase the EF-S lens with it, since the EF-S would not be usable anywhere else. It would be much easier to purchase a real EF lens that has no restrictions on use.

I agree that you can't get much of a zoom lens for $100, though.

---Bob Gross---

[BobbyC]

I've always been fascinated with what makes people spend thier hard earned money on things. Not that anyone is wrong, it's just interesting to me.

The lens is a nice addition but even with the smaller size and cheaper costs, it's not going to be a first rate lense by any means. To some that isn't a big issue and that's cool, but I like to look down the road a little, even if it's only $1,000.00, that's not just pocket change and I wouldn't want to feel like I wasted it, it's a sucky feeling.

[Andy_T]

BobbyC wrote:
You don't have to buy a 17-40L, but I'm not gonna get into it with you, I was just trying to help answer the orignal question. Go ahead and base your camera purchase on one cheap lense and ignore everything else, no skin off my back ;o)

Bobby,

my comment was not meant to be personal - if it made this impression to you, please take my sincere apologies!

I'm facing the same decision at the moment which DSLR to buy in the near to medium future. I did not add that I love to photograph landscapes - so having a true wide angle lens is an important factor in my choice of a camera.

On my old Nikon 601, my preferred lens was a Sigma 24-50, it was on the camera practically all the time, and most of the time used on the wide end.

On my G2, I use the Olympus WCON-08 to get at least 28 mm. (With adapter and lens, the camera is actually bigger than the Digital rebel :))

So my choices at the moment include the Digital Rebel set or the 10D with either the Sigma 15-30 or 17-35 ... This results in a considerable price difference between these options. As I don't really need the extra frame rate or buffer or the other features discerning the 10D from the 300D, price will be an important factor.

Regards,
Andy

PS: I don't think that buying the Digital Rebel will be a waste ... its features and performance should be sufficient to most amateur photographers (and that's what I am) for quite some time!

[BobbyC]

It did seem as though you were intent on tossing every issue except the lense, and I may very well be wrong, but I didn't take it personally. It's so hard to convey the tone of a conversation on a forum.

I should be very clear, I don't think the rebel would be a waste of money at all, unless, you buy it and find out it won't do what you want, then it is a waste of not only money but time as well. There is a reason that a 10D-17-40L would be more money, whether or not it's important enough, only you can decide.

For landscapes, I've seen many very nicely stitched photos that are much wider than you could do with any lense. This might be a case for buying say a 20mm prime or something (that would probably be much higher quality). Landscapes typically need a very sharp lense and I am weary of the EF-S in that regards.

Again I'm just tossing out ideas based on my own experience.

[shafiq]

Thanks all for your comments. Just wanted to update everyone that I have gone ahead and purchased the Canon 10D camera. The decision was based on the following factors:

1. Feedback from this Forum
2. Camera being offered at $1349 + Free Shipping from DELL
3. The Canon 70-200 L IS (Yes Image Stabalization) lens being offered at $1125 + Free Shipping, Brand New US Warranty from DELL

I looked at this as a real bargain and went ahead and ordered yesterday.

Once again I would like to thank everyone for there comments. This truly is a great Forum.

Just as an FYI. They do not list most of the items on the web site. You have to call in and ask. I dealt with Matt, he can be reached at 1-800-999-3355 Ext 82509

Regards
Shafiq,
Florida, USA

[shafiq]

shafiq wrote:
Thanks all for your comments. Just wanted to update everyone that I have gone ahead and purchased the Canon 10D camera. The decision was based on the following factors:

1. Feedback from this Forum
2. Camera being offered at $1349 + Free Shipping from DELL
3. The Canon 70-200 L IS (Yes Image Stabalization) lens being offered at $1125 + Free Shipping, Brand New US Warranty from DELL

I looked at this as a real bargain and went ahead and ordered yesterday.

Once again I would like to thank everyone for there comments. This truly is a great Forum.

Just as an FYI. They do not list most of the items on the web site. You have to call in and ask. I dealt with Matt, he can be reached at 1-800-999-3355 Ext 82509

Regards
Shafiq,
Florida, USA

Oh by the way here is a link to some of the items that DELL does show on the web site...

http://accessories.us.dell.com/sna/productlisting.aspx?c=us&l=en&cs=rc968571&category_id=5416

[Malaxos1]

I just got a Digital Rebel yesterday. I have been using an Olympus E-10 for about a year and have loved it. I have done quite a few weddings and othe jobs with it but found it limited in some areas. For one it had a max shutter speed of 1/650 and also had very high noise levels at anything over ISO 80. While the D Rebel does have a few short comings of it's own its pros by far out weigh it's cons. One thing I noticed was that it is an incredibly fast camera, I am not talking about the 2.5 fps for up to four frames. I am talking about the three seconds from turning it on to shooting, also three seconds between shots out side of burst mode. Being that I don't use custom settings and use M,A modes only I should be able to capture what I want. One draw back is that it does not have spot meter, I will have to get used to that when metering off my gray card. Also the 18mm-55m isn't that bad but it's not even close to the f2-f4.2 lens that came with the E10. One thing I have planned was to one day get a 10D, this camera will end up being it's backup but at least what I buy now for the most part will fit on the 10D...Dean

[Carbon]

The Rebel is great. Canon will sell lots over x-mas and they'll make tons of money to make more awesome lenses. More people will be in the EF world, buying EF lenses. But the Rebel is not for serious photographers. You can add to the list:

expected shutter life - Claimed to be 20,000 shots for Rebel, 70,000+ shots for 10D. This was from a senior Canon technical rep. Call up Canon if you don't believe me, I've been wrong before.

forced AI-autofocus - This is a terrible, incredibly stupid handicap for Canon to build in. It's just software, why not give Rebel users the choice of One-Shot and AI Servo focus? AI Focus is less dependable than giving the user the choice of forcing one mode or another. When I had the Rebel (returned to store, whew!), the system would often break out of one-shot when I was waiting for the right moment to arise.

plastic body - Mount a 950 gram 24-70L lens on the Rebel and tell me what you hear from the hand grip when you lift the camera up. It's not pretty. I shudder (pun intended) to think what would happen to the Rebel if I mounted the 70-200 2.8 IS. Yes, I know it feels great in the store with that puny 18-55mm plastic lens, but mount some real glass and it gets scary. If there's any flex in the actual lens mount and sensor area, you can imagine what havoc it would wreak on the image.

It's not for me, but the Digital Rebel is definitely good for some, though. No dead pixels in the Rebel I tested, which is a good sign. Backfocusing was the same as the two (recent production) 10Ds I tested. In my opinion, EF-S is a definite plus. You can use both EF and EF-S, so how can it be bad? I just hope Canon doesn't go and invest a lot of money in making EF-S lenses. I should have asked Jim Rose what the future of EF-S was when he was here giving a talk. Oh well.

BobbyC wrote:
Here's what I see is the most significant differences:

2.5 fps for 4 shots on Rebel vs. 3fps for 9 shots on 10D
No PC Terminal on Rebel
No ISO 3200 on Rebel
Less viewfinder info on Rebel
No internal flash exposure comp. on Rebel
No incremental white balance setting on Rebel
Darker viewfinder on Rebel
No mirror lock-up on Rebel

No custom functions on Rebel, notably:
SET button customizable
The ability to force tha camera not to fire without a CF card
AF point registration
2nd curtain sync
AE lock button customizable

None of these will keep a person from taking equally good photos with either camera but it could affect the types of pictures taken.

Hope this helps.

[bigted]

I have also just faced the same problem. I was so sure about buying a 10D then Canon went and announced the Rebel. There were no reveiws available only speculation. I waited and waited and eventually Steve's Digicams and DPreview posted early reviews. There seemed to be very little difference in picture quality in direct comparisons but there are some significant differences in functionality.

I have owned 3 digital camera's previously 2 of which being Canon Powershots. The 3 biggest problems for me were picture quality,light/focussing and speed/shutter lag. I have spent well over what the 10D costs with all the various attachments and so this convinced me to once and for all buy a camera that would last.

When reading reviews it seems that the 300/10D's picture quality is better than 35mm SLR Film and you need a large format film camera to beat the 10D/300D. This for me says that the 10D/300D will last a long time as I will no longer be in the race for more pixels.

They both will focus in very low light conditions and with Image Stabilised lenses I will not be missing the shots I have in the past.

The main thing that made me buy a 10D is it's added functionality and speed. 9 frames in 3 seconds means that I will not miss those action shots unless I have made the mistake.

Conclusion

Buy the best Digital SLR you can afford with the best lenses you can afford and stop shelling out money for compacts that are outdated in weeks.

[Malaxos1]

3fps at 9 frames is fast byt don't let the rebels speed fool you. I have been impressed how fast this thing is, 3 seconds from powering to shooting and only 2-3 seconds between shots. It is incredible fast and resonsive, I havn't even noticed any shutter lag at all...Dean