Camera Question

[Andrew Khan]

Hi, I have a question, that maybe some of you could help me with.

Right now I own a Nikon CoolPix 4800 (Point & Shoot) Camera.

And I have the option (If I wanted) to get a Canon Digital Rebel, instead of the Nikon, I currently have. What would you all do? Would you keep the Nikon one, or get the Canon Digital Rebel (Exclude Budget, Please.)?

 

[Andrew Khan]

Is it like EXTREMELY COMPLICATED to use, however?

 

[Andrew Khan]

Here's a question I have though. LEt's say, while chasing you see a shot that looks AMAZING, but it'll only last for a few seconds. Do nyou have to adjust monster settings, enough to miss the shot? Or can you just point and shoot.

 

[Jeff Snyder]

Originally posted by Andrew Khan
Here's a question I have though. LEt's say, while chasing you see a shot that looks AMAZING, but it'll only last for a few seconds. Do nyou have to adjust monster settings, enough to miss the shot? Or can you just point and shoot.

Andrew,

The dSLRs (like the Rebel) are designed to provide greater flexibility in settings, so they aren't really designed to be point-n-shoot, and if that's all you're going to be using it for, you may be better off with an actual point-n-shoot. Actually, dSLRs are easier to manually adjust than point-n-shooters -- it's easier for me to adjust ISO, aperture, etc, on my 20D than it is on my fiance's A85. That said, most dSLRs do have a setting which is basically point-n-shoot. If you don't have much camera experience, but you want to learn, I suggest the Canon Digital Rebel or Rebel XT... It's a relatively inexpensive dSLR and provides a good learning platform. That'll let you save up for the next generation or two.

 

[Robert Edmonds]

Please keep in mind I do not own a digital but in the process of getting some money for one. After looking at the two cameras I would say to get the canon digital rebel. One of the two reasons is because you have interchangable lenses. This means if you want to eventually get more cameras you won't have to buy new lenses only a new canon body that accepts the lenses. Second, you are worried about the compilicated configuration, don't worry about this it won't actually take that long to learn. You were also worried that you might miss a wonderful shot because your camera would be to complicated. However, it might take that knowledge of your "complicated" camera to capture that shot. For instance if you leave your camera in auto the whole time and you shoot into the sun your camera will over adjust because of the light from the sun. But being aware of some of the features the canon might have that the coolpix might not have will allow you to quickly correct for this. Well that's that's just my opinion...

 

[Doren Berge]

Originally posted by nickgrillo
The Digital Rebel has certainly made me happy over the past year - I'd recommend it!

I agree. It's a great all around Digital SLR. I've been kicking one around for a couple of years. It's a great camera for transitioning into the "pro-sumer" range without going broke. The lens it ships with kind of sucks but it's usable. That's where you'll need to spend extra cash. But you can put that off for a while while you get comfortable with the camera. The good news is you can invest in better optics and keep using them when you decide to upgrade the body.

It also has very good auto functions. The "point and shoot" settings are pretty good if you're not comfortable managing your own exposure. And there are several auto options for different situations. Good manual too.

If you are new to digital photography it really is worth checking out. I think it's a great camera.

db

 

[tommywinning]

I puchased a Digital Rebel in June and don't really know a whole lot about photography. But I learn better by reading the manual and then trying different things. From experience, I would go with the Rebel, take the time to learn the basic functions, and continue to learn as you go. Even in the automatic settings it will display the shutter speed and aperture values for each shot when you take it. I am very happy with mine.

 

[Jay Cazel]

You might take a look at the Nikon D70...I got it this year and really like it. Good all around camera IMO.

 

[Doren Berge]

Originally posted by tommywinning
I puchased a Digital Rebel in June and don't really know a whole lot about photography. But I learn better by reading the manual and then trying different things. From experience, I would go with the Rebel, take the time to learn the basic functions, and continue to learn as you go. Even in the automatic settings it will display the shutter speed and aperture values for each shot when you take it. I am very happy with mine.

Great point. You can learn a lot by observing the decisions the camera makes for you in auto settings. And you can experiment from there. The best thing about going digital SLR is that you can experiment and learn without wasting film or processing time. You can just keep shooting. It doesn't cost anything. You can learn a lot about exposure from just messing around.

You can also shoot images and look at the histogram. It's a great way to test shoot an environment and see if your settings are good.

That might seem a little over the top if your just getting started. But it's actually very simple. Here is a great article that explains clearly how to use the histogram to manage exposure settings. I really learned a lot about using my Rebel after reading this.

http://luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/un...istograms.shtml

Of course this works for other Digital cameras as well. Not just the Rebel.


db

 

[PaulChambers]

I have been using a Canon Digital Rebel for over a year now, and with the different settings, it can be like a 'point-and-shoot' camera, or you have the options of setting any or all of the settings manually. I have been very satisfied with the pictures. I have taken long-exposure lightning photos and also fast-action photos like bull riders and race cars. With just a little work and practice, it performs great for me.

 

[Ericka B. Gray]

Nikon vs. Canon

I am fortunate to own both a Nikon D70 and a Canon 20D. I had to buy the Canon 20D for photography school and already had the D70. (Talk about breaking the bank!) The D70 is great but the Canon is better. This goes for the Rebel too. Better low light photography (has to do with bit depth) and I actually think it's easier to use than the Nikon D70. I'd been a die hard Nikon fan for years and bought the D70 so I could use the same lenses. I have kept the D70 as a backup. So, my advice is to go for the Canon. You won't be sorry.

Ericka

 

[Mike Umscheid]

Re: Nikon vs. Canon

Originally posted by Ericka B. Gray
I am fortunate to own both a Nikon D70 and a Canon 20D. I had to buy the Canon 20D for photography school and already had the D70. (Talk about breaking the bank!) The D70 is great but the Canon is better. This goes for the Rebel too. Better low light photography (has to do with bit depth) and I actually think it's easier to use than the Nikon D70. I'd been a die hard Nikon fan for years and bought the D70 so I could use the same lenses. I have kept the D70 as a backup. So, my advice is to go for the Canon. You won't be sorry.

Ericka

A lot of it is individual loyalty to Nikon vs. Canon. Honestly, for landscape/storm photography, when it comes to the camera body for a 6 MP level digital SLR... you can achieve the same results with either Canon or Nikon. I'm not sure what Ericka means by "better low light photography having to do with bit depth". If you mean 16-bit color information data, well, Nikon RAW is 16bit depth.

Really what it comes down to is the glass. How can you best fill the CCD with information? 6 MP, 8MP, 16 MP... if you have crappy glass, you will get crappy high-resolution results. Do research in lenses more than the camera body itself. You will be rewarded. Nikon nikkor is some incredible glass. If you are more familiar with Nikon bodies and functionality, then stick with nikon... if Canon, then Canon. There really is not much difference if you ask me. From a D70 LOVER....

Mike U

 

[Steve Miller TX]

I got the Canon Rebel XT this past April. I couldn't be happier. It was my first ever SLR camera after using point and shoots all of my life. This camera will still do "pont and shoot" photography right out of the box and do a fine job at that for most standard situations. The user manual is really great and I found it instructional and pretty easy to follow and understand...even for a novice like myself. I'd suggest taking it a few pages at a time and then practice with it before proceeding.

It's all digital images...so shoot lots of pics and tinker with various settings and light. All of the camera settings are stored with the image so you can refer to them with each picture. It comes with what I consider to be pretty good bundled software that displays all of the setting information as well as allowing you to do some serious editing of your pictures.

I shoot strictly in RAW format now which with the bundled software allows you to make all sorts of fine tuning and adjustments to make it look it's best....and in my case save some images that I didn't shoot with the correct settings. Then you can convert it to whatever format you please. It even has a batch function that allows certain adjustments for a whole bunch of pics.

Overall, I hear you about the learning curve and I was intimidated myself by it. But, looking back, it wasn't all that bad and I am absolutely happy that I did. I'll never go back! I've got an online gallery listed below in my signature. Feel free to browse through there and when looking at the full picture, click on the little "i" icon next to the image name and you'll see all of the camera settings I used. Maybe that will help as a basic guide.

 

[cdcollura]

Canon Digital Rebel

Good afternoon,

I got hold of my own Digital Rebel in April of 2005 after I had all my gear stolen. The Digital Rebel was sufficient to basically replace the stolen Fuji Digital and Stolen Rebel 2000 SLR!

For a point and shoot capability, set the Digital Rebel on its "automatic" setting (either with the focus and / or the exposure settings knob). That should satify the quick 3-second available shot.

This camera not only can do point-and-shoot, but MANY other things, even shooting lightning, and has raw format as well.

I highly recommend it!

Chris C - KG4PJN

 

[Robert Balogh]

If you are going to consider a D70 or a digital rebel

Several people have alluded to the real key to this question , which is that the most important thing is the glass you are using.

When you really want to talk the best glass in the world, there's only two names to even consider - Leitz and Hasselblad

You might think these are out of reach, and if you want interchangeable lenses, you'd be right, since that digital platform for a Hasselblad is about $15,000 and the platform for the Leica R series about $8000 and not sure its available yet

BUT - the Leica Digilux 2 and Panasonic DMC LC 1 - both are 5 megapixel single lens digitals that feature a Leitz Summicron lens with a range of 24-90mm. The Leica runs around $1500, the Panasonic can be had for $1200

Added benefits are that if you're in to old style film photography is that most settings are adjusted by means of rings on the lens and that both have an emormous lcd display

With the D70 and Digital Rebel in the $800-$900 range without your first lens, these are worth a look.

One problem is that they dont have a RAW buffer, which means that even with a fast SD card you're looking at about 5 seconds between shots in RAW mode. Also, the software that comes with the cameras isnt really adequate for RAW work - and neither is the 64mb SD card that comes standard

Anyway, just another voice to help keep in mind that there's more (and better) out there than Nikon and Canon

 

[Ryan McGinnis]

Here's a question I have though. LEt's say, while chasing you see a shot that looks AMAZING, but it'll only last for a few seconds. Do nyou have to adjust monster settings, enough to miss the shot? Or can you just point and shoot.

The digital rebel can be set to point-and-shoot mode if you need to.

Basically, the difference between a point-and-shoot camera and a camera that allows manual adjustments is like the difference between a car with automatic and manual transmission. Automatic transmission will get you where you're going, but you don't see Indycar drivers using it. If you want to take snapshots, P&S is fine. If you want to take stunning photographs, then you need to learn about photography and then purchase a camera that will allow you the technical means to render your art in the way that you want to. The ability to adjust settings is very important. I've no doubt that your P&S camera can be easily out-performed by a ~10 year old all-mechanical 35mm Pentax K-1000 -- but, yes, you need to learn the technical aspects of the artform (which is not as hard as it sounds!) in order to take advantage of this flexibility.

 

[Ryan McGinnis]

Re: If you are going to consider a D70 or a digital rebel

Anyway, just another voice to help keep in mind that there's more (and better) out there than Nikon and Canon

I think the better value for the money at that point is just to shoot medium format. Glass that good is wasted at 5 megapixels. Yeah, if Zeiss or Leica made lenses to fit Canons, then they'd be worth looking at instead of buying Canon OEM glass -- a lense like that mounted to a 1D MkII would be something -- but 5 megapixels? Heck, you'd have to put a gun to my head to buy that over the Leica 35mm rangefinder like the M7, even if I had to pay twice the price. Why purchase the finest wine money can buy if you're going to mix it with punch?

If you don't mind waiting 5 seconds between shots and only plan on using one lense, you can get a lot more bang for $1200 out of an old-school medium format setup.

 

[Andrew Khan]

But if you set it to point and shoot/automatic, it will choose the appropriate settings for the given situation correct? Umm, I was also looking and I saw besides the Canon Digital Rebel, their is something new out called Canon Digital Rebel XT. Which one is better? I see the XT is more expensive, however. But does have more MP. Do any of the chasers that shoot good pictures, use automatic, you think? Because, I just worry, I'll fiddle to much with settings and miss a potentially awsome shot. Also, whats the best place I can buy one, on the internet?

 

[Andrew Khan]

What about Aperture and Exposure? Do you just not touch those? So are those your custom settings? What about JUST shooting in Auto? How does RAW differ from JPG or something? What does ISO and shutter speed do?

 

[Aaron Kennedy]

I always shoot in Av or Manual. The one exception was at an airshow where I tried some Tv so I wouldn't have to worry about having the right setting for prop blur.

What about Aperture and Exposure?

Aperature controls depth of field... In addition, lens are sharper stopped down.. usually from f/8-f/11. The exception is L lenses which perform much better wide open (say f/2.8-f/4) even though even these will be less sharp than at f/8.

How does RAW differ from JPG or something?

Shooting raw allows you to change the in camera settings such as sharpness/contrast/saturation after the fact. The biggest advantage for me is better control over exposure (say lightening up darker ground when you hjave a bright sky and don't have time for a neutral grad. density filter). Not to mention you can change the white balance afterwards...

What does ISO and shutter speed do?

As ISO increases, sensor noise increases... however you can take pictures at a faster shutter speed or stopped down more to get the same exposure. For example, a shot at 1/100 at f/8 at ISO100 would be 1/250 f/8 at ISO200.

As far as shutter speed goes, you should always shoot at least 1/focal length to keep blur to a min. For myself, I find that I must shoot at 1/2*focal length to get best results (especially at telephoto).

To stop action, you want to use faster shutter speeds. For speeds between 1s and 1/60 you should use mirror lock up to prevent the image being blurry due to shutter slap.

Aaron

 

[Andrew Khan]

Do you know the difference between the rebel and the rebel XT? Thanks for the information, however.

 

[Aaron Kennedy]

The XT is faster, lighter, and more user friendly (as far as manual controls go) compared to the Digi Reb. In addition, it has an 8mp sensor instead of 6, although the major features (reasons to go with the XT) are the aformentioned.

Aaron

 

[Andrew Khan]

I see, however. I have heard very very good things about the regular Digital Rebel, so if I were to get one, would I get the normal or the XT? What would you suggest?

 

[Ryan McGinnis]

I see, however. I have heard very very good things about the regular Digital Rebel, so if I were to get one, would I get the normal or the XT? What would you suggest?

If price is not an issue, get the XT. Actually, if price is not an issue, you can do even better than the XT. XT is simply a newer generation of the digital Rebel. I don't own either, but it's highly unlikely that the old Rebel is going to beat the new and improved Rebel. Most reviews I've read have said similar.

I hate to be the cliched guy you tells you to go use Google, but go use Google. I think you've probably tapped the chase community out for advice about the digital Rebel. In the end, you should be the one making the choice, not us. A good site to start at would be:

http://www.dpreview.com/

They have a ton of camera reviews on that site. All of the reviews are extremely helpful and methodical, with lots of test sample images to give you an idea of how quality stacks up to other cameras in its class.

 

[Greg Campbell]

If Leitz's quality hasn't slipped too much, that 5MP Leica probably makes much better pictures out of the box than a RebXT/20D with the dreaded kit lens. Also remember that 8MP gains only ~25% more linear resolution over a 5MP sensor, hardly enought to make a huge difference in image quality. At any rate, it's good to see some variety in the market.

Now, if someone would only make a digital back for my film camera.....