Reading mode: Light Dark

Canon hits a home run!

Go to last post
I've just got my 450D.

The handling/ergonomics is much improved over my old 350D. No one seems to mention this in the reviews I've seen but:
  • the change to the buttons on the back has solved a big problem with the 350D: the ease of confusing the Exp comp button and the drive mode. I was for ever accidently selecting self timer when trying to change exp comp by feel.
  • the slightly reshaped grip back and front and the addition of textured rubber has transformed the feel and balance of the camera. I couldn't really use the 350D one handed but the 450D is no problem to hold like this.
  • The bigger viewfinder also makes the viewfinder display easier to read. The addition of ISO means I don't need the rear screen switched on at all.
Other things that seem to work better have been mentioned in reviews: much, much better screen than the 350D (for reviewing histogram); improved menu structure; AF now works with my 18-125 sigma; slightly bigger buffer.

The sensor cleaning, live view and the extra resolution are welcome of course and these are the things that seem to sell cameras rather than the "hidden" improvements to handling that I think need more emphasis.
Barry Fitzgerald said:
Tim in upstate NY said:
I just finished reading the DPR review of the 450D and all I can say
is....

WOW!
Click to expand...
Well it looks pretty good. I was never attracted to Canon ergonomics,
and this does nothing much on that one. But it looks like a decent
enough slap of upgraded features.

But WOW isnt really applicable to cameras, I mean they are not "that"
interesting really! And that goes for all of them.

If its enough to turn the tide of Nikon..who knows. And with others
getting in there as well, what canon need now more than anything, is
a new 5d, and for the next 40d to really push the boat out.

--



I am not the 'Ghost Hunter', nor am I the Irish actor in the 'Quiet
Man' ;-)
Click to expand...
--
Galleries and website: http://www.whisperingcat.co.uk/mainindex.htm
 
I haven't compared the two yet, but as an upgrade from the 350D, the 12MP will close the gap with the resolution of my 5D. So I will be able to enjoy the light weight and compactness of the little camera without that nagging feeling I'm not getting the image quality of the bigger camera.
John Tracy said:
Karma Traveler said:
Chris_in_Osaka said:
By the way, home run???? Did we read the same review? They're
definitely on base with a double. What innovative or unique features
make this camera a home run? We know it's not the pricing.
Click to expand...
Well, the review compared the 450D to the 400D, the E420, and D60.
The 450D bested all those cameras in both resolving power and high
ISO image quality. Those two things rarely go hand-in-hand.

Clearly, the 450D is the best of the bunch. It's also clear that
it's in a different price bracket. But why should it matter? It
didn't matter when the D300 was compared to the cheaper 40D. It
didn't matter when the D80 was compared to the cheaper 400D. It
didn't matter when the D3 was compared to the cheaper 5D. Why does
the price difference suddenly matter now?
Click to expand...
Because the world ecomomic situation has changed significantly in the
past year.
It will absolutely matter big time as the present world economy is
not going to receive entry level cameras with open arms that are
priced signifiantly more than the competition , especially when no
one can see any obvious differences at normal prints sizes.
The new Canon is surely as good as it gets but lets be honest. Unless
you print unusually large the 450D resolution advantage isn't going
to be significant to anyone. In reality it's nothing more than a
marginal improvement on anything else already on the shelf for less
money.
John
Click to expand...
--
Galleries and website: http://www.whisperingcat.co.uk/mainindex.htm
 
Dennis Phillips said:
Dennis Phillips said:
Dennis Phillips said:
Nothing really terribly wrong with Canon ergonomics. In fact, I
think there is something wrong with Sony ergonomics. The shutter
button on Sony cameras is just uncomfortable for me. The shutter
button on the Canon and Pentax, even Nikon bodies are better placed
than they are on the Sony.
Click to expand...
It's some sort of weird cult. The cameras that have the very worst
ergomomics are praised by their cult members as having the "best"
ergonomics. You see this among Leica, Sony (formerly Minolta) and
Sigma fans. All those bodies have designs that place controls where
they had to be 20 years ago because of the mechanical linkages from
buttons and knobs to shutter and exposure mechanism.
Click to expand...
A growing cult.

Read Douglas Brown's experience with the A700 at Luminous Landscape.
Here's an extract.

"It's tough, ergonomically well designed, intuitive to use (I still
haven't read the manual and yet managed to instantly come to grips
with and even customise a lot of the camera's features)"
Click to expand...
In other words, he's already in the cult, so it's "well designed".

--
Rahon Klavanian 1912-2008.

Armenian genocide survivor, amazing cook, scrabble master, and loving grandmother. You will be missed.

Ciao! Joseph

http://www.swissarmyfork.com
 
Sadly, yet another camera that can't do auto white balance correctly. Seriously, what is up with this?
 
Dennis Phillips said:
A growing cult.

Read Douglas Brown's experience with the A700 at Luminous Landscape.
Here's an extract.

"It's tough, ergonomically well designed, intuitive to use (I still
haven't read the manual and yet managed to instantly come to grips
with and even customise a lot of the camera's features)"
Click to expand...
Ergonomics is a fickle thing; what one considers 'ergonomic' will always be influenced by previous learning. So a pro with many years of experience may well prefer old camera designs, but if he were learning photography for the first time today, he may well find the new designs easier to come to grips with.

That said, I don't quite see what Joseph S. Wiz. is referring to when he says the A700 'have designs that place controls where they had to be 20 years ago'. On the other hand, he isn't exactly known to be a Canon fan when it comes to ergonomics.
 
Shoot RAW and forget about white balance. If you shoot JPEG with a camera like that, it's just stupid, you can as well buy point and shoot for $200.
 
Unless they significantly beef up the body and specs, the d300 isnt competition for it.
 
I am surprised the difference was that much.

Quote: "The new sensor is superb, and from a resolution point of view puts the EOS 40D to shame without losing any of the high ISO performance that has been Canon's trump card for so long."
 
Anastigmat said:
Nothing really terribly wrong with Canon ergonomics. In fact, I
think there is something wrong with Sony ergonomics. The shutter
button on Sony cameras is just uncomfortable for me. The shutter
button on the Canon and Pentax, even Nikon bodies are better placed
than they are on the Sony.
Click to expand...
I never really got on with canon ergo, that is just myself. I wont be dumb enough to suggest they make bad cameras, clearly they do not. What I was hinting at, was the grip..which isnt that great IMO
Anastigmat said:
It will turn the tide. The 40D came to market too late. It was 10mp
when everybody else were introducing 12mp or more. Now the 450D has
leapfrogged most of the entry level 6-10mp models, and the 45D will
soon be introduced with the same 12mp sensor, no doubt. We may even
see either the 5D or the 45D before photokina. Whichever one is not
introduced soon will be saved for Photokina. How does a 5D MKII with
14.8mp, lower noise than the current model, 5fps, more compact body,
and faster focusing sound? Nikon's nightmare is that the new 5D will
sell for $2,200 or even $1,999.
Click to expand...
We shall see, I only suggest that in the greater market, this camera isnt likely to stall any nikon offensive. I am sure it will sell well. Again the 40d was maybe a bit late, didnt do enough for some. Its a very good price though, and we know it sells well.

--



I am not the 'Ghost Hunter', nor am I the Irish actor in the 'Quiet Man' ;-)
 
OlegK said:
Shoot RAW and forget about white balance. If you shoot JPEG with a
camera like that, it's just stupid, you can as well buy point and
shoot for $200.
Click to expand...
Well I do shoot RAW, but it always looks terrible on the LCD. And this sort of tells me that a high end SLR can't create good JPEGs because the AWB is no good... not really a good excuse.

Anyhow, why does Photoshop's RAW AWB work fine (mostly), when the camera's fails? Can't they just figure out the algorithm?
 
chych said:
Anyhow, why does Photoshop's RAW AWB work fine (mostly), when the
camera's fails? Can't they just figure out the algorithm?
Click to expand...
PS has a great deal more computer power in general and a lot more time to develop a reliable temperature and tint estimate. Due to the quite low blue channel in incandescent light, it might take a lot of work to get a good estimate. If this is true, perhaps the same can not be done in a camera without unacceptable speed penalties. This is speculation but I would assume that there is a reason. Otherwise, this issue would not be there.

I just did a test using my 1d3 and ACR. True to form, the AWB in the camera was not all that good. The ACR result was significantly better. While ACR was better, there was some residual problem in the blue channel. Put another way, the red and green channel was well balanced but the blue was a bit off. That is consistent with the blue channel being a limiting factor. In any event, the eye dropper solved the problem.
--
Leon
http://homepage.mac.com/leonwittwer/landscapes.htm
 
at this price it's a double, maybe a stand-up. $50-75 less, a ground-rule. $150 less, a triple. $200 clears the fence.
 
Helps if one has an external WB sensor -- provided that one is not using non-neutral filters, of course. Not a new thing at all.

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/OlympusE1/page16.asp

Think Olympus didn't bother including such a sensor in the E-{3,4,5}xx lines, 'tho, just the E-{1,3} IIRC.
 
I think you're reading a bit much into that. It doesn't say way better images than 40D it says better resolution - i.e. 12MP vs 10MP.

I do wonder however if it was meant to say 400D not 40D as it isn't tested against the 40D in the review at all and the review says the 450D noise is comparable with the 400D:

"Looking at the EOS 450D (Rebel XSi) compared to the EOS 400D (Rebel XTi) it's good to see that the extra pixels haven't had a significant impact on the higher ISO capabilities of the sensor: chroma noise is a little lower but we presume this is down to a slightly higher level of NR (you can also turn high ISO NR 'on', which reduces chroma NR considerably). Looking closely it would seem that Canon has had to use a touch more luminance NR to get results that match the 400D, but the results are impressive nonetheless"...

That last bit is quite telling - "get results that match the 400D" - Match the 400D doesn't read as Way better than 40D.
--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/philthomas/
 
details associated with the issue are not discussed in the review; this could be due to my inability to find the discussion.

Regards,

Joe Kurkjian, Pbase Supporter



SEARCHING FOR A BETTER SELF PORTRAIT
 
J A K said:
Let's face a very basic fact that if "useless for most types of
photography" is an accurate statement, then "Highly Recommended"
doesn't make any sense. [...] OTOH, if "Highly Recommended" is accurate,
then the CON in the subject line doesn't make sense. So, is it
possible that DPR can explain away what appears to be seriously
conflicting statements?
Click to expand...
No review can be all things to all potential readers. This is dpreview warning users who don't have much experience with live view not to expect to be able to use the 450D like a P&S. The Canon promo video showing a woman using 450D live view to take photos of an active kitten certainly stretches credibility given the current implementation.

It is mildly amusing that for the D300, contrast AF was "pro", but I suppose the reason is they expect (potential) D300 users to understand how such a LV implementation might best used to good effect. I also suspect that dpreview assumes that advanced users who might be interested in the 450D as an alternative body will be smart enough to interpret the data on their own and not worry about someone else's idea of pro vs. con.

--
Erik
 
chych said:
Anyhow, why does Photoshop's RAW AWB work fine (mostly), when the
camera's fails? Can't they just figure out the algorithm?
Click to expand...
Where does it work fine and how bad do the pictures look when it fails? For example, what happens if you AWB a sunset photo? I suspect that the reason that so many cameras now have poor AWB for incandescent is that it's a optimization tradeoff. People will accept warm tungsten photos but perfecting this may make other lighting conditions potentially unacceptable.

--
Erik
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

AlainCh2
Log-Out and then access to posts - The new flat DPR appear
Replies
3
Views
4K
Mathew Anderson
Mathew Anderson
M
Will there be any more laptop reviews?
Replies
3
Views
9K
Dale Baskin
Dale Baskin
RLBur
  • Locked
New Forum Software Coming
Replies
0
Views
4K
RLBur
RLBur
RLBur
  • Locked
*** Upcoming Forum Changes ***
Replies
0
Views
2K
RLBur
RLBur
D
Best Wireless Security Camera System for Home and Office in 2025
Replies
0
Views
16K
dhoni4455
D

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