So what is the verdict on the digital rebels?

[myarrowsaim]

All the reviews I find online mostly just list specs.

I have had a G1 for a couple of years now and just really want a digital slr. The price is nice, but I want some opinions. Thanks!

Josh

[maderito]

myarrowsaim wrote:
All the reviews I find online mostly just list specs.
Josh

Mostly what I've read are great reviews with very positive recommendations. What's not to like about an extremely capable digital SLR that broke the $1000 barrier? The only negatives I've encountered are those who own 10D's or, perhaps, wish they did. I personally own a 10D and am extremely glad that I bought it before the DRebel became available. I would now be agonizing about the choice. When the 10D came in at $1500, I couldn't resist.

Is your real question: 10D vs 300D? Lots of opinions here on that one. Perhaps you want to rephrase or refine your question? :)

[myarrowsaim]

Yeah
I could get a digital rebel body and a slightly better lens than the lens kit for like 1100 bucks so the price was very appealing.

I was just curious if anybody had any major gripes with the camera.

[robekert]

I bought a DR the day they were released to the public. Glad I did. The DR is my first DSLR. I do not agonize over what is missing or the limitations that others have complained about because this is my 1st SLR. I do not have anything to compare the DR against. I guess I am a virgin of sorts, so it all seems good. I went from a G1 (I still use this for IR work) to a G2 (still use because of its small size for P&S) to the Digital Rebel. Much to learn, but a lot of fun.

Verdict...........GUILTY.......of the crime of being an outstanding value.

As for the limitations......There is always a 1D for $8000.

Rob

[xxlt]

myarrowsaim~~Hello :)
I have the DRebel...coming from the G3 and with my level of skill I feel it was the right choice for me. However I was Just on the verge of Buying the D10. Then the 300D entered the market. Either one you will be happy with. If you have been around photography for years and have the $$ get the 10D.

bill from Ohio

[ohenry]

I have been fairly pleased with my DR. The kit lens is not impressive, but does an adequate job for the money. There are limitations to the performance of the DR, but for most amateurs they're not imposing limitations. My biggest objection is the lightweight feel when using a longer and heavier lens, but this is really minor in the long run. There are some issues that I miss somewhat, but have been able to deal with them or work around them without much trouble. If I made a livlihood with a camera, this probably would not be my camera of choice, but all in all it's well worth the money. If the lack of certain features are an issue to you, then by all means step on up to the 10D.

[Plexiprs]

I like mine. A definite upgrade from the G3 I'd been using. It is NOT a 10D or a 1DS, but some people think it should be.

I'm happy, but recognize it is not a top-of-the-line pro camera. I'd recommend it to anyone wanting to get into D-SLR and possessing some basic to intermediate photography skills.

[hmhm]

myarrowsaim wrote:
All the reviews I find online mostly just list specs.
Josh

This is more than just specs:
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos300d/
-harry

[Malaxos1]

I have one and love it. I was dissapoined at first because I was not getting nearly as good photos as I did with my E10. Anyway I did not get too discouraged and went out and bought a different lens. So with the new lens and lots of practice and patience I now feel that it was a great upgrade. There are some limitation as I really like a true spotmeter and flash compensation which the E10 had, however I have since learned to get around them. Also the body is light and my new lens is quite heavy, this caused the camera to tip forward while strapped around my neck. So I went out and got the
BG-E1 battery grip and a few batteries and now it is quite heavy, doesn't tip and makes the camera look and feel better. I do shoot photos on the side for cash, including doing weddings and I am not afraid to use this camera for a paid gig...Dean

[deezeljuice]

I bought a DRebel. It was my first digital SLR, but I have been photographing for about 35 years. I have owned many 35mm slr's, including a top-of-the-line Nikon. I have also owned and used medium formats and truly love them. But I have to say that with a DRebel, some decent glass (it dosen't have to be L glass either) and some Photoshop skills, you can produce excellent images. It all comes down to your skills and creativity. Sure the D-10 and others are more advanced cameras with more features, but in the right hands a DRebel can produce as good or better images. At the end of the day, it's the photographer that makes the images...

[Malaxos1]

deezeljuice wrote:
I bought a DRebel. It was my first digital SLR, but I have been photographing for about 35 years. I have owned many 35mm slr's, including a top-of-the-line Nikon. I have also owned and used medium formats and truly love them. But I have to say that with a DRebel, some decent glass (it dosen't have to be L glass either) and some Photoshop skills, you can produce excellent images. It all comes down to your skills and creativity. Sure the D-10 and others are more advanced cameras with more features, but in the right hands a DRebel can produce as good or better images. At the end of the day, it's the photographer that makes the images...

I couldn't agree more. It's all about the final image that counts...Dean

[myarrowsaim]

Thanks for all the help so far guys.

If I get the digital rebel I don't want the lens kit. What lens should I get?
I was looking at a EF 28-90MM F/4-5.6 II USM LENS

Also, how is infrared with the digital rebel?

[mchwe]

i consider myself an "enthusiast," NOT pro or prosumer. i had a canon slr (elan iie) before the drebel. i probably shoot 100 pictures a month, mostly of my family.

certainly, i cannot exploit the full ability of the drebel. if there is one thing that i really miss not having, it is flash exposure compensation. if you can live without it, i wouldn't hesitate: it is a wonderful camera.

i have a few canon lenses. my primary zoom is the 28-105, and i am very happy with it. even with the multiplier factor, it is a very good range for the camera, even inside.

i would suggest that you owe it to yourself to actually exploit the fact that the lenses are interchangeable: if you get a 28-200 and never buy another lens, you won't really know what you have in your hands. get a 50mm prime and be surprised at how little light you need to take a picture. get a 100-300 zoom and take just about any outdoor sports picture you could want.

in terms of autofocus, it is very fast. one reviewer (i can't remember which one) tested the drebel's autofocus as being faster than the 10d! any rate, if autofocus is important to you, make sure you get ultrasonic lenses-- fast and quiet.

my favorite lens is an 85mm prime, perfect for portraiture. if you buy a lens and don't like or use it, you can get pretty close to your purchase price if you sell it on ebay.

good luck!!

[theoldmoose]

mchwe wrote:
if there is one thing that i really miss not having, it is flash exposure compensation.



If you get the 550EX flash, you can set FEC (and 2nd curtain, and FP) on the flash. You get a first-rate bounce flash that is capable of multi-channel master/slave that you can keep if you upgrade the body later. Highly recommended.

[myarrowsaim]

Does the 420 flash work well with the 300d? That is the flash I use with my G1

[DonCoon]

myarrowsaim wrote:
Thanks for all the help so far guys.

If I get the digital rebel I don't want the lens kit. What lens should I get?
I was looking at a EF 28-90MM F/4-5.6 II USM LENS


If you purchase the DRebel:

1) Get the kit lens with it. It only adds $100 to the price. If you don't like it, sell it on Ebay; they're going for an average of $156 so you'll make a little profit.

2) Don't get the 20-90. It's rated 2.52 (sub-average) on PhotoZone and not well rated elsewhere.
http://www.photozone.de/2Equipment/easytxt.htm

3) If you don't keep the kit lens, consider the Canon 28-105 USM II (3.00 "average" $210), Tamron AF 2.8 28-75mm LD XR Aspherical SP (4.02, "very good" $330), Tamron AF 3.5-5.6 24-135mm Aspherical AD IF SP (3.51, "good" $340AR) or similar. Resist the urge to save $100; you won't be satisfied and end up paying more when replacing it. I'm sure others have more ideas for good deals in this class.

4) Don't even consider a Super Zoom such as a 28-300, 28-300, etc. They're almost all rated poorly except for the highest priced such as the Canon 35-350L for $1400.

5) If you keep the kit lens, look for a 70-200, 70-300 or 100-300 with at least an "average" rating. That said, my Canon 75-300 USM IS is rated 2.62 (sub-average) but has been an acceptable performer. By accident, B&H sent me the cheaper 75-300 without USM or IS and I found it very acceptable. At $145AR I'd consider it a good buy although I returned it to get what I had ordered.

6) If money is an issue, watch B&H's used lens inventory. They have a 75-300 USM there now for $99. I bought a 10 condition 28-135 USM IS for $309 in August.

Best of Luck

[Malaxos1]

I agree abot the Tamron 28-75mm f2.8 lens as being a good choice. I wasn't very happy with the kit lens so I went out and got the Tamron. Also I have a 420EX Speedlight. It does work incredibly well but you still do not have control over the flash out put. Luckely the meter is very accurate so the flash output is usually dead on. What I do is play with exposure compensation to trick the flash to give more or less light...Dean

[Wickedfn4u]

Just downloaded my first batch of pictures from my DR. When they came on the screen for the first time my jaw dropped at the color, detail and beauty. I called my wife in and showed her the pictures. (Back ground, my wife is of the type that would say: is a CD better than tape? or I don't really notice the difference between DVD and VHS) But when she saw the images of my daughters soccer game she actually admitted that I spent my money wisely. Prior camera Sony DSC-P9 4.0mp Point and shoot.

[deezeljuice]

I'm with you. I had a Panasonic 2mgpixel with a Leica lens. Leica probably makes among the finest optics on any cameras. I was really impressed with that camera when I bought it. Loved the pictures. But when I saw the shots from the DR, I was like a kid on Christmas morning. My wife too has said they look amazing... It has brought the fun back to photography for me.

[theoldmoose]

myarrowsaim wrote:
Does the 420 flash work well with the 300d? That is the flash I use with my G1

It works as designed by Canon, where they believe that most users of Digital Rebels will only use the fully-automated modes. For that purpose, the 420EX is probably well-matched, in that it will only work with the camera as a fully automated flash.

For any kind of tricky exposure situation though, like needing to boost/cut the flash exposure by a couple of f-stops, you simply can't do it with the 420EX on a Digital Rebel. I know that someone else posted that they used the exposure compensation on the camera, but that affects both the ambient and the flash exposure values, and so may not get you what you want for some situations. And the well-publicized trick of changing the ISO on the camera doesn't work with digital cameras.

If you want/need to take flash shots with high shutter speeds (like 1/1000, for instance) you will need the 550EX, so you can put it manually in high-speed sync mode. Even though some cameras can command the 420EX to do 'stupid flash tricks' 8-), the Digital Rebel is so dumbed-down that Canon removed those options from the camera menus, so you need a flash with all the override controls on the flash itself, to get back the functions that were removed from the camera menus.

If you don't care about things like high-speed sync, FP or 2nd curtain, or being able to accurately do flash exposure compensation, then get the 420EX, and be happy with it. Shoot in RAW, and then you can fix some exposure problems reasonably in Photoshop. More time consuming than getting the shot in the first place, though.

Note that you can get a lot of that flash functionality by upgrading camera bodies (i.e. get the 10D). But, I figured for the difference in price, I could get the less expensive body with the kit lens, and have more than enough left over to get a first-rate flash, and a used 70-200 f4 zoom. Total outlay: about $1400, still less than the 10D body alone, and I end up with a killer bounce flash, and two useable lenses, covering 18-55 and 70-200. Even though neither of the lenses are very fast, the camera takes almost noiseless pictures at ISO 400, which gives you back a couple of stops, making it easier to use in lower light situations.

Nice DSLR start, I would think. *I'm* having a blast... 8-)

[2new]

This is my first SLR. I have owned a G2 for a couple of years and have been trying to justify spending the money for the 10D. The 300D was a much less painful purchase financially. I am sure that the missing advanced features will haunt me in a year or two as my skill set grows, but then I will upgrade to the latest '10D like' replacement. The picture quality (even with the Kit lens) is phenominal. I have no regrets & would recommend the camera.