Questions from a slow learner....help, please.

[olivia]

I am considering purchasing the new Rebel XT. I have a film Rebel 2000 and the Canon EF 28-105 3.5-4.5, the Canon EF 100-300 4.5-5.6, and the 380EX Flash.

I also have the Canon G2 and the Olympus C5060W (which was purchased on a Canadian vacation when the G2 failed me.....broken card reader pins) and this was all I could find to buy.

Although I have Elements 3, I am not yet proficient, but able to do the basic functions fairly well. Most of my photographs (85%) are of my grandchildren, 8 of them ranging in age from 18 mos. to 8 years......wiggly, fast-moving, active kids.

So now my question.s...did you think I would ever get to it??? I would like to get a camera that will give me the best photo right out of the camera or with limited post-processing. Also I like the idea of losing the lag I currently have with the G2 and the Olympus and adding more zoom. Both of my compact digitals have 4 x zoom.

Is the Rebel XT that camera? I would get the 20D, but I think it is probably overkill for me at this point in my proficiency. Also, do I have a fighting chance of getting good photos (not considering operator error) with the lenses that I currently own?

Thanks for your help!

Olivia

[pradeep1]

Welcome to the forum Olivia.

I have a Rebel XT with the 28-105 lens and it is a good combination to get great results right out of the camera. You may want to invest in a slight better flash that will give you directional control in how the light can be bounced - a 420 EX is a good flash - I have one. The 20D will probably will be overkill for you. The XT is small, fast, and a quite capable little camera. If you want to minimize out of camera processing, you can set the parameters within the XT to the amount of saturation, contrast, and sharpness you want. If you set it right based on what you like, then you can shoot away freely without too many worries. The XT has the green "dummy mode" and all the other creative and manual modes just like your G2 and your Rebel film camera. Actually, you'll be right at home with the digital Rebel XT if you've used the Rebel 2000.

[olivia]

Yes, I've been thinking I need to upgrade to the 400 series flash, 420?

My 380 tilts, but it doesn't swivel.

[cactusclay]

Even getting the older DRebel would elemintate the shutter lag.

[mkh]

I don't know you money situation but I would reccomend the Digital Rebel (300D). It can be had for $650 and should fit your needs. That price would leave room to add other lenses etc. and you can always move up if you find yourself really getting into it.

[Jon, The Elder]

OLIVIA- Consider the fact that you may well progress in photography and like many of us, eventually find you need "more" camera. Then you are faced with disposing of the old (at a loss) and then upgrading. If this happens soon after your first purchase, we call it "buyers remorse".

If you buy a "better" camera now - you will have all the features you will eventually want later.

It is not necessary to use all the "bells and whistles" right away. Half the fun is learning as you go along the path to serious shooting.

"buy cheap, and you will buy twice". Believe me now or later.

Good luck - Jon

[olivia]

Jon, I know what you mean. Here I am with this G2 and the Olympus, plus a couple of film cameras (Rebel 200 and the Yashica T4). What to do with this stuff?? Save it for the grandkids? They will probably think they need to start out with stuff much more advanced when they are old enough to have the interest.

I don't want to buy something I will want to upgrade in 3-5 years, but the 20D is a lot of camera for someone with my current knowledge. And, don't tell anyone, but at 60 years I'm not learning quite as fast these days. I have the budget to buy the 20D, but would be hard pressed to convince my husband that then I also needed more lenses.

What do you think about my Canon EF 100-300 4.5-5.6 lens? I rarely took it past 225 when I was doing film. It was a gift and I'm not sure it's the one I would have selected. The 28-105 that I bought with my Rebel 2000 was always my "walking around" lens.

[Deckyon]

All that being said, you could buy a 1D Mark II, have 8 frames per second, a 580 flash and 24-70mm f/2.8 L lens and still take crappy photos or photos that need editing right away.

Above any equipment you own, it is the knowledge of that equipment that will allow you to get the good shots. Who cares what gear you have if you do not know how use it? Spend $15000 on gear, but if you shred the manual, you could have saved yourself $14500 by buying a G6.

No matter what you buy, while the battery is charging, sit down and read the manual cover to cover. then once the battery is charged, sit the camera on the table, get the manual back out and go back through, cover to cover, the manual and preform the steps on the camera. After all that, keep the manual your bag at all times so you can refer to it. Eventually, you will get to know the camera and its function well enough to operate it in the dark by feel, lighting the LCD to check certain settings.

[CRE@TE]

I think you would be quite happy with the older 300D. It is quite the capable camera. For the price of the new Rebel XT, you can buy the older 300D plus the flash (420EX). You may also want to invest in a larger compact flash card (if you don't already have a large capacity card).

[olivia]

Brad, are you suggesting I buy a G6.....or just trying to make me feel foolish?

I don't intend to "shred the manual," but I am trying to be realistic about my current skill level and my ability to progress. The scientific side of photography is difficult for me. Also, I am 60 and wasn't born with that computer chip that my children and most (many?) of you have. It is an enjoyable hobby for me and I have a number of photos of which I am quite proud.

I want a camera that will give me less lag, better zoom than my G2 and do a decent job with the lenses that I own.

Is that the Digital Rebel XT or do I need to buy something else and more lenses?

Are the lenses that I own good enough quality to support the Rebel XT in a proper way?

[Jon, The Elder]

OLIVIA - I'm 66+ so I understand. My passion is photography, so I have to remember not everyone thinks like me.

Six years ago, I bought a Kodak 260 with a FULL megapixel of resolution.
Then a Canon Powershot S30 (not enough lens)
Then a Nikon Coolpix 5700 (not enough speed, or lens)
Then a Kodak 6490 (too slow, no burst)
Last year - Digital Rebel (300D) Wife took it away from me. She loves it.
I bought the 20D and I think this will be with me a long, long time - It is (in many ways) the equivelant of a good 35mm camera.

At 60, YOU deserve the best - this ain't a dress rehearsal for something else.

[olivia]

Thanks, setiprime! How true about the dress rehearsal. :cool:

[Deckyon]

I was trying to do neither. I was just saying that the knowledge of the equipment is more important than the equipment itself. The best of Ansel Adams work was done on an out of date wooden view camera. Age does not matter.

[Andy_T]

Olivia,

before you jump to buying a new flash, why not try out the 380 you have and find out if you *really* need to upgrade?

It tilts, so you are able to bounce the flash from the ceiling to get nice indirect lighting, and that should do the job to get nice lighting in your pictures.

What Setiprime said ... take a look at the DRebel, the DRebel XT and the 20D in a camera shop and decide which one suits you most. If you get any of these cameras, be sure to get the kit lens with it, as with the 1.6 crop factor, your 28-105 will not be a wide angle lens any longer. The 18-55 kit lens might not be stellar, but for 100$ it does a more than OK job if you need wide angle.

I upgraded my G2 to the 20D by the beginning of this year and I was completely blown away by the quality of the pictures. You can take a look at my gallery (http://www.photo.net/photodb/folder?folder_id=414436) and see if you can tell any improvement between the pictures I took with my G2 and the 20D.

I hope it is there to see for others as well and not just in my imagination :o .
If not, you should definitely blame it on my limited abilities and not on the camera.

Best regards,
Andy

[mdm]

Quick put your film rebel camera on ebay and get a 100.00 out of while you still can. Use that for cf memory, dinner at jack-in-the-box, and a six-pack of beer (cheap beer).

[olivia]

Andy, I very much enjoyed your Gallery. Fantastic! There is an obvious difference in the quality of the photos taken with the 20D, although there were many of the G2 shots that I liked as well. The really important thing to me is that your have this pictorial record of your family.

You obviously gained some experience along the way as well as upgrading your equipment. How much post-processing do you normally do on each photo in your Gallery? Extensive? Minimal?

Thanks for trying to help me with this. I appreciate your kindness.

[Andy_T]

Olivia ...

with the G2 pics, I always shot RAW, converted to TIFF, did USM in PhotoShop and resized the picture for the web.

With the 20D, I shoot the pictures in Large JPG, apply a little USM in Photoshop and resize them. That's it!

Apart from getting better pictures, I now save a lot of time on the workflow. I also save a lot of time not having to wait for the camera to save the pictures to the CF card :lol: .

I know, they would even be better if I also used RAW and TIFF on the 20D, but so far the quality was sufficient for me.

The only thing that is currently not optimal is the flash ... I am using a third party Metz MZ40 flash that always fires full flash. As I only recently found out that I *can* reduce the flash output on the flash :o , most of the pictures with flash in my gallery are overexposed. So one of my next achievements will be a 420 EX, but even a 380 EX would definitely be a huge improvement for me at the moment:wink:

Best regards,
Andy

[olivia]

Thanks, Andy, for answering. I'm glad to know you're getting those wonderful shots without having to do extensive post-processing.

I appreciate your help.

[Todd Jacobsen]

Olivia,

You sound happy with JPEG, and do not want to process too much on your own(which is RAW).

The Digital Rebel provides you an SLR capability (lots of lenses) and also some advanced capabilities for if/when your photography interests change.

But if your are NOT interested in multiple lens use, I believe the Digital Rebel is more than you need (cost wise) and maybe a different, lower priced model would be better for you.

If you want to own a DSLR camera, the Digital Rebel (300 vs 350 XT) is an excellent starter model for the price.

[olivia]

Thanks, Todd. I appreciate your honest advice.

My basic goals in considering an SLR are to get away from the shutter lag of my compact cameras and to provide more zoom. My photography projects at this time are not terribly ambitious, but they are important to me. They include primarily photographing my grandchildren (who move fast) and taking interesting travel photos (we are retired now and usually take one international trip each year plus a couple of smaller trips).

The answer I have been looking for is whether the lenses I currently own (Canon EF 28-105 3.5-4.5, the Canon EF 100-300 4.5-5.6) on the new Rebel will give me a considerably improved shot over the compact cameras that I currently own (G2 and Olympus C5060W). And I hoped to accomplish this without spending a lot of additional time in PS.

I realize I can buy better lenses and improve my situation quite a bit; I am just not prepared to do that at this time, I realize I can practice, practice, read, and practice some more and improve my skills. I will shot in RAW for fun from time to time; I will photograph my rose garden in macro from time to time. I will experiment and hopefully learn more. But mostly I will enjoy myself and my family and record what is happening in our lives.

So I guess all I really wanted to know is whether these lenses which I have owned for 5 years will produce a better image with the Rebel than the compact digitals that I already have.

[Titus213]

olivia,
my opinion is yes, they will produce better technical images than you get from the compact digitals you have. I've been shooting Canon SLR film for 20+ years and could not tolerate the compact digitals. Our son would laugh every time I put his S40 or whatever up to my eye rather than use the screen. Pictures were OK but not up to the film. I finally saw a digital SLR that interested me and that I considered affordable. I bought the 300D and have been more than satisfied. Now our son wants to use the digital Rebel rather than his S40 digital. I only wish I had gone to EOS film before going to digital. I would have some EF lenses. Now I have a couple of nice FD lenses that I don't use anymore and are not worth much on the used market. They are about what you were using on your 2000. Opinions are like thumbs. Most folks have at least two. ymmv I would recommend the 20D if you can afford it, otherwise the 300D is a more than capable camera in my opinion.

[olivia]

Thanks, Titus.

I think I will present my options to my husband and see which way he wants me to go: the new Rebel or the 20D. The 20D would be a bit more now, but perhaps it would be the last camera I need to buy for my purposes. I'll have to convince him that buying this camera gives him endless ideas for future Christmas presents that he won't have to shop very hard for. ;)

Thanks everyone for your help.

[Andy_T]

Olivia,

try out both cameras in a camera shop!

While the specs on paper are important, the 'feel' of the camera might be important to you, as well. (It sure is to me).

I'll have to convince him that buying this camera gives him endless ideas for future Christmas presents that he won't have to shop very hard for. ;)

Hehe, you don't know how true this is :lol:

Best regards,
Andy

[Hellashot]

If you want images you can print good right out of the camera, I don't think a dSLR is for you. A middle of the road P&S compact digital camera is for you. Those cameras do things to the images so they look good. A dSLR makes you post process for good pictures.

[olivia]

Hellashot, is that true if you don't shoot in RAW, but shoot in JPEG (largest), i.e., that post-processing is essential on every shot?

And just how does a compact camera "do things to the images"? Really, I'm not being a smart alec......I just don't understand how this happens.

Thanks for replying. I already have two compact digitals, so I really want to figure this out.

[stiinc]

I just got my 300d Rebel and after a couple hundred shots or so Iv'e found that for day to day shots like family and friends, I do little to no post processing on them...just a little cropping here and there. I use the kit lens and I recently purchased a 75-300 for the zoom shots. I'ts not that bad...Although I'm not in any way a pro or anything. I went from a 1 megapixel Kodak to a 3.2 canon powershot s1 Is and I was blown away by out of box quality. Just my opinion.