Rebel Without a True Cause???

[SYS]

I've been debating hard between DR and 10D as my next digital camera of choice to go along with my recently purchased A80. Since I'm leaving for the Yellowstone National Park tomorrow, I decided to get myself a DR Kit that the Sam's Club carries (but no 10D) in order to try it for the duration of the vacation. (I was plesantly surprised to find an additional BP511 battery in the Kit box!)

I took about 25 shots, about half of which were taken with my old Canon 75-300 Zoom lense that I used for my Canon EOS 650. The other half were taken with the EF-S 18-55mm lense that came with the box. All of them were taken with the manufacturer initial setting.

Upon downloading the images to my computer, however, I was rather disappointed to find that images taken with the 6MP DR aren't any better than the images taken with the 4MP A80. I took the test during my lunch hour so I didn't have the time to fool around with any of the manual features nor did I have the chance to compare the true differences with the actual print results. I'm basing my statement strictly from the computer images between DR and A80 (both taken at their max MP but ISO 50 with A80 and ISO 100 with DR).

The question I have for those who have actually used BOTH the 4MP cameras and DR: Would I be able to see the true difference upon actually printing the images, or those computer images pretty much captured the hardly existing differences in true fashion? In other words, strictly IMAGE QUALITY wise, is A80 about the same as the DR?

[RikWriter]

Upon downloading the images to my computer, however, I was rather disappointed to find that images taken with the 6MP DR aren't any better than the images taken with the 4MP A80. I

You did something seriously wrong then. I recently went on vacation out west, and I took my Digital Rebel while my wife took an A80. When I uploaded the hundreds upon hundreds of pics we both took into our computer, I didn't need to look at the details to know which camera took which pic, even though I took most of the pics on the trip with the automatic settings. The Rebel pics were MUCH sharper and clearer.

[DocFrankenstein]

Your A80 may have done more post processing on the image such as sharpening and color correntions.

But sometimes my S1 gives me better images than the rebel with the lens kit. I think it's because my S1 HAS better lens than the 18-55. If you want to get the most out of your rebel you need to mount an L or at least a prime on it. That way it's gonna stay starp and nice.

What are the shutter speeds? Is it possible that you just blurred the photos? It is also possible that your 75-300 is just too old for the rebel.

[cmM]

IMAGE QUALITY wise, is A80 about the same as the DR?

Image quality does not depend only on the camera body. Rent an L lens, take a couple pix, and then see the difference ;)

[aam1234]

Hi RikWriter and SYS,

I'm afraid I agree with SYS. The first few pics I took with the Rebel were a dissapointment. Was expecting much better photos compared to G3.
But after a while, I started to notice a difference. I don't know what happend to improve the rebel's photos, but guess it's due to learning how to use the camera.

I'm sure you will get a lot of responses talking about the need to post process the photos. Personally, upped the parameters and occasionally spend few minutes adjusting the photos in PSE.

Not sure what's the purpose of what I wrote, but there you have one rebel owner experience.

[SYS]

First, thank you so much for your quick responses!!

Secondly, please excuse my ignorance, but what's an "L" lense? Specifically, 1) what does it do that the lenses I already have cannot do? 2) how much does it cost?

By the way, I'll be shooting a whole lot during my 9-day vacation starting tomorrow, probably in excess of 1,000+ with my 2MP Optura X1, A80, and the Rebel. By then, I'm hoping to see some real differences between A80 and the Rebel.

SYS

[Danny Boy]

The L lens has a higher qualtity in the optics and overall material. It is manufactured in a different manner which gives it a more sturdy feel to it (no loose feel to it). You also pay a much higher price for these lenses but in my opinion, you get what you pay for. When you get to a camera shop, test one and you will automatically feel the difference and when you see the results of a picture taken, you will see the difference. There are tons of threads pertaining to L lenses so read on.

[SYS]

What are the shutter speeds? Is it possible that you just blurred the photos? It is also possible that your 75-300 is just too old for the rebel.

I shot with 75-300 in high enough speed (1/500 and no breathing!!) in order to avoid any blurring. Also, my comparison was based more on photos taken with 18-55mm lense, knowing unfairness of comparing the results of regular lense and the zoom.

[cmM]

Secondly, please excuse my ignorance, but what's an "L" lense? Specifically, 1) what does it do that the lenses I already have cannot do? 2) how much does it cost?

1). These are professional grade, excellent built optically superior lenses. you WILL notice a difference.
(ex: http://www.cmuntean.net/images/jun23702001.jpg taken with the 70-200 f/2.8 L IS).

2) from a few hundred $ to a few thousands

[DocFrankenstein]

Secondly, please excuse my ignorance, but what's an "L" lense?
Pey psst. I can borrow you mine. The first few shots are free. :twisted:

And L lens is the canon "Luxury" series of lenses. Superb optical performance and build quality. They cost... depending on the lens... sometimes an arm... sometimes a leg. :lol: For example 70-200 f/4 L is 550 USD:

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/images/largeimages/183198.jpg

Some of them cost more than your rebel. :D The thing is that the quality they give usually worth the expense. Both because they are sharp and really fast.
1) what does it do that the lenses I already have cannot do?
It gives you a nice warm feeling inside.
It empties your wallet.
The resolution is superb
They are built like tanks
They are usually really fast, which gives you nice low light performance.
Without them, your rebel won't perform to it's fullest.

2) how much does it cost?
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=NavBar&A=search&Q=&ci=8429
Depending on the lens... they are definitely not cheap, but IMO they are worth it. Every lens that has an L in it's name is an L lens :D

By the way, I'll be shooting a whole lot during my 9-day vacation starting tomorrow, probably in excess of 1,000+ with my 2MP Optura X1, A80, and the Rebel. By then, I'm hoping to see some real differences between A80 and the Rebel.
The thing is that both of your lenses aren't very nice. Especially if your 75-300 was designed for film cameras and is 5+ years old. They won't give enough information for the sensor to record wide open.

Next time you're out in on a bright day, try stopping down the 18-55 to f/8 and shooting with that. Make sure the shutter speed is 1/100 or faster. If not, bump the ISO a bit.

You should be able to see the difference that way.

Hope this helps

[roanjohn]

Don't worry about the L lenses for now.

You should already see a difference in your images just from the kit lens alone.

First and foremost, all images from the Rebel has to be post-processed to achieve its maximum potential.

Second, view your pictures 100%.............you will see that images from the Rebel will retain more details with less noise.

Third, try shooting your Rebel at ISO 800............and do the same with the A80................that alone should show you the real difference from both camera.

Ro1

[SYS]

1). These are professional grade, excellent built optically superior lenses. you WILL notice a difference.
(ex: http://www.cmuntean.net/images/jun23702001.jpg taken with the 70-200 f/2.8 L IS).

WOW!! Now, that's a sharp, clean photo!!

:o

[Persian-Rice]

I guess ill throw in a little note for a someone who looks like he needs some info.

A camera is nothing without a good lens and vice versa, and at the end of the day a good photographer. Its like a bottle neck. If you have a great camera and and a mediocre lens then you wont be exploiting the true abilities of the camera. "L " lenses are the L series of lenses from canon which range anywhere from $600 for a 70-200 F4L or $7000 for a 1200mm. They are professional grade lenses that can take some truly stunning pictures if used properly.

I think one other major things to consider is that there is a huge amount of difference between what a Rebel and an A80 when it comes to "in camera" processing. With many of the Dslrs, you need to develop a picture. Most P&Ss the camera does it right aftre the picture is taken. Having access to control the development of your photographs is a huge positive. You get to control how much to fix things, you control the end result. With this being said, learn how to use elements or even better, photoshop.

Welcome to the world for workflow and digital darkrooms :D

Cheers.

[SYS]

Thanks, Doc, and roanjohn, for your tips.

I thought I ran out of all my charms in pursuading my wife in purchasing A80 and the Rebel within a one-week span. But after seeing the "L" lense and what it can do, I gotta dig deeper inside myself for that extra, reserved.... what did I say, CHARM? :?

[cmM]

Hahahaha..

You're hooked now :wink:

Did you get the warning that, on this forum, you WILL be encouraged to spend all your money?

[SYS]

Did you get the warning that, on this forum, you WILL be encouraged to spend all your money?

NO. Thanks to you guys for being SO helpful that my vacation due to start tomorrow has been cancelled in order to redirect the fund towards the purchase of an "L" lense. :D

[SYS]

Okay, one last question. I just went over to another thread devoted to the question of how to do panorama shots with the Rebel, and I know some of you have already contributed to that issue there. One question that didn't come up very clearly for me is that, with A80's panorama mode, you can ALIGN the shots so that you can stitch them later. It is my understanding that there's no such aligning feature in the Rebel? Then, what "alignment technique" do you guys use for panoramic shots? Just a rough alignment or is there a specific technique? There's no mentioning of it in the Rebel's Instruction Manual. Thanks!!

[RikWriter]

Hi RikWriter and SYS,

I'm afraid I agree with SYS. The first few pics I took with the Rebel were a dissapointment. Was expecting much better photos compared to G3.
But after a while, I started to notice a difference. I don't know what happend to improve the rebel's photos, but guess it's due to learning how to use the camera.

I'm sure you will get a lot of responses talking about the need to post process the photos. Personally, upped the parameters and occasionally spend few minutes adjusting the photos in PSE.

Not sure what's the purpose of what I wrote, but there you have one rebel owner experience.

I'm afraid that once you got through with what you wrote, you wound up agreeing with me and not SYS. I told him that the problem he was having was due to his lack of experience, not something inherent to the cameras and you just echoed that.

[jcsorensen]

When all is said and done, great photographs are created by great photographers, and an occassionally lucky one. I read once that a great photographer can make a great photograph from a pin-hole camera and a bad photographer can spend thousands of dollars on equipment and still never produce anything better than a snapshot.

With that said, a good photgrapher will probably produce better photographs with better equipment. But if you're new to photography, work on your skills before spending a fortune on L lenses. Find a good high-end consumer lens within your budget and work on your skills would be my advice for someone starting out.

But then again, I'm not a great photographer, and pobably not even a good one, but I do love taking photographs.

[Lamplight]

When I first got my DRebel I started thinging the pictures weren't as good as the ones produced with my 4mp Olympus point & shoot. But the more shots I took and the more I learned about the camera and post processing (still have a lot to learn!), the more I began to see that the Rebel is in an entirely different league from my old point and shoot. The only lenses I have are the 18-55mm, 75-300mm, and the 50mm 1.8 and I wouldn't think of going back to the Olympus. Also, I agree with Doc Frankenstein when he says to try the Rebel with the kit lens at F8 or so. Obviously an L lens would be the best way to see what your camera can do, but even the kit lens can do pretty darn well considering how cheap it is!

[DocFrankenstein]

We've converted another one. A sacrifice must be made to the L god!

Okay, one last question. I just went over to another thread devoted to the question of how to do panorama shots with the Rebel, and I know some of you have already contributed to that issue there. One question that didn't come up very clearly for me is that, with A80's panorama mode, you can ALIGN the shots so that you can stitch them later. It is my understanding that there's no such aligning feature in the Rebel? Then, what "alignment technique" do you guys use for panoramic shots? Just a rough alignment or is there a specific technique? There's no mentioning of it in the Rebel's Instruction Manual. Thanks!!

Because the Rebel is considered to be a professional camera, you'll find many features missing compared to high end consumer cameras. My S1 for example has tons of options for panoramas, making videos and some others. Rebel won't have this stuff, because it's assumed that you'll want as much control over the image as you possibly can. So they didn't bother making the panorama feature...

Come to think of it, the panorama feature as you know it from A80 is impossible to implement with the Rebel. You can only view the pic through the viewfinder. :lol:

But you can just pan the camera and stitch the pictures later. Afaik, the "panorama" feature doesn't actually do anything to the pictures. It doesn't label borders or where the seams should be. All it does is locks focus, aperture and exposure. So if you set your Rebel to manual mode and manual focus, you're gonna be fine. But you're also gonna want a solid tripod. (200-300 bucks) :lol:

There really should be a warning to people entering this forum. I was happy with my S1... Ignorance is bliss.

[jcsorensen]

I don't mean to sound snooty, and I'm far from a professional, but I have rarely heard of any of the Rebel line (film or DSLR) being called a "professional" camera. High end consumer or maybe even prosumer, but never professional.

OK, I'm putting on the flak vest, but I'm just repeating what I've heard.

Too many varying definitions of what is professional and what isn't--if you don't believe me, just search this forum for the wide ranges of strong opinions on the matter.

Grins!

[DocFrankenstein]

I don't mean to sound snooty, and I'm far from a professional, but I have rarely heard of any of the Rebel line (film or DSLR) being called a "professional" camera. High end consumer or maybe even prosumer, but never professional.

OK, I'm putting on the flak vest, but I'm just repeating what I've heard.

Too many varying definitions of what is professional and what isn't--if you don't believe me, just search this forum for the wide ranges of strong opinions on the matter.

Grins!
I knew I should've put *(not on this forum)* after I said that. It's not your "consumer" dslr for some soccer mom and/or just snapshots. If you consider the amount of post processing that goes in the camera, there's no way you can call it "consumer"

[Kabz]

call it what you want....they are just names.
With the 10D and DR being so alike.....you can make it what you want.
It's all in the other equipment you use and how proficient a photographer you are...
Professional is a term tossed around all too much.
There are many GOOD photographers on this site, and some would call them professionals. Give them a DR and are they not considered pro's? Give them a 10D and they are?
I'm sure I'm not the only one who has seen unbelievable images made with a DR with the stock EF-S 18-55 and compared them to some mediocre images taken with a 10D.
Of course the 10D is higher up there on the scale of camera's, and it definitely ok to consider it "professional"....but then again I have seen 2 megapixel Nikon's deliver better images than some that I have seen for $1,000 cameras.
If you want to make it easy on yourself, and take the craft more seriously...it's all in the lenses I guess is what the general consensus will be.
But you say Rebel without a true cause? Take time to get used to the new camera. You are transferring to a digital SLR from a point and shoot compact digicam. I also thought what you thought, and I realized after pushing the cam and testing its limits in what it can do....it is far superior than so many point and shoot cams.
Don't be discouraged....all I do is look at other people's work and it inspires me.

www.pbase.com for the camera database to check out hundreds of thousands of pictures (apart from this and other photo sites of course)

[Headcase650]

If portraiture or landscape photography is your thing then the reble could be considered a pro camera as it has all the options needed to do these things at a pro level. if on the other hand your trying to do sports or action photography is is a very bad choice of a body as it lacks a large buffer and the ability to lock ai servo focus in the creative modes. A pro camera is defined as a camera that fits the needs of the person taking the pictured. I can see absolutely no reason to use a 1D for portraits. A few years ago you could drop over 10 grand on a pro 3mp slr that is no were near the camera of a rebel or a 10D. So the best camera for a pro is the one that fits there needs perfectly.

[rraman]

When all is said and done, great photographs are created by great photographers, and an occassionally lucky one. I read once that a great photographer can make a great photograph from a pin-hole camera and a bad photographer can spend thousands of dollars on equipment and still never produce anything better than a snapshot.


Very nicely said! I think quite often we put lot more emphasis on the equipment than what's required. This is not to deny the importance of good equipment, but there are many of us (and sometimes that includes me), who concentrate a lot more on getting the latest and the greatest camera gear than developing the photographic skills. Probably because it sounds "cool" to be an owner of all these equipments? Probably because it's much easier to get hold of these equipments if we have the money, but it's not so easy to develop skills which takes a lot of effort and time? Just thinking "aloud".