What is the word on an update to the DRebel with the release of the 20D???

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Amy, Sep 3, 2004.

  1. Amy

    Amy Guest

    I was going to buy a Drebel, but now I am thinking I should wait.

    What's the word??


    Amy, Sep 3, 2004
    1. Advertisements

  2. Several:
    1.) Don't!

    2.) Good idea!
    3.) Wait for what?

    It's moot that the D-Rebel will at some point be superseded by a better
    camera at about the same price point, and that's also true for virtually
    every camera and computer ever made. Better, faster more storage,
    features etc. for same or even less money down the road.

    But the D-rebel will still take great pix 3 years from now, and you can
    get your 24 MP full sensor D 50 (Ooops, the next no. already exists, no?
    the D 60) with GPS and all for $1200.00. Give or take a few magnitudes.
    John McWilliams, Sep 3, 2004
    1. Advertisements

  3. Well given Canon has just announced the 20D, I suspect that they won't replace
    the drebel until at least spring. Besides, how much room for stripping down
    features is left? The drebel is already pretty stripped down IMHO.
    Michael Meissner, Sep 3, 2004
  4. Word is, if you keep waiting for the next model up, you'll never take any
    photographs. The Digital Rebel (300D) is a fine camera, and a couple extra
    million pixels and AF points won't make you any better or worse at taking
    pictures, and no-one is going to peer at your superb shots and say "hmm,
    that's not really high enough resolution". If they do, inform them that
    there's a guy standing *just over there* who is still using a D30, that'll
    get rid of 'em.

    FWIW, I don't think there will be a DRebel 2 this year.
    Martin Francis, Sep 3, 2004
  5. Amy

    Mark B. Guest

    It's less than a year old, I wouldn't expect an update until at least Spring

    Mark B., Sep 3, 2004
  6. The 20D is the Drebel update. It's got the drebel's flash, the drebel's
    noisy shutter, the drebel's lens mount, the drebel's body size/weight, the
    drebel's overly aggressive default jpeg settings.

    David J. Littleboy

    Tokyo, Japan
    David J. Littleboy, Sep 4, 2004
  7. Amy

    des Guest

    Sounds like another whiney 10D owner speaking......
    des, Sep 4, 2004
  8. Amy

    Clyde Torres Guest

    Whiney but correct; nuttin' wrong with dat.

    Clyde Torres
    Clyde Torres, Sep 4, 2004
  9. No update for probably a year. I would expect a price drop to compete with
    the new USD $900 (MSRP) Pentax dSLR.
    Darrell Larose, Sep 4, 2004
  10. Due to economies of scale, I suspect Canon will cut the price to compete
    price wise with the new $900 USD (MSRP) Pentax dSLR...
    Darrell Larose, Sep 4, 2004
  11. Amy

    Mark B. Guest

    ....he said with sarcasm.

    Mark B., Sep 4, 2004
  12. Amy

    Mark B. Guest

    Digital Rebel isn't discontinued, 10D is. Besides, if it was the DReb
    update it would have been priced accordingly. Not to mention the magnesium
    alloy body among other things.

    Mark B., Sep 4, 2004
  13. Amy

    Clyde Torres Guest

    Thicker skin, bro, thicker skin.

    But you are correct in that the 20D is a replacement for the 10D, not the
    DeeRebel. That was a good catch.

    Clyde Torres
    Clyde Torres, Sep 4, 2004
  14. SNIP
    The common denominator in the Canon model numbers is the number of
    digits represents a quality level. The 4 digit numbers are entry
    (D)SLRs, 3 digit ones have more features, 2 digit ones are prosumer
    versions, single digit ones are pro grade models.

    That is, until they deside to adopt another numbering scheme.

    Bart van der Wolf, Sep 4, 2004
  15. Amy

    Skip M Guest

    I was going to fire a return volley, until I noticed your "email" address!
    ;-) But the 20D is hardly the same weight as the DRebel...
    Skip M, Sep 4, 2004
  16. Yes, the reduced weight doesn't get it down to Rebel weight.

    Still, reading through the reviews I found myself reminded more of the Rebel
    than the 10D. I suppose that's natural, since the Rebel is not only the more
    recent camera, but with efficiencies of scale, the parts should be

    I bought the 300D last month, and haven't had that much time to play with
    it, but one shot (with my cheapest lens: the Tamron 28-75/2.8) was so sharp
    and clear at 100% pixels that I was almost in tears. 12MP of that quality
    pixels really would be in excess of 645 quality, despite the claims of the
    insanely crazed film scanning types who think they are seeing real detail at
    5400 dpi.

    David J. Littleboy
    Tokyo, Japan
    David J. Littleboy, Sep 4, 2004
  17. SNIP
    Congratulations with the new family member...
    LOL, I assume you mean me, as we've disagreed before about the amount
    of detail/resolution that lies dormant in a good film image.

    May I friendly suggest that you don't get overconfident with your new
    camera. Overconfidence usually leads to foot-in-mouth disease ;-).
    I've analyzed a few image samples available on the web, and condensed
    some of the information in this graph (I know it's filled with too
    many lines):

    It shows the measured MTFs of a few camera models, adjusted for equal
    output size by using the same criterion as DPreview does; Line Widths
    per Image Height. The triangles are at the Nyquist limit. Any
    significant modulation (say >10%) beyond Nyquist will result in
    visible aliasing.
    It shows that the 1Ds and Provia 100 scanned at 5400 ppi have similar
    performance, but with a bit of sharpening the scan shows *much* higher
    resolution (although combined with graininess, if not reduced).

    I can hear you thinking, what does that combination mean for final
    image quality, what about graininess/noise?

    Simple, if you do a similar experiment as I proposed at earlier
    occasions, and blow up (a crop of ) the DSLR result (e.g. a 300D file
    to 249.12%) to a poster size of 17.0x25.5 inch (43.2x64.8cm) @300ppi,
    then compare with this:
    The target was shot with a Canon f/2.8 100mm Macro lens, at about 3
    metres distance which resulted in an almost 1:30 reduction factor on
    film, small enough to exceed the target's resolution limit.

    A visible central blur diameter of some 60 pixels in the unsharpened
    scan at final output size(!) is common (steady shot with good lens),
    with some sharpening a few additional pixels may become visible (but
    graininess will also become more visible). The subject contrast was
    average to low, due to sub-optimal lighting (but we often don't get an
    opportunity to pick the real-life situation either, in fact it was
    shot between rain showers and has some sky reflections).

    Bart van der Wolf, Sep 6, 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.