Canon Digital EOS Rebel Pros and Cons

To: Fellow Photographers and Photography enthusiasts,

I have searched rec,photo,digital and did not find what I was Looking for.
My question is: Does anyone have experience with the Canon Digital EOS Rebel
, What did you like about it and what didn't you like about it.? I read
about the differences between it and the 10D. I just wanted some feed back
from people that actually shot with it. Thanks in advance for everyone's
help. I always can count on this newsgroup for help.

Thanks Again,

Christina

 

I have one, it's first and only dslr.

#1, feels cheaper than other digital and film SLRs I've tried.
#2, small buffer only allows 4 quick shots in continuous mode, after
that it's 1 shot per second.
#3, no flash exposure compensation, but that's now fixed with the
Russian firmware.

Except for those three things I absolutely love it, I like the controls,
I like the the kit lens, so far I've only added a 55-200mm, it's a fun
camera.

Greg

 

Apart from the functional differences and build, the viewfinder is the
main difference. Like the Nikon D70, the 300D uses a mirror box instead
of a glass prism, to cut down on weight and cost. The 10D uses a real
prism, and the result is much crisper, more contrasty viewfinder image.
This difference is carried through the whole camera - same basic image
sensor, but a much superior body if you need a heavier duty, better
feeling camera.

David

 

Thanks G.T. sometimes I get a lot of unhelpful nonsense when I post. Thank
you agin for your observations

 

Cristina,

I suggest you visit the 300D forum at dpreview. Lot of 300D/DRebel
users there:

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/forum.asp?forum=1031

Phil

 

<< Does anyone have experience with the Canon Digital EOS Rebel
, What did you like about it and what didn't you like about it.? I read
about the differences between it and the 10D. I just wanted some feed back
from people that actually shot with it. >>

Christina-

The Rebel 300 is a fine camera. It is lacking some features the more expensive
models have, but has accurate shutter speed and accepts the best lenses Canon
offers.

Judging by your web site, you most likely have the talent to produce
outstanding images using a camera that has a minimum capability. As a
professional you may find the Rebel acceptable. On the other hand, your images
may benefit from the additional capabilities of more expensive models.

For example, the Canon EOS 1Ds not only has a greater number of sensor elements
than the Rebel, the sensor is larger so less magnification is required for a
given image size.

While I have been generally satisfied with the performance of my Rebel, there
are a few minor things that annoy me such as having trouble making it focus
where I want it to. I have never tried any of the higher models, so it is hard
to tell if they would be any better.

Have you considered renting one? That way you could spend some time with it
and form your own opinion.

Fred

 

I have had mine for a few months now and I love it. Incredibly clear,
beautiful pics, I love being able to use quality Canon glass and it has more
features than I'll ever use. I do wish it had a bigger buffer---you only
get 4 shots before it has to unload to the memory card---but it hasn't been
a big deal for me so far.

 

This is a tale you hear a lot. If you actually try the
cameras in a store, you _may_ find it to be quite wrong.

At least to my eye, the 300D viewfinder is great. I can see all the way out
to the corners, and focus pops in and out better than any camera I currently
own (Mamiya 645, Rolleiflex with Maxwell screen). There is something a tad
chintzy about the image in the viewfinder; the 10D certainly seems smoother
and less harsh. But for framing and manual focusing, the 300D kicks the
10D's butt. (This is with my (-8.75 diopter) glasses. You should try the
cameras with your eyes and your glasses/contacts.)

This is anothe tale you hear a lot. If you actually try the
cameras in a store, you _may_ find it to be quite wrong.

I really like the way the 300D fits my hand and I'm not fond of excessive
weight. So the 300D is the "better feeling camera". If Canon comes out with
a full-frame "3D" or "10D II", I'll buy it and put up with the weight and
viewfinder, as I do with MF equipment. (It's the image quality, stupid.) But
when the image quality's the same, one has a choice.

Besides, if you buy a 300D, you'll want to keep it as your light weight go
anywhere camera when you get the full-frame "3D" or "10D II" after it
appears, whereas the 10D will sit in a drawer or have to be ebayed.

(IMHO, the 10D is getting too close to its sell-by date. It's almosty 18
months old, and a camera-month is like a dog year.)

David J. Littleboy
Tokyo, Japan

 

There is no way to properly frame without a sports finder. How do you
know what's been framed out? You don't!

 

Quite so. I have a 10D, my wife has a 300D. I'm hard pressed to see any
difference in the viewfinder with the same lens mounted.

 

I also had no problems with the 300D viewfinder. Surprisingly bright
and easy to view through, even without a fast lens.

 

My experiences, too.

Phil

 

How would you know, you have to be able to take pics

 

My take is if you know what you're missing in 300D that you absolutely need,
by all mean, get 10D. Otherwise, you'd be glad to save a few hundreds on
300D, collect some good lenses. My experience is a really good lens make
lots of difference in color saturation, contrast, sharpness. In general,
many people are quite happy with their 300D. When a replacement camera with
new sensor technology comes out, you won't feel too bad about selling your
current one. 6MP is good but I feel that the lenses I have got can resolve
more than the current sensors.

 

Please don't feed the troll. If you ignore him, he'll go away and find
another news group to bother.

David J. Littleboy
Tokyo, Japan

 

Quite so. I have a 10D, my wife has a 300D. I'm hard pressed to see any

Ditto and Ditto. I'd forgotten that the 300D has a mirrored box

 

I can't think of any pros, but here are some of the cons:

1) Shit-quality plastic build
2) Metering/exposure problems
3) Focus problems
4) Poor effective resolution
5) Horrible software
6) Battery consumption is ridiculouly bad
7) Must use tripod or IS lenses to prevent camera shake (unlike Sigma
SD* cameras which have camera-shake elimination built into the body)
8) Will be obsolete in a few years
9) Too much noise
10) Uses old sensor technolgy - records image pixels in monochrome
instead of color like the Sigma SD* cameras which use the Foveon
sensor

Look into the Sigma SD10. This is the best digital SLR you can buy.

 

Like:
- Cheapest DSLR in Canon EOS line.
- Smallest and lightest DSLR in Canon EOS line.
- Uses the simpler and cheaper RS-60E3 trigger remote.
- Can use the same battery grip as the D30/D60/10D
- has infrared remote capability with RC-1 or RC-5
- huge user base

Don't Like:
- Too much automation, not enough manual control
- Camera selects the focus mode based on expert system
- Metering mode based on expert system
- No flash compensation
- No secondary command dial.
- Shooting mode dial on the right side.
- user base at the lower end of photography spectrum

Chieh

 

Actually a placstic exterior on a Magnesium frame.

Not really

Better than the 3 mp Sigmas

True -- but who uses the stuff than comes with the camera anyway?

500-600 shots on a very small battery (vs. the 4 NiMH used by a Sigma):
Excellent!

No one else knows of this secret built-in feature -- including Sigma.
I've not used a tripod with my 300D in 8 months of heavy use.

Canon has been making SLRs for years and now is the leader in dSLRs.
Sigma is the cul-de-sac. Likely they will license their Foveon
technology to someone who can use it to build a real camera.

I regularly shoot at ISO 400 and get good results at 800 and 1600, too.
Reviews say the Sigma cannot make it even to ISO 400 without being noisy.

See 8) above.

Well, the reviewers (all of them) say otherwise.

Phil

 

1) Shit-quality plastic build

Well, yes, but only with my Sigma lens (100-300mm F4.5 - 6.7 DL) !
( really !.. any takers ? ).

Actually, I do ( use that photostitching programme that came with it - only
to edit it afterwards in CS or PSP, and the file viewer to download the pics
form my CF card into my computer..).
Does the job fast and good enough for me

Obsolete how ? I agree that in a few years there will probably digital SLR
with different and better specs, but does that mean you suddenly can't take
good pictures with the "old" one ?