Digital Camera Reviews and Recommendations

2. Hans said:

Do you do any astrophotography and/or long night-time shots (30s+)? If so, buy the Canon Digital Rebel XT. If not, then the choice is up to you between Nikon and Canon.

I’ve got a Nikon D70 (there ain’t no ‘s’ here!), and have enjoyed it every bit. When I tried out the (original) Digital Rebel 300 in the store, I was nearly disgusted by the cheap, plasticy feel of it. The XT might be different, though.

The reasoning for my astrophotography issue is that the Nikon D70 (which I have now) exhibits much thermal noise/interference coming from the CCD circuitry on long (30s+) shots. The 300D doesn’t. I have no idea as to whether or not Nikon has fixed this with the D70s.

You can find a great in-depth review of the Canon Digital Rebel 350D/XT, and you should probably keep on eye on the Nikon D70s page for when they post a review.

Good luck, and I’m sure you’ll be pleased with whichever DSLR you choose.

Posted on April 30, 2005 01:00 PM | #

4. Feaverish said:

We have a Canon G6 at work, and I can’t recommend it enough. I think you can find one for $500-$600. It’s got all the pro features (manual exposure and focus, good range of ISO settings, swivel LCD, hot-shoe, etc.) but it can also just take a great picture quickly with the automatic settings if you don’t want to fuss with it. The lens especially is superb. It zooms to a fairly wide angle (about 28mm in 35mm-camera terms), which is nice, and it’s super sharp.

Posted on April 30, 2005 01:16 PM | #

6. bobk26 said:

I just (read: yesterday) bought the big brother of the Rebel XT - the 20d. This is a bit more camera than you’re looking for, but I can attest to the image quality and functions of Canon digital SLRs. From what I’ve read, the XT’s image sensor is almost identical to the 20d’s. If that’s true, then the XT’s images should be great.

The menus, as Brian (#1) pointed out, are well thought out, and through as well. I think that Canon’s lens selection is excellent as well. Not to say that Nikon’s isn’t good…but I think Canon is doing a bit better in features and variety than Nikon is.

So, my recommendation is for the Canon - they’ve never let me down. But I think either camera would do you just fine.

Posted on April 30, 2005 01:44 PM | #

8. Eirik V Johnsen said:

Well - in addition to the sources I have always enjoyed Steves digicams link. My last purchase was a Sony F828 - which I would not have done if I had read Steves review in depth. One of the most important things for me in a camera is responsiveness, and the F828 is murder if you run it in (proprietary) RAW mode. So I am stuck in JPG - even if the image quality sucks.

If i were in the market for a compact digital camera I would check out the G6 - I have a G4, and it is still my best compact digital camera, and a lot of my photographer friends use it. And I would TEST the RAW mode, the cycle time, the zoom speed (against vertical and horizontal lines), and the image quality at 200 ASA - 800 ASA. Or at least read Steves review.

I really started this post to recommend a couple of O’Reilly books that are great starting points:

Digital Photography Hacks

Masting digital photograhy

Essential Digital Photography techniques

You can preview them on Safari.oreilly.com, so you can find which one of them suits your needs.

Posted on April 30, 2005 02:10 PM | #

10. James Archer said:

I’m a Coolpix 4500 owner myself (photos here), but I’m wanting to move on into the SLR world because I just can’t push the 4500 as far as I want it to go, and I want to get a “real” camera (i.e., SLR) before I start dropping money on lenses and filters and so forth.

I think I’ve pretty much settled on the XT, though I also like the other cameras mentioned above. I’m not the kind of guy who buys the latest and greatest just to say he did it, but after handling a friend’s Rebel, I very clearly realized that it was a significant leap ahead of my clunky ol’ 4500.

Posted on April 30, 2005 06:18 PM | #

12. Richard said:

I went from a Canon G3 to a Digital Rebel about a year ago. Three friends were in the same place I was in (wanting to upgrade to DSLRs) and we mostly went different ways:

I went with the Rebel
2 went with the Canon 20D
1 went with the Nikon D70 (he had lots of Nikon lenses from a film SLR that worked with it).

I’ve now used all of the cameras and have a good feel for camera UI having had numerous cameras before this one.

For me (and I’d bet for many) Canon’s menus (as stated above) and control UI is much more intuitive and easier to learn. The Rebel and the 20D are really quite simple to use, even if you have no experience with higher and cameras and manual controls. I found the D70 on anything but automatic quite cumbersome. As you’ll read on Dpreview and elsewhere, it’s specs are great but you need to get your hands on these cameras and use their controls to experience the difference. I can control both the Rebel and 20D easily with little attention to the LCD, in some cases just by feel where the D70 needs a bit more attention. If you’re planning to shoot a lot on automatic then this stuff is less meaningful but then why get a camera like these?

The D70 comes with a better “stock” lens if you go that way and the Canon 18-55mm kit lens is to be avoided. It’s build quality is not great and there are not all that many good copies out there. I got a good one but I’m not crazy about it.

When you get into DSLRs, you’re just beginning to spend money. Lenses are where it’s at and you may want a few, or maybe more than a few.

What you’ll find in reading lens reviews is that some people swear by one and others find that one a piece of crap. Some of this is not just subjective; it’s that with both Canon and Nikon, a single lens type can have a lot of variation in quality control. Some people buy and return numerous copies of the same lens until they get one that works the way they want. Of course, you need educated expecations to evaluate this but it’s something to consider in reading reviews.

No matter which DSLR you get, I highly recommend getting the fastest 50mm lens you can afford with it (in addition to anything else). I got a Canon 50mm f1.4 lens for my Rebel and I use it more than any other. It’s fast enough to produce great pictures in low light with no flash and the focal range, while not a true 50mm on a digital SLR (an issue called “crop factor, in my case 1.6x so it’s really a longer lens than 50) it’s a great focal range for many situations. Fast lenses also allow you to produce great background blurr for portraits and closeups where slower lenses don’t (shallow depth of field). Here’s an example of that shot in front of a window into our backyard. The shallow depth of field blurred the window so all you see if the plant: Geranium.

When I first got my Rebel I used the kit lens and use either automatic or P and set ISO for low light situations and the resulting pictures were higher resolution but not much better than my Canon G3 had produced (I loved that camera). Once I got some better lenses and moved to taking pictures on AE (apeture preferred) things improved quickly. But, if you’re not going to push your photo skills I’m not sure a DSLR is worth it; the above mentioned Canon G6 might be a better choice.

Once I got a handle on using my camera there was no going back: the resolution, crispness of images, and control of exposure has pushed me to spend more time learning and taking more pictures and learning more. I’m hooked and have lots of lenses and am thinking of upgrading to a 20D now.

Why a 20D and what’s wrong with the new Rebel XT?

Nothing wrong with it at all and many love it. I’m addicted to the battery charge length of the Rebel (super long) and the 20D uses the same battery (XT uses smaller battery).

Also, If you ever get a lens with image stabilization (a small gyroscope that stabilizes the lens for better hand holding at slow speeds, and they really do work) it will suck battery power like mad and the more you have the better. Also, the ISO control on the XT is in the menus, not a quick change like it is on the original Rebel and 20D. This is important if you change ISO a lot and once you get into this you will do just that.

The 20D and the Rebel XT have higher resolution sensors but that’s not why I’d upgrade; the reason to upgrade is that these newer sensors will allow exposures at higher ISO speeds with much less noise. This enables you to take pictures without flash at high ISO (better low light sensitivity, like fast film) but without noise. I shoot a lot without flash but at 800 ISO and above my pictures taken with the rebel are a bit noisy when you look close. The newer sensors have gone a long way towared eliminating that.

In the end, the reason I went with the rebel up front and not the 20D was that I knew I’d be spending money on lenses and wasn’t sure I needed the higher end camera. I’m glad I did it this way as the Rebel allowed me to learn, buy more lenses, and now a year later I’m ready to move to the higher end camera.

If you go Canon get the body only, no kit lens. If you go Nikon their kit lens is quite good.

For what it’s worth, here’s what I have:

Canon 300D (Rebel)
Kit lens (never use it now)
Canon 50mm f1.4 (great all around lens, not too expensive)
Canon 100mm f2.8 macro (killer lens)
Canon 200mm f2.8 L (killer lens and L is high end glass)
Canon Tripod mount rings for the 100 and 200
Canon 1.4x teleconverter (makes the above 200 into a longer lens)
Canon 420EX speedlight flash (a hotshoe flash is a must for any flash photography)

My advice would be to get into this and at the same time keep one of your simpler, smaller cameras around to use when you don’t want to cary all this stuff. But, once you start taking great pictures with a higher end camera it’s hard to go back to lower end equipment.

Sorry this is so long winded but a lot of people have made this leap and I have a feeling in looking at their photos online that they wasted money on these high end cameras: they bought the cameras and then were overwelmed learning about photography and just use them on automatic. If you know you’ll never take the thing off automatic and will probably not buy more lenses think twice: the Canon G6 has plenty of resolution (and controls if you care to use them) without the scale or price.

Whatever you do, the best way to become a better photorapher is to take a lot of pictures, as many as you can. If the bigger camera means you won’t take it places then this is important to consider as well.

Posted on May 1, 2005 06:36 AM | #

14. Richard said:

The 10D has the same sensor as the original Rebel (300D) and it’s noisy at high ISO settings. However, the 10D is a great camera and it has more features enabled than the Rebel (which shares its rom but in a dumbed down version).

Both the rebel and the 10D are slower to startup from cold or sleep mode than the new Rebel XT or the 20D.

The lens issue is a big one (as stated above) and once you get into it then you’ll be trying to balance price, number of lenses, zoom vs prime, speed, size and weight, etc. There is no perfect setup or lens but having a few good ones really will improve your photography once you learn how to use the camera and lens together.

Posted on May 1, 2005 09:20 AM | #

16. Ray said:

I just recently parted ways with my old Nikon 4500. I loved that camera. The upgrade, a D70, was well worth it. I’ve enjoyed this camera so much in the short amount of time that I’ve been able to play with it. I highly recommend it.

Posted on May 2, 2005 05:04 AM | #

18. Adrian said:

The suggestion to get a cheaper 35mm SLR is a good one, if you’re taking pictures that are primarily going to be hardcopies.

But if you’re principle medium for these pictures is screen, a digital SLR is a cheaper and more environmentally sensitive choice. What you pay more for up front you will make up quickly in terms of film cost.

With a dSLR you can make mistakes, experiment boldly, and find the limitations of your camera (and more importantly, your eye) with reckless abandon. If the pictures turn out to be crap, delete and repeat. With a fim camera, you’re paying to develop all that cruft.

I have a Canon G5 (predecessor to the G6) and I love it. The optics are fantastic, it takes produces great quality images, and it wasn’t that expensive.

But the fixed lens is a little limiting, and I’m starting feel the need for a dSLR myself. The 20D is a great camera, but the digital Rebel is also a good medium-range camera. I’d recommend going to a camera shop and spending a bit of time with each of your choices. I am willing to bet the camera meant for you will stand out pretty quickly.

Posted on May 2, 2005 06:04 AM | #

20. Tom Passin said:

It all depends on what you want to use the camera for. If you *really* want good low-light capability, you really have to go for a DSLR - because their larger sensors give lower noise - and Canon especially seems to have gotton noise levels way down.

The optical viewfinder of a (D)SLR is a big advantage, too, depending of course on what kind of pictures you want to take.

I have used a Canon Digital Rebel for about a year (I had a Canon Rebel G 35mm before that,a nd a Nikon F2 before that). I love the Digital Rebel. As for low noise, I took a night-time picture ISO-100, 25 second exposure (on a tripod of course), and got a beautiful clean shot.

OTOH, things are not always what they seem. I recently got a Minolta A2, which is one step down from a DSLR, but still a fine camera (and much lighter and handier). It has quite a bit more noise than the Digital Rebel,which I knew when I got it. BUT, it has built-in anti-shake.

With the anti-shake, I have taken low light hand-held photos that had less noise than the equivalent with the Canon, because I could use longer exposures for the hand-held shots (like 1/10 or even 1/5th second!) and still get acceptably sharp pictures.

Most of these cameras are so good that the discriminant is likely to be the usability of the controls for real photography in the field, and the best place to find out about that is on the Luminous Landscape site, http://luminous-landscape.com

Posted on May 2, 2005 07:53 AM | #

22. geeky said:

What everyone else said :) I highly recommend Canons. I have a Digital Elph s500, which I absolutely adore. It’s small enough to shove in my pocket, takes great point and shoot photos, but also has the ability to let me play with things like shutter speed if I want to. And did I mention it takes great photos? We also have a Digital Rebel here at work. I haven’t used it, but my boss is in love with it, and I can say it does take stellar photos.

For me, it all came down to what I wanted to use it for. I wanted the ability to take more complex photos, but I mostly use my camera for point and shoot stuff. And since I planned on taking it on vacation with me, I wanted something that wouldn’t be a hassle to carry around with me.

When I was doing my shopping, I found dcresource.com and dpreview.com to be very valuable resources. And, as I’m sure you’re aware, Amazon allows customers to upload photos they’ve taken with their cameras now, so that’s a good place to see real life shots.

Posted on May 3, 2005 05:57 AM | #

24. Scipio said:

Rebel XT or Nikon D70s? I’m asking myself that same question. Then a buddy of mine said, “In CSI, they use Nikon.” Grissom and team. Night shooting of evidence. Interesting to note. No idea what real-world CSIs use though.

Posted on May 8, 2005 07:28 PM | #