Reading mode: Light Dark

Why is the Canon Digital Rebel XT (350d) so popular?

Go to last post
caterpillar said:
That's probably true. and I will accept that. But please do not
lump me with that attitude! :-)
Click to expand...
I didn't! I was simply supplying a counterpoint to your observation that people were maybe being a bit 'defensive' in this thread :-)
caterpillar said:
Consider this. Canon makes 135,000 XTs a month. Prior to that, they
had a 100,000/mo run for over a year of the 300D. So, in essense
you have millions of users out there. Surely, we do not possess the
same temprarment, opinions and disposition in life!?
Click to expand...
Of course not (several of my friends bought both cameras as did I, nearly!)... and obviously on the bigger forums there is likely to be a larger 'spread' in the types of people posting, but this is why I made the comparison with the 'Canon Talk' forum which is likely to have as great (if not greater) a range of contributors but which is in my experience a much friendlier and calmer place. Also, the Nikon D70 forum isn't 'great' but it doesn't plumb quite the 'depths' that its Canon counterpart reaches, so it seems 'popularity' alone doesn't explain it...
caterpillar said:
Really, the d30/d60/20d forum is even worse, or WAS. They just got
rid of the nastier ones way back so it's quieter now. Maybe Phil
should do another round of cleaning for the 350d/300d forum :-)
Click to expand...
He did, but by 'popular demand' the worst offenders appear to have been 'brought back' (mentioning no names ;-) )...
caterpillar said:
I am a trained researcher so
I can easily separate the junk from the gold
Click to expand...
I'm not unfamiliar with this activity myself... it's just that when one is doing something as a hobby rather than out of necessity it's nicer to do it in 'convivial' surroundings IMHO!

Apologies for 'venting' and 'bashing'... it can be 'theraputic' sometimes! I'll shut-up now! :-)

Best regards!
 
The 350d was simply marketed better.

Personally, I'm waiting to buy a pentax DL.

Although many people complain about the ist ds having dark pics in jpeg, I prefer them over the 350d's because the colors appear bolder to me.

Different strokes for different folks.
 
KSV said:
I have silver version of 31 and honestly do not really care that it
not "perfectly" suitable for *istDS as long as it is the same lens
:-) (well, I know that some people do however). If it would be red
or orange or whatever else it still would not stop me to buy it.
But I honestly think that (say) red would attract more curiosity
from people who does not know about Pentax, thus more people became
aware of it. Have you heard term "branding" (in opposite to
advertising)? This is what my proposition about :-)
Click to expand...
It's not that I mind the silver look of the Limited's it's just that I agree with Jim, I want something that does not get noticed. ... as I said "stealth" is important... although I am proud to be a Pentax owner I am not trying to advertise that I have an expensive or exclusive lens... if I was a show off and people understood what a Pentax Limited was then maybe...

--
Brett



The Journey is the Thing
 
I also have a business degree. You fail to realize that the measures you are looking at only indicate past performance. A couple years ago, you probably would not have bought a Kodak. They are now the #1 P&S company in America. Pentax is gaining ground with the DS and it is a superior product in the under $1000 market. If we look at the way the momentum is going, I would say that Pentax has a good future, if they can keep it up.

Not making their own sensors may be a disadvantage, but many manufacturers do not make all critical parts in their products. Sony and Kodak make sensors for uses that are way beyond the cameras they make and sell. They need people to buy lots of these sensors. Pentax, Minolta Olympus, Nikon.... are good markets for their sensors.
 
A lot of people take the "safe" route when it comes to major purchases. If you want a camera, you buy a C. If you buy a car, get an H. I started with the same mentallity but went out to "kick the tires", look at owner comments and with cameras, look at photos. The 20D is a great camera but the 300D and XT are so different. Some say the XT is a cheaper version of the 20D but I fail to see that. Build quality, and viewfinder are completely different. They even have different sensors. Looking at the photos, I can see that the 20D handles light colored areas far better and also subtle differences in shading. The 300D and XT will give "sharp" photos but they do not capture the light as well as others in the price range and are not built to go the distance.

Pentax can take a good chunk of the market. They first need to want it.

Look what Kodak did. They took the digicam market away from Canon.
 
I don't know if I would say that they took it away. Kodak has another advantage though - everybody knows their name, unlike Pentax. I've had more than one person approach my camera going "Piiiinteeeex?"

They definately have to shape up and start behaving like a powerhouse instead of building brilliant products with halfass marketing and distribution behind them.

And when the transmission in my Honda finally goes (230K miles), I may just buy another. An Opel GT just isn't practical right now. :-/

--
http://www.apt131.com/photolog.html
 
I felt glad I had chosen to buy my DS a little more than a week ago, because I had a hunch the DL will either hike the price of the DS, or discontinue the DS. Paid approx. US$658 for the body + lens. A real deal if you ask me. I might consider picking up a DL body as a backup in the future if I have enough lenses to go around :)
Tijean said:
If you don't mind me asking, that is. The general concensous here
seems to be "thank goodness I got my DS, I don't want a DL!"
Click to expand...
--
http://arang.mine.nu/coalmine
 
He said that he had a graduate degree, not necessarily a business degree. With all due respect, my father has a Masters in Microbiology with a specialization in molecular engineering, but as brilliant as he is, he cannot do laundry (I tried to teach him when my mom was sick, but failed misably) and gave the checkbook to my high school educated bookkeeper mother years ago. What I am saying is that an advanced degree does not certify a person an expert in all matters.

--
http://www.apt131.com/photolog.html
 
I hope you finish your AA and go on from there. Yes, I know he does not have a degree in finance and possibly not business. He is just trying to come up with reasoning to support a decision he made.
 
Tijean said:
If you don't mind me asking, that is. The general concensous here
seems to be "thank goodness I got my DS, I don't want a DL!"
Click to expand...
When I bought my DS a month ago the DL was on the horizon and I couldn't find out the price difference between the DS and DL in Canada. I wasn't sure whether to wait for the DL or not. But I decided to get the DS because of it's better specs and when I did get it, the salesman said that the DL would be a replacement for the DS. I guess they only have so much room for different models, unfortunately.
Bye..................Chris
 
Perhaps I should get a DS instead, but I'm hoping that the DL will be just as spectacular as the DS with a larger lcd screen.

Who knows, maybe the DL might contain bugs or minor defects, but from the samples I've seen so far the pictures are just as nice as the DS.

Can someone direct me to a DS vs. DL thread please? Thank you. I tried searching and was unsuccessful.
 
One thing the DS has is a pentaprism and not a penta mirror viewfinder. This should make the DS viewfinder brighter and clearer, and would be better for manual focusing.
 
K1000Photographer said:
One thing the DS has is a pentaprism and not a penta mirror
viewfinder. This should make the DS viewfinder brighter and
clearer, and would be better for manual focusing.
Click to expand...
Somebody has already commented (sorry, can't find it) that DL is just as bright but of course the viewfinder magnification factor of DL is less

Link to the annoucement here: http://www.dpreview.com/news/0506/05060104pentaxistdl.asp

Summary of where things were changed:
  • Auto ISO
  • 3-point wide AF (*ist DS was 11 area)
  • Wide / spot AF
  • Three level 'soft' digital filter
  • Continuous shooting buffer reduced to 5 / 3 images (JPEG / RAW)
  • Penta-mirror viewfinder instead of Penta-prism, 0.85x magnification (previously 0.95x)
  • Natural-Bright-Matte II focusing screen
  • Larger 2.5" LCD monitor (same pixels)
  • Removal of high speed sync flash (important for outdoor fill flash)
  • Two new languages: Swedish, Dutch
  • Slightly lighter (565g v 605g)
It depends how much you value some of these things that have been "removed" from the spec. The DS is getting some pretty good discounts, will the DL be much cheaper?

One thing is pretty much certain, the image quality will NOT be worse on the DL and this is the most important thing - in fact at the same time Pentax may have done some tweaking of the image processor > JPEG. RAW is already excellent (and in my opinion is what you should be shooting even if you are half serious about photography - keep control of the whole process)

If prices are similar and you would like a DSLR soon (otherwise just keep waiting and waiting, like computers there will always be an upgarded model coming down the line) get the DS - the extras are worth is especially the viewfinder.
--
Brett



The Journey is the Thing
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top