Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EOS Digital Cameras 
Thread started 10 Nov 2013 (Sunday) 08:14
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Is owning a Canon Rebel a joke?

 
moltengold
Goldmember
4,296 posts
Likes: 9
Joined Jul 2011
     
Dec 15, 2013 15:36 |  #571

^^^^ isn't like a photo from a 6D :)
i sold my 6D and waiting for a new body like the 7D II


| Canon EOS | and some canon lenses

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
madasax
Senior Member
Avatar
509 posts
Likes: 5
Joined Jun 2012
Location: Bend, OR
     
Dec 15, 2013 17:42 |  #572

I don't think owning a rebel is a joke. I had a xti then got a t2i and loved it. Took some great pics with only the kit lens and my 50mm. Then I had the chance to sell it for a good deal on a 7d. Also I was left wanting more from my t2i like better af system, top lcd screen and better fps. Hence the 7d I now own. But I took some awesome shots and was used to my t2i and it was no joke of a camera. I took pics that rivaled my brothers wedding photographer shooting with a 2500$ nikon.


Current Gear: 70D - Sigma 10-20 F4-5.6 - 24 2.8stm - 50 1.8 stm -

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ian_socool
Goldmember
Avatar
1,818 posts
Gallery: 36 photos
Likes: 140
Joined Dec 2011
Location: Brooklyn NY
     
Dec 15, 2013 20:07 |  #573

madasax wrote in post #16529974 (external link)
I don't think owning a rebel is a joke. I had a xti then got a t2i and loved it. Took some great pics with only the kit lens and my 50mm. Then I had the chance to sell it for a good deal on a 7d. Also I was left wanting more from my t2i like better af system, top lcd screen and better fps. Hence the 7d I now own. But I took some awesome shots and was used to my t2i and it was no joke of a camera. I took pics that rivaled my brothers wedding photographer shooting with a 2500$ nikon.

Thats basically my only excuse to go up the ladder, although the T5i and SL1 kind of negates the fps thing now.


70D, 70D, SL1, Tokina 11-16 F/2.8, Σ30mm 1.4, 40mm 2.8 Pancake Σ70mm 2.8 EX DG Macro, Canon 17-55 2.8 IS, Σ85 1.4, Σ50-150mm f/2.8 EX DC OS HSM APO, Godox AD 200 X's 2, 430EX II X's 2, Yongnuo YN-560II X's 2, Cowboy Studio wireless flash triggers X4.Ian_socool FlickR (external link) Facebook fanpage (external link) http://ianlynphotograp​hy.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
madasax
Senior Member
Avatar
509 posts
Likes: 5
Joined Jun 2012
Location: Bend, OR
     
Dec 15, 2013 20:30 |  #574

Yea but the 7d has a great button layout


Current Gear: 70D - Sigma 10-20 F4-5.6 - 24 2.8stm - 50 1.8 stm -

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Hillbille
Senior Member
Avatar
530 posts
Likes: 22
Joined Nov 2010
Location: California
     
Dec 16, 2013 00:07 as a reply to  @ madasax's post |  #575

I can't tell you how badly I've wanted a 7D just for the AF and the fps for the shooting I do, but then I also look at the COST of buying even a used one and that deters me. Do I NEED one? No. Would I like to have one, yes. But for the money I read over and over again here on POTN to buy better glass. So I then start looking at a 100 - 400L and that's my goal.

I think I'll have the 100 - 400L first and THEN possibly get a 7D - UNLESS the price of 7D's falls when they introduce the new 7DII, that might change the ballgame for me.

It would be like starting all over again though as I am just getting used to using the T3 in "M" mode and the little nuances of shutter speed and f-stops for what I want to do. The 7D would be such a radical change that I would need to practice a LOT with it before I could trust it. That might sound funny, but I can trust my T3 because I have shot a LOT with it and it rarely disappoints me now. I know what and how to set it to get what I need for what I do.

But, for now I am putting my pennies into the bowl for a 100 - 400L and just waiting. Even a good 100 - 400L is pretty high on my price range so it will be a while.

Hillbille


Rebel T2i, XS, Rebel T3; EF-S 70 - 300mm non L; EF-S 55 - 250mm; 50mm 1.8; 18 - 55 kit; YN-560; YN-468 - Pure Fun and Raw excitement.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
EverydayGetaway
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
10,586 posts
Gallery: 11 photos
Likes: 3783
Joined Oct 2012
Location: Bowie, MD
     
Dec 16, 2013 02:30 |  #576

Hillbille wrote in post #16527528 (external link)
I agree. I was just making a point - in fact the same point - that if the image is a "good" image then you wouldn't NEED to work it over and it wouldn't matter if it was taken with a P & S (some are up well over 10mp now), a Rebel, or a 6D.

I find it funny that I NEVER even looked at exif for most photos I saw on the internet BEFORE I started lurking around on POTN and then only because of what I had read. Now I rarely do it because it simple doesn't interest me. Either I like the image or I don't, doesn't matter what camera body was used, especially here on POTN because a majority of those images have been "massaged" in PS so as to render the original settings moot - unless I want to learn to "massage" the ones I'll take using those settings. LOL!!

Hillbille

You're way over-exaggerating how much people "massage" their photos. To say that the EXIF data is irrelevant is just plain false.

I generally spend no more than a minute per shot in post, unless it's for a client (don't get many of those), but they look pretty noticeably different than a straight out of camera JPEG. Things like aperture, shutter speed, focal length and ISO definitely still matter in the final look of that image, whatever tweaks I make in Lightroom don't have much bearing on that aside from maybe ISO.

And it's not a matter of if you "need" to adjust an image in post. Doing tweaks in post just lets you choose how the final outcome of the shot looks, rather than letting the camera do it (which is what your camera does when you shoot JPEGs). To say that it wouldn't matter at all what camera it was taken with is again a false generalization.

To say that the EXIF data of an image doesn't matter because the photographer did post on the shot anyway is silly, just because people do post processing on a photo doesn't mean you can't learn from their exposure settings.


Fuji X-Pro2 // Fuji X-H1 // Fuji X-T1 // Fuji X-100T
flickr (external link) // Instagram (external link)www.LucasGPhoto.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Hillbille
Senior Member
Avatar
530 posts
Likes: 22
Joined Nov 2010
Location: California
     
Dec 16, 2013 04:32 |  #577

EverydayGetaway wrote in post #16530859 (external link)
You're way over-exaggerating how much people "massage" their photos. To say that the EXIF data is irrelevant is just plain false.

I generally spend no more than a minute per shot in post, unless it's for a client (don't get many of those), but they look pretty noticeably different than a straight out of camera JPEG. Things like aperture, shutter speed, focal length and ISO definitely still matter in the final look of that image, whatever tweaks I make in Lightroom don't have much bearing on that aside from maybe ISO.

And it's not a matter of if you "need" to adjust an image in post. Doing tweaks in post just lets you choose how the final outcome of the shot looks, rather than letting the camera do it (which is what your camera does when you shoot JPEGs). To say that it wouldn't matter at all what camera it was taken with is again a false generalization.

To say that the EXIF data of an image doesn't matter because the photographer did post on the shot anyway is silly, just because people do post processing on a photo doesn't mean you can't learn from their exposure settings.

Me thinks you missed my point sire, my point was that looking at the exif data from one of YOUR photos taken with the equipment YOU have doesn't do me a lot of good unless I am shooting that same type photograph and intend to duplicate YOUR PP when I get done to have the photo I took the exif data from.

So... YOUR photo exif data doesn't really matter to ME at all. Not silly at all either. I don't own a 6D or an EOS M so why would I give a rats butt what your "settings" were from those cameras? I'm not going out and get a $5000 loan to duplicate anything you've done, so please try to see that YOUR exif data does not matter to me at all!!!

EXIF data matters to really anal pros that cannot decide for themselves how to set their equipment in order to get their own images and have a extreme need to always COPY someone else.

But it don't matter to me cause I'm using one of those low end cameras totally unlike anything you have - and - I decided to do my own settings and be happy with what I shoot.

As far as the WAY OVER-EXAGGERATING how much people "massage their photos - I personally (and try to understand this) am speaking from the vast experience of reading and lurking on this forum and seeing the photographs posted and reading the comments from people that suggest, critique, and almost demand post processing be done, undone, overdone, underdone, redone, lightened, darkened, washed, deepened, lightened, filled, etc., etc.. I dare say that until I started perusing THIS forum I had no idea people worked over their photographs so diligently, I was one of those very naive farm boys from the sticks that thought the photographer was pretty much stuck with what came out of his camera. I thought that was what being a "photographer" was all about, actually KNOWING how to set the camera for the conditions at hand in order to produce a viable photograph that matched as closely as possible what the PERSON saw using the camera.

So again - and this is just my opinion garnered from what I read and see here in the threads I look at - I STAND BY MY OPINION. Yes, people do heavily "massage" their photos and in fact there are some that think there isn't a single photo taken that doesn't need SOME processing just to be called a "good" photo.

Hillbille


Rebel T2i, XS, Rebel T3; EF-S 70 - 300mm non L; EF-S 55 - 250mm; 50mm 1.8; 18 - 55 kit; YN-560; YN-468 - Pure Fun and Raw excitement.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Ace ­ and ­ Deuce
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
5,748 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 465
Joined Feb 2012
Location: Pittsburgh, Pa.
     
Dec 16, 2013 06:01 |  #578

I look at other people's exif info to learn, not to copy. If I really like a pic, I almost always check the exif. Maybe I would've shot at a lower ISO and a slower shutter or what have you. Since I am still learning, and always will be, I look at exif info as a tool, not as 'cheating on a test'.


Just my 2 cents.


GEAR LIST

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
waterrockets
Goldmember
Avatar
3,930 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 267
Joined Jun 2010
Location: Austin (near TX)
     
Dec 16, 2013 07:18 |  #579

Hillbille wrote in post #16530954 (external link)
EXIF data matters to really anal pros that cannot decide for themselves how to set their equipment in order to get their own images and have a extreme need to always COPY someone else.

I look at EXIF all the time, and you'll notice that there are many data in EXIF that don't have anything to do with equipment. I find the shot settings are very useful. I learn a lot this way, and it often helps me to help others on POTN when I see things they could do to improve with their settings for a given shot.

Just because you choose not to use a tool because you don't find it useful doesn't make it a useless tool, nor does it make it a tool for people of lower skill. For instance, I also use a jointer handplane instead of a big electric jointer, but I don't judge anyone for choosing to make a board surface flat with a power tool.


1D MkIV | 1D MkIII | 550D w/grip & ML| EF 70-200mm f2.8L| EF 24-105mm f4L IS | Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS | Samyang 14mm f/2.8 IF ED UMC | 430EXii | EF 50mm f1.8

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
chongkiat
Senior Member
287 posts
Joined Apr 2012
     
Dec 16, 2013 07:31 |  #580

People who laugh on you mean he doesnt even know what is PHOTOGRAPHY ;)


Canon 60D Gripped | Canon 17-55mm f2.8 IS USM | Canon 85mm f1.8 USM | Canon 580exII
My Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
tomj
Senior Member
633 posts
Likes: 28
Joined May 2010
     
Dec 16, 2013 07:35 as a reply to  @ moltengold's post |  #581

"The 7D would be such a radical change that I would need to practice a LOT with it before I could trust it."

I think you'd surprise yourself how quickly you'd adapt. I own a 7d and a Rebel XT - I still use the Rebel regularly, and while I really like it I now find it cumbersome compared to the 7d. But I think you're wise to go for the better glass first. BTW, my 7d was a refurb purchased through the Canon Loyalty Program, substantially less money than a new one.


Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Frodge
Goldmember
Avatar
3,076 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 145
Joined Nov 2012
     
Dec 16, 2013 08:41 |  #582

Hillbille wrote in post #16530954 (external link)
Me thinks you missed my point sire, my point was that looking at the exif data from one of YOUR photos taken with the equipment YOU have doesn't do me a lot of good unless I am shooting that same type photograph and intend to duplicate YOUR PP when I get done to have the photo I took the exif data from.

So... YOUR photo exif data doesn't really matter to ME at all. Not silly at all either. I don't own a 6D or an EOS M so why would I give a rats butt what your "settings" were from those cameras? I'm not going out and get a $5000 loan to duplicate anything you've done, so please try to see that YOUR exif data does not matter to me at all!!!

EXIF data matters to really anal pros that cannot decide for themselves how to set their equipment in order to get their own images and have a extreme need to always COPY someone else.

But it don't matter to me cause I'm using one of those low end cameras totally unlike anything you have - and - I decided to do my own settings and be happy with what I shoot.

As far as the WAY OVER-EXAGGERATING how much people "massage their photos - I personally (and try to understand this) am speaking from the vast experience of reading and lurking on this forum and seeing the photographs posted and reading the comments from people that suggest, critique, and almost demand post processing be done, undone, overdone, underdone, redone, lightened, darkened, washed, deepened, lightened, filled, etc., etc.. I dare say that until I started perusing THIS forum I had no idea people worked over their photographs so diligently, I was one of those very naive farm boys from the sticks that thought the photographer was pretty much stuck with what came out of his camera. I thought that was what being a "photographer" was all about, actually KNOWING how to set the camera for the conditions at hand in order to produce a viable photograph that matched as closely as possible what the PERSON saw using the camera.

So again - and this is just my opinion garnered from what I read and see here in the threads I look at - I STAND BY MY OPINION. Yes, people do heavily "massage" their photos and in fact there are some that think there isn't a single photo taken that doesn't need SOME processing just to be called a "good" photo.

Hillbille

I agree with the assertion that photography has definitely changes a bit with digital. We now mix photography with art in post processing. I know negatives were pushed with film, but nowadays, pp has given the user the abilit to totally change the original photo. It's up to the viewer to decide what the think. I do like the ability to enhance m photos a little without overcoming them. But I'll tell you one thing, whine you get that perfect shot with the perfect exposure, little needs to be done in pp.


_______________
“It's kind of fun to do the impossible.” - Walt Disney.
Equipment: Tokina 12-24mm, Canon 40mm 2.8, Tamron 17-50 2.8 XR Di, Canon 18-55mm, Canon 50mm 1.8, Tamron 70-300VC / T3I and 60D

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
EverydayGetaway
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
10,586 posts
Gallery: 11 photos
Likes: 3783
Joined Oct 2012
Location: Bowie, MD
     
Dec 16, 2013 10:53 |  #583

Hillbille wrote in post #16530954 (external link)
Me thinks you missed my point sire, my point was that looking at the exif data from one of YOUR photos taken with the equipment YOU have doesn't do me a lot of good unless I am shooting that same type photograph and intend to duplicate YOUR PP when I get done to have the photo I took the exif data from.

What? You have very little understanding of photography if that's truly what you believe...

So... YOUR photo exif data doesn't really matter to ME at all. Not silly at all either. I don't own a 6D or an EOS M so why would I give a rats butt what your "settings" were from those cameras? I'm not going out and get a $5000 loan to duplicate anything you've done, so please try to see that YOUR exif data does not matter to me at all!!!

That makes literally zero sense. First of all, my EOS M is cheaper than your camera. Second of all, it has the same sensor. You could absolutely feasibly get shots like mine using your setup. As I said before, I do very basic PP to my shots, mostly just adjustments to sharpness, saturation and noise reduction.

EXIF data matters to really anal pros that cannot decide for themselves how to set their equipment in order to get their own images and have a extreme need to always COPY someone else.

This statement would be offensive if it weren't so ignorant. I look at EXIF from others to better understand how they achieved their perspective, DOF and various other things. Doesn't make me anal, it makes me eager to learn and just plain curious.

But it don't matter to me cause I'm using one of those low end cameras totally unlike anything you have - and - I decided to do my own settings and be happy with what I shoot.

Again, my EOS M kit cost me less than any of your gear and it has the same sensor as your T2i, and I use it nearly as much as I use my 6D, so I'm failing to see your point.

As far as the WAY OVER-EXAGGERATING how much people "massage their photos - I personally (and try to understand this) am speaking from the vast experience of reading and lurking on this forum and seeing the photographs posted and reading the comments from people that suggest, critique, and almost demand post processing be done, undone, overdone, underdone, redone, lightened, darkened, washed, deepened, lightened, filled, etc., etc.. I dare say that until I started perusing THIS forum I had no idea people worked over their photographs so diligently, I was one of those very naive farm boys from the sticks that thought the photographer was pretty much stuck with what came out of his camera. I thought that was what being a "photographer" was all about, actually KNOWING how to set the camera for the conditions at hand in order to produce a viable photograph that matched as closely as possible what the PERSON saw using the camera.

Again, you make it sound as though everyone on the forum who does PP is cloning things out, compositing backgrounds and generally going crazy with photos (which would be fine, it's simply not the case). Generally people (like myself) just make very basic adjustments to their RAW files, exactly like your camera does everytime it saves a JPEG.

So again - and this is just my opinion garnered from what I read and see here in the threads I look at - I STAND BY MY OPINION. Yes, people do heavily "massage" their photos and in fact there are some that think there isn't a single photo taken that doesn't need SOME processing just to be called a "good" photo.

So again, technically every photo is post processed by the camera. Not doing ANY PP work to a photo is a bit like shooting negatives on a film camera and then going to Cosco to develop them... seems a little silly to me, but that's just my opinion.

Hillbille

My responses in bold.


Fuji X-Pro2 // Fuji X-H1 // Fuji X-T1 // Fuji X-100T
flickr (external link) // Instagram (external link)www.LucasGPhoto.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ddk632
Goldmember
Avatar
1,606 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 20
Joined Jul 2012
Location: Aventura, FL
     
Dec 16, 2013 11:16 |  #584

EverydayGetaway wrote in post #16531516 (external link)
My responses in bold.

Agree with everything said in bold...

:cool:


Dmitriy Khaykin (external link)
dk (external link) | f (external link) | ig (external link) | t (external link) | flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
WaltA
Goldmember
Avatar
3,863 posts
Gallery: 10 photos
Likes: 111
Joined Feb 2006
Location: Ladysmith, BC, Canada
     
Dec 16, 2013 11:52 |  #585

EverydayGetaway wrote in post #16531516 (external link)
My responses in bold.

Well said


Walt
400D, 5D, 7D and a bag of stuff

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

75,292 views & 0 likes for this thread
Is owning a Canon Rebel a joke?
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EOS Digital Cameras 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is Birdie760
956 guests, 311 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.