Pricing out a New Digital Rebel
Posted March 7th, 2005 @ 03:50pm by Erik J. Barzeski
I stopped in at my local camera store to price out a new Digital Rebel XT. Here's what I've got so far (prices from B&H - I intend to get the local store to match or better the prices):
Canon XT Kit (w/18-55 lens) 999.95 2 x Lexar 80x 512 MB CF Card 119.90 Canon EF 28-135 IS Lens 409.95 Canon NB-2LH Li-ION Battery 49.95 Canon BG-E1 (old model) Battery Grip 99.95 72mm Canon Circular Polarizing Filter 109.95 Split Neutral Density Filter (???) 99.95 Camera Bag of some sort 39.95 ------------------------------------- ------ Total $1929.55
That's just below my budget ($2k). I have no idea if the cost of the SND is right, or if I've got the right circular polarizing filter. I went with two 512MB cards instead of a single 1GB card for somewhat obvious reasons.
If anyone has ideas, suggestions, or comments: lay 'em on me.
Donate Life
Posted 07 Mar 2005 at 4:18pm #
i just got a refreshed Rebel at my local applestore for 299.95
Firesale
Posted 07 Mar 2005 at 5:24pm #
I guess before you go out and spend all your dough, you should read this:
http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/notcamera.htm
[found here: http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech.htm ]
Posted 07 Mar 2005 at 5:37pm #
Tim, good article, but the guy's wrong to a point. A $100 digital camera is not going to take pictures as well as the EOS Rebel XT, and the quality of a lens is very important. Yes, people can obsess over equipment, but if you're trying to say that I am doing so, then you really don't know me very well yet…
Posted 07 Mar 2005 at 6:07pm #
I would say that your secondary lens choice is a bit unconventional - wouldn't something a bit longer be a better addition to the kit lens? Personally, I would ditch the kit lens and get something like the 17-85mm as an all-round lens (if I were going the for the Canon in the first place, that is...)
With the filters, just make sure that they are the same diameter as the filter holder on the lens. This will be specified on the lens (eg, the kit lens has 58mm). Otherwise, you'll need step up rings to allow them to fit.
It's worth checking what the speed of the XT's card interface is. There will be a maximum speed it can write, regardless of the card. There's not much point spending extra on super-fast cards if the camera can't make use of them. (Of course, if you're uploading with a card reader, faster cards can make a difference here too.)
Are you completely sold on the XT? I wouldn't discount the D70 and E-300. The D70 has better lens options available, and the 6 -> 8MP difference isn't that huge. The E-300 has the dust filter + good kit lens + tele lens option (I think you can get it with the 28-90mm + 90-300mm equiv. lenses for $999 with the current rebates). Plus, have you actually held any of the cameras in your hands? Don't forget that you have to do that in order to take pictures...
Whatever you choose, hope you have fun taking pictures!
Posted 07 Mar 2005 at 6:09pm #
Buy that thing!
I hated the article myself but didn't want to let you know that up front. (I read a few of photographer blogs that seem to think it's must read before you take the plunge into the SLR world.)
The only part of the article that I really agree with was the parts about the mindset you have to be in when shooting, but the rest of the article didn't really resonate with me. (fyi: I'm an extreme amateur)
Personally, I'm of the engadget ilk, i.e. if it's got buttons, I want the best one around. I say: why cripple yourself and risk taking a blurry, lower rez shot of something that could have been the greatest photo you've ever taken -- if only you had the right equipment. I'd chose overkill for 99.9% of shots rather than miss that one that really mattered.
It's an amazing device, and I'm so jealous of you right now it's ridiculous.
Currently getting by with my canon s410... but wishing it was a xt.
I look forward to your photos as well as your advice and reviews.
Thanks!
Posted 07 Mar 2005 at 6:25pm #
I started to write a comment, and it become a full-blown rant. So I posted it to my site. I don't have an automated trackback system set up, though.
Basically, I agree with Erik. It's possible to get obsessive with equipment (and I border on that), but the equipment *does* matter, especially with digital photography.
Posted 07 Mar 2005 at 6:31pm #
For $100, the kit lens is worth it. The secondary lens was recommended to me, though I'm considering going to the 75-300. Remember, with a 1.6 multiplier, the 28-135 will get out to about 210mm.
The difference is minimal. I'm not gonna save $5 to get a 40x card when I can get an 80x card.
I was going to get the D70 over the original Digital Rebel. But then the XT was announced, and I decided to get it. It trumps the D70. Olympus? Never came up and will not be considered. Canon and Nikon are the big dogs.
Posted 07 Mar 2005 at 7:15pm #
If you have a CostCo (http://www.costco.com) around, then I just got an e-mail flyer that they have the Rebel for $769.99. The direct link to the product is (http://www.costco.com/Browse/Product.aspx?prodid=10037433&whse=&topnav=&cat=&s=1).
And, I also am envious of you picking one of these up. Good luck. I look forward to seeing your pictures.
Posted 07 Mar 2005 at 7:45pm #
I have the 10D and love it. Erik you'll have a great time with it. I also have the 28-135 lens and it's a great all around lens. You should also pick up a flash as the built-in has it's limitations. The only other thing I got recently was a firewire based compactflash reader. Fast. I don't have it sitting here so I can't tell you who the manufacturer is, I believe it's Lexar's.
Posted 07 Mar 2005 at 8:53pm #
I'm very excited at the XT, though if I found a 300D for $300 I would be hard pressed to pass that up. I have been doing a lot of research trying to decide between the XT and the D70 and I'll probably be going with the XT.
From what I've read, I would personally go for the 75-300mm over the 28-135mm because of all the range overlap with the kit lens. I've also seen that it's recommended to pick up a prime lens for low light, something like the f/1.8 50mm.
Posted 07 Mar 2005 at 9:06pm #
Get a 7x-300 lens. The distance they'll capture is just so much fun. (I just posted pics taken with my Sigma AF 70-300 earlier today).
And stick with the kit lens. For the extra $100, it's worth it. It's a good 'overall' lens.
Posted 07 Mar 2005 at 9:21pm #
Erik, you won't feel slighted with the EF 28-135 IS lens. It is in a whole different league from the inferior EF 75-300 IS.
Three things:
1) When you're buying the neutral density filter, make certain you get one of the rectangular kind with the external filter holder. I believe the brand is Cokin, and you'll probably want the P (for pro, presumably) style. Save some coin and buy HiTech filters rather than Cokins. Don't buy a round, screw-on split neutral density filter. They are far too restrictive.
2) Lose the Kit lens and buy an EF 50 1.4 instead. It's practically the Canon reference lens, and will give you a really good opportunity to get accustomed to your camera without worrying about zooming and other stuff.
3) Don't think of the Rebel as having a focal length multiplier. The frame is cropped, not magnified. The flaw in thinking in terms of a focal length multiplier is you wind up with weird perspectives. For example, if you multiply the focal length of a 28 mm lens by 1.6, you'll have a normal lens. But it will still have the perspective of a 28 mm lens. Close features would appear larger than they would with a real normal lens. This doesn't make as much difference on the telephoto side of the equation, because the perspective difference between 135 mm and 210 mm (with the EF 28-135 IS) isn't as obvious.
I think you'll be very happy with your Digital Rebel.
Posted 07 Mar 2005 at 11:57pm #
Guys, there's absolutely no need to try to talk me out of things. I'm not getting the 75-300. I'm getting the kit lens and the 28-135 to start.
Please, there's no need to keep telling me to get something else. I won't be getting anything else.
I'll get a screw-on circular polarizing filter and a square SND. May not even get a filter holder for it (or whatever they're called). I'll get a Singh-Ray SND and I'm not sure what polarizer, but it'll be halfway decent.
Mmmmmkay?
Posted 08 Mar 2005 at 3:59am #
Hey Erik. I'd be interested in knowing the cost of the body (without the kit lense). i've got a couple Rebels 35mm and a buttload of lenses that I use on those. And if I were to buy a high end digital camera, I'd go with Canon simply because I already had all the lenses for them.
That said, I've also been looking at the Rebel XT, mainly as something to covet until I can afford it, and I'd be very interested in your experiences.
as far as filters go, yeah in your last post, you've got the right idea. I've got a whole set of square filters, which I use in a filter holder. I've found I tend to get better pictures than with my circular filters.
But then as much as they're trying to make digital the new 35mm...they are different, so picture quality WILL vary, so...
Posted 08 Mar 2005 at 11:26am #
Hey Vinay,
You're right that quality will vary. The 16 x 20 prints from my digital Canon EOS 1Ds that I sell look far better than the ones I'd sell from my old film EOS 1n 🙂
Posted 08 Mar 2005 at 2:13pm #
With Photoshop, you really don't need the split neutral density filter. Just take two exposures, one for the forground and one for the background and stitch them together. There's a nice tutorial on the subject here:
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/blended_exposures.shtml
Hope this helps,
Phil
Posted 08 Mar 2005 at 4:14pm #
Yes you have the right polarizer.
Yes you should get a square ND Grad filter. The Cokin system is the one you'll want to get. P stands for the size of the filter and is pretty much standard. The other two sizes are A and X-Pro. The A filters are the least expensive and X-Pro are the most expensive. Galen Rowell, before his untimely death, produced a ND Grad filter set with Singh Ray. You can find them on his site.
I also second the recommendation on the 50/1.4.
"The 16 x 20 prints from my digital Canon EOS 1Ds that I sell look far better than the ones I'd sell from my old film EOS 1n"
Really? I shoot only film and routinely have 30x40 prints done that still blow me away every time i see them. How were you having your printing done?
Posted 09 Mar 2005 at 1:38am #
Hi Sean,
Up to 13 x 19 I do on my Epson 2200, and larger I do here: http://www.calypsoinc.com on the Lightjet. It looks amazing. I've had the chance to shoot with a 1Ds Mark II recently, and it's astounding.
Posted 09 Mar 2005 at 11:10am #
Josh,
The 2200 is great printer. Lightjet prints on Fuji Crystal Archive are the best though. Cibachrome? What's Cibachrome? 😉 I know a couple of photogs who are using the 1Ds MKII and swear by it. The files are huge though which threw them for loop in the beginning.