Choosing the Right Canon Rebel - Page 2 - ClubTread Community

User Tag List

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
post #16 of (permalink) Old 12-12-2009, 05:05 PM
Headed for the Mountains
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Grande Prairie, AB, Canada.
Posts: 172
Default

I upgraded to a Rebel XSi a little over a year ago, and have been very happy with the photos it takes. I agree with many posts that making the purchase at a camera store is the way to go.

One caution I will make is with the optional telephoto lens. Some kits are available with a second 75-300mm telephoto lens, but in my experience I have found this to be a pretty low quality lens. I rarely pack it anymore, and will likely upgrade to something of a better quality in the near future. If your daughter is interested in a telephoto later on, it would be worth investing in a better one at that time.
ian779 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #17 of (permalink) Old 12-24-2009, 10:33 PM
Headed for the Mountains
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: West Coast, British Columbia, Canada.
Interest: Anything Alpine related, running, computers, fly fishing, chatting.
Posts: 231
Default

You can't go wrong with almost any Canon or Nikon SLR camera. Don't worry, just buy what you can afford and don't think too much about the camera you're using. Especially for outdoor photography because my Dad used the first generation Canon Digital Rebel for outdoor photography in Utah and I was shocked by the image quality when he told me that it was a Digital Rebel and not a higher end Canon Digtal SLR camera. His photos are so good that it was published in several American photography magazines.

Vertical_Trekker is offline  
post #18 of (permalink) Old 01-10-2010, 11:27 AM
Off the Beaten Path
 
spacemonkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: White Rock, BC, Canada.
Interest: photography, craft beer
Posts: 587
Default

downside to the canons though is the cost of a new lens as their lenses all have internal stabilizers as opposed to say a sony body that has built in stabilizers
spacemonkey is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #19 of (permalink) Old 01-10-2010, 12:44 PM
Off the Beaten Path
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Maple Ridge, BC, Canada.
Interest: Photography, Skiing
Posts: 795
Default

Quote:
quote:Originally posted by spacemonkey

downside to the canons though is the cost of a new lens as their lenses all have internal stabilizers as opposed to say a sony body that has built in stabilizers
?? I'm not sure I understand this comment. Not all Canon lenses have IS and depending on what you're shooting (I'm not saying there aren't situations where it would be handy) you probably don't even need it. I have a pretty decent Canon set up and not one of my lenses has an internal stabilizer, nor do I feel I need one. I personally bought into the Canon family because their lens quality for cost was pretty good.

However this does bring up a good point, the body selection doesn't matter much. Only the glass will hold its value. So many people agonize over which camera body to buy, but the fact is it will be obsolete pretty much the day you buy it because digital camera technology improves every year.

David and Karen is offline  
post #20 of (permalink) Old 01-10-2010, 04:53 PM
Headed for the Mountains
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: vancouver, bc, Canada.
Interest: mtn biking, surfing, bmx, skimboarding, rock climbing, skateboarding, snowboarding and of course hiking.
Posts: 467
Default

My only advice is to spend more on a good lens than on the body. digital cameras in general, especially ones with small sensors like the rebels, don't register the depth of field as well as film cameras do. An f/4 camera on film is not the same on digital, it probably around f/7 so you don't get the same blurry backgrounds like the lens would register on film. Generally the lower the aperture of the lens the better the images will look. I would aim around atleast f/2.8. I have an f/4 lens on my canon and its awful for shooting portraits, I've just reverted to shooting film.

if the cameras just gonna be used for landscapes, that lens will be fine, it will be decent for portraiture, but an f/2.8 lens would be much better


a bit off topic, but thats my advice. any of the rebels will do, but a nice lens will make the biggest difference for how good the pictures look, and the photographer of course.
baminem is offline  
post #21 of (permalink) Old 01-10-2010, 05:03 PM
Headed for the Mountains
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: vancouver, bc, Canada.
Interest: mtn biking, surfing, bmx, skimboarding, rock climbing, skateboarding, snowboarding and of course hiking.
Posts: 467
Default

Oh one more piece of advice.

The nikon cameras can take the old lenses which you can usually find for fairly cheap, so you can get really good lenses without spending thousands of dollars.

canon changed their lens mount, so their cameras don't accept the older lenses. I wouldn't take nikon out of consideration.
the d/40 is the nikon equivalent of the rebel.


baminem is offline  
post #22 of (permalink) Old 01-10-2010, 05:52 PM
Headed for the Mountains
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Edmonton, Ab, Canada.
Posts: 101
Default

Bamenim, I'm not sure what you mean about old Canon lenses.

The EF lens mount, came out in 1987 and I have lenses I bought then that work with my kids Rebels and my Mark 1DS 3 til this day.

It is the lenses made specifically for the smaller APS-C sensor that will work on the Rebels but not work on the full size sensor cameras.

Blog http://www.danjurak.wordpress.com
Website http://www.danjurak.com
danjurak is offline  
post #23 of (permalink) Old 01-10-2010, 07:52 PM
Summit Master
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Winnemucca, NV
Interest: Outward bound author of the Seinfeld thread who builds his own snowshoes
Posts: 3,332
Default

yes, but glass can last much longer than that. My mom has quite a few cannon lens' that were older than that. If those were able to fit a new camera, she would have upgraded to DSLR a long time ago. Instead, she still chooses to shoot with film when she wants good qality shots because it would cost way too much to build up the same "quiver" that she had before.

What the guy at Kerrisdale camera told me is that nikon vs canon was just a personal preference, so choose whichever i liked the look and feel of more. for me it was the nikon and I've been quite happy with my d60. Don't just limit yourself to the canons
Farmer is offline  
post #24 of (permalink) Old 01-11-2010, 05:35 AM
Headed for the Mountains
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Edmonton, Ab, Canada.
Posts: 101
Default

I think the guy at Kerrisdale was right.

I've used Canon cameras as part of my job for many years. I work with many professional photographers daily and the split is almost 50/50 Canon/Nikon.

There are arguments pro and con to both sides. I love the latest Nikon D3X does and in fact had a loaner from Nikon for a few weeks along with the 12-24 but stayed with Canon because I have a sizeable investment in lenses.

If I were starting to shoot again, I would happily use either brand. It's a toss up for me.


Blog http://www.danjurak.wordpress.com
Website http://www.danjurak.com
danjurak is offline  
post #25 of (permalink) Old 01-11-2010, 05:24 PM
Headed for the Mountains
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: vancouver, bc, Canada.
Interest: mtn biking, surfing, bmx, skimboarding, rock climbing, skateboarding, snowboarding and of course hiking.
Posts: 467
Default

danjurak you're right I didn't realize Canon has had the EF mount since 1987, but Nikon lenses from 1977 and up will still work with nikons.
baminem is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page



Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome
 

Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.1