Original Canon Rebel vs New Rebel XT (Dig SLR)

WakeTech · Addict Joined: 19 Jan 2003 Posts: 949 City: Edmonton

Well, I'm looking into these digital SLR the original I can get for 850 and the tx is 1200. This are canadain dollars so don't flip out. Anyway just getting in to photography will I notice the difference between the two and can someone posts some pics from each camera. And let me know what lenses you used because I assume that makes some difference. Oh and how are they for burst shots ? Any other info is greatly appreciated.

Thanks

Damon · Posted: Aug 16, 2005 4:37 pm Post subject:

This picture was recently taken with a XT with a 70-200L f4.

Tv: 1/1600
Av: 5.0
ISO: 200

dmb · Posted: Aug 17, 2005 4:20 am Post subject:

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/compare_post.asp?method=sidebyside&cameras=canon_eos300d%2Ccanon_eos350d&show=all

The XT has exrta megapixels, a VERY slightly quicker burst mode, but a larger buffer for more photos in continuous mode. They are basicly the only differences...

As for lenses, they definately make or break the camera, if your budget is stretched you are probably better off going with the Rebel and using the extra $350 on better quality glass.. The lenses will have a longer life than bodies, so are more beneficial to invest in.

Lizrd · Posted: Aug 17, 2005 11:39 am Post subject:

Love my xt and it is considerably smaller than the original.

Want2ride · Outlaw Joined: 13 Jan 2003 Posts: 182 City: Layton, Utah

You can take a look at my pictures here http://www.pbase.com/want2ride all of them were taken with the original DR....the burst mode on it is one of the reasons I want a newer body, I think it shoots 2.4 frames/sec and only in burst of 4 and on the Rebel XT you can shoot in bursts of 14 at 2.8 frames/sec...so if your wanting a faster camera you are going to have to spend more money, but for someone thats just getting into photography I think its a great camera!

emzcorey · Newbie Joined: 22 Jul 2005 Posts: 33 City: Lilburn

IMO, The new rebel is a step back in the consumer photography field... Canon has taken a 10d and turned it into a point and shoot size. The size alone would really make me go away from this camera. Even though I am a hard core Canon user, I would still prob say the d70 is you best bet for that level, if you were telling me you could go a bit higher, I would definetly go with the 20D... Great camera, and it might go down as this new 5d (kidna 20d with grande sensor) comes out, though not really in the same level. I like the old rebel, but its really really plastic, and can brake on you if you shoot sports alot... My friend has had one for a year or so, shooting heavily no doubt, but now he gets the Error 99 just about every 5 shots. PS: people posting pictures... really... the pro's can make dreb shots look amazing... put a great lens on it, and It will work... Go with the standard cheep lenses that most new users are getting, and couple that with inexperiance... What im saying is that posting your pictures you take with the camera really dont help much considering that most higher level cameras can take the exact same shot, and you really cant compair that way.

Your best bet is to look at www.dpreview.com and scope out the forums even, just do your homework and you will be fine. Good luck!

dmb · Posted: Aug 18, 2005 3:25 am Post subject:

emzcorey have you heard any FACTS about the 5D, or is it all speculation/rumors from forums etc? I'm just curious because I didn't think Canon had made a media release on it yet

RD · Addict Joined: 22 Apr 2003 Posts: 626 City: Discovery Bay

The 5D could be a complete hoax but if it's released as advertised it will be 13.5 mp. It's also rumored to be only 3 fps with a 9 point AF, not exactly want you want for shooting sports. If it ends up selling for $3500 US I would probably look at the 1DmkII before I'd get that. It appears to be aimed at the wedding/portrait/fashion market. I was hoping they would put an 11-12mp 1.3X imager with 6+ fps and a 23 to 45 pt AF system in it.

emzcorey · Newbie Joined: 22 Jul 2005 Posts: 33 City: Lilburn

From what I understand it is amed to be an inexpencive alternative to the 1dsmkII. I have no idea to price, nor have I heard any rumors to that part. It seems like it isnt a hoax, but like you said there hasnt been any official statement from what I've heard. It really isnt pointing towards sports at all, but depending on the price It could still bring the market down in price a bit.

Though, I think its great for photography to become so accesible... wow all the soccer moms with rebels... I can tell its going to be hard to come up in photography now, im 17, and I can tell the amount of photographers has inflated sence 2 years ago when I started. I guess I'll just have other options open. I wish there were more wakeboard mag. or publications that I could either work for or sell to in GA. Oh well... good luck everyone!

secretarial · Newbie Joined: 18 Jul 2005 Posts: 16

propecia - http://www.bestrxpills.com

GVineW8ke · Newbie Joined: 10 Aug 2005 Posts: 4 City: Colleyville

If you want a really good camera i would spend a few extra bucks for the cannon d50, i bought 3 of these for the photography class that i teach and they have worked out really well for all skill levels. I personally have a d100 and i wouldn't give that camera up for anything.

dmb · Posted: Aug 25, 2005 1:18 am Post subject:

You mean a Nikon D50 and D100?

emzcorey · Newbie Joined: 22 Jul 2005 Posts: 33 City: Lilburn

d50... is there such a thing? and Canon has 2 n's not 3... and the d100 is getting very old... That was put out before the 10d, and it wasnt ment to go though as much... the 1d is older but it was built a lot stronger.

abovethewake · Addict Joined: 25 Dec 2004 Posts: 583 City: sarasota

Maestro · Posted: Sep 06, 2005 6:55 am Post subject:

He was probably referring to the 5D - http://www.dpreview.com/articles/canoneos5d/

emzcorey · Newbie Joined: 22 Jul 2005 Posts: 33 City: Lilburn

Well prob not, considering thats a canon... Im thinking he was thinking d70, it doesnt matter anyways, lol.