PDA

View Full Version : Canon Digital Camera opinions, prices???


Upper Michigan Prostar190
10-13-2005, 02:34 PM
OK, heres the deal: My dad has been a long time hobbyist photobug. He likes to shoot pictures at family events primarily and whatever things our family has done over our lives. He and my mom have 27 huge picture colages adorning the walls in their house. The highlights of our lives are displayed all over for family and friends to remember,laugh, and cry with.
so he has always used Canon cameras, they are just his preference. back in the day he started with the classic A-1, then the AE-1 Program, then about 5 years ago we bought him a Rebel 2000 with an optional speedlite flash for christmas which he truly loves. He has always been reluctant to digital photography, but a few weeks ago he mentioned he would like to get a Digital Rebel sometime. SO I am thinking it might be a good Gift for him. My mom never knows what to get him, so I am trying to help her out. He was looking at the 6.3 MP model as he usually doesnt get the latest-greatest-fastest electronic devices, he usually buys the next in line that is being phased out as they are starting to drop prices on so he isnt paying full buck. now I know amazon has these for $750 NEW, so is that a good price? or should we wait for it to drop more? the 8.0 MP has been out for a while so I dont know if the 6.3 has hit the basement price or not. I wonder if its going to drop more after the holidays? I just want to know whats a good price. I think those 6.3 MP were about $1100 or so when they first came out, is that correct?

Anyway, I would be very thankful for any assistance in the matter. Thanks!!! :) :wavey:

UMP

Davo
10-13-2005, 02:51 PM
I know you could find the digital Rebel for just under a grand on the web when it first came out, so $750 sounds pretty good to me.

One day I'm gonna pick one up for myself - the pics look great from what I've seen posted (wakeboarding mainly).

skeeler
10-13-2005, 02:55 PM
I know you could find the digital Rebel for just under a grand on the web when it first came out, so $750 sounds pretty good to me.

One day I'm gonna pick one up for myself - the pics look great from what I've seen posted (wakeboarding mainly).

Digital Rebel would be a great choice. Easy to use, and takes great pics.

ski_king
10-13-2005, 03:04 PM
Digital Rebel would be a great choice. Easy to use, and takes great pics.
If I get a Canon Digital Rebel, will my pictures look as good as skeeler's?

skeeler
10-13-2005, 03:10 PM
Do what I do.....burn the image into your brain. If you want, get the camera, and come out to Nebraska for a "Photo Clinic".

east tx skier
10-13-2005, 03:15 PM
Great choice. I'm eyeing them right now as a matter of fact. For a good price, I'd keep my eyes peeled for used one or a refurb. My minolta 700s was used and I've gotten great service from it with no trouble whatsoever.

Here's an example of what the digital rebel 6.3 mp can do for your skiing. I took this from the bank at the South-central regionals last year.

east tx skier
10-13-2005, 03:16 PM
Here's the thread (http://www.tmcowners.com/teamtalk/showthread.php?t=43&highlight=regionals) where I originally posted the pictures I took that day.

skeeler
10-13-2005, 03:23 PM
Great choice. I'm eyeing them right now as a matter of fact. For a good price, I'd keep my eyes peeled for used one or a refurb. My minolta 700s was used and I've gotten great service from it with no trouble whatsoever.

Here's an example of what the digital rebel 6.3 mp can do for your skiing. I took this from the bank at the South-central regionals last year.

Hers another Rebel XT sample.....got a great deal on a reburb 20D.

BeavenX5
10-13-2005, 03:41 PM
I got a digital rebel EOS 4MP last year. Great camera, does very good picture. Even my 8 years old son takes amasing wakeboard pictures with it. 8p 8p Only negative point is that this kind of camera is bulky for sports. Positive point is that most of your dad older toys will probably fit on the new Digital rebel.
Do not worry about the 6.3MP. My 4MP Rebel EOS on the highest resolution creates files of 4 megs on my computer. I print them often on 8X10 and does not see the grain of the picture.
You will probably not use the 6.3MP on its highest resolution anyway as these files are very big to handle.
$750 sounds like a good price.
One more thing: you might want to buy it with a different lens (longer zoom or macro) than the one your dad has already as the one from the Rebel 2000 will probably fit well for the Digital Rebel.
You should visit a local Canon dealer about this.
JC

Upper Michigan Prostar190
10-13-2005, 03:42 PM
COOL!!! NIce pics guys! :eek3: those are impressive!

OK, now do you think those 6.3 MPs will take a price drop after christmas? My dad is the type of guy that would want me to wait and get one after the price drop(christmas morning isnt that magic to him, hes not 8 yrs old) so I am just trying to decide if I should continue waiting until after the holidays? or do you think $750 is the basement on those?? I kinda thought they should have dropped to about $500 by now, but maybe I am out of touch. I just thought with how fast that market moves, the prices would have fallen more. :confused:

anybody recommend a good place to buy one?? I have always had good luck and good prices with Amazon.com, but I am open to suggestions too.

Thanks for all the help so far!! and for what ever help is yet to come :)

UMP

Leroy
10-13-2005, 03:52 PM
I'm watching eagerly UMP, I'm looking for 5-8Mpix and at least 12x optical zoom. Will include this in my searches on ebay. I'm generally comfortable with things like this from Ebay.Time to upgrade my Olympus Camedia 3.3mp 3x optical.

Mag_Red
10-13-2005, 03:55 PM
You might also take a look at the Cannon PowerShot S2 IS :moon:

skeeler
10-13-2005, 04:01 PM
One nice thing about a higher megapixel camera, is you can crop the image to desired size or subject without any resolution loss. Also you have to look at what you are going to use it for. If you are taking action shots, then a digital SLR is a no brainer. Faster shutter speed, sequence shooting ability, software upgrades, and interchangable lenses. Just a thought.

tommcat
10-13-2005, 04:07 PM
i have a canon A70 that i like a lot. not real high res but its on the smaller side so i can fit it in my pockets when snowmobiling.
only 3.2 megapix but still takes great quality pics, pretty easy to use too.

jrhollow
10-13-2005, 04:08 PM
I am looking at getting a new digital and know very little about them. The digital on that I have takes forever to shoot a picture, which makes action shots pretty difficult. How can you tell how fast the picture is taken, shutter speed?

skeeler
10-13-2005, 04:22 PM
I am looking at getting a new digital and know very little about them. The digital on that I have takes forever to shoot a picture, which makes action shots pretty difficult. How can you tell how fast the picture is taken, shutter speed?

This is the camera I have to use at the bar or out with friends, but will also take great sport shots. Fits in the pocket nice. Heres a good place to look; http://www.dpreview.com/

jrhollow
10-13-2005, 04:42 PM
Skeeler what model is that camera? Are there any major draw backs to that camera?

east tx skier
10-13-2005, 04:46 PM
For point and shoot, I went with the Canon digital elph. I liked it's color rendition over some of the other p&s cameras.

skeeler
10-13-2005, 04:56 PM
Skeeler what model is that camera? Are there any major draw backs to that camera?

I seem to like it. It's a Sony DSC-W5. Camera Review; http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/specs/Sony/sony_dscw5.asp

My friend has an Olympus C-5500 Sport, and the sharpness of the lens was jaw-dropping!!! Great camera for a point and shoot. Heres a picture of my son taken with the Olympus. Camera Review; http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/specs/Olympus/oly_c5500sz.asp

Upper Michigan Prostar190
10-13-2005, 05:41 PM
One nice thing about a higher megapixel camera, is you can crop the image to desired size or subject without any resolution loss. Also you have to look at what you are going to use it for. If you are taking action shots, then a digital SLR is a no brainer. Faster shutter speed, sequence shooting ability, software upgrades, and interchangable lenses. Just a thought.

This is why my dad wants it. He doesnt want to have grainy pics. He wants to interchance lenses with the Kick arse lens he bought for his film rebel(which does interchange with digital model rebels) and his flash will work too. so he has the best of both worlds to a point. he will have a 35mm film rebel, a digital rebel, the standard lens, his kick arse lens, and his kick arse flash. That way he can have options. He will only go with an SLR period. And I will tell you this, he and I both have film rebel 2000's and those babies are damn good point and shoots too.(other than they are big and bulky and wont fit in your pocket). I can take action shots on the drop of a hat with my film rebel. My parents and I went to an Air show this year and I took some absolutley amazing action photos of the jets with my rebel and the standard lens. that camera is quick and sharp. tip for you, if your gonna use these for dark shots, or night photos, get a speedlite flash for it. When I am playing guitar in a concert that my parents are at, I always know when my dad is snapping a picture because the entire stage gets flooded with light, it even overpowers the house spotlight. very effective flash, the stage is always dark and the pics are bright and clear.

I am just cheap and dont want to buy if the prices might be going to drop soon.... you know, its like rolling dice. Do you guys think the prices will drop anymore on them??? I had heard that canon has a 10MP version on the way, is that true??

UMP

BriEOD
10-13-2005, 06:44 PM
I have a Digital Rebel and I really like it. It takes great shots. I paid closer to $1K when I got it about a year, year and a half ago.

bigmac
10-13-2005, 06:49 PM
You can be certain that prices will drop, and that something better will come along shortly after you buy the camera.

For action shots such as water sports, you can't beat a digital SLR. Don't get too hung up on the megapixels - that only matters if you're doing enlargements bigger than about 11x17, or if not particularly adept at framing your image in the viewfinder.

Personally, I'm partial to Nikon over Canon, but both companies are capable of excellent images and the choice between the two probably makes little difference.

http://www.pbase.com/hmac/image/46598102.jpg
http://www.pbase.com/hmac/image/32058974.jpg

http://pbase.com/hmac

maristarman
10-13-2005, 07:04 PM
Got a digital rebel 6.3 MP camera last christmas for $600. (Bought on sale over the internet for $800, and canon had a sweet rebate deal going so I got $200 back).

$800 is a good price. The price seems to have settled now. The stock lens that comes with it isn't that great.

If you buy a zoom, get one with the image stabilization. Makes all the difference in the world.

Took me about 2 years to talk the wife into it. She loves the camera.

If you're not in a hurry, you may want to wait a month or so. Usually they have good sales around christmas.

bigmac
10-13-2005, 07:40 PM
If you buy a zoom, get one with the image stabilization. Makes all the difference in the world.


Heh...image stabilized lenses are nice, but only in situations where you have to use a slow shutter speed. Bear in mind that an IS lens of reasonable quality will cost substantially more than the camera. You can get an IS lens for $500, but it's a slow lens. The only advantage of image stabilization is that it will give you 2-3 stops for low-light shooting since IS will let you hand-hold a shot with a slower shutter speed than you'd normally be capable of...but those cheap IS lenses only get you down to an f-stop of 4.5 or so, meaning you'd be better off spending the extra money on better glass and a larger (f/2.8) f-stop (faster lens).

P-hat_in_Cincy
10-13-2005, 08:24 PM
Since our last digital camera took a dive into Norris Lake on our August houseboat trip :o , we recently replaced it with a Panasonic Lumix FZ5. Things I looked for were pictured quality, OPTICAL zoom, ease of use, burst mode capture, etc... The FZ5 was reviewed really high for it's class. 5mpx picture quality is great with 12X optical zoom lens, it's easy to use (w/o reading manual), and it'll capture images at about 2.3fps (highest quality setting...besides tiff) until the card is full. I term it a 'tweener b/c it's a little big to fit in your pocket, but not as big as the SLRs.

Don't have much experience with it yet since we just got it last Sunday, but so far so good.

One suggestion...opt for the high speed memory cards. From what they say, they contribute to reducing the file write time to the card and enable faster 'next image' capture.

One more...research, research, research and then go somewhere you can get your hands on one to fumble around with.

Farmer Ted
10-13-2005, 10:18 PM
I saw a Nikon D50 at Circuit City for around $699 or $799 so I got to looking and remembered that Minolta came out with the Maxxum 7D. Not really interested in dropping $1200 on a camera even though I have a ton of lenses from my Minolta 7000 that are compatible with it.
Much to my surprise, Minolta just released the Maxxum 5D, still compatible with the older Minolta lenses and it's only $800 now. Hopefully the price will drop a bit.

Anyone have any experience with the D50, Maxxum 7D or 5D?

maristarman
10-13-2005, 10:44 PM
Heh...image stabilized lenses are nice, but only in situations where you have to use a slow shutter speed. Bear in mind that an IS lens of reasonable quality will cost substantially more than the camera. You can get an IS lens for $500, but it's a slow lens. The only advantage of image stabilization is that it will give you 2-3 stops for low-light shooting since IS will let you hand-hold a shot with a slower shutter speed than you'd normally be capable of...but those cheap IS lenses only get you down to an f-stop of 4.5 or so, meaning you'd be better off spending the extra money on better glass and a larger (f/2.8) f-stop (faster lens).


Uhhhhhh, sure.

Obviously bigMac you are way outa my league.

All I know is that the IS lens that I have is good enough so that I can get nice clear up close shots of the kids wakeboarding and tubing.

Thats good enough for me.

bigmac
10-13-2005, 11:55 PM
Uhhhhhh, sure.

Obviously bigMac you are way outa my league.

All I know is that the IS lens that I have is good enough so that I can get nice clear up close shots of the kids wakeboarding and tubing.

Thats good enough for me.

Bottom line, image stabilization is pointless in daylight. It's fine if your shooting in low light - it eliminates camera shake at longer shutter speeds. It won't help for kids on the tube on a nice sunny summer day.

milkmania
10-14-2005, 07:47 AM
here's one feature I use the most on my S7000.......

Upper Michigan Prostar190
10-14-2005, 09:48 AM
Bigmac, you da man!! sounds like your an old school shutter bug that really learned about photography, thats cool! You sound like my dad, he knows all that technical photography stuff. YOu know your stuff onthe lenses. I cant remember the Canon lens my dad bought for his Rebel, but he researched it alot before he bought, and I do remember it cost more than the camera itself. He told me the reason he chose it, but it went over my head.
I toyed around with photo stuff when I was young, just scraping the surface. My dad was starting to teach me, but I lost interest. Its kind of complicated stuff. He wanted to get a dark room and develop our own film, etc... I hear you can do that these days relatively cheap and alot more enviromentally friendly with chemicals that arent nasty like the old days. Did you ever get into that??

UMP

east tx skier
10-14-2005, 12:01 PM
I saw a Nikon D50 at Circuit City for around $699 or $799 so I got to looking and remembered that Minolta came out with the Maxxum 7D. Not really interested in dropping $1200 on a camera even though I have a ton of lenses from my Minolta 7000 that are compatible with it.
Much to my surprise, Minolta just released the Maxxum 5D, still compatible with the older Minolta lenses and it's only $800 now. Hopefully the price will drop a bit.

Anyone have any experience with the D50, Maxxum 7D or 5D?

I just popped my Mom's Minolta 9000 lense on my Min. 700s. Gotta love that compatibility.

bigmac
10-14-2005, 12:40 PM
Bigmac, you da man!! sounds like your an old school shutter bug that really learned about photography, thats cool! You sound like my dad, he knows all that technical photography stuff. YOu know your stuff onthe lenses. I cant remember the Canon lens my dad bought for his Rebel, but he researched it alot before he bought, and I do remember it cost more than the camera itself. He told me the reason he chose it, but it went over my head.
I toyed around with photo stuff when I was young, just scraping the surface. My dad was starting to teach me, but I lost interest. Its kind of complicated stuff. He wanted to get a dark room and develop our own film, etc... I hear you can do that these days relatively cheap and alot more enviromentally friendly with chemicals that arent nasty like the old days. Did you ever get into that??

UMP

Jeez, I had a complete color darkroom for years. When digital SLRs got to the sub-$3000 point, I went digital and completely replaced the whole stupid darkroom with PhotoShop. What a revelation..! I absoultely do not miss the hassles and fumes of the darkroom.

There's a huge range of lenses available for Canon and Nikon digital cameras. The thing about lenses is that innovation in lens technology is at a much slower pace than digital cameras. A typical digital SLR has a product cycle of about 2 years. The digital SLR camera one buys today is much better than a similar camera for the same price (or more) from 2 years ago. OTOH, a high quality lens that one buys today will still be a high quality lens in 10 years. By the same token however, the price for that lens will be about the same.

IOW, digital camera bodies are basically disposeable commodities and will continue to be until sensor technology plateaus in 4-5 years. The days of your grandfather's 35mm Leica taking just as good an image as a current 35mm Nikon are gone. Every new generation of current digital SLRs is better than the previous (as is typical of digital electronics).

So, your dad was smart to buy a good lens, even though it out-performs his camera. When his digital Rebel needs to be replaced, it can be replaced by a better digital Rebel that can take better advantage of those high-quality optics. My point is that to buy a $400 image-stabilized zoom lens with a max aperture of f/4.5 probably doesn't make as much sense as spending $1000 for an IS lens with a max aperture of f/2.8. This assumes that one is going to stay in photography, but even if not, good-quality lenses hold their value on ebay far better than digital camera bodies and far better than lower-level camera lenses.

My point about image stabilization is that IS only corrects for camera shake. But if you're shooting with enough light to use a high-enough shutter speed, such as your kids tubing on a sunny day, camera shake isn't an issue. The other issue is that high frequency shake, such as trying to shoot from a boat hauling a water skiier, often exceeds the capability of the image stabilization motors and in those cases you're better turning the stabilization off. The water skiing images I shot here (http://www.pbase.com/hmac/water_stuff) and here (http://www.pbase.com/hmac/thursday_morning) were all shot with a $2000 Nikon 200mm image-stabilized zoom lens, but I turned the image-stabilization off because I was shooting at a high enough shutter speed that it was unnecessary.

east tx skier
10-14-2005, 01:15 PM
My sister had the color dark room for a while, too. We finally sold her old Beseller enlarger about 5 years ago. Photoshop takes up much less space.

east tx skier
10-19-2005, 01:18 PM
I saw a Nikon D50 at Circuit City for around $699 or $799 so I got to looking and remembered that Minolta came out with the Maxxum 7D. Not really interested in dropping $1200 on a camera even though I have a ton of lenses from my Minolta 7000 that are compatible with it.
Much to my surprise, Minolta just released the Maxxum 5D, still compatible with the older Minolta lenses and it's only $800 now. Hopefully the price will drop a bit.

Anyone have any experience with the D50, Maxxum 7D or 5D?

All my plugs for the DigiRebel and I go the other way. Still think Canon makes great cameras, but the compatibility of my lenses was a big factor for me.

Farmer, given that I have a 35 mm SLR minolta and a host of lenses, I started investigating the new K/M SLR Digitals. It was hard to find a bad review. I just bought a 5D last night. Got what appears to be a heck of a deal on a brand spankin' new one (body only). I'll end up getting an 18--70mm lens next month once I recover from the initial cost (while the lenses are interchangeable, the magnification on the part that records the image (brain fart) on the DSLRs is different. So multiply the lens specs by 1.5 to figure out what your lenses will give you. Example, the 18mm setting on the lens = 27 on a 35 mm SLR). So my 26--70 mm lens I have now is going to be 39mm at its widest on this camera. I can probably live with that for the short term.

Got my mom to call her camera guy in Houston about the 7D v. 5D. The only difference he noted was weight (7D has a metal casing and is heavier). My research reveals that the 7D also has more buffer. So you're getting 9 frames per second holding the button down as opposed to 3 fps for 10 seconds with the 5D. I decided I can live with 3 fps (30 frames per 10 second burst), which will come in handy for those ski shots.

Body ran me $604 delivered. Hope it's not some scam artist. Looks to be a legit business. I guess that's why we've got the old fraud protection on the credit cards. Should be here by next week. I'll send you the link to the website if you'd like. Also read the 9D is coming out soon. But you can miss out on fun trying to stay ahead of the technology curve. 2 years ago, when my mom got the 6.3 mp digirebel, some people were saying, "wait because they'll be at 12 mp by next year." 6.1 actual is plenty for what I'm using it for.

jpattigr
10-19-2005, 02:25 PM
Check out the Panasonic Cameras, I have the FZ5 and it features,
12 X Optical Zoom
Leica Glass lens
4 shots per sec,
Image stablization, needed on big zoom
Check out this site for great reviews on all cameras.
www.steves-digicams.com/2005_reviews/fz5.html

I owned a Canon prior to this and they also make great cameras, but I do like this Panasonic better!! :D

east tx skier
10-19-2005, 03:37 PM
Ya know, just thinking about it, I can't imagine needing more zoom than that panasonic offers. Still, I think the DSLR cameras are great choices (especially if you already have compatible lenses.

I'm pscyhed abou the image stabilization in the camera body. Minolta is really touting that feature (stabilization no matter what lense you use).

bigmac
10-19-2005, 06:29 PM
Ya know, just thinking about it, I can't imagine needing more zoom than that panasonic offers. Still, I think the DSLR cameras are great choices (especially if you already have compatible lenses.

I'm pscyhed abou the image stabilization in the camera body. Minolta is really touting that feature (stabilization no matter what lense you use).
The rule of thumb is that your shutter speed should be the same or higher than the focal length of your lens (200 mm lens = 1/200th of a second) to avoid blurring of the image due to camera shake. Above that, image stabilization won't help. So they say...

east tx skier
10-20-2005, 11:35 AM
This will be my first experience with it. I've got two telephoto lenses. One is a minolta 70-220mm. The other is a fixed 400 mm lens. With ski shots, I'm usually at around 1/500 or higher anyway. I just let the camera set the f-stop automatically (I was never very good at that).

east tx skier
10-20-2005, 04:07 PM
Well, that place was running the old bait and switch. Fortunately, I was keeping a very close eye on them. Ordered the Kit from Amazon for about $100 more (given the fact that I would save $50 over buying the lens separately and they were offering free shipping). Less to worry about.

I should've known that there was something fishy about that price.

bigmac
10-20-2005, 05:04 PM
Well, that place was running the old bait and switch. Fortunately, I was keeping a very close eye on them. Ordered the Kit from Amazon for about $100 more (given the fact that I would save $50 over buying the lens separately and they were offering free shipping). Less to worry about.

I should've known that there was something fishy about that price.

Bait and switch is a relatively common scam in the online camera sales biz. Generally, the lower the price the more likely you are to get screwed.

Far and away, the most reliable place to order camera equipment is B&H PhotoVideo (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/) . They are not the cheapest, necessarily, but they are utterly reliable with the best customer service.

If one is going to buy camera equipment online, always first check out the vendor at http://resellerratings.com , and dont' foget to scroll down and reader user's comments.

A good tutorial for online buying pitfall avoidance can be found at this web site... (http://www.ximinasphotography.com/lessons/lesson08/camera_2.html)

east tx skier
10-20-2005, 05:07 PM
Yup, resellerratings was where I got my info. I made sure to document my cancellation in writing and have notified my credit card co. I fell fine with Amazon. I've had no trouble returning things there in the past and don't anticipate having to return this camera.