Need help - Digital Rebel or XT?

[chesapeaketechie]

I am a pretty new photographer, having used mostly point and shoot cameras and the ocassional SLR /dSLR. I was foruntate enough to be able to take a DR to Disney World last summer. Now I am trying to deide what to purchase:

1) Buy the Digital Rebel w/Kit Lens & eventually EF-S 17-85 IS lens
2) Buy the Digital Rebel w/o Kit Lens & replace w/ EF-S 17-85 IS lens

1) Buy the Digital Rebel XT w/Kit Lens & eventually EF-S 17-85 IS lens
2) Buy the Digital Rebel XT w/o Kit Lens & replace w/ EF-S 17-85 IS lens

I do have some problems with holding the camera steady and tend to get some blurry shots.

Some questions regarding the XT:

-Several folks on the forums are talking aboit focusing issues with the XT, was this also the case with the Digital Rebel?
-Does Auto mode on the XT start with ISO 400 and not use 50/100/200? Is this also the case on the Rebel?
-I've read the LCD on the XT is hard to read in sunlight and the menus are a bit more involved to change ISO and a few other settings? Thoughts?
-Speed - 14 shots vs. 4 on the Digital Rebel, is this the main difference along with start up time?

I've got some pictures from Disney last year I can post up if anyone is interested. Thanks and I'll look forward to hearing from everyone!!

[cmM]

they're both good cameras, but the XT has a whole bunch of extra features that the rebel doesn't, such as selectable AF modes, metering modes, faster frame rate, Digic II, faster write speeds, etc...
IMO it's an affordable DSLR, and well worth the money. I own a DRebel & 20D. The only downside of the 350D compared to the 300D IMO would be the size and weight

[Andy_T]

Chesapeaketechie,

welcome to the forum :D

You've come to exactly the right place with your question.

Go with the DRebel, if the difference in price is important for you.
Go with the DRebel XT, if you want to have better low lights performance, faster startup time, more flexibility and a bit more resolution.
Take a look at the 20D as well, if more solid build and better ergonomics might be important for you (but it's a lot more expensive).
They are all great cameras.

And last (but certainly not least) take a look at the 'recommended beginner lenses' (http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=56747)thread.
My suggestion would be to get the camera with the 18-55 kit lens, use it for some time and then decide in which respect you would like to upgrade it first.
There are a lot of options, like the very sharp and cheap EF 50/1.8 or the EF 28-135 IS.

Best regards,
Andy

[chesapeaketechie]

Thanks for the quick responses! With the available firmwares for the 300D, does that pretty much negate the flexibility loss (i.e. AI Servo in scene modes, mirror lockup, etc)? How is low light performance better with the 350?

How does the 28-135 IS compare to the 17-85 IS?

Thanks!


Chesapeaketechie,

welcome to the forum :D

You've come to exactly the right place with your question.

Go with the DRebel, if the difference in price is important for you.
Go with the DRebel XT, if you want to have better low lights performance, faster startup time, more flexibility and a bit more resolution.
Take a look at the 20D as well, if more solid build and better ergonomics might be important for you (but it's a lot more expensive).
They are all great cameras.

And last (but certainly not least) take a look at the 'recommended beginner lenses' (http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=56747)thread.
My suggestion would be to get the camera with the 18-55 kit lens, use it for some time and then decide in which respect you would like to upgrade it first.
There are a lot of options, like the very sharp and cheap EF 50/1.8 or the EF 28-135 IS.

Best regards,
Andy

[Andy_T]

With the available firmwares for the 300D, does that pretty much negate the flexibility loss (i.e. AI Servo in scene modes, mirror lockup, etc)?
Yes, if you don't mind using a 'hacked' firmware.

How is low light performance better with the 350?
The 350 uses the next generation imaging chip featuring micro lenses and better DIGIC processing. This results in less noise at ISO 1600 making it more usable for low light photography.

How does the 28-135 IS compare to the 17-85 IS?

It's about 50 mm longer :lol:

No kidding, the 28-135 is a very nice lens, and if I am not wrong it is cheaper than the 17-85. If you have the 18-55 kit lens to cover the wide angle, you will have a longer zoom range.

But there are also a lot of other options like the Tamron 28-75/2.8 that doesn't have IS, but has better image quality and constant f/2.8 ... you really should look at the different options.

I think that the 17-85 is a bit expensive for what it has to offer, but there are many users who swear by it.

Best regards,
Andy

[fortinaa]

If money isn't the limiting factor here, I would go with the XT to start. As mentioned, it's lighter, faster in every respect, and has all the features 300D users have been asking for. Yes, you can use a hacked 300D, but you still don't get all of the features. So far as I am aware, AI Servo is still not nearly as flexible as it will be with the 350XT or 20D where it is built in. As far as menus go, you won't notice the difference if you have not owned another digital SLR. If you learn to use the menus the way the XT has them to begin with, you're golden!

I would also say not to look at just the Canon lens line-up. If you aren't jumping right into L lenses, then Sigma and Tamron have very competetive lenses to offer. The 28-75 XR Di is one of them. I purchased this lens and ended up selling my 28-135IS because I used the constant F2.8 more than the IS for motion shots. It is also quite a bit sharper than most copies of the Canon out there. Stick with the Kit, and maybe add the Tamron or the Canon 28-105 USM. It has Nice optics for less $$$ and will add to your range without breaking the bank right away.