Disappointed by Digital Rebel (Canon EOS-300D)

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Open Wound, Mar 7, 2004.

  1. Open Wound

    Open Wound Guest

    I was attracted to the Digital Rebel primarily because of its
    high-sensitivity sensor. I had read many reviews which all praised
    the Rebel's ability to take virtually nose free images at ISO 400.
    I thought the Rebel would be a good choice for me because higher
    ISO will let me increase the shutter speed, which will let me take
    less blurry pictures of my 1-year-old who won't stand still.

    I was disappointed by the pictures, however. The problem was very
    poor dynamic range. If the light on the subject's face is even a
    little bit uneven (indoor lighting) then you get washout. I didn't
    understand this at all, because even my older Pro90 took better

    So I did some research. Turns out, the dynamic range falls sharply
    as you increase the ISO. See the charts at:
    What this means is that permanently setting the ISO to 400 as I
    had previously planned to do is not an option at all. Even increasing
    the ISO from 100 to 200 causes a significant decline in dynamic range.
    So it looks like I will have to set the ISO to 100 most of the time.
    Which cancels out the reason I bought this camera.

    Had I known, I would probably have purchased the FujiFilm FinePix F700
    instead. You can get this camera for around $270. It has lower
    resolution than the Digital Rebel (3.1 Megapixels), and of course it
    is not an SLR, so you can't change the lens. But it has one of the
    best dynamic ranges, and the lowest manual ISO setting on this camera
    is ISO 200. This camera would probably take better pictures than the
    Digital Rebel, with better dynamic range, and less blurry because of
    the higher ISO. (ISO 200 is sufficient for best quality, whereas the
    Canon requires ISO 100.)

    Still, the Digital Rebel has the advantages of an SLR: I am going to
    get an F1.8 50mm lens for around $70. This will let me increase the
    shutterspeed a little bit. But it is unclear whether this will bring
    the picture quality closer to the $270 FinePix F700.
    Open Wound, Mar 7, 2004
    1. Advertisements

  2. Open Wound

    Canongirly Guest

    You'll enjoy the Finepix f700 shutter lag.
    A 50mm lens on a 300d will in effect be an 80mm
    Canongirly, Mar 7, 2004
    1. Advertisements

  3. Open Wound

    Tony Spadaro Guest

    Tony Spadaro, Mar 7, 2004
  4. Open Wound

    John Navas Guest

    [POSTED TO rec.photo.digital - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

    There is no Free Lunch.
    Why not use Auto ISO, and shoot in Shutter Priority AE (or Sports) mode?
    I seriously doubt that.
    John Navas, Mar 7, 2004
  5. Open Wound

    John Navas Guest

    [POSTED TO rec.photo.digital - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

    Perhaps that will make him happy, but maybe not -- all the talk about money
    suggests a serious case of DSLR Buyer's Remorse. ;-)

    In <q0u2c.71827$> on Sun, 07 Mar 2004
    John Navas, Mar 7, 2004
  6. [snip]

    And, I haven't had any of his problems.

    Fred A. Miller, Mar 7, 2004
  7. Open,

    The solution for you is to leave the camera at a lower ISO and use
    electronic flash to stop the action. If there is plenty of light, then
    you can do a lower ISO without worrying about shutter speed.

    Gary Eickmeier
    Gary Eickmeier, Mar 7, 2004
  8. Open Wound

    jriegle Guest

    Welcome to digital. It in many ways is like slide film. You have limited
    latitude to work with.

    Underexposing a bit will retain highlights that tend to blow out. Correct
    later in a photo editor. Using the raw mode will also help retain some
    working latitude.

    The Rebel has image parameters that you can set. You can use one of the
    available three and set one for lower contrast.
    jriegle, Mar 7, 2004
  9. Open Wound

    Boris Harss Guest

    Hmm.. How about a fast AF for this job, I'd see the limitations more
    there than anywhere else....
    Nor do I. Look at this, posted here not too long ago by JPS:

    This is the D30, not the same chip. Plus: Yes, digital cameras behave
    more like slide film. A Simple question here: Did you use the RAW mode?
    If not, you have only 8 bits per channel dynamic range in the file, thus
    no change of correcting later on in Photoshop or alike.
    A littel bit??? ;-)))
    Sorry, but you are doing something wrong here. My guess is the file
    format JPG plus harsh lighting. If you have constant propblems with the
    highlights, I recommend to slightly underexpose.

    Boris Harss, Mar 7, 2004
  10. Open Wound

    bmoag Guest

    Digital sensors currently resemble slide film: they do not tolerate
    over-exposure, losing all detail in the hightlights. The only workaround is
    to understand this and realize that using the oncamera flash for non-static
    candids is a crap shoot.
    bmoag, Mar 7, 2004
  11. Digital sensors currently resemble slide film: they do not tolerate
    On camera flash always sucks whether if's film or digital.
    Randall Ainsworth, Mar 7, 2004
  12. Open Wound

    John Navas Guest

    [POSTED TO rec.photo.digital - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

    In <070320041347061616%> on Sun, 07 Mar 2004 13:47:06
    It can indeed suck in some cases, but can be good in other cases -- it all
    depends on what you are doing and trying to accomplish. I have some very nice
    images taken with on-camera flash.
    John Navas, Mar 7, 2004
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.