Reading mode: Light Dark

Canon Digital Rebel Kit -- thoughts of a Sony user

Go to last post
Ulysses said:
I'm not here to save nuthin'. :-)

I'm just saying: It's a Rebel. Everyone knows that. It comes with a
lens in the kit version. It's not a god-awful lens. It's just not
the best one on out there.
Click to expand...
Uly,

All I was inferring was that when threads seem to get to the height of ridiculous conjecture and totally subjective opinion you usually arrive to bring in a dose of common sense and perspective that plants the thing back on the ground.......

I do find the ad-nauseum discussion of the "dumbed down, silly-putty bodied drebel (sniff sniff) to be quite amusing at times.

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

Take Care and Have a Great Day,

Mongrel
 
No way, the unit I tried was solid, beleive me I was very very surprised, I took your word for it when I first read it, not anymore. The 300d is more solidly built than the 717, there was no give and I seriously doubt your truthfulness on this matter. If anyone's reading this try this out for yourself, hold a 300d and you'll see it's a solid piece of kit.
Matthew Cromer said:
It felt cheap to me, the magnesium body of the 717 feels much more
solid. The unit I tried out had definite give in parts of the
surface that I noticed without trying to bend it.

--
my favorite work: http://www.pbase.com/sdaconsulting/favorite_work
Click to expand...
 
Haha! That was an intelligent response, you've certainly proved my point. What I find funny was for the longest time you've been harping about the build quality of the 300d and in your initial post you begrudgingly admit that it should hold up, heehee, even you couldn't deny that it was solid. Then you try and cover it up by saying it had some flex, I'm thinking what flex??! What part? It was totally solid and better built than your precious 717, better ergonomics too. I may be a twit at times but your a dork all the time : )
Matthew Cromer said:
Yes I made up the whole thing. You caught me.

I was actually playing with a G3 the whole time.

Twit.

--
my favorite work: http://www.pbase.com/sdaconsulting/favorite_work
Click to expand...
 
Ummmm.... The 300D is lighter than the 828 and more compact. The Pentax is the almost the exact same size as the 300D and is the same weight. You'll do better with a V1 or G5. You won't be getting a much smaller DSLR than the 300D.

Brian
kanocto said:
Where are the reviews???
Matthew Cromer said:
Played with it this afternoon.

First impressions:

Build Quality: Plastic felt cheap, worse than I thought. It had
some "flex". Should hold together though.

Kit Lens: Looked sharp through the viewfinder. Very cheap feeling
build

Looks: Didn't look nearly as bad in person as the online picture

AF performance: Sluggish with the kit lens. Lightning-fast with
the $800 17-40L USM.

Handling: Felt OK but not nearly as nice as the D100 I played with.
I prefer the 717 but then again I am intimately familiar with it.

I tried to do some comparison ISO tests with the Sony. At ISO 800
the Canon seemed to be 1/3 to 2/3 stop more sensitive based on the
default matrix metering of the same scene. Shay and Uly, perhaps
you can do a comparison of this?

Verdict: Seems like a good way to get a dSLR + lens if you can
live with the limitations.

--
my favorite work: http://www.pbase.com/sdaconsulting/favorite_work
Click to expand...
--
kek
Click to expand...
--
The Hunger Site: http://www.thehungersite.com

'THE Graphic design directory'.... http://adigitaldreamer.com
-------------------------------------
http://www.skulpt.com
 
Heheheh... Mongrel, this is an excellent way to look at things. We need to all be out there shooting more. :-)
Mongrel said:
Just think if every key-stroke was a shutter press we would all be
pros by now...
Click to expand...
--

Ulysses
 
Ron Parr said:
Godfrey said:
Ron,

I'm well aware of how matrix metering works. I'm also well aware of
what the results looked like from my testing and subsequent use of
the data.

While in theory it should take a diverse number of scene types to
provide a complete test, in practice the results are quite useful
and provide an advantage even with just one average scene type
tested.

My analysis is that most matrix metering algorithms are much
simpler than one would be led to believe.
Click to expand...
This is a circular argument.
Click to expand...
Please articulate what you consider as circular here. You seem to be insistent upon promotiing theoretical considerations as the only true way to understand these issues, but empirical observations seen in practice have greater value to me.

Godfrey
 
Well, dimensionally the 300 d is larger in height and width and smaller in only depth, and thats without a lens. Add a tele and the 300d will be bigger all around.

The 828 is half a pound heavier than the 300d without a lens, add a tele and the 828 will be about evenor lighter. Of course the 828 is made out of magnesium and glass, not plastic.
Brianos 2.0 said:
Brian
kanocto said:
Where are the reviews???
Matthew Cromer said:
Played with it this afternoon.

First impressions:

Build Quality: Plastic felt cheap, worse than I thought. It had
some "flex". Should hold together though.

Kit Lens: Looked sharp through the viewfinder. Very cheap feeling
build

Looks: Didn't look nearly as bad in person as the online picture

AF performance: Sluggish with the kit lens. Lightning-fast with
the $800 17-40L USM.

Handling: Felt OK but not nearly as nice as the D100 I played with.
I prefer the 717 but then again I am intimately familiar with it.

I tried to do some comparison ISO tests with the Sony. At ISO 800
the Canon seemed to be 1/3 to 2/3 stop more sensitive based on the
default matrix metering of the same scene. Shay and Uly, perhaps
you can do a comparison of this?

Verdict: Seems like a good way to get a dSLR + lens if you can
live with the limitations.

--
my favorite work: http://www.pbase.com/sdaconsulting/favorite_work
Click to expand...
--
kek
Click to expand...
--
The Hunger Site: http://www.thehungersite.com

'THE Graphic design directory'.... http://adigitaldreamer.com
-------------------------------------
http://www.skulpt.com
Click to expand...
 
Foamed duranium like they use in tricorders and photon torpedo casings.

"The two-part case is constructed of duranium foam, which is resistant to a wide range of environmental conditions."

Light weight, rugged, and it just plain looks great!

;-)

--
Shay
http://www.shaystephens.com/portfolio.asp

'Cameras are not artists, photographers are.'
 
Matthew, you ARE a liar, and a dork. Enjoy living in denial. I'm not saying all injection molded plastic is superior to magnesium, but in the case of the Rebel against the 717, this time plastic pays off, construction matters too not just materials.
Matthew Cromer said:
I'm not going to continue a conversation with a person who calls me
a liar. If you want to believe that injection-molded plastic is
superior to magnesium alloy -- go for it.

--
my favorite work: http://www.pbase.com/sdaconsulting/favorite_work
Click to expand...
 
Actually, the casing of the Digital Rebel does look an awful lot like that of the tricorder and hand phasers. And those things are getting dropped and kicked ALL the time. You don't see any of the Federation officers complaining about it.

Hey. If it's good enough for Borg assimilation, it's good enough for me. :->
Shay Stephens said:
Foamed duranium like they use in tricorders and photon torpedo
casings.

"The two-part case is constructed of duranium foam, which is
resistant to a wide range of environmental conditions."

Light weight, rugged, and it just plain looks great!

;-)
Click to expand...
--

Ulysses
 
Matthew Cromer said:
I'm not going to continue a conversation with a person who calls me
a liar. If you want to believe that injection-molded plastic is
superior to magnesium alloy -- go for it.
Click to expand...
I don't recall anyone calling you a liar or claiming that plastic is superior to mag-alloy. Someone who disagrees or finds fault with your observation or opinion should not be characterized as a 'liar'. You have an 'opinion', it is just that-your opinion. It isn't something objective like "the camera weights 2lbs." It is your subjective observation we are talking about here. Certainly at least you could have worded your original post more respectfully and with a bit more objectivity if you had desired.

The only point being made is that which you call "cheap" plastic build quality actually feels quite solid to others who have handled the same camera, including every reviewer that I have read. Your observation and opinion in this particular aspect of the Digital Rebel is suspect because you have an obvious bias against it.

Which is perfectly fine and your opinion is legitimate as long as you allow those who disagree a reasonable amount of respect.

After handling both the F717 and the DRebel there is really nothing cheap feeling about either one. They are different for sure. But I find nothing in the Rebel build that is any cheaper feeling than the swivel lens attachment, lens surround, and buttons on the F717.

Now I will give you this-calling the F717 or any other camera 'names' or whatever is not the way to carry on a reasonably intelligent discourse.

--

Just think, if every key-stroke was a shutter-press we would all be pros by now...
 
Whoops, sorry Mongrel, I just called him one, around a minute before you posted. to me this guy is clearly lying about the rebel's construction to the point that it's FUD propoganda, and he's getting a little insulting too, I certainly am not about to let him get away with it. Again if anyone thinks I'm a jerk pick up a rebel and see for yourself which one of us is lying.
Mongrel said:
Matthew Cromer said:
I'm not going to continue a conversation with a person who calls me
a liar. If you want to believe that injection-molded plastic is
superior to magnesium alloy -- go for it.
Click to expand...
I don't recall anyone calling you a liar or claiming that plastic
is superior to mag-alloy. Someone who disagrees or finds fault
with your observation or opinion should not be characterized as a
'liar'. You have an 'opinion', it is just that-your opinion. It
isn't something objective like "the camera weights 2lbs." It is
your subjective observation we are talking about here. Certainly
at least you could have worded your original post more respectfully
and with a bit more objectivity if you had desired.

The only point being made is that which you call "cheap" plastic
build quality actually feels quite solid to others who have handled
the same camera, including every reviewer that I have read. Your
observation and opinion in this particular aspect of the Digital
Rebel is suspect because you have an obvious bias against it.

Which is perfectly fine and your opinion is legitimate as long as
you allow those who disagree a reasonable amount of respect.

After handling both the F717 and the DRebel there is really nothing
cheap feeling about either one. They are different for sure. But
I find nothing in the Rebel build that is any cheaper feeling than
the swivel lens attachment, lens surround, and buttons on the F717.

Now I will give you this-calling the F717 or any other camera
'names' or whatever is not the way to carry on a reasonably
intelligent discourse.

--
Just think, if every key-stroke was a shutter-press we would all be
pros by now...
Click to expand...
 
Ulysses said:
Hey. If it's good enough for Borg assimilation, it's good enough
for me. :->
Shay Stephens said:
Foamed duranium like they use in tricorders and photon torpedo
casings.

"The two-part case is constructed of duranium foam, which is
resistant to a wide range of environmental conditions."

Light weight, rugged, and it just plain looks great!

;-)
Click to expand...
--

Ulysses
Click to expand...
--
Shay
http://www.shaystephens.com/portfolio.asp

'Cameras are not artists, photographers are.'
 
Matthew Cromer said:
Why don't you go work on your Coca-Cola portfolio some more and
spare us your histrionics.

--
my favorite work: http://www.pbase.com/sdaconsulting/favorite_work
Click to expand...
Wow - that was an angry post! The DR could be the end all be all of cams - made out of plutonium - and they could give one away to you individually and you would still find a reason to pay $1000 for the 828. Your opinion of the DR would be the LAST that people should look at. Your posts of the past few weeks have confirmed your bias against the camera.

You are judging a book (camera) by it's cover - didn't your parents ever warn you of that??

I like you Matt - you are entertained to say the least! :-)

--
Bauerman
http://www.bauerman.Galleries.photoshare.co.nz
 
Godfrey said:
Godfrey said:
This is a circular argument.
Click to expand...
Please articulate what you consider as circular here. You seem to
be insistent upon promotiing theoretical considerations as the only
true way to understand these issues, but empirical observations
seen in practice have greater value to me.
Click to expand...
The crux of your argument seems to be that it's not necessary to take a lot of readings because you've gotten interesting results from just a few. This contains the assumption that the results you got from just a few situations will generalize to the others - otherwise they wouldn't be interesting. That seems circular to me.

I disagree with your comment that I'm promoting theoretical considerations here. I've been promoting a very simple empirical test (pointing at a flat scene) as a way to measure sensitivity. The theory comes in only in my efforts to explain what I believe is flawed with using matrix metering on complex scenes as a means of measuring sensitvity.

I guess there is some theory involved - it's the basic scientific principle of limiting the number of variables in an experiment. However, this is a theory about experiments and not an instance of theory as a substitute for experiments.

--
Ron Parr
FAQ: http://www.cs.duke.edu/~parr/photography/faq.html
Gallery: http://www.pbase.com/parr/
 
Ron Parr said:
Member said:
Please articulate what you consider as circular here. You seem to
be insistent upon promotiing theoretical considerations as the only
true way to understand these issues, but empirical observations
seen in practice have greater value to me.
Click to expand...
The crux of your argument seems to be that it's not necessary to
take a lot of readings because you've gotten interesting results
from just a few. This contains the assumption that the results you
got from just a few situations will generalize to the others -
otherwise they wouldn't be interesting. That seems circular to me.
Click to expand...
I did a simple test, generalized from my observations, then tested the solutions against a wide variety of scene conditions. Analysis of the results proves that the generalization holds. There's nothing circular about that, although there is a feedback loop.

The results of the test were that the auto mode matrix exposure evaluation was underexposing by 0.3 to 0.7EV on average when compared against two other metering tools. The solution was to bump up exposure by 0.3EV as a default. The results are good. The problem is not apparent in all cases; the test revealed when it was apparent and experience has demonstrated when it is not.

This is not a measure of "sensitivity". It's a measure of exposure calibration. A sensitivity measurement would either seek for what the minimum threshold change in lighting that would change the auto exposure mode's selected setting, or the minima and maxima conditions that the camera meter will respond to. That's very different from exposure calibration.

Godfrey
 
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