Thoughts on Canon 500D

Started Mar 25, 2009 | Discussions thread
ForumParentFirstPreviousNextNext unread
Flat view
George Sears
Contributing MemberPosts: 663
Like?
Thoughts on Canon 500D
Mar 25, 2009

I don't know why they don't call it the Rebel Xti XV, or something useful.

The fact that they bundle a 10x zoom shows where the consumer end of the dSLR thing is going ( they also bundle the cheapest lens they make). Some people have suggested, at the very least, these ultra MP sensors require truly superb lenses, or they are wasted. I don't know if this is true, but here is one point of view:

"My contention is that the Canon 50D ushers in a new era where we will need distinctly better lenses and finer focusing skills than we have needed thus far with digital SLR cameras. In the days of film I always used a Leica rangefinder for 35 mm b&w, but a Canon SLR or Mamiya M645 for colour. In this modern digital era I no longer need to resort to medium format to achieve my desired standard in colour images, but I certainly will be wanting better SLR lenses. That photo of Fisherman's Cove looks very good indeed if I regard it as just the central 40% of a 24 by 36 inch print. But I am worried about how the corners would look!"

This from:

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/50d.shtml

I have a nice Fuji f6000 with a 10x zoom, about the zoom range Canon is offering. It weighs a lot less, perhaps because it has 9 million fewer pixels. (In fact, it is lighter because it is scaled to the smaller sensor it uses.) My experience is that it is sharp in the corners. I looked at some of the Canon pix with the super zoom, and I was somewhat underwhelmed.

My sense is that the superzoom bundle is bridge camera quality at a dSLR price.

It would be interesting to see test results where you could say what the Fuji F6000 could do, versus the low end dSLR's, especially since these dSLR's are increasingly being used with 10x zooms.

The problem may be that everything has a cost. People may love MP counts and super zooms, but using these two things together produces what result?

Surely, at some point, camera manufacturers have to demonstrate how they define their vision of progress? Especially when older designs, which actually did work quite well, have been discarded?

I guess one way to sell dSLR's is to not have any other real options. I know this works for Canon and Nikon, maybe Sony.

I also wonder how well video is going to adapt to a still camera. Cisco bought Flip. Since they do networking, video could simply appear on your TV, with the right interfaces. Video is a battlefield, for software and hardware, media integrators. Processors make it fairly easy to do HD, though the difficulties tend to move to the computer with the advanced codecs. It's just hard to say how valuable HD video in an SLR will be. I think DPR touched on power zooms. It's difficult to zoom a video without power zoom, at least smoothly. Do you need the big sensor, with everything scaled up? What is the convenience? It still sounds good, but....

George Sears

ForumParentFirstPreviousNextNext unread
Flat view
ForumParentFirstPreviousNextNext unread
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow