| Author | Thread |
|
|
02/10/2004 07:26:11 PM · #26 |
Thanks Azrifel, a good read!
Thanks to you too Gordon, this is the part I have problems distinguishing " Final image quality - colour fringes, general sharpness of the image, resistance to flare, contrast of the resulting image" Hard to process the technical info that the lens sites describe, I feel like if it's more expensive it must be better, which is a feeling I don't like. Side by side picture comparisons are nice and very much sought after. They can be quite revealing if done right.
|
|
|
|
02/10/2004 07:36:22 PM · #27 |
Originally posted by Paige:
I feel like if it's more expensive it must be better, which is a feeling I don't like. |
Not necessarily...if you're into image quality over the convenience of a zoom lens, for instance, prime focal length lenses offer top quality optics at a very reasonable price. The 28/2.8, 35/2, 50/1.8, 85/1.8 and 100/2 meet or beat the best L series zoom lenses in their respecive focal lengths in terms of sharpness, colour, contrast and maximum aperture. I have a 28/2.8 and a 50/1.4 and the majority of my photography is done with one of these two lenses. The 28/2.8 and the 50/1.8 are by far the cheapest way to get really sharp pictures. My third lens, a 70-200 F4L, is a professional series lens and it's not any sharper than either of these two lenses. If you're willing to sacrifice some zooming ability, consider a few prime focal length lenses. |
|
|
|
02/10/2004 08:18:39 PM · #28 |
Originally posted by jimmythefish:
Originally posted by Paige:
I feel like if it's more expensive it must be better, which is a feeling I don't like. |
Not necessarily...if you're into image quality over the convenience of a zoom lens, for instance, prime focal length lenses offer top quality optics at a very reasonable price. The 28/2.8, 35/2, 50/1.8, 85/1.8 and 100/2 meet or beat the best L series zoom lenses in their respecive focal lengths in terms of sharpness, colour, contrast and maximum aperture. I have a 28/2.8 and a 50/1.4 and the majority of my photography is done with one of these two lenses. The 28/2.8 and the 50/1.8 are by far the cheapest way to get really sharp pictures. My third lens, a 70-200 F4L, is a professional series lens and it's not any sharper than either of these two lenses. If you're willing to sacrifice some zooming ability, consider a few prime focal length lenses. |
If anyone is still shooting film with older Canon cameras, the FD lenses are cheap and easy to find on Ebay. I bought THIS LENS today for $38.00.
|
|
|
|
02/10/2004 09:28:36 PM · #29 |
| What I am hearing from everyone is that the lens selection is at least as important as the camera body. It seems reasonable to assume that if one is going to make an investment in good lenses than paying about $500 more for the 10d body is very much worth the money. |
|
|
|
02/10/2004 09:34:20 PM · #30 |
With the new 8mp Powrshot Pro 1 due out in April, many may opt to buy that product, rather than take the leap up to DSLR. Something to think about. It's lens-centric in design with a CCD sensor instead of CMOS and I think it supports RAW.
|
|
|
|
02/10/2004 09:54:14 PM · #31 |
Originally posted by lnede:
I am thinking about getting one or the other. Is the EOS 10d worth the price difference? |
Check out these reviews...
The Canon EOS 10D.
The Canon EOS 300D (Digital Rebel).
Both reviews are extensive, and both provide comparisons. The 10D review compares the 10D with the D60, and the 300D review compares the 300D with several cameras, including the 10D.
I recently had to make the same decision you are going through now. I bought the 10D and I am very happy with it. Although, I probably would have been just as happy with the 300D. Now the only problem I have is that my wife wants more diamonds to make us "even".
Good luck! |
|
|
|
02/10/2004 09:57:13 PM · #32 |
Originally posted by lnede:
What I am hearing from everyone is that the lens selection is at least as important as the camera body. It seems reasonable to assume that if one is going to make an investment in good lenses than paying about $500 more for the 10d body is very much worth the money. |
Depends on where you live, I guess. In Canada, the D-Rebel is $1500 with the EF-S lens. The 10D is $2200 for just the body. It would cost about $400 to get a Tamron lens with roughly the same range and quality as the EF-S lens. That's nearly double the price. Sure, a bigger frame buffer, faster write speeds, mirror lock-up, etc... would be nice, but I don't think Ansel Adams ever complained about not having servo AI focus in aperture priority mode. |
|
|
|
02/10/2004 10:08:25 PM · #33 |
Originally posted by orussell:
With the new 8mp Powrshot Pro 1 due out in April, many may opt to buy that product, rather than take the leap up to DSLR. Something to think about. It's lens-centric in design with a CCD sensor instead of CMOS and I think it supports RAW. |
I came very close to buying the Minolta DiMAGE A1 before I got the D-Rebel. The GT lens is better than the EF-S lens, the A1 has way more features and control options, and it's a few hundred dollars less than the D-Rebel. I really don't care about how many megapixels a camera can capture -- I'm more interested in image quality than image size. It came down to two things for me: the Rebel's physically larger CMOS sensor produces less noise at higher ISOs, and more importantly, I *HATE* electronic viewfinders. I'm perfectly willing to put up with the Rebel's small, 95% coverage, pentamirror-based, optical viewfinder. |
|
|
|
02/10/2004 10:35:57 PM · #34 |
Originally posted by Dyslexic:
would be nice, but I don't think Ansel Adams ever complained about not having servo AI focus in aperture priority mode. |
Ansel Adams wasn't a sports photographer...I am ;). |
|
|
|
02/11/2004 10:10:35 PM · #35 |
Exactly. Again, it boils down to what you are going to be using your camera for the most.
Originally posted by jimmythefish:
Originally posted by Dyslexic:
would be nice, but I don't think Ansel Adams ever complained about not having servo AI focus in aperture priority mode. |
Ansel Adams wasn't a sports photographer...I am ;). |
|
|
|
|
02/11/2004 11:14:59 PM · #36 |
Originally posted by jmsetzler:
If anyone is still shooting film with older Canon cameras, the FD lenses are cheap and easy to find on Ebay. I bought THIS LENS today for $38.00. |
I hope I don't sound ignorant with this question, but can this lens be used with the Rebel and if not, why? |
|
|
|
02/11/2004 11:17:23 PM · #37 |
| Says FD mount,Rebel is EF mount..... |
|
|
|
02/11/2004 11:19:10 PM · #38 |
Originally posted by pitsaman:
Says FD mount,Rebel is EF mount..... |
After I looked at the description again I figured that had to be it... |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 08/31/2025 06:52:01 AM EDT.
