Canon Digital Rebel (Not XT!)

[WillCAD]

I just bought a Digital Rebel, after 2 years of drooling over them and hoping the prices would come down.

I'm not a newcomer to photography, or to digital, or even to Canon, for that matter, but since I'm just starting out with this camera, I figured a thread discussing its relative merits, along with any tips and tricks that Digital Rebel owners might have, might be a good idea.

So let's have it, the good, the bad, the ugly, and the pretty - what do you know about my new camera?

 

[RangerPooh]

My husband bought me the EOS Digital Rebel back in the summer of 2003 as a belated wedding present. I still don't know how all the functions work but I love it!!! My husband doesn't care for it too much as it's much simpler than his (he's got the EOS1, EOS10D, and EOS20D). My friend has the film version and she too loves it. The only downside to this model is that since it's so much lighter than the rest of the EOS line it flexes when you put a heavier lense on it. If you are really into cameras than it's masterable in days. I've had it for over 2 years now and have been very satisfied with it.

My favorite lense is the 24-85mm but I'm pretty happy with the kit lense too. A nice feature of it is being able to shoot in RAW and then edit in photoshop (as well as Elements). I have taken this camera on trips everywhere (WDW, Hawaii, Camping, snow, etc) and it has yet to fail me.

Have fun playing with your new camera. Did you get the silver body or black body? I've been after hubby to buy me the black body after we read that it was coming out last year.

 

[SStJean]

I've also had mine for about 2yrs now. I've made 3 trips to WDW, numerous trips to Atlanta and all over New England with it. The camera has taken some really great pictures and the ones that weren't so good were my fault alone.

The one thing that I found missing from this camera was auto-exposure bracketing. This is a feature found on the higher level models in which you can set it to automatically adjust the exposure +/- x-many stops in 1/3rd stop increments (from 1/3rd to 3 stops above and below). Luckily, the Rebel has the same capabilities as some of the higher-end bodies, Canon just disabled the features. There is a "firmware upgrade" (read "firmware hack") that makes it work like the Canon 10D. It may void the warranty, but it does give you the auto-exposure bracketing and some programmable modes. If your camera is out of warranty and you are not "risk-averse", it's a great way to get these features without upgrading your camera body.

CAVEAT: Before you run the "hack", please read and understand the directions. There is a possibility that if the firmware update is interrupted before it completes (like by a low battery), your camera may be unusable until fixed by Canon ($$$).

I can send you the URL if you'd like, just PM me.

 

[WillCAD]

Have fun playing with your new camera. Did you get the silver body or black body? I've been after hubby to buy me the black body after we read that it was coming out last year.

I got the black body. I think it looks much more professional and less "touristy" than the silver. It wasn't easy to find, though - Canon has discontinued the Digital Rebel (also known as the 300D) in favor of the new Digital Rebel XT (350D). I like the original better; the XT is lighter and smaller, and feels cheaper and more fragile to me.

I bought my black DigiReb from an eBay merchant for $599. It's a refurb kit, but comes with a 90-day Canon warranty, and I spent an extra $44 for a 3-year Mack Camera warranty, so I'm completely confident that this camera will be with me for a long time to come.

I am currently using a Sigma 28-200 lens that I originally bought for my 35mm Rebel G, but because of the 1.6 multiplier, it gives me an equivilent focal length of 45-320. After I pay off the new camera by selling off my old digital and 35mm cams, I intend to buy one of the new Sigma 18-125 digital lenses, which give a digital camera the same effective focal length as a 28-200. Of course, that lens is about $300, so it may be a while before I can go get it!

 

[Kelly Grannell]

1. I got the black body. I think it looks much more professional and less "touristy" than the silver.
2. I like the original better; the XT is lighter and smaller, and feels cheaper and more fragile to me.
3. I intend to buy one of the new Sigma 18-125 digital lenses, which give a digital camera the same effective focal length as a 28-200.

1. Totally agreed. The silver screams "I'm digital, steal me"
2. XT is too small for me although I'm still drooling about its instant on feature. With the Rebel, I have the option to not use the battery grip if I want to walk around with a 50mm f/1.8 lens, I can't do that with XT due to its small sized (I'll be forced to use the battery grip at all times)
3. Get the 18-200 instead (for about $50 more). From 125-200 is not that great, but if you really have to use it, you'll have the option without lugging bagloads of lenses on your shoulder. Right now I'm stuck with 18-125mm (good enough even for wedding and product photography) and have to carry an additional 70-200mm lens wherever I go. Very annoying for travelling purposes. Just make sure you buy the 18-200 from a place with liberal exchange policy because at the 125-200 range, certain copies of the lens have terrible chromatic abberation (what can we expect? $350 for a 18-200 lens. My 70-200 lens cost around $2k and it's still not the perfect lens, although my 50mm f/1.8 lens costing only $70 is super sharp with fabulous colour rendition)

Cheers,
Kelly

 

[brack]

I have had my Rebel for about 18 months (two cruises and four WDW trips) and still have my Canon EOS1 but rarely use it anymore. The Rebel is a very good camera. I use the battery grip all the time for the weight and have the 28 - 135mm lens with stablization. I would love to have some of the advanced features of the other Canons and have looked at the "hack" but will probably not use it. (call me chicken).

 

[WillCAD]

3. Get the 18-200 instead (for about $50 more). From 125-200 is not that great, but if you really have to use it, you'll have the option without lugging bagloads of lenses on your shoulder. Right now I'm stuck with 18-125mm (good enough even for wedding and product photography) and have to carry an additional 70-200mm lens wherever I go. Very annoying for travelling purposes. Just make sure you buy the 18-200 from a place with liberal exchange policy because at the 125-200 range, certain copies of the lens have terrible chromatic abberation (what can we expect? $350 for a 18-200 lens. My 70-200 lens cost around $2k and it's still not the perfect lens, although my 50mm f/1.8 lens costing only $70 is super sharp with fabulous colour rendition)

Kelly, how do you find the barrel distortion or pincushion effect in an 18-200 lens? I have found only slight barrel distortion in my 28-200, but as the range of zoom gets wider and wider, lenses tend to have more and more barrel distortion when shooting at the wide angles, which is a concern to me because a lot of my pics are of buildings or indoors where there are a lot of straight lines in the shot.

 

[Kelly Grannell]

Kelly, how do you find the barrel distortion or pincushion effect in an 18-200 lens? I have found only slight barrel distortion in my 28-200, but as the range of zoom gets wider and wider, lenses tend to have more and more barrel distortion when shooting at the wide angles, which is a concern to me because a lot of my pics are of buildings or indoors where there are a lot of straight lines in the shot.

Barrel distortion at wide angle can not be eliminated. Anything wider than 35mm WILL have a slight barrel distortion and getting worse as it gets wider. It's just optics, nothing can help that. Now our camera uses 1.6x crop factor, so in order to get an equivalent to 28mm, you'll need a 18mm lens. That's somewhat near fish-eye so yes, you can't do anything (in terms of getting a better lens) to get rid of the barrel distortion.

Photoshop CS2 and some other freewares such as PT Lens ( http://epaperpress.com/ptlens/ ) can remove pincushion and barrel effect quite effectively.

Hope it helps.

 

[WillCAD]

Actually Kelly, the way it was explained to me was that barrel distortion is not ONLY caused by how wide the wide angle is on a lens, but ALSO by how far the wide is from the tele.

In other words, barrel distortion is worse on a 28-200 lens than it is on a 28-80, and worse on a 28-80 than on a fixed 28mm.

You're right that barrel distortion can never be completely eliminated, but lens manufacturers have been doing things with the various lens elements over the last few years to minimize it. There was a time when a 28-200 lens was considered impossible because of barrel distortion, but today there are several on the market that have very minimal barrel distortion and take excellent pictures at 28mm.

 

[Kelly Grannell]

WillCAD,

that is true too. However, the barrell distortion on the 18-200 is not any worse than on 18-125. The part that is worse is that between 125-200, the aperture is f/6.3 Somewhat unuseable for indoors but perfectly fine for outdoors.

 

[Razor Roman]

I've had my Digital Rebel since December 03, and taken 6,500 shots with it so far!

I was mainly using the kit lens for now, but I have also bought the 85-300mm Canon Zoom lens (the $300 one) I know it's not the "best" but when you can get a full frame shot of Mickey performing in Fantasmic! from the center row and have it look great, that's good enough for me!

 

[Kelly Grannell]

I've had my Digital Rebel since December 03, and taken 6,500 shots with it so far!

I was mainly using the kit lens for now, but I have also bought the 85-300mm Canon Zoom lens (the $300 one) I know it's not the "best" but when you can get a full frame shot of Mickey performing in Fantasmic! from the center row and have it look great, that's good enough for me!

I wish I've bought the 85-300 or something that's rather small but have the reach of 300mm. My zoom (and only reaches 200mm) is ginormous and comes with the annoying white colour screaming "steal me".

I'm curious, at 300mm, what is the maximum aperture for it? f/5.6? f/6.3?

Cheers
Kelly

 

[brack]

Razor Roman: I looked at your photo gallery. Good stuff! I thought that I was the only adult male to have a picture taken with Stitch's one eyed alien friend.

 

[gruZ]

We've had a 300 since August of 2004, and have taken about 6500 pictures with it. In fact, last week in WDW we took over 1300 pic's in 8 days! The pictures are fantastic! We just bought a new Tamron 18-200 compact zoom, and while we are still trying to figure out the best way to use it (it's a bit soft at the longer FL), the compact size and 320mm equivalent is very useful for an all-purpose, travel lens. If you have any questions, feel free to PM me.

 

[ndelaware]

I wish I've bought the 85-300 or something that's rather small but have the reach of 300mm. My zoom (and only reaches 200mm) is ginormous and comes with the annoying white colour screaming "steal me".

I'm curious, at 300mm, what is the maximum aperture for it? f/5.6? f/6.3?

Cheers
Kelly

Are you actually complaining about have one of Canon's "L" series lense? I'll trade you a black 75-300 if you want. LOL!

 

[Kelly Grannell]

I'm only complaining because it's not practical for travels. I love my L very much (especially the f/2.8 and IS feature) but there is no way (unless I travel for a sole purpose of picture hunting) I'll be carrying that lens all over the place. It's too eye-catching.

I just wish I have the budget to buy a 28-300 lens beyond using my 18-125 lens.

 

[ndelaware]

I was only having a little fun with you. I personally hate that white/gray color, I like my lenses to be black. It's more of a personal thing with me.

 

[Kelly Grannell]

I understand the original purpose of using white coloured lens body, but now when the lens material will not warp under high temperature, there is no more use for white lens body other than to show off. I wish Canon would stop doing that.

 

[Razor Roman]

Kelly, at 300mm i believe it's f/5.6

 

[Kelly Grannell]

Wow, it's not too bad. It has IS feature too?