Is owning a Canon Rebel a joke?

kitacanon wrote in post #16447060
Sad to say that focusing MF lenses on the XSI is seriously unreliable...I will keep them on the 30D...

Funny, and i can MF much better on my T2i than my 60D.

This obsession with equipment can only make me laugh.

I remember thinking how great it was when I got a camera that only needed one swipe of the winder with my thumb rather than two. (And of course two swipes was an even bigger improvement over winding a knob).

I have strong feelings that it's likely that the majority of the people that are now buying digital SLRs are only doing it because it's the "latest and greatest" in high tech gadgets. If they had to use film and manually focus their lenses, manually advance the film, be constrained to having to shoot an entire roll of film without being able to change ISO (ASA) and having to wait a day or so to have their film developed and prints made, they'd have zero interest in photography.

Every truly experienced photographer here (not "camera owner" - huge difference) - knows that a talented photographer can and will create art with a pinhole camera made out of a cardboard shoe-box. And a new camera owner with no patience to learn about composition, subject matter and lighting won't be able to do anything with a DX 1 that they probably would do as well if not better with a P&S or even a disposable camera.

It's the singer, not the song - (Mick Jagger)

Today's bottom of the line Rebel cameras may not be as solidly built as a Nikon F from 60 years ago, but it's still going to do a whole lot more for an owner that knows how to use it.

The 50th anniversary of the killing of JFK is coming up. I'm sure their will be a lot of news footage from inside the Dallas Police Dept. from that tragic weekend on TV over the next 10 days..... I don't think you'll see anyone from the press back then using a 35mm camera. They were still using Speed Graphic cameras (or similar) with viewfinders that were pretty much "best guess" as to framing. But they were pros. The fact that they couldn't shoot 10 fps wasn't even a dream. They used anticipation and that was effective enough. They had to manually change flashbulbs too, so they had almost no advances in technology since the late 1800s and still, they captured images (not just in Nov. of 1963 - but for the most part for the prior 100 years) with very little change - maybe not having flash powder and having flash bulbs was the biggest advance between the Civil War and WW II.

They didn't grow up with Playstation and X-Box - they spent their time in dark rooms and worked as apprentices learning the art of photography, never giving their equipment any more thought than remembering to bring it.


Peace,
D.

waterrockets wrote in post #16447124
I haven't compared with my 1D3. Small viewfinder problems?

Exactly.

1Tanker wrote in post #16447225
Funny, and i can MF much better on my T2i than my 60D.

Really? Through the VF?

EverydayGetaway wrote in post #16447270
Really? Through the VF?

Yes. It's kind of disconcerting. I have no issue MFing with the Rebel (even for BIF)... i have to play around too much with the 60D(both using standard focusing screens).

As a potential T4i buyer for a backup to the 1dsii, I must say I had no idea the Rebels had an inferior mirror, sensor, shutter assembly, VF, archaic AF, lousy non-articulating LCD screen among other such crappy things. Those pictures taken with the Rebels sure fooled me.

1Tanker wrote in post #16447313
Yes. It's kind of disconcerting. I have no issue MFing with the Rebel (even for BIF)... i have to play around too much with the 60D(both using standard focusing screens).

Huh, very odd. For me the tiny (in comparison to the 6D) viewfinder made it very difficult. Add the benefit of the EG-S screen and I don't think I could go back to my T2i

The XSI VF is as bright and just about as large as the 30D, (and no smaller than newer Rebels), but the 30D focusing screen is much coarser so images pop in and out more obviously, and the 30D microprism, though faint, is still noticeable....making it much more usable than the XSI for MF....and I've never used split image VF and removed the microprism screens from my Nikons, focusing on matte screens only.

Delija wrote in post #16447262
This obsession with equipment can only make me laugh.

I remember thinking how great it was when I got a camera that only needed one swipe of the winder with my thumb rather than two. (And of course two swipes was an even bigger improvement over winding a knob).

Same here. Heck, when I got a camera with a light meter, Minolta SRT303, that was such a huge luxury for me. Before that, I had to "train" my eyes to read light. No money for a separate light meter. Learning how to read light and setting your camera manually was such a fun. It made me pause and stare at a scene, for some time before pressing the shutter. I just could not afford wasting money on film. Every frame counted. A 12 exposure roll of film lasted a month shooting landscapes. My current DSLR bodies go through 12 frames in less than 2 seconds on burst. What a contrast a few generations of photographic gear makes. So I ask xxxD, xxD, 1D, or whatever body user, pro or otherwise, can you read light with naked eyes?

I had a Yashica fx-2000 super. Had a crude light meter that was +/- or good.i used that camera for years and took amazing shots on my travels out west. That is why it really annoys me when folks on here try to tell people their brand new rebels are junk and they need a ff. You don't need a ff. You can get one if you want one, but its not necessary. I'm not sure most people realize how crude cameras were even 20-25years ago. Then as someone else pointed out, film comes into the picture. Go out and try and take pictures that are meaningful with 24 or 36 exposure worth of film, without instantaneously seeing the result. I have a t3i and a 60d, both gems.

Joke or not, I find it funnier to create crappy photos with my 1DX than if I try to do the same with my 400D.

apersson850 wrote in post #16447735
Joke or not, I find it funnier to create crappy photos with my 1DX than if I try to do the same with my 400D.

Lol

Delija wrote in post #16447262
This obsession with equipment can only make me laugh.

I remember thinking how great it was when I got a camera that only needed one swipe of the winder with my thumb rather than two. (And of course two swipes was an even bigger improvement over winding a knob).

I have strong feelings that it's likely that the majority of the people that are now buying digital SLRs are only doing it because it's the "latest and greatest" in high tech gadgets. If they had to use film and manually focus their lenses, manually advance the film, be constrained to having to shoot an entire roll of film without being able to change ISO (ASA) and having to wait a day or so to have their film developed and prints made, they'd have zero interest in photography.

Every truly experienced photographer here (not "camera owner" - huge difference) - knows that a talented photographer can and will create art with a pinhole camera made out of a cardboard shoe-box. And a new camera owner with no patience to learn about composition, subject matter and lighting won't be able to do anything with a DX 1 that they probably would do as well if not better with a P&S or even a disposable camera.

It's the singer, not the song - (Mick Jagger)

Today's bottom of the line Rebel cameras may not be as solidly built as a Nikon F from 60 years ago, but it's still going to do a whole lot more for an owner that knows how to use it.

The 50th anniversary of the killing of JFK is coming up. I'm sure their will be a lot of news footage from inside the Dallas Police Dept. from that tragic weekend on TV over the next 10 days..... I don't think you'll see anyone from the press back then using a 35mm camera. They were still using Speed Graphic cameras (or similar) with viewfinders that were pretty much "best guess" as to framing. But they were pros. The fact that they couldn't shoot 10 fps wasn't even a dream. They used anticipation and that was effective enough. They had to manually change flashbulbs too, so they had almost no advances in technology since the late 1800s and still, they captured images (not just in Nov. of 1963 - but for the most part for the prior 100 years) with very little change - maybe not having flash powder and having flash bulbs was the biggest advance between the Civil War and WW II.

They didn't grow up with Playstation and X-Box - they spent their time in dark rooms and worked as apprentices learning the art of photography, never giving their equipment any more thought than remembering to bring it.


Peace,
D.

You're right, but i 50 years, someone will be posting in some forum about how we used to have to choose between video and stills when recording, and had to worry about things like "ISO noise" and "buffer clearing."

Technological advances have always made things more accessible to the general population, and the general population has different skills and interests than talented professionals. These days, a nose-picking teenager can size up a house for window blinds using an iPhone app, when it used to take a skilled expert an hour to go through, measure, interpret needs, decide on double-blinded windows vs. single, etc.

It used to take a skilled craftsman to build an Arts and Crafts dining chair. Then people developed cheaper manufacturing technology and shipping technology, and 15 years ago everything started coming from China. Now technology has advanced enough to cheaply bring those jobs back to the USA, and give them to robots. 3D printing and other automation will bring us to the point that a family will soon make their own crappy furniture.

Don't blink.

waterrockets wrote in post #16447958
3D printing and other automation will bring us to the point that a family will soon make their own crappy furniture.

Don't blink.

At least we can take away business from walmart when that happens.

Frodge wrote in post #16443838
5d is a joke by today's standards.

Since a 5D can make lots of money this very day in the hands of someone who knows how to use it, it just can't be a joke even using todays standards.

You are one of the people who thinks that "todays standards" really means something when it comes to the capabilities of a camera. Todays standards can only affect the market value of a camera - the camera is just as capable 10 years after it was released as long as it has been cared for and is in operational conditions.

Fitness Freak wrote in post #16443994
I know, there are actually several legitimate reasons to have a battery grip, it just always strikes me as funny when it's listed in people's gear. Almost like if I listed how many gb's the memory cards I currently have in my cameras now have. It's just my sense of humor, nothing wrong with people putting it, it just makes me smile. Obviously I'm easily amused.

The grip just makes the camera more pro - so why shouldn't we mention it?

Then maybe the message might be nothing more fancy than: I don't feel comfortable using my camera without the grip, and the ability to combine grip + hand-strap results in a very comfortable long-time use.

Right now, I have to settle as a one-handed photographer for quite a number of weeks. With grip + hand strap, I'm just about able to use the camera as long as the light is good so I don't need to ask too much of the IS. Without the grip, I'd have to settle for a G15.