[majid]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Konig /img/forum/go_quote.gif However, what piqued my curiosity are hasselblad cameras. Do they have some kind of capability to see through dressing rooms and womans garments to justify their selling price?

Not sure if you are talking about the new H line or the classic V series. Hasselblad is the Rolls-Royce of medium format cameras, and they deliver amazing image quality. They are actually very affordable used, since many wedding photographers are unloading them to go digital. I paid $1200 for my mint 1984 vintage 500C/M with a film back and a Zeiss Planar 80mm f/2.8 lens. That lens is the most basic one in the lineup and not well regarded, but I inspected slides with a 50x microscope and they have as much resolution as those shot with my old Leica 50mm Summicron. The larger medium format negative means much better detail and smoother tonality than 35mm or digital, and they are built like tanks.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jmmtn4aj /img/forum/go_quote.gif If the 400D is anything like the 300D, it uses a system of mirrors to reflect the image going through the lens up into the viewfinder. Purportedly this is a less efficient method of delivering an image as compared to using a glass prism. More light is lost through the mirror method, and as a result the image that appears in the viewfinder is darker than what is actually on the sensor.

The trade-off is price and weight, of course. The Rebels are very lightweight cameras, which is a plus as most DSLRs are significantly heavier than film SLRs and if you wear yours on your neck, you can definitely feel the weight at the end of the day.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jjcha /img/forum/go_quote.gif One of the pains of the 1.6x focal crop cameras is just trying to get a good normal prime.

I used a 35mm f/1.4L as my normal prime on my Rebel XT. Yes, the lens is more expensive than the camera, but the results are well worth it. Also, the lens depreciates far less quickly than the body...

 

[jjcha]

Quote:

Originally Posted by majid /img/forum/go_quote.gif I used a 35mm f/1.4L as my normal prime on my Rebel XT. Yes, the lens is more expensive than the camera, but the results are well worth it. Also, the lens depreciates far less quickly than the body...

Yeah, I've looked long and hard at that lens. So far I haven't bit, mainly because of size and that I do prefer the slightly wider 28mm. But it is tempting as it is undoubtedly a fantastic lens if it works for you.

Best regards,

-Jason

 

[Bob_McBob]

Is your 70-300 the current IS version, or do you mean one of the cheap 75-300s? If it is the 70-300IS, you probably have enough of an investment in Canon that it would be silly to buy a different manufacturer's camera.

In the absence of an existing lens investment or particularly compelling reason to choose the Canon system, I would probably look at something like the Pentax K10D. I rarely recommend the Rebels to people looking for a first/cheap DSLR, because I don't feel they offer much in the way of features compared to similarly-priced cameras from other manufacturers. Canon better have something nice up their sleeve this March, because incremental improvements are getting pretty lame.

 

[vo328]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bob_McBob /img/forum/go_quote.gif I rarely recommend the Rebels to people looking for a first/cheap DSLR, because I don't feel they offer much in the way of features compared to similarly-priced cameras from other manufacturers. Canon better have something nice up their sleeve this March, because incremental improvements are getting pretty lame.

Bob, I'm curious in knowing what features are lacking in the D400 vs other similarly priced cameras, in your opinion?

Also, is a replacement model expected in March for the D400?

 

[Bob_McBob]

Quote:

Originally Posted by vo328 /img/forum/go_quote.gif Bob, I'm curious in knowing what features are lacking in the D400 vs other similarly priced cameras, in your opinion? Also, is a replacement model expected in March for the D400?

In-body anti-shake, dust and environmental seals, large and bright pentaprism viewfinder (Pentax DSLRs have superb viewfinders), spot metering, top status LCD, unlimited 3fps JPEG shooting, focus system stuff (K10D has NINE cross sensors!), small features like wider auto-bracketing, auto-ISO, etc.

The competition like the D80, A100, or K10D are usually compared with the 30D rather than the 400D. The main thing Canon has going for it with its camera bodies is lower noise levels at high ISOs, but other manufacturers are getting better in this respect. I would classify this as one of my compelling reasons for choosing Canon a year ago.

Considering the 400D was released a few months ago, I doubt it will be updated in March. I'm sure we will see an incremental 30D updated the same way the 400D was, probably with a better sensor, DIGIC III, better AF system, etc.

 

[archosman]

Quote:

Originally Posted by dj_mocok /img/forum/go_quote.gif 5D is too expensive. 400XT is too small (if you have large hands). If I were to go Canon I'd probably get 30D. But heard that they might have new camera coming soon? 40D or something?

If you have the battery grip it's just about full sized...

 

[MD1032]

Yeah, bottom line, what will convince you either way in the end will be how the camera looks and feels to you. Canon Digital Rebels, to me, feel cheap in comparison to the competition. The hand grips are tiny, cramped, and slippery, and the plastic on the exterior doesn't seem as robust-looking and feeling as Nikons, although I'm sure it offers the same protection. The interface on both is about the same, albeit Canon's looks "neater", though having the exact same functionality and ease of use.

As for Compact Flash versus SD memory, Compact Flash has a significant advantage over SD in that it's WAY, WAY cheaper. Getting an affordable high-speed 1 gig card for my D50 was a complete pain (and believe me, if you get the standard SD cards with a DSLR, you'll notice the difference even more than in a P&S), an equivalent CF card would be half the price. Then again, Nikon took that sacrifice when designing the D50 in order to make it smaller and distinguish it more from the D70.

I mean, really, to reiterate, you can't go wrong with any DSLR you buy, Canon, Nikon, or Pentax. They all have their advantages and disadvantages, and the best thing you can do for yourself is to go to a nearby Ritz Camera (not associated with them, BTW) or camera shop where they're knowledgeable, will let you pick up, feel, use, and explain all the different DSLR's, and unlike Best Buy, there will be lenses attached and there won't be any 500 lb. security devices attached.

 

[Mrvile]

Quote:

Originally Posted by archosman /img/forum/go_quote.gif If you have the battery grip it's just about full sized...

Not really...I use the battery grip with mine and I still find the grip too thin. The battery grip doesn't change the thickness of the actual grip itself.

 

[Samgotit]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mrvile /img/forum/go_quote.gif Not really...I use the battery grip with mine and I still find the grip too thin. The battery grip doesn't change the thickness of the actual grip itself.

This is completely dependent on the person's hand and what he desires in the feel of a camera. Again, a good reason to try them personally.

With the grip it fits me perfectly.

 

[dj_mocok]

Quote:

Originally Posted by MD1032 /img/forum/go_quote.gif Getting an affordable high-speed 1 gig card for my D50 was a complete pain (and believe me, if you get the standard SD cards with a DSLR, you'll notice the difference even more than in a P&S), an equivalent CF card would be half the price.

I'm not sure about Canon 400D, but I am using my lowly regular speed Transcend SD card in my D80 and there's no speed difference at all, because the camera has 9-shot buffer for large, highest quality jpeg, so regardless of the speed, you won't find any difference. I think for RAW, it has 6 shot buffer or something (don't shoot RAW, can't remember precisely).

So basically, say you take 5-6 consecutive shots, and while you're pausing and not shooting (checking the results on LCD, recompose, refocus, etc...), the camera then will write the images in the buffer into your memory card.
And by the time you're ready to take pictures again, the buffer is back to 9 again, so no difference if you use a normal speed or 150X SD.

But probably the only time you'll see the difference is when you transfer the files to PC or you shoot long burst of RAWs, but really, if you're into that kind of RAW bursts, you'll be looking at something like D2Hs or D2X anyway.

So far I haven't experienced not being able to take picture because I need to wait for the camera to be ready, and I shoot lots of consecutive portraits.
But I'm still gonna get the 150X Transcend, it's so affordable and fast, who can resist it.

 

[vo328]

I just have to start figuring out how the frick to use the thing now that I have it. I read the manual a few times, and now need to beef up on my understanding of general photographic technique. Any good sites you guys can recommend? Hmmm... maybe that warrants its own thread.

Bob, thanks for the response. Being such an entry-level photographer, I guess I didn't really notice those differences. I really liked the Canon for its feel and light weight. I hope I don't get a case of upgraditis in a year or so. Given my time here on Head-fi, camera upgraditis is probably lurking right around the corner... or at least, the need to accessorize. I'm going to fight that though and try to increase my basic skills first. Let's see how that goes.

 

[vo328]

Oh, and speaking of CF cards, I ordered a 4GB Sandisk Extreme III CF card, simply for the speed of transfer pack to my PC. Hopefully, it will be worth it.

 

[Mrvile]

Quote:

Originally Posted by vo328 /img/forum/go_quote.gif I really liked the Canon for its feel and light weight. I hope I don't get a case of upgraditis in a year or so. Given my time here on Head-fi, camera upgraditis is probably lurking right around the corner... or at least, the need to accessorize. I'm going to fight that though and try to increase my basic skills first. Let's see how that goes.

Actually it's called L-fever. Buy one L-lens and before you know it, you suddenly have three or four and a very deep hole in your wallet

But as you learn more about photography and what is involved, you're going to find yourself thinking more about what lens to buy next instead of how your camera body could be better. In the long run, the body just doesn't matter quite as much. I know a lot of people who shoot with 10+ year old 10D's and 1D's with an arsenal of top-of-the-line lenses.

 

[dj_mocok]

But also don't forget to take pictures with them once in awhile.

 

[Bob_McBob]

Quote:

Originally Posted by dj_mocok /img/forum/go_quote.gif I'm not sure about Canon 400D, but I am using my lowly regular speed Transcend SD card in my D80 and there's no speed difference at all, because the camera has 9-shot buffer for large, highest quality jpeg, so regardless of the speed, you won't find any difference. I think for RAW, it has 6 shot buffer or something (don't shoot RAW, can't remember precisely).

It's true that the D80's raw buffer is 6 frames, but if you bought a better SD card, you would be able to get way more than 9 JPEG frames in a burst. Even with a crappy SD card you should probably be able to get around 23 frames (the counter reads 9). According to dpreview, with a fast card it takes 110 frames and stops, and it can immediately take another 110 frames if you release and hold down the shutter release again. This is essentially unlimited JPEG shooting at 3fps.