Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Canon EOS dSLR

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Sep 17, 2003, 9:42 PM   #1
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 106
Default Canon digital Rebel

Hi:
I'm very interested in buying the Canon digital Rebal but i have a few questions i need answered. I understand it doesnt come with a lense except when packaged with the EF-S 18-55mm zoom lens.
I have two digital cameras and the optical feature 6x (fugi s602) is a great feature for zooming up close at sporting events like my sons hockey games ect..... I'm asking does this camera with that lense packaged with it, give me the opportunity to do the same zooming effect as i had with my optical zoom on my fugi?? The write up also says this camera has alot of modes to shoot in, does anyone out there know if i'll be able to shoot in a sports mode to capture hockey or baseball action to freeze the action? My oly 100rs although its a 1.2 megapixel does a great job at that but the downside is that you can really only print a 4x6 or you'll see the pixel difference. Any help is very much apprciated. jcarboski
jcarboski is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Sep 17, 2003, 9:58 PM   #2
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

The EF-S 18-55mm is really a 3x zoom lens (ie 28-90mm). However you can get away with any other lenses that you want on this camera. The Sigma 50-500mm is a 10x zoom for example (ie 80-800mm effectively)

The 300D is pretty fast and responsive if that's what you mean, but @ 2fps it's not anything like the 100RS. You can freeze any action by upping the shutter speed, but then it'll be too dark. Flashes can freeze the actions too but then which flash are you planning on using for shooting @ that frame rate (beside a portable HV supply)?
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 17, 2003, 10:40 PM   #3
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 106
Default jcarboski again

NHL:
Thanks for you info your always a solid information source here Do you think the new FUGI FINEPIX S-5000 3.1 MEGAPIXEL 10X OPTICAL/2.2X DIGITAL ZOOM DIGITAL CAMERA IS A BETTER CHOICE SEEING WHERE IT HAS THE 10X OPTICAL? That also has the first/last 5 speed option on there like the s602 i have. It also freezes the action pretty good? It is a 3.1 million effective on a 6 plus megapixel camera like the Canon rebel digital. Whats your personal take on the camera of my sports needs keeping in mind i'd love the 10x it makes a big difference. Let me know. As for the chance to exchange lenses on the canon models on the rebel, for getting about the sport of hockey for a second, would that camera with the 10x equivalent be really good in a baseball/lacrosse outside pictures type thing? Thanks NHL. jcarboski
jcarboski is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 17, 2003, 11:13 PM   #4
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

What you're asking is quite difficult to quantify since you're mixing several terms:

1. 10x zoom means the ratio from from tele to wide. ie the S5000 is effectively a 37-370mm. The Sigma lens I refer too is also a 10x zoom ie 50-500mm, but on a 300D it becomes an effective 80-800mm with the 1.6x factor! A normal field of view is 50mm. What this means is the S5000 has a maximum magnification of 370/50=7.4; However a 300D with a 50-500 will be 500x1.6/50=16! more than twice the magnification of the S5000. In practical term, the S5000 with its non-removeable lens will bring a subject 7.4 times closer with its 10x zoom, but a Digital Rebel with the above 10x lens will bring the subject in 16 times closer!

2. The 300D is a true 6.3Mp camera. The S5000 has a true 3.1Mp, but through the diagonal geometry of the pixels the manufacturer can interpolate to something double that... it's effective to certain degree for sure, but that's why they can hold the price down.

3. The two cameras are effectively designed for two different markets and I'm sure the S5000 is much more compact and easy to use than a Digital Rebel with a 50-500mm lens, at least the S5000 give you some wide-angle, and a lot lighter too; However there's no way that this camera can approach the speediness of a dSLR like the 300D (ie almost no shutter delay)

4. It's an apple/orange comparison: the S5000 is $500 out of the door... The Digital Rebel with a 50-500m is more like $1500 (and you'll still need that EF-S 18-55mm for the wide-angle part which you need to change to plus the occasional dust cleaning sessions!)

You should buy what you're confortable with and fitting your need...
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 18, 2003, 3:29 AM   #5
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 9
Default

I would advice against buying a Fuji s5000.

I am completely new to photography and therefor purchased a Fuji s5000 as my first DC, mainly because of the 10x Zoom and its +3 MP (interpolated to 6MP). My main reason for buying a DC was to take photographs of my son of 8 months.

Now, after 5 days, I am returning the Fuji, exchanging it for either a Canon A70, the soon to come A80, or a G3 (being somewhat influenced by the rechargable AA pack I already bought).

My reason for doing so is :

It is almost impossible for me to produce a crisp, clear image of whatever I choose to photograph. Using its standard settings (AUTO, as I am not yet familiar with settings concernng Aperture, shutter speed, etc.) I could not produce a single sharp image without using the flash (which is of excellent quality I must add).
Every photo shows signs of blurs when my son was moving, even when using my tripod. The pictures that were sharp were all taken with flash, but as I am a beginner, I wanted a DC that even produces clear pictures when being used in AUTO-mode.

I hope this long story will make your chosing of a good DC somewhat easier.
Melvin V is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 18, 2003, 6:36 AM   #6
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

If you're taking picture indoor on Auto @ a slower shutter speed, most of the time thing will be blurry without flash regardless of any camera.

I don't see how a different brand can do any better job though... under the same condition. It's usually 90% photographer who is @ faults, the fact being your S5000 produced excellent result with the flash on indicated either subject movement or camera shake @ slow shutter speed!
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 18, 2003, 10:22 AM   #7
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 9
Default

What I forgot to mention was that the camera produced no sharp images, even as the taking of the picture was succesfull. I am well aware that the camera probably had way to much functions for me to apprehend as a beginner, that's why I used the auto settings. But I think a camera has to have AUTO-functions that suffice under normal conditions.

The pictures that my father took at the same time as me, with his Minolta Dimage 2300 are far superior in quality (being only a 2 MP camera). These do not show blurry side-effects, which my Fuji 5000 pics did. He knows even less about photography than I do, and therefor also uses standard settings.

Your comment makes me well aware of the fact that someone with a lot more knowledge than me, could come up with pristine pictures and I therefor must conclude that my advice against buying a Fuji 5000 may be a bit off. I stand corrected.

What I must say is that I, with my inferior knowledge of photography, could not come up with a clear, sharp image with a quality that one might expect from a 3 MP, or even the advertized 6 MP, camera.
Melvin V is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 18, 2003, 11:07 AM   #8
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 5,803
Default

Melvin V

It comes down to a question of settings used on the camera (either set by you, or chosen by the "AUTO" mode.) Your camera stores the settings the pictures was taken at into the picture (called "EXIF" data.) The camera should have come with a program which can read and display that data. Could you look up this info from one of the blury pictures:
shutter speed, focal length, aperture

And a brief comment about what the picture was of (running/moving child, child sitting in high chair, cat sitting in chair...) We need to know if the subject was in motion and generally how much.

This should give us enough info to know if the problem is with the settings of the camera or the user. It is easy to take a blury picture. It can be done with any camera (1MP to 14MP, $300 to $8,000.) It's all a question of the setting used, and the technique of the photographer.

Taking pictures indoors is not as easy as you might think. Your eyes are much more sensitive to light than your camera is. Just because it is easy for you to see, it can be hard for the camera. This causes the camera to use a longer shutter speed and therefor take blury pictures (captures the motion instead of stopping it.) Did your father use a flash? If so, that would easily explain why his pictures came out sharp.

Eric
eric s is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 19, 2003, 2:38 AM   #9
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 9
Default

Eric, thank you for the mini-lesson, this will greatly help increasing my photography skills. I will try to find a blurry picture, which might be difficult for I deleted these most of the time, keeping only the sharp ones (which were all taken with the use of the flash).

Now I know why the camera used a lower shutter speed, as my living room, in which the pics were taken, is not very well lit (it is about 15 metres long with some windows on either side of that, covered by what we call "lamellen", vertical beams of plastic, roughly 10 centimetres wide, which can block almost any incoming light when closed (obviously I do not know the English word for them ). These are always halfway closed to prevent people from looking into our house all the time.

One might conclude that the blurry pics were indeed a result of my lack of knowledge in this field, but the pictures are somewhat disappointing in quality in general. I would love to post some, but do not have any place to upload them onto the web, is someone is interested, feel free to send me an e-mail. I would really lik eto know how you guys feel about the quality etc, seeing that you know way more about these sort of things than I do. Perhaps I am just being to demanding, judging to harshly, only to be disappointed by any next camera in this price-region.

My address is : [email protected]
Melvin V is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 19, 2003, 11:12 AM   #10
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 5,803
Default

How much light a camera needs was a very hard lesson for me to learn. I do mostly outdoor photography, but within about an hour of sunset. The lighting and shadows are very interesting then... but it's also very dark (for a camera.) With a max fstop of 4.5, I had to play a lot of tricks to get a decent shutter speed (and even then, I have to depend on image stabilization and learn to be very steady.) And after all that, I'm still not thrilled with the sharpness I've been getting.

I don't blame you for deleting them. I do much the same thing. Except when it would have been a really, really good picture. Then I add them to my "ones that got away" file because they remind me of that amazing thing I saw when I took the picture.

I beleive your shades are called "Venetian Blinds" over here. I have them in several rooms myself:
http://www.u-ta.com/images/blind1.jpg

Those are very good at producing a room with enough like for people, but not enough for a good camera shot (without a flash or extra light source.)

Sure, I'll take a look at some pics. I'll send you some email. If you want, I can even post them to this thread so others can comment.

Now, it should be stated up front that I know next to nothing about that fuji. But if it's like other digital cameras, you should expect to do some post processing in an image editor. There are many reasons for this, which I could go into if you care, but it's a fact of life. Basically any camera (on its default settings) no matter the cost, will make pictures that require some editing.

This is true of film cameras too, BTW. The 1-hour developers would edit/enhance your pictures for you, without you knowing it. Most of the time, the results are great so you don't mind. If you were a professional, you'd pick a place which does as little changes as possible (or does them to a quality level which is acceptable to you.) This includes changing contrast, sharpening, brightning the picture, altering the colors and many other things. This picture of mine had a muddy background initially. But after some editing it's much better:
http://www.marx7.org/~esmith/images/...ght_sunset.jpg

A lot closer to the sunset colors that were actually there. I'm not a fan of post processing (editing) my pictures... it isn't a lot of fun. But it's required to get the most out of your pictures.

Eric
eric s is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 4:30 AM.