D Rebel XT, question from the experts

I know Rebel XT is being compared to 20D and is being evaluated how

it would stand against 20D. But my question is about its comparison

with current DRebel(300D) which I own. Certain advantages that I can

think of would be ETTL II and more megapixel quicker startup time.

 

I have couple of questions

 

1- How would you compare XT to 300D with Russian Hackware? Are there

any custom functions or other functions missing in the XT as

compared to current Rebel with extra functions from hackware.

 

2- Is smaller size and weight of XT going to be a disadvantage if

using with a larger Zoom (70-200) as far as stabilizing the camera

is concerned?

 

3- Any difference in the Kit lens as compared to the one with 300D?

 

In essence is XT worth upgrading from 300D. In other words should I

sell 300D on ebay before 350D is out and its price really plunges.

1 - I wouldn't

 

2 - Not really

 

3 - Same optics, slighly different finish on the barrel

 

The XT is a better camera. If you can afford the upgrade and you lust after the new features, do it.

If you already have a 300D with the WASIA "hackware" only you can decide which features you "miss" that are included in the new 350D.

I havent installed the hackware as my camera is just 2 weeks old and I know if I install it then I would lose the warranty, I would only install it if it gives me any edge over functions present in XT,

Infact that is the purpose of my post.

Thanks

If you've got the money upgrade, or you will forever doubt yourself and won't be happy until you do.

 

I for one am waiting for a bit longer, this iteration has little to offer in real usability improvements (see below). In short:

 

1- a quick read of the Wasia features would show this... it is self evident (2nd curtain sync and shutter mode selection being two new big additions they've added.) To which the answer is probably "if you gotta ask what they are, you dont' need them"

 

2- this is such a matter of opinion it's useless to attempt an answer. It will depend on your own personal taste.

 

3- probably not.

 

 

The new Rebel misses the mark on several big features which I'm holding out for personally (features which actually will improve my photography and aren't just little software edits):

 

1) Viewfinder, viewfinder, viewfinder. The new Rebel's viewfinder actually took a step backwards in this respect...it got *smaller*. Ugh. If you don't know what I'm talking about, go borrow a film SLR (a good example would be an Olympus OM-1, OM-10, etc) from the good 'ol days, and look through it's viewfinder. Really do this if you don't know what I'm talkign about. It's worth doing if you haven't seen it, but be warned it will ruin your perception of what you've been using. Absolutely *no* contest how much better they were *even back then*, than the tunnel-vision viewfinders digital SLR's have now. It's like moving from a 640x480 screen from the 80s to a modern high-resolution cinema display, but all the more frustrating as it's on a 30 year old camera.

 

2) Focusing would be great to bring up to the standard of their Elan film SLR's (eye focus for one, I kind of like it, why can't they put that on >$1000 slrs?). And while we're on focusing, they didn't include a good fine-focus feature like that on the 20Da with it's LCD-screen-based focus. Manual focus is pretty much as difficult as it can be on these cameras unless you're in very good light.

 

3) Sensor full-frame. Yes, 1.6 is here to stay, but full frame is coming, it's inevitable, just may have to wait a couple years...which is ok as it will improve the viewfinder in the process.

 

I'm not jumping to upgrade personally, none of the features that are missing are *that* compelling, and in any case, they're mostly the low-hanging fruit which the designers have solved with a few firmware and software updates and can now bring to market, rather than substantial hardware upgrades like full-frame sensors and mirrors.

Bob, how can you say the XT is a better camera before anyone has actually shot with it? The specs might look a bit better, but honestly (for me) its the quality of the images that counts. FWIW I own a 20d and a digital rebel.

Of course it's better. It has a lot more manual control and an extra 1.7MP.

 

Even if the image quality was the same, it would still be better.

 

Just like an EOS-1v is better than a Rebel film camera, despite the image quality being identical.

 

If all that matters is image quality, then all 35mm film cameras are the same and every 35mm camera ever made is inferior to a $100 Yashica TLR.

Well as I said this was a questions for the experts and I am glad to hear from all of you. special thanks to Bob Atkins.

As far as viewfinder is concerned I dont think change in its quality really matters in low light as it is probably difficult to use it for manual focus in lowlight anyway whether 300D or 350D. Although apparently they seem to claim that it is brighter now. I agree overall Xt might be a better camera as I have used 300D and 20D and with exactly same settings pictures from 20D look better prob just because of more MP or prob better metering

I'm certainly not an expert but looking through the press release the main things that would make me consider the upgrade from a 300D are:

- 2nd curtain flash

- More flexible metering modes

- The new battery grip (I really like the idea of being able to grab a pack of AAs if I'm on holiday or something)

- Faster write speeds to CF

 

As I've only had my 300D for about 3 months and I'm far from outgrowing it, I'm not going to rush to upgrade. I've also just recently installed the russian firmware which has given me even more things to experiment with.

Don't be afraid to install hack firmware. It seems that Canon happily conduct warranty service even if hack firmware is on the camera - and besides, it's usually possible to re-install Canon's own firmware if you need to send your camera in for servicing anyway. Incidentally, there is now a new version of hack firmware available for the 300D. The features are described here:

 

http://ca.geocities.com/tanm@rogers.com/undutchables_0.1.0.pdf

 

and the Wasia version is described here:

 

http://ca.geocities.com/tanm@rogers.com/wasia_b71_firmware_features.pdf

The 350D has a different sensor than the d20 - will it have the same low light performance ?

I'd be cautious about the use of AA cells in the grip.<p>

Canon actually say in their litereature:<p>

"<em>...as with the EOS 20D with the BG-E2, the use of AA betteries should be considered only as a last resort..."</em>

<p>

Reports from 20D users suggest that battery life is VERY short with AA cells. It seems to be a lifebelt to support you if your Li battery goes dead and all you can find are AA cells. It does not seem like an alternative way to power the camera in normal use.

8.0 MP will give you a larger acceptable print than 6.3 MP, but if you print only up to 8x10' images, then I'd suggest that buying the best lenses you possibly can would render better quality results than actually changing the body and keeping the same mediocre glass.

 

I own a 300d with a kit lens, 28-105 3.5-5.6, a 50 1.8, an 80-200mm, & a 500mm cheapo mirror lens. I can honestly say that if I purchase better glass Id get better results. But to date I haven't had an issue getting nice prints up to 8x10.

 

The battery issue is a little annoying, because if you've invested is several batteries, you can't use them in the XT.

 

I agree with the posts above that:

 

The XT is a better camera (see Bob's comments)but will it make a difference to what you shoot? ,...., only you can say.

 

The WASIA hackware is relatively benign. You can install it and if you need to service the camera and you are concerned, just re-install the factory firmware.

 

I hope this helps

>>my camera is just 2 weeks old<<

 

Ah! Should have waited :) Maybe the store will let you trade it in for the new one. If not try selling it now. The XT *is* a better camera in many ways! In fact it is good enough to make a GREAT 2nd body for 20D owners.