-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
Would you buy it?
- Thread starter jursy
- Start date
Yes, I WOULD buy it if I were in the market for a new camera. But since I'm not, I WON'T.
Yes, I like the pic quality shown.
Yes, I like the pic quality shown.
Richard Bolt
Leading Member
Ordered mine for AU$1699 from http://www.centre.net.au
(which is on par with the US prices)
(which is on par with the US prices)
Peter Phan
Senior Member
And I already have a 10D.
Thanks for the replys. Peter how are the images straight from the camera for the 10d with no touching up, I am talking about take the pic and print it with out touching anything up on the computer?
Peter Phan
Senior Member
I really can't say because I shoot all my images with low sharpening in-camera. I then load them onto my computer, put them into a folder, then batch sharpen them with my favorite sharpening action. I pretty much shoot exclusively in JPEG because RAW workflow is just too slow and cumbersome for me.
These images are from the camera, then run through my automated sharpening actions in Photoshop. So basically the extent of processing was:
1) out of camera JPEG sRGB
2) resize for web
3) automated sharpening action
I tend to shoot wide open or near wide open for portraits, with mild sharpening. If I stopped down more, the images would get even sharper.
The 10D gives me what I want. Great color, great sharpness, film-like images. It's better than I ever got from film. And I can do all my "processing" in less time than it took to drop off my film at my lab!
These images are from the camera, then run through my automated sharpening actions in Photoshop. So basically the extent of processing was:
1) out of camera JPEG sRGB
2) resize for web
3) automated sharpening action
I tend to shoot wide open or near wide open for portraits, with mild sharpening. If I stopped down more, the images would get even sharper.
The 10D gives me what I want. Great color, great sharpness, film-like images. It's better than I ever got from film. And I can do all my "processing" in less time than it took to drop off my film at my lab!
Dan Walkowski
Member
Yes, and I did. Pre-ordered it from Ritz.
Etherwolf
Well-known member
Nice...uh...composition!
Peter I got a question,
If I get the Rebel and want to correct the WB do I have to start with a RAW file or can a JPEG be corrected? I have been reading all evening and STILL haven't figured out if I will be able to easily manipulate the images from the Rebel (Batch processing?) or if it would be a laborious task. The comments about underexposure and the WB being wacko worry me.
PS 8 isn't due out until the end of the year...
--
'Any sufficiently advanced technology
is indistinguishable from magic.'
--- Arthur C. Clarke
Peter I got a question,
If I get the Rebel and want to correct the WB do I have to start with a RAW file or can a JPEG be corrected? I have been reading all evening and STILL haven't figured out if I will be able to easily manipulate the images from the Rebel (Batch processing?) or if it would be a laborious task. The comments about underexposure and the WB being wacko worry me.
PS 8 isn't due out until the end of the year...
--
'Any sufficiently advanced technology
is indistinguishable from magic.'
--- Arthur C. Clarke
Marc H178106
Member
No, i would not.
I was planning to buy an 10D when canon released the news about the 300D. After reading the specs of the camera i figured that the 10D is still the camera for me. (actually, i would love to buy a Nikon D2H, but that cam is just way to expensive for me)
Altough the picture quality looks great, some of the limitations of the camera, like burst rate/max frames, limited or no control over focus/metering modes and a plastic body, makes that i prefer a 10D over a 300D.
Peter Phan
Senior Member
I use custom white balance for everything. I try to keep my post-processing to a minimum. That means I try to get the white balance right at the time of shooting, so I don't have to tweak it later. And since I shoot everything in JPEG, you can't really tweak white balance later (like you can when shooting RAW). I use the Expo/Disk, which is a God-send for digital photography! All of these shots were done with custom white balance using the Expo/Disk. All are spot-on, with no need for tweaking later. At first, I thought it was a bit expensive ($120 now), but I realize that it has more than paid for itself in color accuracy and post-processing headaches.
http://www.expodisc.com/
Not to say that I don't use Auto White Balance (AWB), too, because I do. Easy lighting situations like regular daylight, etc, AWB handles perfectly. It's primarily when I have artificial lighting, mixed lighting, or when I want to be safe about the WB (which is most of the time), I CWB. Sometimes, I'll even compare the AWB image to the CWB image to see which rendition I prefer.
As for your WB-correcting question, techniquely you can only correct white balance later if you are working with the RAW file. But in reality, you can do plenty of tweaking with a JPEG files, too. But why bother? Get it right the first time. It only takes a few seconds with the Expo/Disk and custom white balance.
bektravels
Forum Enthusiast
That's the best price i've seen so far - I hope they don't hike it up once its released [ie when I have $$ to by one]... everyone else seems to be selling it for $1800 ++
dchao
Veteran Member
... don't foget to add the cost of a comparable lens such as the 17-40 F4.0L.
Marc H178106
Member
Why?
Cost is (within reason) no concern for me.
I am getting an unexpected bonus from work in the region of 4000 euros, so the price of the camera is less of a reason to prefer one camera over another.
And finally, I currently don't see why i need such a lens. I am planning to buy 2 lenses with te camera, a Canon 28-135 IS and a Sigma 100-300 F4 EX. I dont need a wide angle lens at this moment, and when i do need it i always can buy such a lens, or a Sigma AF 17-35/2.8-4.0 EX Asf. (HSM) which is a lot cheaper than te canon 17-40 F4, which probably will be enough because i don't often make wide angle shots.
dchao
Veteran Member
I agree with you, 300D is primarily designed for people looking for 18-55mm zoom range on a 1.6x FOV DSLR.
Etherwolf
Well-known member
Thanks Peter! I will look at that link. I'm not sure this camera makes sense for a newbie like myself but I would like my skill to be the limiting factor in the images I produce. Not the tool (s).
Wolf
--
'Any sufficiently advanced technology
is indistinguishable from magic.'
--- Arthur C. Clarke
Wolf
--
'Any sufficiently advanced technology
is indistinguishable from magic.'
--- Arthur C. Clarke
clayge
Well-known member
Given the attrative price and quality output, I might just get it even though I know there few serious flaws on the 300D. I guess nothing is perfect... 
Seriously, I will wait until the retail box comes out and take few last looks from Phil and the fellow members' photo samples then decide. If the image indeeds match the 10D's, yes, I will definitely get it.
If Cannon is watching this, fix the damm AWB !!!
Seriously, I will wait until the retail box comes out and take few last looks from Phil and the fellow members' photo samples then decide. If the image indeeds match the 10D's, yes, I will definitely get it.
If Cannon is watching this, fix the damm AWB !!!
P
Phil Askey
Guest
But that's because I've handled used both and can AFFORD both.
Phil Askey
Editor / Owner, dpreview.com
--
Phil Askey
Editor / Owner, dpreview.com
Petteri Sulonen
Forum Pro
...but since I do, I'm definitely not interested in a downgrade.
What would it take to get me to upgrade? In order of importance, 1.3x or 1.0x FOV crop, two stops more dynamic range, 10+ MP resolution, and of course a price I can swing. I figure it'll be a year or two yet...
Petteri
--
Portfolio: [ http://www.seittipaja.fi/index/ ]
Pontification: [ http://www.seittipaja.fi/ ]
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum