careful now! Canon will suck you in! ..........

you just have no idea what you are talking about ;-)
there are tons of non-L lenses that will give you way
nicer definition and certainly not nearly as gross amount of
aberration as the sony does - 50mm f/1.8 and 85mm
f/1.8 are not L lenses and the quality from them is
amazing - i feel for you i truely do

ps: don't call the canon 300D cheapo if you haven't yet
tried one - predjuding like this sets you up for good flaming ;-)

Dan Clark said:

You'll waste your money on this camera and then spend $1000-$2000
to buy decent lenses that cover the same zom range as the 828 out
of the box. The Canon "L" series lenses are excellent lenses and
the only Canon lenses worth buying! Otherwise you'll get your
cheapo Canon 300D + lens and get poor pics and wonder "why do these
pics look awful, when the imager is so good?!?"

And, if Canon can't manufacture the 10D without focusing problems,
what makes you think they can manufacture a LESS expensive, HIGHER
volume camera without the same problems?

Get a clue... You've been taken in by the Canon marketing hype.

Regards,

Dan.

Click to expand...

GiGo
http://www.fredmiranda.com/hosting/showgallery.php?ppuser=9392&cat=500&thumb=1

Get real!!!

I own the 717 and 17-40 4L. I know very well the differences. The 17-40 shames the 717. My Minolta D7i produces less CA than my 717 (the Minolta was a piece of junk though).
On has to be on drugs to be so naïve.

Yea, like we see those photojournalists and pro photographers using the 717 as their prime gear.

I like my 717, but I’m not going to think so unrealistically ignorant. When I was 16 I thought my baja bug could beat a 911 Turbo. Man, was I ever dreaming.

Matthew Cromer said:

Bull* .

The 717 lens produces very little CA. Far, far less than the
17-35L on the 10D, even with the Sony WA convertor attached.

There is a moderate amount of CA when using the lens with
conversion lenses, but the base lens has very little.

--
my favorite work: http://www.pbase.com/sdaconsulting/favorite_work

Click to expand...

--



http://www.pbase.com/domotang

butachan said:

Steve Cavigliano said:

The worst part is that it uses the 10D's "Outstanding AF". Now
there's a scary thought.

Click to expand...

Do you own a 10D? There is no comparision between the AF in the 10D
and a 7x7.

Click to expand...

My 7x7's have always focused well. Maybe a touch slower, but it doesn't backfocus, frontfocus, sidefocus, or in any other way ruin the shot. I can also change focal lengths (lenses to you) and it still focuses.

No I don't have a 10D. I wouldn't touch one until they fix the focus problem. You probably have a 10D and will tell me there is no focus problem. Sorry, I'm not buying. Save that for the CSLR "I can't get my 10D to focus" posts.

I'm sure most of the 10D's focus fine. There are just too many that don't. Anything over 1 or 2 % is an issue. I believe the number is greater than 10%. It may even be much higher as people try new lenses. From what I've seen in the CSLR some folks have it and don't even realize it.

You've got your opinion, I've got mine.

Steve

--
http://www.pbase.com/slo2k
'The question is not what you look at, but what you see' - Thoreau

johnd1 said:

.........Buy this new low cost Canon and there will be question
about wanting another lens for this camera one soon after you find
that it the supplied lens simply isn't sufficient to satisfy your
needs. It's a starter lens ,thats all.
The f3.5 aperture is slow and will be almost useless in anything
but bright light. Shortly after purchasing this lens you will
begin a never ending journey into the most confusing ,most costly
world of interchangeable lenses.
I've been there ,done that, and while I understand the advantages
of a dslr system much more clearly now, I also discovered the
dissadvantages .
Personally, I'm seriously thinking of switching back to either the
828 or the Minolta A-1.
John

Click to expand...

--
V-1, 5700, i950

Mike

LOL JJ,

I haven't made up my mind. But, I have been very disappointed by the 10D and it's issues. I just can't get excited about an expensive camera with this kind of issue.

If 99.99 % of the 10D's are perfect focusing machines. I'd be the dummy that got stuck with that .01%....LOL

You continue to sit back and take it easy. We'll handle all the excitment here....LOL

Steve

FWIW, if the 828 has a major issue like this. It will be off my list, in the wink of an eye.

coyote said:

Steve Cavigliano said:

John,
I think you are absolutely right. A plastic bodied camera that
will crave lens, just like the 10D. So you save $400, or so, by
going with the 300 and still wind up with a $3000 kit. That
doesn't make any more sense, to me, today, than it did yesterday.

The worst part is that it uses the 10D's "Outstanding AF". Now
there's a scary thought.

The 300 kit might be nice to have for a second camera. But, I
wouldn't trade my 717 in for one. I will however do whatever I can
to get an 828

Just my opinion,
Steve

Click to expand...

Geez Steve, sounds like you have already made up your mind. I'm
sitting here with the ol 707 watching all the hurrah going on and
am going to wait for things to be evaluated by Phil, Dave, Steve
etc. Then watch the forume some more- fun times.
JJ

Click to expand...

--
http://www.pbase.com/slo2k
'The question is not what you look at, but what you see' - Thoreau

Oh yes, Dan,

No question about that. Canon might have just as well done away with the manual controls as there will undoubtedly be a high number of users that will use P mode exclusively.

However if Canon is wrong and the majority of 300D purchasers don't buy more lenses the camera might not prove to be such a huge success for them.You can bet we will never know.
John

Daniel Jackson said:

I knew what you meant John, I just feel, maybe wrongly, that a vast
majority of the 300D users will be the same type that got the
AE-1's in the 70's as a camera to have for family outings,
birthdays vacations and will use it on auto mode and may never
change a lens like probably 75% of the AE-1 users did. Granted some
that get it will expand their horizons and learn to use the various
modes and additional lens, flashes and may even move up to a 10D or
higher. I've run into people that had the old AE-1's that feel the
small P&S stuff is to small, cant do much, isn't a real camera
etc.. and feel now with this entry level Dslr they may dip their
toe in the water and give it a try.

--
Scotty, I need more power! I'm givin it all she's got Jim!
http://www.pbase.com/daniel_jackson/root
Pbase supporter

Click to expand...

Who's been brainwashed? Sorry, got to go and take some pictures.

David

johnd1 said:

david mingay said:

Dan Clark said:

And, if Canon can't manufacture the 10D without focusing problems,
what makes you think they can manufacture a LESS expensive, HIGHER
volume camera without the same problems?

Get a clue... You've been taken in by the Canon marketing hype.

Regards,

Dan.

david mingay said:

johnd1 said:

The f3.5 aperture is slow and will be almost useless in anything
but bright light.

Click to expand...

What are you on about? the 300D gives you low noise at iso 1600,
and if you really need low light ability, combine that with the
(almost free) 50 f1.8 w...

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

This is exactly what turned me sour on the 10D.

I bought a second 10D last week . The 10D camera is so good in almost every respect that I did not want to give it up, so I ordered another 10D in hopes it would perform flawless..

Fresh off the assembly line with the latest serial #'s, it performed almost identical to my first 10D that had been already readjusted by Canon service . It proved to me that the 10D is unable to focus on certain l objects even in good light on occasion. Overall the camera is everything good the reviewers said and images are near unbeatable, but the focussing can be undependable at times.

I'm convinced the auto focus design has it's limitations and I'm am not willing to accept it and consequently stopped thinking about buying any additional expensive lenses for it .I really wanted to get a couple more L lenses.

It's clear to me that images from the 10D are among the smoothest, cleanest high ISO 10D images attainable and simply not available from anything else but a dslr, but if I fully expected the 10D to excel at focussing. Truth is it doesn't and I'm very dissapointed and frankly I just don't know where to go from here.
John

Steve Cavigliano wrote:
.

Steve Cavigliano said:

The worst part is that it uses the 10D's "Outstanding AF". Now
there's a scary thought.
Steve

johnd1 said:

.........Buy this new low cost Canon and there will be question
about wanting another lens for this camera one soon after you find
that it the supplied lens simply isn't sufficient to satisfy your
needs. It's a starter lens ,thats all.
The f3.5 aperture is slow and will be almost useless in anything
but bright light. Shortly after purchasing this lens you will
begin a never ending journey into the most confusing ,most costly
world of interchangeable lenses.
I've been there ,done that, and while I understand the advantages
of a dslr system much more clearly now, I also discovered the
dissadvantages .
Personally, I'm seriously thinking of switching back to either the
828 or the Minolta A-1.
John

Click to expand...

--
http://www.pbase.com/slo2k
'The question is not what you look at, but what you see' - Thoreau

Click to expand...

how much does a canon lens similar to 828's cost? a 28-200mm good for everything lens.

Thank goodness we have Sony.

Sony improves their high end camera in EVERY conceivable way...even a couple ways we didn't expect.

The new camera is faster, bigger, stronger, has higher resolution, better color, all new processor, amazing lens, 235,000 pixel EVF...Sony did everything they could to give us a better camera.

Canons new camera is revolutionary in only one respect. Its cheaper. Not just less expensive...cheaper. They didn't improve on ANY of the specs over their already inexpensive camera. In fact, on several specs they went backward!

Canon has one purpose....control the market, to sell lenses. They haven't given the consumer two seconds thought.

I'm not considering for ONE second trading my amazing 828 lens and live preview for the cheaply built 300...but if on merit alone I WERE considering it, that consideration wouldn't last long just on principle.

dave

--
Amazing what we can do with just three crayons, red green and blue!
http://yourbattlecreek.com/dave/

John:

I share your pain. I also have a 10D and I think the picture quality are marvelous. And I do think the focusing of the 10D has limitation. The actualy focus area is bigger then the square on our viewfinders, that is why it have problem focusing some plane in similar contrast.

But neverless, i would never go back to anythign less than DSLR. Last week I was out with my F717 since I didn't feel like bringing my camera bag with me. Shot couple of dozen shots, when I got home and upload the picture, i almost slam my F717 on the floor. Because during usage of 10D, I am spoil by it. From my F717 picture, I am seeing noise which I did remove but in return making the making a little softer. I saw CA and the image are oversharpen at -2. Oh well, that is what I give up for portability.

Learn to work around the 10D, it is a great tool. Just don't expect the camera to function like the 1D. There are times I know that autofous would work, i simply use mf. Actually there are times Av, or P mode are too slow for me I need to shoot in M mode with mf.

johnd1 said:

Steve Cavigliano wrote:
.

johnd1 said:

The worst part is that it uses the 10D's "Outstanding AF". Now
there's a scary thought.
Steve

johnd1 said:

.........Buy this new low cost Canon and there will be question
about wanting another lens for this camera one soon after you find
that it the supplied lens simply isn't sufficient to satisfy your
needs. It's a starter lens ,thats all.
The f3.5 aperture is slow and will be almost useless in anything
but bright light. Shortly after purchasing this lens you will
begin a never ending journey into the most confusing ,most costly
world of interchangeable lenses.
I've been there ,done that, and while I understand the advantages
of a dslr system much more clearly now, I also discovered the
dissadvantages .
Personally, I'm seriously thinking of switching back to either the
828 or the Minolta A-1.
John

Click to expand...

--
http://www.pbase.com/slo2k
'The question is not what you look at, but what you see' - Thoreau

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

--
C a n o n 1 0 D - 2 8 -- 1 3 5 I S -- 5 0 m m f 1 . 8
550EX Flash
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
C a n o n G 1 Sony F717
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://pages.infinit.net/poru/3d

With the lense kit package u have the 15-55 EF-s lense.

Just buy an 28-135 IS lense with the 1.6x factor, it becomes 45-216. The lense cost about $350. so the total comes to $1350. and best of all, the lense comes with Image stabalization.

People will complain the 28-135 might not be fast enough, but people have to consider with the low noise iso, even ISO at 800-1600 are usable.

leo221 said:

how much does a canon lens similar to 828's cost? a 28-200mm good
for everything lens.

Click to expand...

--
C a n o n 1 0 D - 2 8 -- 1 3 5 I S -- 5 0 m m f 1 . 8
550EX Flash
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
C a n o n G 1 F717
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://pages.infinit.net/poru/3d

David A. Melges said:

Thank goodness we have Sony.

Sony improves their high end camera in EVERY conceivable way...even
a couple ways we didn't expect.

The new camera is faster, bigger, stronger, has higher resolution,
better color, all new processor, amazing lens, 235,000 pixel
EVF...Sony did everything they could to give us a better camera.

Canons new camera is revolutionary in only one respect. Its
cheaper. Not just less expensive...cheaper. They didn't improve on
ANY of the specs over their already inexpensive camera. In fact, on
several specs they went backward!

Canon has one purpose....control the market, to sell lenses. They
haven't given the consumer two seconds thought.

I'm not considering for ONE second trading my amazing 828 lens and
live preview for the cheaply built 300...but if on merit alone I
WERE considering it, that consideration wouldn't last long just on
principle.

dave

--
Amazing what we can do with just three crayons, red green and blue!
http://yourbattlecreek.com/dave/

Click to expand...

--I would think the camera is just as cheaply built as the cheap lens they are putting on it.

V-1, 5700, i950

Mike

...I went and picked up a couple Rebels last night, and was honestly amazed at how cheap they feel. Obviously we have to wait to know, but I'm not expecting much in build quality.

dave

mike bustad said:

--I would think the camera is just as cheaply built as the cheap
lens they are putting on it.

V-1, 5700, i950

Mike

Click to expand...

--
Amazing what we can do with just three crayons, red green and blue!
http://yourbattlecreek.com/dave/

...........unless you use an external flash ( lens blocks the on board flash) plus with the not so wide angle of 45mm you have to backup constantly unless the room is at least 20ft wide. So this means you will need an additonal wide angle lens and finding a good one at low cost becomes a real frustrating experience with the 6X crop. Surf the Canon dslr forum and read the hundreds thousands of wide angle related threads.
john

Paul ho said:

People will complain the 28-135 might not be fast enough, but
people have to consider with the low noise iso, even ISO at
800-1600 are usable.

leo221 said:

how much does a canon lens similar to 828's cost? a 28-200mm good
for everything lens.

Click to expand...

--
C a n o n 1 0 D - 2 8 -- 1 3 5 I S -- 5 0 m m f 1 . 8
550EX Flash
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
C a n o n G 1 F717
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://pages.infinit.net/poru/3d

Click to expand...

David A. Melges said:

Thank goodness we have Sony.

Sony improves their high end camera in EVERY conceivable way...even
a couple ways we didn't expect.

The new camera is faster, bigger, stronger, has higher resolution,
better color, all new processor, amazing lens, 235,000 pixel
EVF...Sony did everything they could to give us a better camera.

Click to expand...

Thats because they have the entry level covered and didn't have anything as similar as the 828 is to a Dslr.

David A Melges said:

Canons new camera is revolutionary in only one respect. Its
cheaper. Not just less expensive...cheaper. They didn't improve on
ANY of the specs over their already inexpensive camera. In fact, on
several specs they went backward!

Click to expand...

Thsi is meant to be an entry level camera as they have the mid range covered with the 10D, sports covered with the 1D ( new model coming soom) and the high end covered with the 1Ds.

David A Melges said:

Canon has one purpose....control the market, to sell lenses. They
haven't given the consumer two seconds thought.

Click to expand...

Thats theii goal make money as any company does. They listened to their customers and came out with the 1D then the 1Ds then the 10D and now the 300D

David A Melges said:

I'm not considering for ONE second trading my amazing 828 lens and
live preview for the cheaply built 300...but if on merit alone I
WERE considering it, that consideration wouldn't last long just on
principle.

Click to expand...

You shouldn't, they are marketed to different segments of the market.

I'm totaly amazed how many people have this knee jerk reaction a entry level Dslr in going to compete with a top of the line prosumer camera. Use your heads people

David A Melges said:

dave

--
Amazing what we can do with just three crayons, red green and blue!
http://yourbattlecreek.com/dave/

Click to expand...

--
Scotty, I need more power! I'm givin it all she's got Jim!
http://www.pbase.com/daniel_jackson/root
Pbase supporter

John:

I know what kind of problem u are talking about.

1) i actually use it indoor, but off course with IS on and shooting at 1/30-1/60.

2) the wide angle problem really depends what kind of shooting you are going to do. I know some people do need 17-40L when they have to do house/room shots, architecture.....but I do admit the 1.6x is a factor. but personally , I am not a WA person.

and this is why I suggest him to get the new Ef-S 15-55 lense. I do not know about the quality of the lense, because I hate to speculate anything without even trying and testing it. So with my finger cross, I hope Canon would make the lense "decent" and not have CA everywhere and soft in the corners.

johnd1 said:

Paul ho said:

People will complain the 28-135 might not be fast enough, but
people have to consider with the low noise iso, even ISO at
800-1600 are usable.

leo221 said:

how much does a canon lens similar to 828's cost? a 28-200mm good
for everything lens.

Click to expand...

--
C a n o n 1 0 D - 2 8 -- 1 3 5 I S -- 5 0 m m f 1 . 8
550EX Flash
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
C a n o n G 1 F717
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://pages.infinit.net/poru/3d

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

--
C a n o n 1 0 D - 2 8 -- 1 3 5 I S -- 5 0 m m f 1 . 8
550EX Flash
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
C a n o n G 1 F717
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://pages.infinit.net/poru/3d

....the new Canon is not a good choice for a casual shooter...too many great options for under $500 for the casual shooter.

this is aimed at serious amateurs, and lightweight pros...just like the 828.

Two different styles of camera, but they both want the same customers.

And toward that end, a lot of people will buy each....I just feel a little sorry for those choosing the Canon, because in my opinion, this is a "bait and switch"

Hook the customer into the Canon lens and accessory lineup, and when they feel dissatisfied with the quality of the cheaply made camera, they are far more likely to go Canon with their second purchase.

I'm really not trying to offend anyone, but I think there are two ways to be successful....figure out what the customer wants and provide it at a fair price, or use a marketing strategy to sell them something else.

Sony listened, Canon schemed....thats how I see it.

dave

--
Amazing what we can do with just three crayons, red green and blue!
http://yourbattlecreek.com/dave/

Garrett Adams said:

Many people misunderstand what the "L" designation means. All it
indicates is that Canon has used some rare earth element in one or
more of its' lens elements (like UD glass or fluorite). In trying

Click to expand...

What element would that be that Canon is using in their L lenses? Is it Ce, Pr, Nd, Pm, Sm, Eu, Gd, Tb, Dy, Ho, Er, Tm, Yb or Lu? Fluorine is a halogen not a rare earth. I don’t know what they make UD glass out of but I have never heard that it was made from any rare earth element before, maybe you can enlighten me about this.

I always thought that L stood for luxury and that they were distinguished from the rest of the series because they use special optical technologies. I never heard that they contained rare earth elements in one or more of their elements.

Greg

Dan Clark said:

And, if Canon can't manufacture the 10D without focusing problems,
what makes you think they can manufacture a LESS expensive, HIGHER
volume camera without the same problems?

Get a clue... You've been taken in by the Canon marketing hype.

Regards,

Dan.

david mingay said:

Dan Clark said:

The f3.5 aperture is slow and will be almost useless in anything
but bright light.

Click to expand...

What are you on about? the 300D gives you low noise at iso 1600,
and if you really need low light ability, combine that with the
(almost free) 50 f1.8 w...

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

This is entirely untrue.

Besides numerous and excellent primes, you have lenses like the Canon 28-135 IS USM which poroduce excellent images, not to mention Canon mount Sigmas which provide remarkable images, Tamrons, Tokinas etc.

A fair estimate for coparable glass to the 828 woulld be around $500-$600, making the Rebel plus lenses $200-$300 expensive than the 828.
--
Regards,
DaveMart
Please see profile for equipment