New Canon Digital Rebel

[pstewart]

My sweet hubby just ordered me a Canon digital Rebel camera. He got a 28-80 macro lens for it, which sounds fine, since that's the same all-purpose size lens I am used to using on my Minolta Maxxum film camera.

I wanted a telephoto lens too, to get wildlife shots. He said he ordered an F 4.0 75-300 zoom. This sounds good, but I haven't seen it except a tiny photo on the web and I have some questions for anyone who has this same lens for the digital rebel.

About how long and heavy is it and is it cumbersome to use?

And, do you need to use a tripod or have you taken good handheld shots with it at the maximum zoom of 300?

If you have a tripod, what kind do you recommend?

General question: With a digital camera do you err on the side of underexposed or overexposed. I had read something about this once, but forget which they recommended, and why.

Thanks.
Phyllis

[shecodes]

My sweet hubby just ordered me a Canon digital Rebel camera. He got a 28-80 macro lens for it, which sounds fine, since that's the same all-purpose size lens I am used to using on my Minolta Maxxum film camera.

I wanted a telephoto lens too, to get wildlife shots. He said he ordered an F 4.0 75-300 zoom. This sounds good, but I haven't seen it except a tiny photo on the web and I have some questions for anyone who has this same lens for the digital rebel.

About how long and heavy is it and is it cumbersome to use?

And, do you need to use a tripod or have you taken good handheld shots with it at the maximum zoom of 300?

If you have a tripod, what kind do you recommend?

General question: With a digital camera do you err on the side of underexposed or overexposed. I had read something about this once, but forget which they recommended, and why.

Thanks.
Phyllis

Phyllis, I have taken 3100 pictures with my Digital Rebel. About 1/3 or more have been with the 75-300 lens. I have a tripod, but I don't use it. I should be using it, but for most of what I take, I haven't need it.

The lense is about 5 inches, and weighes about 16 oz. It's not hard to use, I can change lenses pretty quickly. It's no different than changing lenses with a film camera.

[jseah]

also, keep in mind that because of the "magnification factor" of the sensor, the 75-300 lens acts as a 120-480mm lens. I don't have the current one, but I do have the older one (I think it is the II series) and it is a hand holdable lens, although you do need to go with a faster shutter speed at 300 to minimize camera shake.

[wtraub]

LUCKY YOU! I'm saving freelance money for that camera

[sheila]

Hi Phyllis

Apparently, according to many posters on sites such as DPReview and Fred Miranda, the 75-300 is not the sharpest lens that Canon makes and its poor wide open. I highly recommend the 70-200 f/4 L which is the sharpest lens of this focal length (other than the 2.8 version) which is a reasonable price and is very light. I never use a tripod with this lens. Regarding lenses, IMHO if you buy cheap, you buy twice!

Cheers
Sheila

[rsun]

I need some info... I am thinking of buying the Digi Rebel, what are the users thoughts on this camera? I was comparing it to the Minolta Dimage A1...I know it's not an SLR but the features are close!!!
Also Nikon is releaseing the D70 soon which is to compete with the Rebel should I wait till the Spring 2004 or just go with the Rebel.
Also do they make a underwater housing for it yet ????

I primarley want to shoot sports and some artsey pictures!!!

HELP!!

[bobtrips]

I made my decision between the same two cameras and chose the A1. But I'm not going to suggest that the A1 would be the best camera for you.

I purchased the A1 because I wanted a smaller, lighter camera for travel. The A1 with its 28-200 mm lens and built-in image stabilization should take care of my needs to shoot in a variety of situations, including low light without flash.

All that said, the 300D will take pictures that can be printed larger and will shoot clean pictures at higher ISO settings. The last feature may be important to you if you want to shoot sports. You need to minimize shutter speed to minimize motion blur. I can tolerate slow shutter speeds as long as I don't get camera movement blur as my subjects are generally static.

The 300D is going to give you a lot more lens options. But those options take a bite out of one's budget.

Wait for the Nikon? It depends. Do you own good Nikon glass now? If not, I can't see any reason to wait.

[pstewart]

also, keep in mind that because of the "magnification factor" of the sensor, the 75-300 lens acts as a 120-480mm lens..

How do you get it to do this? Do you set the camera a special way? I am a complete idiot about the new digital technology. Any tips on using this lens would be appreciated. Thanks.

the 75-300 is not the sharpest lens that Canon makes and its poor wide open.

It may be less than perfect, but if it's Canon the flaws would most likely be minor and easily corrected with Photoshop. Back in the old days of film such differences were much more important.

I haven't used the camera yet...still haven't read the manual! I am an idiot when it comes to anything that has computer chips, and frankly it scares me! My hubby promised to do the book-learnin' for me, then show me how to operate it. Hopefully this weekend. I'm excited, but pretty nervous right now, knowing that my poor old brain has to go through that painful learning curve before I can really enjoy my new toy.

Phyllis

[rsun]

Bobtrip wrote:

All that said, the 300D will take pictures that can be printed larger and will shoot clean pictures at higher ISO settings. The last feature may be important to you if you want to shoot sports. You need to minimize shutter speed to minimize motion blur. I can tolerate slow shutter speeds as long as I don't get camera movement blur as my subjects are generally static.

Are you able to get action shots with the Minolta Dimage ? it would save me money going that way... I wouldn't have to buy another lens. I just want to get some good surfing and skateboarding shots and most likely high school football?

Are the ISO setting the only difference ? are you happy with your choice ?

And most likely it would be used for portait shots of the family!!!!
5MP would make nice 8X10's???[/quote]

[pstewart]

Rsun, don't even consider a non-SLR camera, especially if you are taking portraits or close-ups. Just my two cents, but I can't imagine not being able to see exactly what I'm going to get on the pic.

[bobtrips]

Action shots.

I haven't tried with the A1 yet but will make some predictions from my slower-to-focus Oly C2100z. Non-SLR digitals are slower to focus than are dSLRs (has to do with the type of focusing systems that they use). If you're moving from a film camera to a non-dSLR digital the delay can be frustrating and off-putting. But you learn to work around this problem (at least I did).

You need to pre-focus on your subject by pressing the shutter button half-way, waiting for the proper moment, and then completing the press. You also have to press slightly sooner than you would with other cameras. But one learns to do this, just as one learns to 'lead' a clay when shooting skeets, one learns to run to where the ball is going to be in tennis, etc.

Also using the drive function helps to capture the magic moment. Just press the button slightly sooner than when you think the best moment will occur and rip a strip of shots. Later pick the best when you get them up on your screen. (This is what the big boys did in the days of film. Motor drives got that great shot of the hand inside the rim in most cases , not a single well timed shot.)

So, I think you can shoot sports with the A1. The 300D should just make it easier, especially night games under artificial light.

[bobtrips]

------

Magnification factor.

The sensor in the lower range dSLR is about half the size of a frame of 35 mm film. When you use a regular 35 mm lens on your 300D you are using only the middle of the lens - think only the middle of the film frame. I'm not going to try to explain the geometry of it all. I'm a bit fuzzy on the explanation and haven't had any coffee yet this morning. But the end result is that your lens will act as if it is 1.5x, 1.6x (depending on the camera) longer than it will on a full frame (film or digital) camera.

That's a good thing for telephoto work such as wildlife shooting. You get reach with a smaller, lighter, less expensive lens. It's a bad thing for wide angle work. You have to buy a shorter, more expensive lens to get the same effect that you would get with a full frame camera.

[bobtrips]

WYSIWYG

It's not a dSLR/non-dSLR issue. It's a TTL (Though the Lens) issue.

Compact cameras use 'peek hole' viewfinders. They're OK for general shooting but will drive you crazy when trying to do closeup work or when using add-on telephotos.

What one really wants it to be able to look through the same lens that will be used by the film/sensor to capture the image. There are two ways to do this, a glass/mirror viewfinder (Optical View Finder or OVF) and an Electronic View Finder (EVF). The EVF is a tiny LCD screen installed in the viewfinder and is used by the A1 and other long zoom fixed-lens digitals.

Both the OVF and EVF have advantages. You get a clearer view with a OVF which makes manual focusing easier. You get information displays with EVFs that you can't get with an OVF (including pre-shot histograms).

Having used both I'll take the EVF. I seldom focus manually, auto focus works much better than I do in most situations. Much of my photography is what one might call 'street photography'. (Except the 'street photography that I've usually seen has been quite bad.) I need all limited amount of time that I have to concentrate on framing and getting the 'moment' right.

If I need to manually focus I can with the A1 (but acknowledge that it would be easier with an OVF). Of course if I need to manually focus I have the extra time. In general manual focusing would be quicker with an OVF, but I can get it right 99% of the time with an EVF.

The A1 EVF is 'third generation' and much better than my C2100z and Leica is releasing a camera with a better EVF. Within another generation or two I don't think there will be any reason to stick with OVFs.

(I've shot hundreds of portraits and closeups with an EVF. No problems whatsoever.)

[rsun]

Thank you Bobstrips!!!!

the difference in price between the two is close $899 fo rthe A1 and $999 for the Rebel.
I have to determine what the best deal and need would be... I think I will be going with the rebel!! I could just sit on it a while and wait for the Nikon D70 to come out, Nikon is making an SLR to compete with the Rebel.

I saw the Galleries of all the people who use the Rebel very impressive!!!
I guess if the Rebel was $400 more than the A1 I would have gone with the Minolta but there is only a $100 difference. ( I know I would have to buy the extra lens 55mm-200mm to match the focal lenght of the A1)

To get use out of a wide angle... do they sell wide angle lens that screw to your exisiting lens ? - I know Century make it's for Pro-video.
or do I have to spend the cash and buy a really wide lens like an EF 15MM f/2.8 fisheye ?

I do have to buy a card, I was thinking of the high speed flash card professional film 256MB made by Write Acceleration Technology? is that a good card or better yet have you heard of it ?

It looks like I am going to get addicted!!! at least it's not as expensive as the video gear I use for work!!!!!!!!!!

Thanks again!!! dfo yu have any pictures posted using the A1 ?

[jseah]

also, keep in mind that because of the "magnification factor" of the sensor, the 75-300 lens acts as a 120-480mm lens..

How do you get it to do this? Do you set the camera a special way? I am a complete idiot about the new digital technology. Any tips on using this lens would be appreciated. Thanks.

Phyllis

Phyllis,

There is nothing you need to do. It is built into the camera itself. Bear in mind that the size of the SLR lens is based on 35mm film (that is the physical size of the 35mm film frame). Since the physical size of the sensor in the 10D is smaller than a 35mm film frame, using the same size lens on a 35mm film camera and the 10D will result in the picture from the 10D showing the magnification factor. While this magnification factor has the advantage of letting you shoot closer with a smaller lens, the downside is that you lose wide angle (a 17mm wide angle lens will translate to a 28mm wide angle on the 10D). There are two digital SLR's on the market that has full-frame sensors (the size of the sensor is the same size as the size of 35mm film); the Canon EOS 1Ds and the Kodak DCS14n. The older Canon EOS 1D has a magnification factor of 1.3.

This magnification factor also applies to APS film cameras that use interchangeable 35mm lenses like the Canon EOS IX and IX Lite (has a magnification factor of 1.4 since the APS film frame is roughly 70% the size of the 35mm film frame). With P&S digitals and digital camcorders, because the size of the sensor in these cameras are even smaller, the magnification factor is even more dramatic.