Canon Digital Rebel Kit -- thoughts of a Sony user

[Matthew Cromer]

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

 

[Bill Bennett100518]

I also bought the 300D this week end and was very happy with the quality of pictures I was able to achieve. I did however return it for the 10D for a couple of reasons. First I want to shoot sports and the 4 frame buffer I felt was small compared to the 9 frame 10D. Second I really wanted the PC port on the camera instead of using an add on to the hotshoe. Last I really did not like the plastic feel of the body. I think duribility wise I think the 10D will be better if any bump or bruises should occur.

Initially I thought I would keep my 717 but after learning more about the DSLR's I really do not feel I really would use my Sony much.

Was waiting for the 828 but decided I wanted more flexibiltiy of DSLR. I really enjoyed the 707 and 717 I was able to learn alot.

My wife still has the V1 so I will no enjoy learning from both forums. People in this forum have been very helpful especially Shay and Uly.

I look forward to continuing my journing of understanding all the different aspects of Photography it is very rewarding when you get that sweet shot.

Bill

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

 

[Jamie154594]

I also bought the 300D this week end and was very happy with the
quality of pictures I was able to achieve. I did however return it
for the 10D

I would be curious to know how many people play with or even buy the 300D, only to return it for the 10D?

Jamie

 

[Bakman_29]

I read a different opinion about build quality here ?

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1009&message=6169437

BaKMaN

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

--



http://www.digitallyactive.com

 

[Mongrel]

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

Actually I thought the nicely finished 'plastic' felt pretty nice compared to the film rebel and several other makers 35mm slr bodies. Almost as nicely finished as my S-75. Definately solid enough for everyday usage. I'm not sure how many psi it takes to flex it but mine doesn't flex at all under reasonable pressure. Of course the CF compartment doors are always a weak spot on most digitals and the DRebel is no different. If you remember that this is a camera and not a hammer you'll be fine.

The weight of the camera surprised me also. Quite a bit heavier than I expected it to be after reading so many 'plastic toy' comments. I was impressed with how nice it really was in person.

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

hmmm...yes it did look sharp. As to build quality? Compared to an old FD lens I guess you could say 'cheap'. You could also say 'light'. As far as fit and finish,again looked better than I expected considering some of the lenses I've seen on other 35mm slrs and the comments made on the various forums. Not great-not bad. I have never yanked a Sony lens out of it's plastic case so I can't really compare the Canon lens to the Sony lens to see if the Sony's are any better built.

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

Agreed

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

again...hmmm...compared to my S-75? Compared to an old Minolta Maxxum I shot last summer? Light years ahead. It locks in fast and with authority. The AF on the DRebel is faster and more accurate (so far) than I am in most circumstances. Again the DRebel AF is in a different league compared to the three AF cameras I have used. While were here let's talk shutter lag.....I forgot....the DRebel has no noticiable shutter lag.

How about that dreaded "only 4 shot buffer", well I just bang out three in a row pause and bang out three in a row...pause...bang out three in a row....Oh yeah, did I mention that the flash will fire every time I press the shutter button? That's pretty cool.

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 haven't held the D100. I have held the D60, which is a big, black, heavy, rubbery feeling thing. Maybe that's good for some, not so good for others. Kind of a personal choice thing I guess. I don't mind or prefer either one at this point.

The DRebel is bigger than my AE-1 but weighs less. No surprise there. It is bulkier and heavier than the S75. No surprise there. I don't know yet if I care for the large (to me anyway) handgrip. The AE-1 is very thin and easy to manipulate for me. However the DRebel is easily held and shot with one hand which the light weight helps with alot. Controls are fairly intuitive considering I went from the Sony menu and control system which I have gotten to know so well. I have had no problem figuring out the menus on the fly-very simple system.

If I had a choice I would take an AE-1 traditional style body over the new-fangled EOS super bodies I think. But that's just what I'm used to.

I tried to do some comparison ISO tests with the Sony...

I honestly haven't shot the DRebel enough to give any real feedback on metering etc. I have carried it around a few days while walking and biking. I will say this-you won't forget it is around your neck. BTW-the neck strap is so hard and plasticky (is that a word?) It makes your neck sweat big time (where did I put that old strap?). This I have enjoyed immensely (no, not the neck sweat, the shooting\using). It is a great feeling having that old slr control and flexibility in a digital format. I don't hesitate to take any shot I want to try anymore. Just adjust the settings and fire away. Oh, and the shots are looking pretty fine even without having to play around with them. The color rendition alone makes it worth it to me.

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

Other Verdict: Seems like a GREAT WAY to get a DSLR if your money is tight and you are below a certain income bracket that can afford to buy these things on a whim left and right. The DRebel is a MAJOR PURCHASE in my house (here's a hint: my newest car is 9yrs old-heheh).

Trust me you WILL LEARN TO OVERCOME THE LIMITATIONS if you are serious about learning to become a good photographer more than playing 'can you top this' with your forum buddies.

If you have hesitated to jump on a DSLR because of price or other considerations you owe it to yourself to check this one out. If you are comfortable with the SLR design and don't mind spending time with the manual and taking alot of 'test shots' to learn it, this may just be the one for you. If you are a techno perfectionist who NEEDS to have every possible option under the sun at your finger tips (whether you use or understand them or not is another thread altogether-lol) you better pass it over. In fact you may as well pass over the 10D too, because it may not have something that another camera has (or will have very soon) and then where would you be?

Seriously, this is a camera that brings a very good basic DSLR to a lot of people who just couldn't justify or afford the $1500+\- price of admission.

I look at it this way; by the time I have learned and outgrown everything that this camera has to offer I'll be ready for whatever the next generation of DSLR cameras bring to the game. By then I'll even have some lenses to get me started.

Just another view from a 'Sony' owner, Regards, Mongrel

 

[Greg Gebhardt]

--
Greg Gebhardt in
Jacksonville, Florida

 

[Bill Bennett100518]

After a few days of DSLR I must say I am very happy to have made the purchase. Much different than the camera's I have been using.

I will keep the V1 for a small carry around camera but I guess the 717 will have to go. These lenses are very $$$$$.

Bill

 

[Ogilvy]

Played with it this afternoon.

First impressions:

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

Disagree: Build quality quite good, better built than the Fuji S2 and certainly better than the 717, wasn't as solid as the 10d/d100 but comparable to d30/d60, plastic had a slightly smoother finish and it was lighter, good ergonomics, grip is quite deep. Was quite surprised because I was expecting something quite flimsy.

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

The version I tried was a usm version, from Japan, not a bad lens, light but feels well put together but cheaper feeling than the other eos lenses.

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

Agree, had a nice titanium finish, not silver

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

The lens i tried was usm, af was very fast

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.

Felt good in hand, should be even better with the battery grip.

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?

Noise levels seem comparable to the 10d

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

 

[Ron Parr]

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?

Unless you were pointing at a scene with uniform brightness, matrix metering is not an appropriate way to do this comparison since differences in exposure may be attributable to differences in what the matrix metering algorithm chooses to expose for and not fundamental sensitivity differences.

You also didn't say against which camera you compared.

--
Ron Parr
FAQ: http://www.cs.duke.edu/~parr/photography/faq.html
Gallery: http://www.pbase.com/parr/

 

[Matthew Cromer]

Disagree: Build quality quite good, better built than the Fuji S2
and certainly better than the 717, wasn't as solid as the 10d/d100
but comparable to d30/d60, plastic had a slightly smoother finish
and it was lighter, good ergonomics, grip is quite deep. Was quite
surprised because I was expecting something quite flimsy.

Better than the 717?

LOL.

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

 

[Teresa51867]

I bought the 10D three weeks ago. At first thought I might keep the 717 because I loved that camera...as soon as I starting picking lenses I knew the 717 had to go so I could buy a new lens. No L glass for me yet but it certainly is a tough choice which lens to purchase. Good Luck. Here is a link to a few of the shots I have gotten with the 10D. All except the beach shots are with the new camera and I have learned that I have a lot to learn!
lifeski.smugmug.com
Teresa

 

[Matthew Cromer]

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?

Unless you were pointing at a scene with uniform brightness, matrix
metering is not an appropriate way to do this comparison since
differences in exposure may be attributable to differences in what
the matrix metering algorithm chooses to expose for and not
fundamental sensitivity differences.

The cameras were a Sony 717 and 300D with the kit lens.

I tried about 3 different compositions within the store because I realized that matrix exposure algorithms vary quite a bit. I actually think the matrix meter using real scenes is one of the best way to judge sensitivity since that's what most people will be using most of the time.

I'd like to try this again with a sample camera in more of a variety of EV and scene contrast values. Hopefully someone with access to both cameras can look at this further.
--
my favorite work: http://www.pbase.com/sdaconsulting/favorite_work

 

[Ron Parr]

I tried about 3 different compositions within the store because I
realized that matrix exposure algorithms vary quite a bit. I
actually think the matrix meter using real scenes is one of the
best way to judge sensitivity since that's what most people will be
using most of the time.

It's the worst way to test because it confounds sensitivity with metering. If you want to test sensitivity, you should put the cameras in situations where there is no chance of a disagreement on how to meter the scene.

If you want to test a metering mode like matrix metering, then you would need to set up dozens, perhaps hundreds, of scenes and compare them for proper exposure. Since no camera will get all such scenes right (and there will be some room for interpretation of what "right" is) you'd need to have humans vote on the correct metering and then compute average performance (measured by agreement with human judgement) for each metering system across these scenes.

The point is that these are two separate parts of the camera system. Using a handful of scenes in matrix mode to compare sensitivity is incorrect procedure and does not produce meaningful results about underlying sensitivity.

--
Ron Parr
FAQ: http://www.cs.duke.edu/~parr/photography/faq.html
Gallery: http://www.pbase.com/parr/

 

[k-photo1]

Took a couple of shots at Store the other day with 300d. I think build was very good and viewfinder good. Pretty nice and locked on photo's even in dimly lit store. PRinted out a couple shots at the kiosk and they were fantastic. Finaly got my 1 yr old with no blur.

The bad: It is way bigger than I expected! Huge. Keep in mind that I want the smallest that there is, so I was not impressed. I have an old Canon AV-1 that is very small compared.

Why does it have to be so big, there is no film anymore.

I will wait for F828 or save for the stD.

Where are the reviews???

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

--
kek

 

[Matthew Cromer]

I tried about 3 different compositions within the store because I
realized that matrix exposure algorithms vary quite a bit. I
actually think the matrix meter using real scenes is one of the
best way to judge sensitivity since that's what most people will be
using most of the time.

It's the worst way to test because it confounds sensitivity with
metering. If you want to test sensitivity, you should put the
cameras in situations where there is no chance of a disagreement on
how to meter the scene.

There is always the potential of disagreement on how to meter a scene.

Even a flat grey scene. Do you always meter them as 18% grey, or as something else?

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

 

[Ron Parr]

There is always the potential of disagreement on how to meter a scene.

Even a flat grey scene. Do you always meter them as 18% grey, or
as something else?

It should be 18% gray. There might be disagreements about this, but in any case, the final shots can be examined and one can easily determine if the resulting brightness levels are equivalent.

The important point is that disagreements about how to measure flat gray are different from the issues that arise with matrix metering a general scene. With a flat gray scene, there is no question of WHAT to meter. With matrix metering and anything other than a flat scene, there can be disagreements about what parts of the scene should be used to determine exposure. There's no ground truth on this - only opinions.

Metering a flat scene separates the issue how the exposure is determined from what objects in the scene are used to determine the exposure.

--
Ron Parr
FAQ: http://www.cs.duke.edu/~parr/photography/faq.html
Gallery: http://www.pbase.com/parr/

 

[fmkjr]

Did you own an S2... looking at various cameras and someone I know has one and really likes it. (I cannot try it as he is on the other side of the country...) (I have the f707)

thx frank

Played with it this afternoon.

First impressions:

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

Disagree: Build quality quite good, better built than the Fuji S2
and certainly better than the 717, wasn't as solid as the 10d/d100
but comparable to d30/d60, plastic had a slightly smoother finish
and it was lighter, good ergonomics, grip is quite deep. Was quite
surprised because I was expecting something quite flimsy.

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

The version I tried was a usm version, from Japan, not a bad lens,
light but feels well put together but cheaper feeling than the
other eos lenses.

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

Agree, had a nice titanium finish, not silver

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

The lens i tried was usm, af was very fast

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.

Felt good in hand, should be even better with the battery grip.

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?

Noise levels seem comparable to the 10d

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

 

[Godfrey]

What doing tests with the matrix metering enabled tells you is what choices it will make on comparable scenes compared to other cameras. I did this with my F717 vs Konica KD500Z and a Sekonic hand-held incident light meter. It taught me that the Sony will tend to underexpose compared to the other two. Since then, I set the Sony to +0.3EV as a default and my pictures taken casually come out much better.

Godfrey

I tried about 3 different compositions within the store because I
realized that matrix exposure algorithms vary quite a bit. I
actually think the matrix meter using real scenes is one of the
best way to judge sensitivity since that's what most people will be
using most of the time.

It's the worst way to test because it confounds sensitivity with
metering. If you want to test sensitivity, you should put the
cameras in situations where there is no chance of a disagreement on
how to meter the scene.

If you want to test a metering mode like matrix metering, then you
would need to set up dozens, perhaps hundreds, of scenes and
compare them for proper exposure. Since no camera will get all
such scenes right (and there will be some room for interpretation
of what "right" is) you'd need to have humans vote on the correct
metering and then compute average performance (measured by
agreement with human judgement) for each metering system across
these scenes.

The point is that these are two separate parts of the camera
system. Using a handful of scenes in matrix mode to compare
sensitivity is incorrect procedure and does not produce meaningful
results about underlying sensitivity.

--
Ron Parr
FAQ: http://www.cs.duke.edu/~parr/photography/faq.html
Gallery: http://www.pbase.com/parr/

 

[Ron Parr]

What doing tests with the matrix metering enabled tells you is what
choices it will make on comparable scenes compared to other
cameras. I did this with my F717 vs Konica KD500Z and a Sekonic
hand-held incident light meter. It taught me that the Sony will
tend to underexpose compared to the other two. Since then, I set
the Sony to +0.3EV as a default and my pictures taken casually come
out much better.

Two points here:

1. Matrix metering systems can compare the scene against a database of hundreds of different patterns to try to guess the right exposure for the scene. To come up with a general statement about how one system behaves in comparison with another would require testing against a large battery of scenes.

2. While such results would be interesting, they woud not be indicative of what Matthew was trying to test - the underlying sensitivity of the sensor.

--
Ron Parr
FAQ: http://www.cs.duke.edu/~parr/photography/faq.html
Gallery: http://www.pbase.com/parr/

 

[Matthew Cromer]

The basic problem is that both cameras can (and actually do) apply different curves of the linear data to create a jpeg.

I don't know how to create an apples to apples comparison given the lack of RAW in the Sony, but I think the general matrix exposure comparison is probably just as interesting since that is how most folks use the cameras.

You could shoot a representative assortment of scenes / compositions with both cameras and get some interesting comparison numbers.

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