300D and 828 - The real issue

DigitalDoggie · Dec 17, 2003

Isn't technology great!! Here we sit, arguing whether a Canon 300D is better than an 828. Just 4 short years ago, we all drooled for the new 1.3 and 2 megapixel cameras. Many of us took great shots with these simple cameras, shots we still enjoy today. Gosh, how could any of those shots be any good, considering none of those cameras could hold a candle to the 300D or 828. Guess I should delete all those files.

Now, 4 years later, we argue over the differences between two camera that OBLITERATE the capabilities of our models of just 4 short years ago. In the film world, we used to get upgraded SLR's once per decade, which certainly limited the amount we could argue over Canon vs. Nikon (at that time).

Now, we have two SUPER cameras, ones that blow away all models of just 2 years ago, and all we do is argue. And we don't do it very honestly either.

I had a 717, and fell into the Canon D300 camp, but I always loved my 717, and still love the shots it took. Do I love the low noise at high ISO I get from the Canon 300D, yes! But guess what, I HAVE TO USE HIGH ISO WITH the 300D because the lenses are so much slower than the lens on the 828. Those of us Canon users that keep bitching "Show me an ISO 800 shot from an 828, so I can bash the noise" are missing the point!! If the Sony user had to go to ISO 800 to get the shot, we 300D owners would not even be able to get the shot with our 300D because we would have to go to ISO 3200 (which we don't have) with out F5.6 lens.

So bottom line is this... if you want to compare apples to apples, you have to compare the Canon 300D at ISO 400 to the Sony at ISO 100. Then the noise advantage is far less....

.... AND BOTTOM LINE, all this lamenting about noise, only visible at 100% crops, and not even visible when looking at the whole shot on the computer screen at once (and after all, isn't that how you really look at pictures), and not visible on a 4x6 or 8x10 print, is just a bunch of hogwash.

I take great shots with my 300D. And if I had a Sony 828 instead, I'd get great shots with it. Both cameras KICK BUTT, and are awesome tools compared to all other sub-$1000 cameras that have come before them.

Less typing, more picture taking!!!

Ulysses · Dec 17, 2003

DigitalDoggie said:
Less typing, more picture taking!!!

Agreed!

That said, it's good to do all of this evaluation, and if there is something that we can call Sony on and that they need to fix, then they need for us to be tough about it.

My issue is that we need to be clear on what the problem is and why it occurs.

And we need to be less subjective and more objective about the images that we've been producing with our current and past cameras. Sometimes we remember our old images with a little too much love, forgetting that they manifest many of the same problems, to either a greater or lesser degree.

I've done it, too.

--

Ulysses

Natty Brito · Dec 17, 2003

....absolutely agree with you. Both cameras seem to get the best and often the worst out of us. An apple is an apple, an orange is an orange.

Photographic Regards.

Natty Brito (Portugal)

SpiderJohn23 · Dec 17, 2003

I am by no means a professional photographer, at best, I am a amateur with a good knowledge of photography.

We are our own worst enemy. I go out and shoot 100 shots and, when I review them, find 10 or 12 that I am "satisfied" with. I show the 100 shots to my friends and family and they sing my praises as the second coming of Ansel Adams!! LOL!

I guess my point is, to the average joe on the street, the problems that folks are finding with the "insert digital camera model number here" do not exist. And while I want the best quality photos for my money, most people that view my shots don't notice the bad qualities.

Now, if I earned my living with a camera, it would be different. Then again, I wouldn't choose a Sony as my tool of choice.

Just my $0.02!

sj

Don Jagoe · Dec 17, 2003

Well said. The bottom line is that we, as photographers, are really fortunate to be in a time and place where these superb choices exist--at affordable prices. And we should be thanking these extraordinary Japanese engineers and technologists, instead of pitting one DigiCam camp against the other.

s k u l p t118025 · Dec 17, 2003

I agree for the most part. Except I was taking low light F1.8 pictures at ISO 400 with my 300D using a cheap 50 1.8 for xmas tree decorating last night. For the most part though, the people who get things like the Sigma 70-300, and the other average lenses, this is the case. For most just starting out, this is true. For others that care more about brightness, they will get brighter lenses. Of course at a cost, but not for me and my 50 1.8 for now. : )

It's ALL about what works for you. You could have the most amazing camera in a persons hands, and if it doesn't work for them, it just doesn't. : ) The 717 works for a truckload of people. It's stupid for anyone to say that another camera will work better for them. Only they know. : )

}
:9) Brian
}

DigitalDoggie said:
Isn't technology great!! Here we sit, arguing whether a Canon 300D
is better than an 828. Just 4 short years ago, we all drooled for
the new 1.3 and 2 megapixel cameras. Many of us took great shots
with these simple cameras, shots we still enjoy today. Gosh, how
could any of those shots be any good, considering none of those
cameras could hold a candle to the 300D or 828. Guess I should
delete all those files.

Now, 4 years later, we argue over the differences between two
camera that OBLITERATE the capabilities of our models of just 4
short years ago. In the film world, we used to get upgraded SLR's
once per decade, which certainly limited the amount we could argue
over Canon vs. Nikon (at that time).

Now, we have two SUPER cameras, ones that blow away all models of
just 2 years ago, and all we do is argue. And we don't do it very
honestly either.

I had a 717, and fell into the Canon D300 camp, but I always loved
my 717, and still love the shots it took. Do I love the low noise
at high ISO I get from the Canon 300D, yes! But guess what, I HAVE
TO USE HIGH ISO WITH the 300D because the lenses are so much slower
than the lens on the 828. Those of us Canon users that keep
bitching "Show me an ISO 800 shot from an 828, so I can bash the
noise" are missing the point!! If the Sony user had to go to ISO
800 to get the shot, we 300D owners would not even be able to get
the shot with our 300D because we would have to go to ISO 3200
(which we don't have) with out F5.6 lens.

So bottom line is this... if you want to compare apples to apples,
you have to compare the Canon 300D at ISO 400 to the Sony at ISO
100. Then the noise advantage is far less....

.... AND BOTTOM LINE, all this lamenting about noise, only visible
at 100% crops, and not even visible when looking at the whole shot
on the computer screen at once (and after all, isn't that how you
really look at pictures), and not visible on a 4x6 or 8x10 print,
is just a bunch of hogwash.

I take great shots with my 300D. And if I had a Sony 828 instead,
I'd get great shots with it. Both cameras KICK BUTT, and are
awesome tools compared to all other sub-$1000 cameras that have
come before them.

Less typing, more picture taking!!!

--
The Hunger Site: http://www.thehungersite.com
-------------------------------------
http://adigitaldreamer.com
-------------------------------------
Portfolio at: http://www.skulpt.com

Antonio Gomes Miguel · Dec 17, 2003

Agree 1000 %.

I love the pictures I take with my 2 years Nikon 775 2MP, I expect nothing but all it does. To have perfect pictures i have to trust my eye and my F5...and some times pray a little.
Hope I had a 828 in my hands.

AntMiguel

DigitalDoggie said:
Isn't technology great!! Here we sit, arguing whether a Canon 300D
is better than an 828. Just 4 short years ago, we all drooled for
the new 1.3 and 2 megapixel cameras. Many of us took great shots
with these simple cameras, shots we still enjoy today. Gosh, how
could any of those shots be any good, considering none of those
cameras could hold a candle to the 300D or 828. Guess I should
delete all those files.

Now, 4 years later, we argue over the differences between two
camera that OBLITERATE the capabilities of our models of just 4
short years ago. In the film world, we used to get upgraded SLR's
once per decade, which certainly limited the amount we could argue
over Canon vs. Nikon (at that time).

Now, we have two SUPER cameras, ones that blow away all models of
just 2 years ago, and all we do is argue. And we don't do it very
honestly either.

I had a 717, and fell into the Canon D300 camp, but I always loved
my 717, and still love the shots it took. Do I love the low noise
at high ISO I get from the Canon 300D, yes! But guess what, I HAVE
TO USE HIGH ISO WITH the 300D because the lenses are so much slower
than the lens on the 828. Those of us Canon users that keep
bitching "Show me an ISO 800 shot from an 828, so I can bash the
noise" are missing the point!! If the Sony user had to go to ISO
800 to get the shot, we 300D owners would not even be able to get
the shot with our 300D because we would have to go to ISO 3200
(which we don't have) with out F5.6 lens.

So bottom line is this... if you want to compare apples to apples,
you have to compare the Canon 300D at ISO 400 to the Sony at ISO
100. Then the noise advantage is far less....

.... AND BOTTOM LINE, all this lamenting about noise, only visible
at 100% crops, and not even visible when looking at the whole shot
on the computer screen at once (and after all, isn't that how you
really look at pictures), and not visible on a 4x6 or 8x10 print,
is just a bunch of hogwash.

I take great shots with my 300D. And if I had a Sony 828 instead,
I'd get great shots with it. Both cameras KICK BUTT, and are
awesome tools compared to all other sub-$1000 cameras that have
come before them.

Less typing, more picture taking!!!

Kelvinz · Dec 17, 2003

I think the complainers can be grouped into 2 categories.

a.) The ametuer photographer who has just gotten into DSLR's and has just steped away from point and shoot cameras and dosen't yet know how to use their DSLRS that well but are so happy that they can take clear pictures with their DSLR. Yet I have yet to see any really good pictures come out on the 300d forum, and when good pictures are posted often its by the same people whom post quality pictures.

b.) The equipment chasers those whom just want the lateset and greatest technology. Without a doubt many of the photographers on here don't need even the resolution of the Sony F717, most people on here probally don't even print out larger than 4x6. People on here are just playing a game where they are trying to get the best equipment and not realizing that a good photographer dosen't need all this fancy Equipment in order to take good pictures.

I'm sure many of you have had amazing shots that you've taken with your old camera. I for one have taken some pictures that I will always cherish with my old Nikon 995 and F717.

-Kelvin

DigitalDoggie · Dec 17, 2003

Actually, it's devisive comments like yours that fuel most of the anger....

You state... "Yet I have yet to see any really good pictures come out on the 300d forum"

That's just plain laughable, and everybody knows it. It serves no other purpose then to pi*s people off and keep these stupid flame wars going.

Kelvinz said:
I think the complainers can be grouped into 2 categories.

a.) The ametuer photographer who has just gotten into DSLR's and
has just steped away from point and shoot cameras and dosen't yet
know how to use their DSLRS that well but are so happy that they
can take clear pictures with their DSLR. Yet I have yet to see any
really good pictures come out on the 300d forum, and when good
pictures are posted often its by the same people whom post quality
pictures.

b.) The equipment chasers those whom just want the lateset and
greatest technology. Without a doubt many of the photographers on
here don't need even the resolution of the Sony F717, most people
on here probally don't even print out larger than 4x6. People on
here are just playing a game where they are trying to get the best
equipment and not realizing that a good photographer dosen't need
all this fancy Equipment in order to take good pictures.

I'm sure many of you have had amazing shots that you've taken with
your old camera. I for one have taken some pictures that I will
always cherish with my old Nikon 995 and F717.

-Kelvin

Kelvinz · Dec 17, 2003

As I state that there are some good pictures coming of the 300D but its by the same good photographers time after time. It just seems to me that some people have gotten in over there heads and bought too much camera for themselves, when they would of been better off with a point and shoot.

-Kelvin

DigitalDoggie said:
You state... "Yet I have yet to see any really good pictures come
out on the 300d forum"

That's just plain laughable, and everybody knows it. It serves no
other purpose then to pi*s people off and keep these stupid flame
wars going.

Kelvinz said:

I think the complainers can be grouped into 2 categories.

a.) The ametuer photographer who has just gotten into DSLR's and
has just steped away from point and shoot cameras and dosen't yet
know how to use their DSLRS that well but are so happy that they
can take clear pictures with their DSLR. Yet I have yet to see any
really good pictures come out on the 300d forum, and when good
pictures are posted often its by the same people whom post quality
pictures.

b.) The equipment chasers those whom just want the lateset and
greatest technology. Without a doubt many of the photographers on
here don't need even the resolution of the Sony F717, most people
on here probally don't even print out larger than 4x6. People on
here are just playing a game where they are trying to get the best
equipment and not realizing that a good photographer dosen't need
all this fancy Equipment in order to take good pictures.

I'm sure many of you have had amazing shots that you've taken with
your old camera. I for one have taken some pictures that I will
always cherish with my old Nikon 995 and F717.

-Kelvin

Click to expand...

kennyp · Dec 17, 2003

DigitalDoggie,
Great post!
--
Ken from CO. 2100uz, C-4000 and DSC-F717 http://www.pbase.com/kenron

DaShiv · Dec 17, 2003

DigitalDoggie said:
I had a 717, and fell into the Canon D300 camp, but I always loved
my 717, and still love the shots it took. Do I love the low noise
at high ISO I get from the Canon 300D, yes! But guess what, I HAVE
TO USE HIGH ISO WITH the 300D because the lenses are so much slower
than the lens on the 828. Those of us Canon users that keep
bitching "Show me an ISO 800 shot from an 828, so I can bash the
noise" are missing the point!! If the Sony user had to go to ISO
800 to get the shot, we 300D owners would not even be able to get
the shot with our 300D because we would have to go to ISO 3200
(which we don't have) with out F5.6 lens.

At full wide, the F828's lens is f/2.0 and the DRebel's kit lens is f/3.5. That's only a stop and two-thirds.

At the tele end for the kit lens, the DRebel's kit lens is f/5.6, compared to what is probably around f/2.4 for the F828 at that stop. That's two and a half stops.

Here's a noise comparison between the DRebel against "prosumer" cameras:

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos300d/page14.asp

The DRebel in P2 mode has about 2.5-3 ISO stops less noise throughout. (Keep in mind the shooting in custom modes or in RAW further reduces noise.) Even assuming that the F828 is among the very best prosumers in noise (which looks doubtful at this point), the DRebel still has cleaner images using the kit lens. This is disregarding potential CA/blooming issues on the F828 and the much better DOF control on the kit lens. Of course the kit lens has less reach as well.

Now, slapping a $70 50/1.8 lens on the DRebel gives you those three stops of ISO back, and then some. And third-party constant f/2.8 normal zoom's from Tamron and Sigma (can be had for around $300-350) will also nullify the aperture difference as well. And one has the option of forgoing the kit lens on the DRebel to put that money to better lens to begin with as well. Yes, this does cost extra, but people buying prosumer cameras are also willing to buy all sorts of pricey tele/wide extenders (I have three Olympus and Nikon ones myself). They can't buy anything to make the lens faster or allow them to shoot at higher ISO's.

The advantages of the F828 over the DRebel are in its feature set (both software and hardware), and not in its image quality or ISO equivalence.

DaShiv

The Krakken · Dec 17, 2003

I have the ability to shoot at f2.8 at most any time, except when I use the kit lens...which is getting rarer by the day.

Most people who own a 300D shoot with more than just the kit lens...and a good many of those can go to 1.8 and/or 2.8 without breaking their piggy banks.

DaShiv said:
DigitalDoggie said:

I had a 717, and fell into the Canon D300 camp, but I always loved
my 717, and still love the shots it took. Do I love the low noise
at high ISO I get from the Canon 300D, yes! But guess what, I HAVE
TO USE HIGH ISO WITH the 300D because the lenses are so much slower
than the lens on the 828. Those of us Canon users that keep
bitching "Show me an ISO 800 shot from an 828, so I can bash the
noise" are missing the point!! If the Sony user had to go to ISO
800 to get the shot, we 300D owners would not even be able to get
the shot with our 300D because we would have to go to ISO 3200
(which we don't have) with out F5.6 lens.

Click to expand...

At full wide, the F828's lens is f/2.0 and the DRebel's kit lens is
f/3.5. That's only a stop and two-thirds.

At the tele end for the kit lens, the DRebel's kit lens is f/5.6,
compared to what is probably around f/2.4 for the F828 at that
stop. That's two and a half stops.

Here's a noise comparison between the DRebel against "prosumer"
cameras:

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos300d/page14.asp

The DRebel in P2 mode has about 2.5-3 ISO stops less noise
throughout. (Keep in mind the shooting in custom modes or in RAW
further reduces noise.) Even assuming that the F828 is among the
very best prosumers in noise (which looks doubtful at this point),
the DRebel still has cleaner images using the kit lens. This is
disregarding potential CA/blooming issues on the F828 and the much
better DOF control on the kit lens. Of course the kit lens has
less reach as well.

Now, slapping a $70 50/1.8 lens on the DRebel gives you those three
stops of ISO back, and then some. And third-party constant f/2.8
normal zoom's from Tamron and Sigma (can be had for around
$300-350) will also nullify the aperture difference as well. And
one has the option of forgoing the kit lens on the DRebel to put
that money to better lens to begin with as well. Yes, this does
cost extra, but people buying prosumer cameras are also willing to
buy all sorts of pricey tele/wide extenders (I have three Olympus
and Nikon ones myself). They can't buy anything to make the lens
faster or allow them to shoot at higher ISO's.

The advantages of the F828 over the DRebel are in its feature set
(both software and hardware), and not in its image quality or ISO
equivalence.

DaShiv

The Krakken · Dec 17, 2003

I think that in the hands of a capable snapper, the 828 will produce exemplary results.

The Krakken said:
Most people who own a 300D shoot with more than just the kit
lens...and a good many of those can go to 1.8 and/or 2.8 without
breaking their piggy banks.

DaShiv said:

DigitalDoggie said:

I had a 717, and fell into the Canon D300 camp, but I always loved
my 717, and still love the shots it took. Do I love the low noise
at high ISO I get from the Canon 300D, yes! But guess what, I HAVE
TO USE HIGH ISO WITH the 300D because the lenses are so much slower
than the lens on the 828. Those of us Canon users that keep
bitching "Show me an ISO 800 shot from an 828, so I can bash the
noise" are missing the point!! If the Sony user had to go to ISO
800 to get the shot, we 300D owners would not even be able to get
the shot with our 300D because we would have to go to ISO 3200
(which we don't have) with out F5.6 lens.

Click to expand...

At full wide, the F828's lens is f/2.0 and the DRebel's kit lens is
f/3.5. That's only a stop and two-thirds.

At the tele end for the kit lens, the DRebel's kit lens is f/5.6,
compared to what is probably around f/2.4 for the F828 at that
stop. That's two and a half stops.

Here's a noise comparison between the DRebel against "prosumer"
cameras:

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos300d/page14.asp

The DRebel in P2 mode has about 2.5-3 ISO stops less noise
throughout. (Keep in mind the shooting in custom modes or in RAW
further reduces noise.) Even assuming that the F828 is among the
very best prosumers in noise (which looks doubtful at this point),
the DRebel still has cleaner images using the kit lens. This is
disregarding potential CA/blooming issues on the F828 and the much
better DOF control on the kit lens. Of course the kit lens has
less reach as well.

Now, slapping a $70 50/1.8 lens on the DRebel gives you those three
stops of ISO back, and then some. And third-party constant f/2.8
normal zoom's from Tamron and Sigma (can be had for around
$300-350) will also nullify the aperture difference as well. And
one has the option of forgoing the kit lens on the DRebel to put
that money to better lens to begin with as well. Yes, this does
cost extra, but people buying prosumer cameras are also willing to
buy all sorts of pricey tele/wide extenders (I have three Olympus
and Nikon ones myself). They can't buy anything to make the lens
faster or allow them to shoot at higher ISO's.

The advantages of the F828 over the DRebel are in its feature set
(both software and hardware), and not in its image quality or ISO
equivalence.

DaShiv

Click to expand...

DigitalDoggie · Dec 17, 2003

I was a general message... yes, we can evaluate it to death. Yes, you can get a fix 50mm lens that is F1.8... that really compares to a 200mm+ zoom, right? That's really apples to apples. And the 828 is F2.8 at full zoom, not F2.4 like the 717, so your numbers are wrong too. At full zoom, on a comparable lens like the 28-135, which is F5.6, you are two stops better on the Sony, hence you must boost Canon ISO to 800 to match Sony ISO 200.

DaShiv said:
DigitalDoggie said:

I had a 717, and fell into the Canon D300 camp, but I always loved
my 717, and still love the shots it took. Do I love the low noise
at high ISO I get from the Canon 300D, yes! But guess what, I HAVE
TO USE HIGH ISO WITH the 300D because the lenses are so much slower
than the lens on the 828. Those of us Canon users that keep
bitching "Show me an ISO 800 shot from an 828, so I can bash the
noise" are missing the point!! If the Sony user had to go to ISO
800 to get the shot, we 300D owners would not even be able to get
the shot with our 300D because we would have to go to ISO 3200
(which we don't have) with out F5.6 lens.

Click to expand...

At full wide, the F828's lens is f/2.0 and the DRebel's kit lens is
f/3.5. That's only a stop and two-thirds.

At the tele end for the kit lens, the DRebel's kit lens is f/5.6,
compared to what is probably around f/2.4 for the F828 at that
stop. That's two and a half stops.

Here's a noise comparison between the DRebel against "prosumer"
cameras:

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos300d/page14.asp

The DRebel in P2 mode has about 2.5-3 ISO stops less noise
throughout. (Keep in mind the shooting in custom modes or in RAW
further reduces noise.) Even assuming that the F828 is among the
very best prosumers in noise (which looks doubtful at this point),
the DRebel still has cleaner images using the kit lens. This is
disregarding potential CA/blooming issues on the F828 and the much
better DOF control on the kit lens. Of course the kit lens has
less reach as well.

Now, slapping a $70 50/1.8 lens on the DRebel gives you those three
stops of ISO back, and then some. And third-party constant f/2.8
normal zoom's from Tamron and Sigma (can be had for around
$300-350) will also nullify the aperture difference as well. And
one has the option of forgoing the kit lens on the DRebel to put
that money to better lens to begin with as well. Yes, this does
cost extra, but people buying prosumer cameras are also willing to
buy all sorts of pricey tele/wide extenders (I have three Olympus
and Nikon ones myself). They can't buy anything to make the lens
faster or allow them to shoot at higher ISO's.

The advantages of the F828 over the DRebel are in its feature set
(both software and hardware), and not in its image quality or ISO
equivalence.

DaShiv

DigitalDoggie · Dec 17, 2003

How do you shoot F2.8 most of the time? You bought the 70-200 F2.8 zoom, and another zoom for the low end with F2.8? So you have $2500 invested in lens to match the Sony's lens speed?

The Krakken said:
Most people who own a 300D shoot with more than just the kit
lens...and a good many of those can go to 1.8 and/or 2.8 without
breaking their piggy banks.

DaShiv said:

DigitalDoggie said:

I had a 717, and fell into the Canon D300 camp, but I always loved
my 717, and still love the shots it took. Do I love the low noise
at high ISO I get from the Canon 300D, yes! But guess what, I HAVE
TO USE HIGH ISO WITH the 300D because the lenses are so much slower
than the lens on the 828. Those of us Canon users that keep
bitching "Show me an ISO 800 shot from an 828, so I can bash the
noise" are missing the point!! If the Sony user had to go to ISO
800 to get the shot, we 300D owners would not even be able to get
the shot with our 300D because we would have to go to ISO 3200
(which we don't have) with out F5.6 lens.

Click to expand...

At full wide, the F828's lens is f/2.0 and the DRebel's kit lens is
f/3.5. That's only a stop and two-thirds.

At the tele end for the kit lens, the DRebel's kit lens is f/5.6,
compared to what is probably around f/2.4 for the F828 at that
stop. That's two and a half stops.

Here's a noise comparison between the DRebel against "prosumer"
cameras:

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos300d/page14.asp

The DRebel in P2 mode has about 2.5-3 ISO stops less noise
throughout. (Keep in mind the shooting in custom modes or in RAW
further reduces noise.) Even assuming that the F828 is among the
very best prosumers in noise (which looks doubtful at this point),
the DRebel still has cleaner images using the kit lens. This is
disregarding potential CA/blooming issues on the F828 and the much
better DOF control on the kit lens. Of course the kit lens has
less reach as well.

Now, slapping a $70 50/1.8 lens on the DRebel gives you those three
stops of ISO back, and then some. And third-party constant f/2.8
normal zoom's from Tamron and Sigma (can be had for around
$300-350) will also nullify the aperture difference as well. And
one has the option of forgoing the kit lens on the DRebel to put
that money to better lens to begin with as well. Yes, this does
cost extra, but people buying prosumer cameras are also willing to
buy all sorts of pricey tele/wide extenders (I have three Olympus
and Nikon ones myself). They can't buy anything to make the lens
faster or allow them to shoot at higher ISO's.

The advantages of the F828 over the DRebel are in its feature set
(both software and hardware), and not in its image quality or ISO
equivalence.

DaShiv

Click to expand...

PDM · Dec 17, 2003

In theory your ISO/fast lens comparison sounds good, but you are referencing your F717 which doesn't have CA issues like the F828. All the outdoor shots I have seen by users with new cameras all show excessive CA, purple fringing, and even some red color bleeding and flare when the lens is used anywhere near wide open. The only really good shots I have seen are when the lens is severly stopped down. In other words, the while the Sony F717 may have performed admirable at open aperture, the F828 does not.

DigitalDoggie said:
I had a 717, and fell into the Canon D300 camp, but I always loved
my 717, and still love the shots it took. Do I love the low noise
at high ISO I get from the Canon 300D, yes! But guess what, I HAVE
TO USE HIGH ISO WITH the 300D because the lenses are so much slower
than the lens on the 828. Those of us Canon users that keep
bitching "Show me an ISO 800 shot from an 828, so I can bash the
noise" are missing the point!! If the Sony user had to go to ISO
800 to get the shot, we 300D owners would not even be able to get
the shot with our 300D because we would have to go to ISO 3200
(which we don't have) with out F5.6 lens.

So bottom line is this... if you want to compare apples to apples,
you have to compare the Canon 300D at ISO 400 to the Sony at ISO
100. Then the noise advantage is far less....

DaShiv · Dec 17, 2003

DigitalDoggie said:
I was a general message... yes, we can evaluate it to death. Yes,
you can get a fix 50mm lens that is F1.8... that really compares to
a 200mm+ zoom, right? That's really apples to apples.

I made the comparison using the kit lens already. I had clearly used this as an example that one can buy additional speed with a DRebel, which one can't with the F828.

DigitalDoggie said:
And the 828
is F2.8 at full zoom, not F2.4 like the 717, so your numbers are
wrong too.

I was making a conjecture based on the equivalent focal length of the F828 at the kit lens's max range (I used f/2.4 at 88mm for F828). I had already mentioned the lower range of the kit lens, and this is clearly one of the hardware features I noticed as an advantage of the F828 at the end of my post.

DigitalDoggie said:
At full zoom, on a comparable lens like the 28-135,
which is F5.6, you are two stops better on the Sony, hence you must
boost Canon ISO to 800 to match Sony ISO 200.

But one is not limited to trying to match the F828's range with a single lens. Also, the 28-135 has IS, which gives it superior low-light capabilities over the F828.

Again, out of the box the F828 has many feature advantages over the kit lens, especially with a larger zoom range. But this is easily nullified by spending a bit more on extra lens (one does NOT need to buy L lens to reach f/2.8 on zooms), or for features like IS.

I've repeatedly said that the F828 is a killer camera in terms of pure hardware specs. If one needs an all-in-one package out of the box, the F828 is clearly a very attractive choice. But it's not very difficult to beat the F828 with an extensible system--which not everyone is interested in using, of course!

DaShiv

DaShiv · Dec 17, 2003

DigitalDoggie said:
How do you shoot F2.8 most of the time? You bought the 70-200 F2.8
zoom, and another zoom for the low end with F2.8? So you have
$2500 invested in lens to match the Sony's lens speed?

One does not need to buy L lenses to reach f/2.8 in zooms. And the DRebel is FAR superior to the F828 within the same focal range at f/2.8 if you look at raw image quality.

Of course, there's no denying that to get the focal range coverage of the F828 requires additional money. This is clearly an advantage for the F828, along with the F828's many other features.

DaShiv

The Big Bad · Dec 17, 2003

I dont understand why people are saying the 300D has slow lens. yes it does have some lens that are slow and it also has lens that are a few stops faster than the sony glass. 85mm/1.2, 50mm f1 and 1.4, not to mention the $70 1.8 verson. 24mm 1.4, etc etc

Sure there are some slow lens as well, they are cheaper and for the people that dont need the speed a fine option as well.

Thats sorta the beauty, you can tailor your lens selection to your needs.

--
http://www.pbase.com/bigbad

300D and 828 - The real issue

Leading Member

Ulysses

Guest

Senior Member

Member

Leading Member

Senior Member

Member

Leading Member

Leading Member

Leading Member

Senior Member

Forum Enthusiast

Senior Member

Senior Member

Leading Member

Leading Member

Senior Member

Forum Enthusiast

Forum Enthusiast

Senior Member

Keyboard shortcuts