Pro1 or Rebel XT

[mattsiesco]

Hi,
Im currently saving for my new camera (updating from 4.0 mp sony cybershot which I cannot stand) and Im stuck between the Powershot pro1 and the Rebel xt. My situation is as follows. which would be better for my situation?

-Im a broke college student (majoring in photography and or digital editing)
-Ill have to buy it for myself and I work and am working a basic college student part time job at about 40 hours a week in the summer for $6.50-7 an hour. I'd like to get the camera soon, ecspecially for my upcoming vacation.
-The pro1 comes with everything I need for about $750 and the Rebel XT would put me back about $1200-1300 after buying memory cards and accessories.

What I want/need in a camera
-VERY low noise level in the photos
-Versatility (I really like the 28-200 mm 35mm equivelent lens of the Pro1+macro)
--I wouldnt be able to get a new lens for a long time with the rebel (Id be stuck with the 18-55 mm lens for that time)
-Quick start up time and quick 'recovery' time between shots. My cybershot seriously lacks in these alot.
-I also like the ability to use the LCD screen to preview shots, but can you use the viewfinder for accurate shots(?) because with my cybershot, you cannot accurately do both.

Im not sure if the Pro1 will meet my needs compared to the Rebel XT. Is it worth saving alot longer for the XT or is the Pro1 comparable in quality and versatility?

Im also not sure about the aperature range on the Pro1. Can you only adjust it 2 stops or can you adjust it more digitally? Its only somewhere around 3.5-5.8 on the listing.

Thanks alot for any help. Im basically wondering if the Pro1 will work as a low-noise, high quality camera for working on more serious photography and probably using for my college digital photography classes until I can get a digital slr. Thanks alot for any help, I really appreciate it.

[Michaelmjc]

The xt is definately a better camera... but for your situation the Pro 1 will be perfect. It costs a lot less, has a nice zoom to it. The XT you'll have to buy lenses, and all kinda of accesories. A good zoom lens with the same aperature of the Pro 1 would set you back quite a bit too.


I'm sure you'll be more than happy with it, but who am i to say.

Read a few reviews on it, and good luck.

[mattsiesco]

Thank you for the reply. Is the pro1 at least comparable in image quality to the Rebel and can you accurately focus manually with the Pro1? Thanks again.

[Michaelmjc]

It also has a USM lens, (ultra sonic motor) you can also adjust it manually.

They are both 8 megapixles, so I'm sure the image quailty is pretty similar.

Overall it looks like a great camera.

[tmurphy]

Thank you for the reply. Is the pro1 at least comparable in image quality to the Rebel and can you accurately focus manually with the Pro1? Thanks again.


Firstly I dont's have the XT, but the 20D, but I hope my experiences may help.

I have both a 20D and a Pro 1, and have bene using the Pro 1 exclusivley for a week or so now and I am delighted with the final results, but sometime a little frustrated with it's operation:-


Focusing
Whilst accurate on the Pro 1, it does take time to lock on. (Upto 0.5s sometimes). this can be a real pain when trying to capture a fast moving subject. It's also has a hybrid focusing system, where you can move the focusing point around, it's just a bit too fidley for me. As for manual focusing, I've tried with the eye piece TFT and the fold out TFT and have had no sucsess, the resolution is just too low to tell!

Noise
LOTS of it at anything above ISO100. This is probably this camera's lowest point. The noise is very promenent at the higher (200 & 400) settings. This can be rectified later by post processing PS or similar, but I can't understand why Canon's flagship compact shuld perform badly at these settings. ( My mother has an A85 and it's fine at 200 and 400!)

Image Quality
Firstly a stange one, even though both camera's are 8MP the image sizes are different! The Pro 1 gives 3264 x 2264 images and the 20D gives 3504 x 2336 images:confused: But the overall quality is very comparable, the images from the Pro 1 actually need less post processing than those from the DSLR and are sharper and more saturated straight from the camera.

Overall It's a great camera, and is a damn site easier to carry around rather than a backpack full of Lenses, Filters, Adapters, remotes etc. but I just couldn't see myself using it as my main camera. It's great to have as a take anywhere camera, but not the one i'd take on say a holiday trip to Hong Kong, as I'd want the flexibility of a DSLR. I have found myself thinking a few imes I've been out with it, "I wish I'd brought the bigger camera"

One thing I've also noticed is that when shhoting RAW, the software I use for processing (Phase-One) only gives me very limited functionality with the image, as oppossed to RAW images from DSLR's.

I know it's just my opinion but I'd go with the XT :D

On a side note, if you want a funny sight, imaging a Pro 1 with the 550EX flash attached, this is the combo I use for shooting my Ebay pics, not often the flash is 1.5x bigger than the camera!

[Hellashot]

Maybe consider the Digital Rebel. It's quite a good camera and a couple hundred less than the XT since you're in college.

[KennyG]

What I want/need in a camera
-VERY low noise level in the photos

-Quick start up time and quick 'recovery' time between shots. My cybershot seriously lacks in these alot.


My wife has a Pro 1 and I would like to comment on two points you raised.

The Pro 1 is noisy, very noisy indeed, images in anything other than ideal light conditions exhibit unacceptable noise.

Start up is slow and shot to shot times are nowhere near as fast as a DSLR.

For what it is, a family snapshot P&S, it is fine. As an alternative to a DSLR, it does not come anywhere near.

[mattsiesco]

I actually found the Rebel XT for $700 with lens at http://www.bestpricecameras.com/prodetails.asp?prodid=216902&start=1

The site has ridiculously low prices and I'm wondering what the deal is... Anyone have any experience? If its a legit site, I could get the Rebel XT for nearly the same price Id pay for the Pro1.

[condyk]

http://www.resellerratings.com/seller8754.html

Doesn't look too hot a place to shop!

Pick up a nice SH Digital Rebel via the Marketplace section here or over at fredmiranda.com buy and sell section ... will keep you going nicely. Save some money for a decent lens!

Or look here and select cheapest new/best store rating:

http://resellerratings.shopping.com/xPC-Canon_Digital_Rebel_EOS_300D~S-5~OR-0

Boy ... why don't we have this in the UK :confused:

[mattsiesco]

Thanks alot, condyk, definitely not buying there,hahah.

[Michaelmjc]

It was also in US funds, thats why it seemed so cheap.

I would say look for a used 300D with kit lens. It's a great camera, very low noise in the pictures.

I'm sure you could find one in the marketplace on this forum.

[Tom W]

There's also a few brand-new Digital Rebel / 300D cameras still available. Here's one at onecall.com:
http://ww1.onecall.com/PID_20967.htm

[tim]

-Im a broke college student (majoring in photography and or digital editing)

This is all I really need to read to make a recommendation. IMHO you need an SLR, digital is my preference. The reason is so you can get to grips with depth of field: cameras with small sensors have more depth of field, medium sized sensors like the XT have less, and 35mm film has even less - you have to learn to work with it. An XT would be great, but a 2nd hand 300D (original Rebel) would be almost as good - the main disadvantages are it's a little slower to use, has a smaller image buffer, and has higher ISO noise. For learning though, it'd be fine.

Also you may need the capabilities of a "real" camera for work with studio lighting, hotshoe flashes, etc. It doesn't matter how much you read, you have to do it yourself, try it out, and get used to it. Sure, it costs more, but you'll learn a lot more too. The feedback loop (take pic, put on PC, check EXIF) is so short with digital you learn really quickly. Also, learning about RAW is a good thing, but the PRO1 might do that.

I'd recommend you get the 18-55 kit lens (it's a good value wide angle), and the 50mm F1.8 lens. Both will teach you a lot. You can probably get away without anything else for now, except a memory card, and you might learn more having to worth with average equipment than you would with top-of-the line.

Good luck, and you know where to go if you have questions :)

[mikesd]

I have both and the XT wins hands down, not even a contest, but they are totally different cameras and used for different purposes. I would not even consider shooting a wedding with a Pro1 but for a light weight carry around camera the Pro 1 is very good and is capable of stunning photos when used in the right conditions.

[lostdoggy]

Its unfortunate that I'm not ready to unload my DRebel Just yet or you might gotten it for a song.
My intent was to unload the DRebel w/Kit lens, Sigma 28-300, 512MB CF, 1GB CF, and Sigma EF 500 Super for under a grand and replace it with a MKIII. But as you can see MKIII is not out yet. So keep an eye out for it in Market Place if you still interested in it when I'm ready. I made this offer to relatives and friends but they think I'm ripping them of at that price. I even offer the DRebel kit lens for $450, could you imagine how fast that would have been gone here, but got a no. Oh well.

[David1943]

You've received some very good advice here already and I wholeheartedly second the opinion that you'd do well to seriously consider a used 300D with kit lens. The 350D is a later model but the basic principles of both are the same and a 300D will give you ample scope for learning creative photography.

With either a 350D or a 300D, one thing you will almost certainly want to get is a decent external flash and a bargain 300D will help you budget for that.

In any event, good luck with your course which I hope you'll greatly enjoy.

Regards, David :)

[davidfig]

starving student,

IMHO, I would rather go with the Canon S1 IS then the Pro1. Longer range and I just don't see the 8mpixel doing much for me. They both have small sensors, and this leads me to the real answer. Get the SLR, even if you have to go to ebay. You can find DRebels for a good price. Also find a deal on the Sigma 18-125 and you will be happy for a long time. To do better than this, you will need a high paying job. ;-)

[mattsiesco]

thanks for the great advice, Im def. getting a DSLR after reading reviews of the Pro1 and your generous info. Id like to see if theres any way to get the RebelXT for the MP and the features, but if it comes down to it, I think the 300D will work just fine for me. Plus I know I'd kick myself when I take more serious classes and get more serious about photography when I spent 3/4 of the money that an XT is for basically a point and shoot 8mp. Thanks alot:)

[FScott]

You probably have enough advice on this and the consensus seems to be to get the 300D used if possible with the kit lens and the 50mm 1.8 as a sharp, inexpensive prime. This is very good advice. I still have my 300D and use it often. If you can't find a used one from someone you trust you can buy a refurb from for example:

http://www.abesofmaine.com/viewproduct.asp?id=cneosrd1855krb&l=Pricegrabber

Their reseller rating is okay. Then you can get the 50mm 1.8 prime from:

http://www.onecall.com/ProductDisplay.mpt?ProductID=4766&FEID=130&PMNID=838

In the end you will be out about $650 and will have a great system to learn with. Save the extra money and eat.

-- Scott.

[mattsiesco]

hahah, I am not starving, just broke. It's just non-'neccesities' (not that photography isnt neccesary to me, dont get me wrong) that im talking about being broke. My first check is coming this week and if it's decent, I'll consider waiting for the XT so I can use it 'longer' before I'm wanting more MP.

Once again, thanks for all the great advice:)

[chris clements]

Just because they're both quoted at 8mp DOESN'T make the images remotely comparable. The Pro's 8m sensors are crammed onto a tiny (Sony) chip, whilst the 8m 350/XT sensor sites are MUCH larger. Larger sensor = stronger/truer signal= less noise.
It's true that the Pro1's pictures may sometimes need less 'tweaking' on your computer, but that's just because of the high amount of in-camera processing needed to get anything decent out of the Sony chip. You'll have much more information (and truer information) coming from the 350/XT.

You'll be disappointed by shutter lag , zooming speeds and focussing speeds with the Pro1. These won't be appreciably better than your current camera. For instance, sports photography is out of the question.

If the budget is really tight, why don't you consider a Rebel/300 at current run-out prices? This will significantly outhandle and outperform the Pro1 and will bring you into the wonderful world of DSLRs.

... and don't get hung up on "wanting more MP". How often do you print at A3 or above? 6 or 8mp are more than enough

[tim]

Just because they're both quoted at 8mp DOESN'T make the images remotely comparable. The Pro's 8m sensors are crammed onto a tiny (Sony) chip, whilst the 8m 350/XT sensor sites are MUCH larger. Larger sensor = stronger/truer signal= less noise.

If I may clarify, or at least say how I understand it. The same number of pixels in a larger area area means each pixel is larger, and therefore lets in more light. The more light that gets let in the more photos there are to count, and the sampling error between pixels will be smaller. This means less "noise", which is really just sampling error.

[Andy_T]

'Sometimes it's a bit more illustrative to actually see how the sensor sizes ... and pixel sizes really compare.

http://www.bidencap.de/SensorSize.jpg
http://www.bidencap.de/PixelSize.jpg

You have been given very good advice in this thread, and I think the decision to go with a 300D is a very smart one.

As far as 'broke yes, but not starving' is concerned ... well, you *will* be, once you get hooked on lens fever :lol:

Best regards,
Andy

[tmurphy]

Noise...proof is in the pudding...

Shot on a Pro 1 @ ISO400

http://images.helms-deep.co.uk/PRO1.jpg

Same Shot with a 20D...
http://images.helms-deep.co.uk/DSLR.jpg

Never tested before, but even I was shocked at that result :shock:

[chris clements]

The same number of pixels in the same area means each pixel is larger, and therefore lets in more light.
The XT/350 sensor sites can be made larger because they're the same number but in a LARGER area.
I presume just a typo.

[tim]

The XT/350 sensor sites can be made larger because they're the same number but in a LARGER area.
I presume just a typo.

Yeah just a typo, thanks for pointing it out, i've corrected the original post.

[zacker]

i have both and love both! the pro1 takes exceptionaly sharp pics, has an awsome "super" macro mode and is small and light enough for travel... it is quite noisey above 50-100 ISO and is slow in the AF department but the lens is super clear and at 28-200MM is also very usable! the XT is also great but its the lenses that will set you back, plus the lens on the pro1 is an "L" lens!! so..... I say, if its studio work under lights or landscapes in good sun or Macro's your shooting the pro 1 will perform well, if its anything else..go with the rebel.oh yeah, make sure the pro1 one is newer so its got the new firmwear and they have fixed the dust in the lens problem!
-zacker-

[mattsiesco]

Wow that is noisier than my very very noisy cybershot. Definitely going with the 300D or 350D.

[Tom W]

Noise...proof is in the pudding...

Shot on a Pro 1 @ ISO400

http://images.helms-deep.co.uk/PRO1.jpg

Never tested before, but even I was shocked at that result :shock:

Hate to say it but my lowly S-400 is a bit better than that at ISO 400. It's too bad Canon doesn't come up with a better high-end P&S with a bigger relatively low-noise Canon CMOS sensor. A Pro-2 like that would blow the competition away.

[chris clements]

It's too bad Canon doesn't come up with a better high-end P&S with a bigger relatively low-noise Canon CMOS sensor. A Pro-2 like that would blow the competition away.

Even with Canon's dominance in P&S digitals, I doubt there's sufficient profit margin to set up their own chip factory for this market when Sony do it so well. Or did, until they let loose their much-criticised 8meg sensor into the world.

Do any of the major players other than Canon make their own?

I know the Pro1 and all its 8 meg rivals share the same noisy Sony sensor, and I believe even the N*k*n DSLRs are built round Sony ??

And why haven't Foveon upped the pace after such a promising start?