Should I buy digital rebel XT?

[cameraG]

A question on whether I should buy a digital rebel XT to replace G2.
I was very attempting to get a digital rebel XT, mainly for shooting under light without flash. Based on sample pictures, it seems that a digital rebel XT could produce a reasonable good pictures at 1600 iso. However, the lense (F3.5-F5.6) included in the kit is substantially slower than the one in G2 (F2.0-F2.5). I tried on my G2 and I found out that F3.5 requires about 3 times longer exposure time than F 2.0. At this moment, I am shooting low light pictures using G2 at iso 400. The pictures are a littel grainy but still usable.
It seems for me that a digital rebel XT with F3.5 lense at 1600 iso may need similar exposure time that needed by a G2/F2.0/iso 400. If that is true, probably I should not invest $600 to get a digital rebel XT.
Am I right or wrong? Any other camera/lense combinations (below $1000) that can do much better low light jobs than G2? Many thanks!

[aLFaDaRK]

Well you could buy the XT body alone, and replace the kit lens with a fast prime, like the 50 1.4, or 50 1.8 - but you sacrifice zoom.

[gabrioladude]

I see this to be an "apples to oranges" comparison

the rebel is a different "beast"

-it is bigger
-the lens set up is different
-it has more capabilities from a functionality perspective
-it expects that you will post process your images to get the sharpness people expect from their images etc etc

as you can see from my signature I shot a DSLR and enjoy the benefits they provide, but I just purchased a G7 because I don't want to carry around a DSLR all of the time

[Statement]

Believe me, the xt does not perform that well at 800 iso, let alone 1600..

[Nidz]

opps.. double posted.. sorry.

[Nidz]

Well I gotta say I've had my Digital XT for a year or more now and shot over 8500 shots in many various locations and photography types and I love it. For the money it's an excelent camera especially for those who are looking to break into the SLR market. Not much wrong with the kit lens but yes, I agree you will soon be wanting more glass for it once purchased. Sure high ISO can be grainy but you get that with lots of other models. There shouldn't be too masny occassiona where high ISO is needed. Good Luck

[Saudidave]

Believe me, the xt does not perform that well at 800 iso, let alone 1600..

My XT performed very well at 1600 not to mention 800, so you are doing something very wrong.
As for light levels, you get a halving of light as you progress, ie, f1.4 has double the light of f2, which has double the light of f2.8 etc. The sequence is

1.4 - 2 - 2.8 - 4 - 5.6 - 8 - 11 - 16 - 22 - 32

[kidpower]

Just a personal opinion. My Rebel XT performs outstanding ay ISO 800 and I regularly shoot indoors (sports and other) at ISO 1600 with noise (I clean up with Noise Ninja). The noise at 1600 still allows me to print at 8 x 10 that is more than acceptable to the average person.

While not the best DSLR "high noise" performer, it still does an excellent job.

If your exposure is close to correct at the higher ISO's your noise level will be greatly reduced.

[cameraG]

Thank you all for valuable inputs. I just ordered a digital rebel XT.

[sugarzebra]

Good choice and you will enjoy the camera.

[Nick_C]

I agree, ISO800 & 1600 are fine, ive done direct comparisons with the 30D & the results are so close, the XT is a damn fine camera, exposure is critical when using high ISO's so maybe thats why somebody on here said the high ISO was poor.

I went from the Powershot Pro1 to the 350D & noticed a massive improvement in overall sharpness, lower noise, faster performance etc.. it just totally blew the Pro1 out of the water, not even comparable!! so I would presume it would be as bigger jump going from the G2 to a 350D (XT).

Nick :-)

[NickSimcheck]

ISO 1600 on the XT is like ISO 200 on S3 IS and ISO 400 on the G7. It's not that bad, in fact I'd print a ISO 1600 (cleaned with Noise Ninja) print all the way up to 8X10 without any thought.

[cameraG]

Got a XT kit from Dell at $58X.xx and a Cannon 50 mm/1.8 lense from Amazon at $69.99. With 50 mm lense, the camera performed extremely well at low light without flash. I am very happy. Thank you very much for the suggests.

[cdifoto]

ISO 1600 on the XT is like ISO 200 on S3 IS and ISO 400 on the G7. It's not that bad, in fact I'd print a ISO 1600 (cleaned with Noise Ninja) print all the way up to 8X10 without any thought.

I printed and framed an 11x14 ISO1600 from the XT with mostly shadow detail where noise is most prevalent. Looks great.

[rhys]

Properly used the XT is a great camera. It is, however, a very different animal from your G2 and you might find the transition challenging.

[Broncobear]

XT is really a great camera, my 800's come out just fine, 1600 has a bit of noise but I hardly shoot at 1600.

If I had to buy it again now rather than the XTI , I still would..just because I'm comfrotable with what it does.

That being said, I'm also looking to adding a new body once there is a new update replacing the 30D, but who knows when that will be released,

[ray_lam5]

Im sorry but there is simply no comparison between a prosumer grade camera and the xt. In low light conditions the xt is an amazingly accomplished camera even 800-1600, but i do warn you that buying a digital slr leads you to a slippery slope of addiction. Please dont do it you will end up spending every penny you have on new lens, flash, tripod etc etc...

enjoy the g7 for all its worth and be a happy consumer, only go the slr route if you really love photography you are willing to invest a huge amount of cash on. This was my mistake and i do sometimes regret it, but hell what a hobby! sorry im contradicting myself but you get the gist!

DONT DO IT

[Broncobear]

Im sorry but there is simply no comparison between a prosumer grade camera and the xt. In low light conditions the xt is an amazingly accomplished camera even 800-1600, but i do warn you that buying a digital slr leads you to a slippery slope of addiction. Please dont do it you will end up spending every penny you have on new lens, flash, tripod etc etc...



He makes a valid point, your going to fall in love with photography with this camera.

[Nick_C]

I agree with ray_lam5, you really have to watch yourself with this as if your not careful it can be very expensive, im pretty much settled now with my gear, I might buy a 70-xxx sometime but at the moment I have no need for it.

I agree to some degree with the comment that you cant compare the XT with a "Prosumer" DSLR, but from my own experience & despite what some people have said about the 30D being far superiour to the XT, I didnt find this myself, the difference was mainly a more flashy body, lots of the other things that were supposed to be far better (focussing) etc.. wasnt much in it, so I consider the 350D/400D/30D all to be at the same level, I wouldnt however want to compare a 350D (XT) to a 5D or anything higher than that...

Nick :-)

[Nick_C]

It is possible though to keep this from costing you a fortune, its easy to get carried away with all the lenses on offer but like most people I don't have a lot of money to spend, the 350D is a stunning little camera, its won so many awards in its time, more than any other DSLR.

I decided when I went over to a DSLR from a Powershot Pro1 that I didnt want to get caught up in the whole DSLR bag of lenses kind of thing, I want to travel light, so thats why I just go out now with my 350D & Sigma 17-70 lens, I get some great shots with that lens, its fantastic at macro shots too, alright not TRUE macro but its pretty stunning!

The only lens that I would like (providing its at least as optically good as my 17-70) is the new 18-200 OS that is coming out soon, that would be an ideal lens for walking around, but I just hope they make the optics good, not like the old 18-200 :-(

Nick :-)