Epic Battle

[Sandman]

Dave Lewis,

Awesome response! Well said. You are a master of prose!

Cheers,

jim

t's all in the sensor size not the pixel count. The smaller the
sensor and the higher the pixel count the more liklihood of image
noise, especially at higher ISO's. Plastic is a better material for
cameras, in my mind. It is resilient and will not dent or deform in
an accident. It is non conductive and will not cause electronic
failure with mild moisture exposure. A tiny sensor and
corresponding small lens will have such broad depth of field that
out of focus backgrounds will not be practical. The Canon EOS
digital system including the CMOS sensor and camera's mechanical
and electronic components are well established as the industry
standard by which everything else is compared. The Canon lens
system is endless and probably the best in the industry.

In short, you are buying a professional quality and capable camera
in the Rebel D, while in the Sony you are buying just another small
sensor camera with a long zoom lens that will have all the
compromises that such zoom lens - small sensor combinations have
industry wide.

There really is no choice if ultimate image quality and versatility
is your concern. If you want something slick from a slick company
that performs pretty much like all other consumer cameras do with
overly sharpened, and saturated images, then the Sony is the way to
go.

The Rebel D is a camera to grow with, giving rise to an
accumulation of lenses and flash equipment and storage cards and
various other items that are common to the broadest photographic
system in the industry. The Sony is just another dead end consumer
camera that will be replaced with something with more impressive
numbers in a year. It will give you absolutely nothing to build on.

I'm sure the Sony will give you wonderful images for as long as
you own it. The Rebel D will be compatible with everything you
accumulate in your future with the Canon system. It is a camera
that will provide you with potentially much better images and a
future with a superb system.
--
Dave Lewis

--
galleries at: http://www.pbase.com/sandman3

 

[Juli Valley]

If you are frustrated with shutter lag in shooting action, go for the DSLR. If you hate noisy photos at higher ISOs than 100, get the Canon.

 

[adrianchew]

Here's my dilemma...

I've tried taking photos of figure skating with the 300D... the biggest nightmare is the lack of light, and any telephoto at approx. 200mm is likely to be F5.6, unless you get a bigger lens, the Sony is F2.8 at 200mm, plus it comes with image stabilization built-in.

200/2.8 ISO 800, well 200/5.6 ISO 1600 on the 300D is a full F-stop slower, and the difference between 1/250 and 1/125 means a sharp or blur action shot. Plus having image stabilization.

Bigger lenses I can afford, but they can be pesky to bring into some events when the camera gestapo is out in full force. So the Sony is looking like a maybe - I need to see what its like in final form... everything sounds good on paper, just wonder what the lag time is.

The epic battle between the 300D and Sony 828 has a lot of people
confused.
Price: Sony is Cheaper in long terms
Quality: Sony has much pixels and its new 4th colour
Lenses: Canon has a large diversity of lenses of all kinds
Body: Sony (magnesium alloy) vs Canon (plastic) come on!

I really can't decide between this two cameras
I have talked to some nice people in the Sony Talk forum.
Now, I want to hear you.

Thanks

 

[Peter K Wagner]

Have you tried the 28-135 IS lens? With the 300D 1.6x crop factor, that is 216mm effective; it also has the image stabilization. Looks like a 300D + 28-135 is only slightly more than the Sony.

Also, if the 828 has image noise similar to the 707 and 717 then the 300D at ISO 1600 is more like the noise of the Sony at ISO 200--that 4x ISO will go a LONG way in the speed department.

Do you find that you need ISO 1600 ? Wow! That must be pretty dark. Perhaps shooting raw and lightening the results on the PC would help.

Have you thought about a prime such as the Canon EF 200mm f/2.8L II USM Lens? How about the 70-200 4.0 L (or of course the 2.8L IS). Yeah, they might get you kicked out the venue.

 

[Dr. Don Sandell]

Thank God for
plastics. PLASTIC! "The Graduate" 1967.

Don, I swear I was gonna say the exact same thing in my reply!
Now I wish I had. LMAO!

Cheers,

jim

LOL Jim..............I needed to say that.......now I feel better!

 

[Lee Beasley]

I've owned digital point-and-shoot cameras since 1997 up to a Minolta D7 prosumer-type, and I loved every one of them. I had no experience in SLR photography whatsoever prior to buying the 300D. But, there's absolutely NO comparison between a P&S and the DRebel. I would buy it again in a heartbeat. I know it's missing some features of the higher end models, but I don't know how to use them yet, so I don't notice their absence.

I'm having a ball and I have a few nice lenses that I can migrate to the next generation. You literally can't take a bad picture. The full manual mode flat out tells you how close to balanced your photograph is going to be. How much more can you ask of a camera? I took my long zoom lens to the zoo the other day and got some shots that just knocked me out. I can't wait to learn what I'm doing...

If you like to be challenged, you can't go wrong with this camera. Oh, and did I mention there's just about no noise in these shots? You don't have to remove it, because it's not there in the first place.

 

[adrianchew]

I've considered the 28-135 IS - haven't tried it - but maybe. Still its F5.6 though. The IS may not be that useful on that though - I don't think it supports panning like the 70-200/2.8L IS.

I might consider the 70-200/4L and keep the lens I have now as a backup - Tamron 28-300/3.5-6.3 XR. I'll probably shoot with my 35-350L when I can bring it in and decide... since that's probably around F4.5 at 200mm... just to get an idea.

Having figured out unsharp mask and manual levels today was a big help.

The other part is that I'm not there necessarily to take photos - so too much camera/lens gets in the way of convenience. Can't have it all I guess.

Have you tried the 28-135 IS lens? With the 300D 1.6x crop factor,
that is 216mm effective; it also has the image stabilization.
Looks like a 300D + 28-135 is only slightly more than the Sony.

Also, if the 828 has image noise similar to the 707 and 717 then
the 300D at ISO 1600 is more like the noise of the Sony at ISO
200--that 4x ISO will go a LONG way in the speed department.

Do you find that you need ISO 1600 ? Wow! That must be pretty
dark. Perhaps shooting raw and lightening the results on the PC
would help.

Have you thought about a prime such as the Canon EF 200mm f/2.8L II
USM Lens? How about the 70-200 4.0 L (or of course the 2.8L IS).
Yeah, they might get you kicked out the venue.

 

[Dwight1973]

Great post Dave. I was going to respond, but I don't think I could have said it any better. I come from the 717 to the 300D now. I haven't picked up the 717 since the 300D arrived. It's now the wife's camera, until she doesn't mind me selling it for lenses

t's all in the sensor size not the pixel count. The smaller the
sensor and the higher the pixel count the more liklihood of image
noise, especially at higher ISO's. Plastic is a better material for
cameras, in my mind. It is resilient and will not dent or deform in
an accident. It is non conductive and will not cause electronic
failure with mild moisture exposure. A tiny sensor and
corresponding small lens will have such broad depth of field that
out of focus backgrounds will not be practical. The Canon EOS
digital system including the CMOS sensor and camera's mechanical
and electronic components are well established as the industry
standard by which everything else is compared. The Canon lens
system is endless and probably the best in the industry.

In short, you are buying a professional quality and capable camera
in the Rebel D, while in the Sony you are buying just another small
sensor camera with a long zoom lens that will have all the
compromises that such zoom lens - small sensor combinations have
industry wide.

There really is no choice if ultimate image quality and versatility
is your concern. If you want something slick from a slick company
that performs pretty much like all other consumer cameras do with
overly sharpened, and saturated images, then the Sony is the way to
go.

The Rebel D is a camera to grow with, giving rise to an
accumulation of lenses and flash equipment and storage cards and
various other items that are common to the broadest photographic
system in the industry. The Sony is just another dead end consumer
camera that will be replaced with something with more impressive
numbers in a year. It will give you absolutely nothing to build on.

I'm sure the Sony will give you wonderful images for as long as
you own it. The Rebel D will be compatible with everything you
accumulate in your future with the Canon system. It is a camera
that will provide you with potentially much better images and a
future with a superb system.
--
Dave Lewis

 

[Jack_DC]

Oh, and did I mention there's just about no noise in these shots?
You don't have to remove it, because it's not there in the first
place.

No noise, but dust, dust, dust adds up...

 

[Dwight1973]

I think you're mistaken. The Minolta A1 has the IS, not the 828.

Here's my dilemma...

I've tried taking photos of figure skating with the 300D... the
biggest nightmare is the lack of light, and any telephoto at
approx. 200mm is likely to be F5.6, unless you get a bigger lens,
the Sony is F2.8 at 200mm, plus it comes with image stabilization
built-in.

 

[Dave Lewis]

Dave Lewis,

Awesome response! Well said. You are a master of prose!

Cheers,

jim

Well, thanks, Jim I appreciate that.
--
Dave Lewis

 

[Dave Lewis]

Great post Dave. I was going to respond, but I don't think I could
have said it any better. I come from the 717 to the 300D now. I
haven't picked up the 717 since the 300D arrived. It's now the
wife's camera, until she doesn't mind me selling it for lenses

Thanks so much, Dwight.

--
Dave Lewis

 

[TimL184437]

Lassiter,

I have a few questions:

1. If you want wide angle, why not get the 828 or the A1 -- they
both give you 28 mm equivalent.

Because I stated interior shots and 28mm is way to narrow. I'm waiting for the sigma 12-24.

2. If you need the Canon for wide angle architecture shots, why get
a 75-300?

Umm...because I also have other shoots than interiors. (such as exteriors, sporting events, nature)

3. If you need the Canon for wide angle architecuture shots, why
exchange the 75-300 for a 55-200?

I purchased the 55-20 before I purchased and returned the EF75-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM. The 55-200 is a much better lenses with more light!

4. If you're disapponted with the options in Canon lenses -- the
widest available lens selection in the world -- what lens do you
want, exactly?

World Peace! How about lenses made for 1.6 dslr? That would be a good start would it not?

I'm not following this at all. Are you sure this isn't a problem
with a dSLR rather than with the lens selection?

That's a nice thought but the problem lies within interior shots (wide angle) proper lighting and a lenses that gives a true multiplier for dslr's. Hope I was able to answer your few questions properly and to relieve you of your confusion?

 

[Mongrel]

Thank God for
plastics. PLASTIC! "The Graduate" 1967.

Don, I swear I was gonna say the exact same thing in my reply!
Now I wish I had. LMAO!

Cheers,

jim

LOL Jim..............I needed to say that.......now I feel better!

--

Just think, if every key-stroke was a shutter-press we would all be pros by now...

 

[Eugene Danilkis]

I really think the battlefield is a bit muddled here. It's really not about the 300D vs the 828. It's about DSLR vs. P&S. That's really what you have to decide first, then you can decide which DSLR or which P&S camera. So compare the advantages of those two fields in general. There will be better and cheaper DSLRs to come and there will be better and (maybe) cheaper P&Ss to come. So i suggest decide which field you want to be in first. Otherwise, you might be right back here again in less than a year with "400D vs. 929".

I know it's a bit tougher to compare just general DSLR vs general P&S instead of specific cameras, but i think it also lets you focus on what you want in your camera and what you hope to get out of it.

Good luck and enjoy whichever camera you get!

The epic battle between the 300D and Sony 828 has a lot of people
confused.
Price: Sony is Cheaper in long terms
Quality: Sony has much pixels and its new 4th colour
Lenses: Canon has a large diversity of lenses of all kinds
Body: Sony (magnesium alloy) vs Canon (plastic) come on!

I really can't decide between this two cameras
I have talked to some nice people in the Sony Talk forum.
Now, I want to hear you.

Thanks

 

[Tommy_T]

Firts of all, 300D is here now. 828 is not here now.

If you can wait - then you should decide what you need a camera for. Based on that, decide what lenses you will need and check the total price (maybe no kit lens and 50mm F1.8 for $50 will be enough for you? Or maybe you will want to buy 70-200 F2.8? Dont forget that EF lenses will be 1.6x longer, which is good for telephoto, but bad for wide).

If you cant decide based on the TOTAL price (camera and lenses), think whether you will REALLY need these features:

300D - probably less noise, small apertures for bright objects (828 is limited to F8.0), bulb for night shots, maybe faster AF.

828 - spot meter (good only if you know how to use it), laser AF (instead of that horrible flash-assisted AF 300D has).

Now, 300D has ISO1600, which is one full stop ahead of 828, but if you cant afford bright lenses for your 300D, there goes that F stop. 28-200mm F2.0-2.8 sounds very very good and bright and you will need to spend a lot of money if you want to match that with 300D. How good or bad the 828 lens is optically? I don't know. i know that 717 was pretty good.

If you still can't decide - wait until 828 is in the stores, go have a look and see which one feels better to you in your hand - maybe you will absolutely hate the feel of 828. or maybe you'll love it

tom

 

[Donald Cooper]

Hi Adrian,

As Dwight mentioned, the Sony doesn't have the stabalization system, it's the Minolta. But that shouldn't matter: for action shots it's irrelevant since IS won't stop motion blur -- and that's what you're trying to avoid. So IS isn't a factor.

You need a fast lens. If you are on a tight budget, and aren't we all -- except for DavidP ;-) -- then you might want to get a faster prime. Otherwise I'd say look at the Sigma 75-200 2.8. That's a much faster lens. And it's way less expensive than the Canon 2.8 IS.

Also remember that you can crank up your ISO. At least two stops on the Sony, maybe more. Remembering that every time you double your ISO number you gain a full stop on the aperture, crank it up and see if that doesn't give you enough light.

I've considered the 28-135 IS - haven't tried it - but maybe.
Still its F5.6 though. The IS may not be that useful on that
though - I don't think it supports panning like the 70-200/2.8L IS.

I might consider the 70-200/4L and keep the lens I have now as a
backup - Tamron 28-300/3.5-6.3 XR. I'll probably shoot with my
35-350L when I can bring it in and decide... since that's probably
around F4.5 at 200mm... just to get an idea.

Having figured out unsharp mask and manual levels today was a big
help.