Canon EOS Digital Rebel 6.3mp ???

[Moose]

Can anyone give me some information on this camera? Looking at one for $250.00. I just trust your opinions.

Thanks, Tim

[finnbay]

It's a great entry level dslr. The "deal" depends on how many clicks it's had. stfcatfish or dbl can give you all the pros and cons, but I know many that used one and they all have liked it.

[Steve Foss]

Tim, I shot a Digital Rebel for newspaper work for 3 years. The same sensor as the pro-level 10D, the original Digital Rebel was Canon's first consumer-market DSLR.

I've made prints using that 6.3 Mp sensor to 20x30, so there's no doubt some great quality is there.

It's a good entry level camera, and I wouldn't be put off by the idea that it's now the oldest of four generations (since then has come the Rebel XT, XTi and now the new XSi).

The original DRebel was slow to wake up when you turned it on, has a basically non-functional Al servo autofocus (Al servo automatically tracks moving subjects) and was only capable of 3 frames per second max, so it had obvious drawbacks for fast action like sports.

But for most other applications it worked just beautifully.

I also worry how many shutter actuations it has. Those cameras were rated to 50,000, and there's no way to know exactly how many clicks of the shutter that body has had, unless it's had so few that the current owner has a good estimate.

Also, I use a Rebel XT for one of my backups, and I bought that brand new about a year and a half ago for $475. I bet you could find a used XT, now that two newer generations are out, for $300 or a bit more. That's got quite a few advances over the original DRebel.

In any case, DRebel or XT, you'll have a camera that will capture great quality images.

[polarsusd81]

I have one and have had very good results with it. $250 is a good price I would think, if it doesn't have too many clicks. Mine is getting up to about 40,000 and is still working fine. I am not sure what the shutter is rated to, but it has been reliable for me. I bought mine brand new quite a few years back, when they first came out, but if I were to sell it(which I don't plan to do), trying to get 250-300 seems reasonable.

Here are a couple sample images...

Shot at ISO 100, 1/2000th sec. F2.8 @ 24mm with Canon 24-70 F2.8L

This shot, will give you a general idea of the noise you can see before any post processing (probably the biggest downfall of this particular camera)

Shot at ISO 800, 1/20th sec. F2.8 @ 32mm with Canon 24-70 F2.8L

Note - I posted these images at a larger size so he can get a good idea of the image quality. These are still only 1/3 of the original size though, and I have printed up to 13x19 without much in the way of noticable degredation in the images.

[nluchau]

I just bought the same camera with a lens for $100.

Here are a couple pictures I have taken so far.

Nick

PS: The images have been resized

[nluchau]

Here is another pic I took with it. I thought it was cool.

[Steve Foss]

That was a really good deal for $100!

hsolist auctions generally fetch $225 to $300 for the DRebel body and 18-55 kit lens combined.

[nluchau]

It was a friend of mine that sold it to me, he just bought a 40D and wanted give his old Rebel a new home. He didn't really need the money.

[Dbl]

Lucky for you nluchau!

[nluchau]

It is a heck of a step up from my Sony H1 that is for sure. I did not mean to hi-jack the thread with my purchase. If it helps in your decision I will try to post more pictures taken with my Rebel.

$250 is still a good deal I think. Does it come with any lens?

Nick

[Moose]

Not a problem nluchau, It's nice to here all options. Steve when you say it's not fast enough for sports are you talking just the start up or are you also talking shutter speed. I purchased the Kodak z712is and when I try to take pictures of my Boys sports it is always a 1/2 second behind what the screne shows initially and it takes forever to process and recover for another shot. In general if I upgrade to a Dslr will they recover faster than my Kodak? Also if I purchase a long zoom point and shoot that takes RAW format pictures will the noise be eliminated at higher ISOs or am I just better off with a DSLR? Next does the XT start up faster than the EOS and lastly does the xt autofocus better? I do not have a lot of photography experience and would like to be able to use it right out of the box and learn as I go.

Thanks for all your help, Tim

[finnbay]

Moose,

I think stfcatfish was referring to a couple of points. First, the Al Servo mode tracks and refocuses moving objects automatically, so if you have an athlete moving towards you, when you push the shutter half-way down, it will keep the focus clear. The earliest dslr's had al servo, but the newer ones are much better. Second, hard as it may be to believe 3 frames per second is pretty slow, and depending on what you're shooting, you may miss the best part of the action - pitcher delivering a pitch, hockey player shooting a puck etc. My Canon Mark II's will crank out 8 frames a second - sounds like a machine gun! The shutter lag will be MUCH better with a dslr. Its measured in thousands of a second, so when you complete the shutter release, it takes the picture virtually immediately. If you're waiting for a shot, the camera (to save battery life) will go into sleep mode, and with the first generation dslr's it won't wake up very fast. I started with Canon 10D's and that was one of the most frustrating parts for me because I'd miss some shots waiting for the camera to wake up. Hope this helps!

[Dbl]

I can address the sports issue with the XT. By fast enough there are a couple of considerations.

First the ISO on XT only goes to 1600. I don't recall the last time in the last three months I came off of 3200 ISO with a 2.8 lens. Indoor sports shooting requires a fast autofocus system, good ISO capability and fast lenses, this equals $$$. Outdoors is a whole different story, you can get by with much less because your lighting is so much better.

The second fast issue is that the auto focus system on the XT is not that sophisticated so it can struggle with fast moving objects in low light conditions.

The last fast issue is the relatively low frames per second capability at only 3 fps. Something in the neighborhood of 5 fps or more is nice to have shooting sports.

Shutter lag with most DSLR's is really not a big issue, you won't get the lag you get with even a sophisticated point and shoot. You mentioned how slow you Kodak writes to the buffer. DSLR's will write at a much faster speed than point and shoots. This is dependent on what file types and how large the file is and the speed of the memory card but in most DSLR's it won't be a large issue.

Noise at high ISO is effected by many things, sensor size, and exposure accuracy being two large factors. Noise will never be eliminated even on a DSLR but normally the senors are much better at giving you clean files at high ISO.

If sports are going to be your primary focus or even a large part of it you may find yourself after a few months wishing you had stepped up to the next level of camera. Entry level and inexpensive with indoor sports shooting doesn't really go hand in hand. If sports will be a small part of your use than the XT will work out I would think nicely for you, especially at the $250 price range.

[Dbl]

I see Ken posted at the same time as I did he has some excellent advice, sorry if I repeated some of his information.

[finnbay]

Geez Dan, you do that well!

[Steve Foss]

Moose, you've heard from the two people on this board who make most of their photographic livings from shooting sports, while it only was a part of my living for a few years.

So I won't repeat their perspectives (much). And no offense to Dan and Ken, who are excellent photographers. However, my outlook differs slightly, based partly on my own experience and partly on what I advise clients.

If you really want sharp shots of action sports, as opposed to someone shooting a freethrow, you won't be happy with the original DRebel. Its Al servo is poor for that as already mentioned.

I have shot the DRebel XT for indoor fast-action sports but as Dan said it is not optimal because of its limitations of iso1600. However, I have shot a LOT of indoor sports at iso1600 using a flash with very nice results. I was shooting for a different type of client than Dan and Ken, however, so that's a consideration. They rarely if ever use flash on indoor sports, for reasons partly due to their style and partly to the demands of their clients.

I think you need to weigh what you really want vs the cost. You're hearing talk from sports photography pros who may require a different level of sophistication of equipment than what you're after.

That's not meant to be condescending in any way, just the likelihood of the matter.

The original DRebel, if you add a flash, will shoot indoor sports at iso800 or 1600 very nicely if you don't plan to shoot players coming straight toward you. Sideways shots and shots where players set up to shoot baskets, or scoop volleyballs, or are poised to leave a diving board will be fine. Some of the best images I've seen of sports and athletes have little to do with them careening here and there and more to do with them pausing before switching direction, or static portraits as well. I used the original DRebel in this way for about 3 years with fine results.

And the original DRebel will do great work at all other shots that are less demanding as far as subjects moving quickly toward the camera.

At outdoor sports, which offer generally a lot more available light, you won't need flash, though the limitations of of the original DRebel autofocus still apply. I have shot birds flying straight toward me outdoors with the DRebel XT on Al servo and gotten excellent sharp shots, though that works much better in good light, because autofocus craves contrast to lock on and track.

I know this is a lot to take in. The worst thing that could happen here is that you get depressed about your potential purchase and decide not to take the next step. We buy what we can afford and work hard to make the best of our equipment. I say that to clients a lot. It's a beautiful world you are about to enter, so enter it with anticipation and have fun.

Hope this helps, and keep asking questions as often as needed!

[polarsusd81]

A lot of really great advise on the entry level DSLR's from the Canon lineup from these guys. I think I personally have outgrown my D Rebel, but the new camera that I want is well out of my price range right now, so I make the best of what I have. That is really what it is all about, working with what you can afford. I have learned a lot using my D Rebel, and wouldn't trade the knowledge gained from that experience for anything. When I step up into the next range of camera, I know that I will be able to take full advantage of the features I am missing right now. Using the camera within its limitations will, in my opinion, make you a better photographer because you will have to experiment a little to get the shot the way you want it. You will miss some shots in the begining, but when you have learned what it takes to nail it and you do, it will put a huge smile on your face.

My two biggest complaints with my camera are noise performance at high ISO and the lack of AI Servo focus tracking. But like stfcatfish said, learn to time your shots right and use the right angles, and you can sidestep around that.

[finnbay]

No offense taken, Steve. When you were shooting sports for the paper, you were taking equipment that was not intended for sports photography at all, under marginal lighting at best, and doing a very nice job with it. Sheesh, you could have probably used a pinhole camera with a flashlight and made it work. So your points are well taken. Bottom line, what is the equipment going to primarily used for? If it's sports, I'd get something better. If sports is just part of a bigger mix, then it can be made to work.

[Steve Foss]

 Originally Posted By: finnbay

Bottom line, what is the equipment going to primarily used for? If it's sports, I'd get something better. If sports is just part of a bigger mix, then it can be made to work.

Yep, I agree with that completely.

And thanks for the kudos, Ken. I actually had a lot of fun pushing that marginal gear to its limits. Well, since I'm still shooting primarily mid-range Canon bodies, I guess I continue to try to push that envolope. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't.

Tom, I feel the same affection for the DRebel at the paper as you feel for your own. It's what I used to make the switch to digital, and even after I bought my own 20D and 30D and XT, I kept using the DRebel for a lot of newspaper stuff.

[Moose]

WOW,

What a great amount of information and very informative at that. The camera will be used for all types of family, sports, outdoors basicly a general use camera. The deal I had lined up fell through but I am going to continue to look for an entry level DSLR. Even the higher end point and shoots are not performing well enough to do what I want to do. I will probably look for an XT but If I find a nice deal on a Rebel that will work also. I might research a Nikon or Olympus also just to see what is out there. I also like Panasonic as a manufacturer.

If I hadn't mentioned it before Thank you all for the help Tim