Topic: How do you like the Canon Digital Rebel Xt ? (aka EOS 350D) ..

[ljsurfer2002]

SSIA ...

I really want to buy one of these bad boys to do weddings .. I have a 28mm f/2.8 fixed, a 50mm f/1.8 fixed, and a cheap-o 80-200mm f/4.5-5.6 lense too ... I have shot with a EOS Ellan II for about 6 years now and i'd like to buy a digital Canon SLR body to go with my lenses to shoot all these wedding gigs I get. I've rented the Canon EOS 10D .. it's pretty good .. I'm hoping to rent the 20D soon... But i'd rather get the Rebel Xt plus a $500 lense then just the cost of the body-only 20D ... Any thoughts?

Tyler

[MattD]

Tyler,

To do weddings, you'll need at least a 20D, if not a 1-Series body. You'll also need some faster mid-to-long glass to go with that. The 80-200/4.5-5.6 will be unusable at most weddings (basically anything indoors) due to the lack of light. I'd also argue that if you're doing a wedding yourself, you need two bodies.

I know the XT is an improvment on the DRebel, but as far as AF performance goes, the 20D and 1-Series bodies annhilate it. Ideally a 16-35 2.8, 24-70 2.8, 70-200 2.8 and a few faster primes would be good with a 1D/20D pair. However, if you've been doing well with the lenses you have now, more power to you. I'd say that the 20D would be a good buy.

[DesignVHL]

I love my rebel for concert photos, of course I wish I could have afforded the 20D. But if you don't want to spend that kind of doe, the XT is a great way to go....Def. going w/ a higher one next time - esp once something newer/faster comes out. But actually isn't more about the lens and how fast it is?

[dgodwin]

Go with nikon and buy some of my stuff

[MattD]

But actually isn't more about the lens and how fast it is?

To an extent, but even with an f/1.2 lens (the 85/1.2, for example), you need a high ISO to get proper exposure in low light, which is common to almost any indoor wedding. I don't have any experience with the XT's high ISO noise, but I know on my Rebel/300D that it becomes pretty bad at ISO 800 and above. The 20D is pretty good at 800 and decent even at 1600.

If you're using a flash setup, then you have a bit more flexibility. A nice diffuse flash to get evenly lit faces makes a world of difference.

[DesignVHL]

I don't generally use flash at shows I shoot, but I am thinking of looking into some. This is my first Digital SLR, so I decided not to splurge w/ the 20D. But the way things have been going, I'll probably upgrade in about a year or two if $$$ allows.

[MattD]

I don't think flash photography is allowed at a lot of shows. I also don't like the results of a flash at a concert anyway. I was speaking about weddings in the above reply. I'm holding onto the digital rebel for at least another year, myself.

[phanophish]

Check out fredmiranda.com.  It's one of the best resources for digital photography I have ever run across.  Basically you will get the Canon & Nikon fans supporting their platform, but most will argue that while qulaity glass (regardless of manufacturer) is important, it's the photographer that makes the difference.  You will see some stunning Wedding shots taken with D70s & Digital Rebels as well as D20s 1Ds & D2Xs.  If you are starting from scratch there are some features that the 20D offers that are desirable, most notably better low light performance, but great photos can be taken with any camera.  Digital is so nice both from a cost standpoint and for the flexibility it offers in post processing.....

[dmonterisi]

fyi, the 350d (digi-rebel xt) and the 20d have the same sensor and processing chip built into them, so ISO performance is very very similar if not identical.  the same photo taken with the same lens on either body should be almost indistinguishable.  there are numerous reasons to prefer the 20d (frame rate, build quality, AF system, WB selection, more responsive shutter, etc).  but actual image quality will be almost indistinguishable.

[DesignVHL]

phano - nice steve shot! Did you take that yourself? Are you hitting any Particle shows this tour?

Also, I'm w/ you on the flash photography. I would never use one for a concert either - the natural lighting from the stage when it hits right is just perfect for me! Even if I have to deal w/ a little graininess till I upgrade....it hasn't been too bad when there is enough light to be let in.

[pfife]

fyi, the 350d (digi-rebel xt) and the 20d have the same sensor and processing chip built into them, so ISO performance is very very similar if not identical.  the same photo taken with the same lens on either body should be almost indistinguishable.  there are numerous reasons to prefer the 20d (frame rate, build quality, AF system, WB selection, more responsive shutter, etc).  but actual image quality will be almost indistinguishable.

This is what I've read too.  There was a site somewhere where they did a comparison.... its really quite shocking how similar the quality was.

[DesignVHL]

yeah...when i went to purchase my new digital slr, i actually had the 20D in mind, not the rebel....so I WAS planning on spending more, but i also wasn't planning on getting a new lens...which I was able to afford since i went w/ the rebel instead. The reason I chose the rebel is because of the guy workin' behind the counter at Wolf. He was a photographer for events - like theater - so he dealt w/ low light and such. Since I was buying the camera primarily for concerts...He told me pretty much the same thing about the rebel and 20d comparison. And suggested that I go w/ the rebel and then get a good lens. So, that's what I did. I've been pretty satisfied. I also figured that it would be a perfect lead in to the next generation of 20d's....

[divamum]

Thanks for the fredmiranda link - very helpful.

Any updated comments on the Rebel XT (you'll see from my other post I'm starting to sniff around....)

Tx!

[ljsurfer2002]

I still love mine. When I tried the 20D it was just 'too heavy' at the end of a long day shooting a wedding. but it's still a great camera. now they have the 30D and the 5D or something? Canon had a few more body models come out since last year...

[Chrisedge]

Better to have the money spent on glass.

2 lenses for Concerts/Weddings

17mm - 55mm f/2.8 IS USM - $1179
and
70mm - 200mm f/2.8L IS USM - $1699

I'd rather have spent the money on those lenses than the 20D/30D...(Upgrading that will happen once I have these lenses...)

[Ed.]

May I suggest www.dgrin.com as well.  Its not quite as busy as fm.com and the folks there are a lot like the folks here...nice and willing to help a noobie in need.

The lenses I use most for concerts/lowlight shooting are my sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 (soon to be replaced by the canon L version) and the 70-200mm f/2.8L non IS (non IS was sharper than the IS version, and I like to think I have a steady hand).  I use the 50mm f/1.8 on occasion in extreme lowlight circumstances.  Plus its dirt cheap so theres no reason why you shouldn't have one.

A good rule of thumb, your shutter speed be equivalent to your focal length...so if you're shooting at 200mm, your going to almost need a shutter speed of 1/200 to get a steady shot.

The xt does just fine in low light from all the pictures I've seen, however, I've never used one, but for the most part its quite similar to the 20D and 30D just without the bells and whistles.

other good sites for reviews on lenses...
www.photozone.de
www.pbase.com - you can search lenses hear and get sample pictures taken with the lens by pbase users.
http://www.photodo.com/
there's also a great review board on fm.com

also, one last thing to remember, the rebel, xt, 10D, 20D, and 30D all have a 1.6x crop...if you want a full frame camera like a normal slr, you're going to have to move up to the 5D or one of the more professional cameras.

[MattD]

A good rule of thumb, your shutter speed be equivalent to your focal length...so if you're shooting at 200mm, your going to almost need a shutter speed of 1/200 to get a steady shot.

That rule of thumb was created in the days of the 35mm SLR. If you have a crop body, you're going to need to alter that accordingly. For example, for a 1.6x crop with a 200mm lens, you'd want a shutter speed of 1/320.

[Ed.]

d'oh, good call.

another good tip, take lots of shots.  I can easily burn through a 4gb card during a concert.  You're bound to get at least a couple good shots.

[BayTaynt3d]

Don't forget about prime lenses... Canon has a 50mm f1.8 that sells for $80!!! Sure no zoom, but you'll be loving that f1.8 in the dark with no flash.

They also make another reasonably priced 85mm f1.8 prime as well. They have their downsides, but you've got to love those fast lenses...

[divamum]

d'oh, good call.

another good tip, take lots of shots.  I can easily burn through a 4gb card during a concert.  You're bound to get at least a couple good shots.

OMG, you're not kidding. I forgot the FIRST rule of film shooting the other day which was to make sure you have at least 3x as many rolls of film as you think you'll need (I've been spoiled by a pretty big card in my digi p&S).  Fortunately I was watching the counter and realised in time so I didn't miss the end of the show which was actually the "most important" bit (I have an 8 year old who would never have forgiven me if I'd'a missed her Big Moment) but sheesh - it really pointed out to me how long it's been and how lazy I've become. 

I can't even FIND my tripod these days - it must've gotten lost in the last move. 

The thing that cracked me up most was how I'd take a shoot and then automatically glance at the back of the camera to "check" the image... but of course there wasn't one!  Duh.  Had to just do it in my head, trust the Canon's lightmeter (my god I'd forgotten how good it is) and split between slow-shutter no-flash and hoping the built-in flash had enough in it to make the distance (it did). 

But it felt really really REALLY good to be shooting something "for real" again.  I'm no photographic genius - it's all just for fun - but I'd forgotten just how much FUN it really is.  Which is, of course, why I'm prompted to scout around for gear and have raised all these questions!  I've been so into the recording side of things for the last 2 years I'd almost forgotten how much fun taking pictures is

[dmonterisi]

A good rule of thumb, your shutter speed be equivalent to your focal length...so if you're shooting at 200mm, your going to almost need a shutter speed of 1/200 to get a steady shot.

That rule of thumb was created in the days of the 35mm SLR. If you have a crop body, you're going to need to alter that accordingly. For example, for a 1.6x crop with a 200mm lens, you'd want a shutter speed of 1/320.

i don't think the crop factor applies to that rule of thumb.  it's what i go by on the 20d and i don't suffer problems with camera shake.  i'm able to get sharp images with my 135 down to 1/90 if i'm careful and certainly at 1/125.

[MattD]

Well, it is only a rule of thumb, but the sensor size matters. Basically, the blur is magnified relative to the sensor size. The final image size also matters - I think the original rule was with a 35mm creating an 8"x10" print. Plenty of digicam owners never print or only do 4"x6" from their local drugstore or photo shop. With good technique, many people can easily do better than that rule, as you've said.

Balance also matters a lot for steadiness. Having shot a few with your 20D (+ grip?) and 135/2 at the State, that is one well-balanced combination. An XT + a 70-200/2.8 is not a stable combination. I can't imagine using an XT as my full-time body. Last year, I shot with one that some guy in Chicago had with him and it felt like using it with any L made it awkwardly lens-heavy. It was decent with that 17-85 IS the guy was using, though.

[BayTaynt3d]

http://www.popphoto.com/cameras/1924/hotshot-shoot-out.html

[Ed.]

http://www.popphoto.com/cameras/1924/hotshot-shoot-out.html

be careful though, a lot has happened since then...two more major players have come to the field - the sony alpha and the soon to come out nikon D80.  Not to mention the 20D has dropped considerably in price do to the 30D.

[BayTaynt3d]

The guy's on a budget, and the xt is plenty good, that's my only point. A used 20D is still going to be more $ than a new XT isn't it?

[Ed.]

True, but not by much.  The Sony Alpha's are only $900-$1000 with kit lens and they're 10.2mp's but from all the reviews I've read, the noise sucks above ISO800

If lowlight shooting with high ISO's is still your main focus, then canon anything is the way to go.

[divamum]

http://www.popphoto.com/cameras/1924/hotshot-shoot-o ut.html

GREAT review info - thanks!!  Thanks too for the other site links - they're all great resources.

I think both budget constraints and the extra weight of the 20d mean that the XT will prolly fit my needs. I don't use my cameras so hard that the metal body is a dealbreaker and given the lack of $ to spend, that's something I can live without (nice though it would be). And since I already have some decent Canon autofocus lenses from my 35mm rig, I think that pretty much means I'll stick with them - I'm sure more recent generations of USM are faster but the optics on these are terrific and have served me well. At this point, I need to put all $ just into getting on the digiSLR food chain. Then I can upgrade lenses in due course if and as it becomes necessary.  But for now...

thanks again guys for all this great info and for pointing me in the right directions website and shoppingwise. Google is a wonderful thing, but reccos from here are even better!

[Ed.]

I think you'll be quite happy with the xt, have fun engossing yourself with another expensive hobby. 

[divamum]

I think you'll be quite happy with the xt, have fun engossing yourself with another expensive hobby. 

geez, you're not kidding.  My wishlist is now a set of HEB's, an R09 and an XT body.  Santa better take credit and offer 0% interest is all I can say!!