Should I replace Powershot S50 with EOS 300D?

[Matixvolta]

Hi,
I've been using S50 for around 8 months now. I dunno if I should go to the next step to replace it with EOS 300D. To me the compact camera restricts how I take pictures because of the limited DoF. I'm starting to work on close-up shots and I don't feel that S50 did a good job. Also, the zoom is restricting my photography a bit.

Let's say i'm an amateur-intemediate who used camera quite extensively. From fireworks, landscape, black and white, slow shutter speed to fast. I also played around with apature.

I also had a look at Powershot S1 IS but since it's only 3.2 megapixel i scrapped it off my drawing board. Reason I proposed that was coz of 10x zoom.

What's the 'major' benifit of 300D compared with S50?

[RichardtheSane]

Main advantage...
It's an SLR.

You have a choice of lenses, you have a much more responsive camera.

But...
You need deeper pockets, remember that the 300D is the forst step. You will feel the need for a telephoto/zoom lens very quickly. More flash cards and definitly more batteries (300D uses them much quicker than the s50)

And that was the very brief saturday morning version...

[Guillermo Freige]

Matix:

Major benefits: Noise levels, more "film-like" look, fast AF, better optics (but not with the included lens)

If you can, keep both. They are very different cameras. Of course the 300d is a better camera in a lot of areas, but try to carry a 300d with a lens in your pocket :)
The included kit lens is not so good also, so in some aspects the S50 imbuilt lens is better, mostly in CA in the borders of the image. So to buy a better lens (as the 28-135IS) is a good idea.
Also it can double as a backup camera if something wrong happens with the 300d.
Regarding battery life, Richard is wrong (sorry rich :)). The 300d has longer battery life (the double at least) than the S50.

[Chazs]

I'm was in your position the last few weeks, however, I was contemplating stepping up from the S40. On Tuesday I went to the local camera store and took about 20 pictures with both the S40 and the Rebel. Here's what I found out...

1) Less picture noise shooting at 1600 ISO on the Dreb than at 400 ISO on the S40.

2) A/F was A LOT faster on the DReb (interesting since I just read the discussion on A/F speed of Nikon D70 versus Canon D1. It's all relative folks. Gee, remember the days of manual focus.)

3) Depth of field was great, less than an inch at macro-wide open. Never could do that with the S40.

4) I also cropped a picture by about 20% and enlarged it to an 8x10. Wow!!

5) Finally, swapped off the lens and put on a 300mm (480 mm after the conversion) and pulled in a license plate from about 300 yards!! Hand held even.

After switching back and forth between cameras the S40 started feeling tinier more "toy like". Looks like I'm back in the SLR arean after a 5 year hiatus. :)

About the only downer I found with the DReb is that in RAW mode (around 6 mb per picture) the write-time is fairly long...say 5+ seconds.

Comparing the printed pictures side by side did it for me. Something about the color, clarity, tonal balance, and depth of field from a "real" lens are just not possible with a point-and-shoot lens. I'll still carry around the S40 because it can more easily fit in my pocket and can be made silent situatuations when necessary.

Go to your local camera store and take some sample shots. I think you'll be sold. I'll be heading into town today to finally make the plunge. Now, which lenses should I buy? (Can't say that with the point and shoots.)

[Chazs]

Guillermo, Question on your suggestion about the 28-135 lens. I'll be getting the Dreb today, and can either get the kit, or body only and add to it the 28-135 lens. IS that really worth a few hundred dollars more? and what is the quality advantage this this lens over the kit lens? CHAZS

[Guillermo Freige]

Its a very good lens, and with a excellent value. I'm posting some crops and the links to the full images at the end, from the same picture (almost) taken with the 18-55 at 55 and the 28-135IS at 50, at 1/800 f/8 ISO400, with minutes of difference. Sorry about the different framing. Despite that, you can see the HUGE difference between lenses. Straight from camera images. You can still buy the kit lens to cover the 18-28 range, or skip it and buy some good wideangle lens as the Canon 17-40L or Sigmas 12-24 or 17-35 (all in the $600 range).

18-55 top-right border (at 55)
http://gfreige.homelinux.org/18-55-crop1.jpg

28-135 top-right border (at 50)
http://gfreige.homelinux.org/28-135-crop1.jpg

18-55 center area (at 55)
http://gfreige.homelinux.org/18-55-crop2.jpg

28-135 center area (at 50)
http://gfreige.homelinux.org/28-135-crop2.jpg

http://gfreige.homelinux.org/18-55-55-f8.jpg

http://gfreige.homelinux.org/28-135-50-f8.jpg

And this is a similar picture taken prevously with the 50/1.8 at f/8. This one is in AdobeRGB colorpace and using a wider framing.

http://gfreige.homelinux.org/50-f8.jpg

[Guillermo Freige]

This is a S50/300d + kit lens comparison

I've tried to use a parameter set in each camera to keep the image output as similar as possible between them, including similar pixel size relative to the image, color response (saturation and white balance) contrast, sharpness and depth of field. Both taken in RAW and converted to 16-bit tiff, and then saved as quality 10 JPEG wihout any postprocessing.

The S50 picture was taken using P mode with -2/3 exp.compensation, cloudy WB, ISO 50. Normal settings. Wideangle end of the lens used (7mm). 1/1000 f/4.
The Drebel picture was taken using the included kit lens at M mode at daylight WB, ISO 100. Custom settings (Saturation +1, Contrast 0, Sharpening +2, because the Drebel generates by default a less saturated and much less sharpened image). Wideangle end of the lens used (almost, 21mm used instead of 18). 1/125 f/11 (i've used those parameters instead of 1/1000 f/4 to simulate the S50 DoF). Be aware than the Drebel at ISO 100 is as sensitive as the S50 as ISO 50, that´s why the same speed/aperture relation render a similar exposed picture despite the different ISO setting.
Both pictures are in sRGB colorspace and with full EXIF info. Large files (2+ MB each)

S50 picture:
http://gfreige.homelinux.org/Garden_S50.jpg

Drebel picture:
http://gfreige.homelinux.org/Garden_DRebel.jpg

[Matixvolta]

The times when i really need a good camera is when i do nightshots. S50 is decent except that there's heaps of noise when shooting with ISO 400. This i really discredit from using high ISO.

I also i like idea that the AF is much better and faster. This is truely a big bonus to me as sometimes i don't have the split second to change the parameter and bracket.

Does the 300D also do add-on features like S50 such as b/w prints, white balance, etc? If that's so then that's a real bonus.

What's the slowest shutter speed 300D can do. I know that S50 can only do it up to 15 sec...alright in most cases but a bit short when taking nightshots such as fireworks.

[Guillermo Freige]

Noise from the 300D at ISO 100-400 is almost nonexistent, at ISO 800 is similar to S50 ISO 100-200 in medium to dark areas, and ISO1600 is similar to the S50 at ISO 200 in dark-medium areas, more like ISO 400 in really dark ones, but almost nonexistent in bright areas at any ISO setting. AF is much better, but it also depends of the lens. With a really fast lens (as any f/1.8 prime) if you can take the picture handheld at ISO 1600, you can focus. The kit lens is a little worse because is less luminous. Manual focusing is MUCH better because you actually are using an optical viewfinder, and not a LCD or EVF, so you are seeing the real thing. This also means you can't use the LCD as a preview tool, but as a review one only.
No DSLR have the "effect modes" of the digicams, as B&W or sepia. you must do that in postprocessing. You can modify contrast, saturation, sharpness, tone, white balance. and also colorspace (sRGB or AdobeRGB). RAW mode doesn't reduce the burst depth (it's always 4 shots in all modes)
Regarding shutter speeds, you can use a timed 30sec exposure, or longer ones (to 2h) using bulb mode. Noise levels start to be noticeable at ISO 100 after 10m exposures