Will I see a noticable improvement in quality if I upgrade to Canon Rebel from Powershot?

<p>I am not happy with my new Canon Powershot SD1400. I want to upgrade to something that will give me sharper, truer images. I've tried adjusting all the modes with my Powershot and it doesn't help. My pictures are mostly of children indoors (low light).<br>

I'm thinking of investing about $300-$500 on a used Canon Rebel.<br>

I have taken one photography class and have LOVED my Minolta Film Camera. It's always worked great for me in simple Auto mode and the Powershot was my first attempt at digital.<br>

So, my question is:<br>

1) will I really see a noticable difference in quality if I purchase a Rebel, even if it's an old one, say from 2003? or is digital just that way unless I spend alot more money and I just have to accept it?<br>

2) can someone direct me to an overview of the Rebel models and dates, etc..so I can tell whether an Xti or 300D is newer or older, etc..<br>

3) Is Rebel the best way for someone like me, or should I be looking at other models too?<br>

Thanks. Really looking for some advice what to do here.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Yes the rebel will give huge improvement. For model names see bottom of the following page:<br /> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_Canon_EOS_Digital_Cameras</p>

<p>The keys to those indoor pictures of children in poor light are: using a higher ISO setting, using a faster lens, and (when possible, and the results suit the purpose), bouncing a flash off of the ceiling/walls in order to bring more light to the scene. A DSLR will help a lot (especially with shutter lag time!), but it won't help as much as you might hope if you don't use a lens gathers enough light in those dim situations.</p>

<p>1. As Arie says, there will be an improvement. Canon Rebels' imaging sensors are several times larger than those in Powershot cameras. In imaging chips, real estate matters. All other things being equal, the camera with the biggest chip wins.</p>

<p>2. I would not buy an eight year-old DSLR. Save your money and get a new Rebel or at least a recent model used Rebel.</p>

<p>Imaging sensors and camera firmware have improved incredibly over the last eight years. The new the Rebel you buy, the more dramatic improvement you'll see over your Powershot.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>My pictures are mostly of children indoors (low light).</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Yes. A Rebel will give much higher quality pictures for these circumstances. Looking for any of the Rebel models from the XT forward. </p>

<p>The other component that affects image quality greatly is the lens. The bundled kit zooms don't admit much light. The cameras can compensate to an extent but the trade off is grainier, noisier pictures. A good alternative/additional lens purchase is the 35mm f2. It doesn't zoom, but most importantly lets in two to four times more light than the probable default kit lens.</p>

<p>The 50mm f1.8 is less expensive than the 35mm f2. It gives a mild telephoto field of view on the Rebel so it may be less generally usable in small indoor spaces.</p>

<p>OK thank you. All good advice. From the table Arie posted, I see that I will need at least a T1i if I want to take video.<br>

So, is the trade off for better quality that I can't take quick videos? In that case, I may need to keep my Powershot for video?</p>

<p>Hi, i own a 350D and am very happy with the results. It's an older camera, but can produce very fine pictures and can be bought very cheaply. For low light, you might want to consider an Canon EOS 50mm 1.8 II lens, around $90 and very good quality/price wise.</p>

<p>Cheers</p>

<p>Yes indeed, the T1i is the first rebel to support video. This is thanks to introduction of the Digic4 processing chip ( see table). Another advantage of this chip is that it allows iso (film speed) up to 12,800 with a very competent 1600 iso. This helps a lot in low light. As such the T1i is a major upgrade from previous models.</p>

<p>Cost is $649 right now, with lens<br>

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/613613-REG/Canon_3818B002_EOS_Rebel_T1i_500D.html<br>

Perhaps you can find one for cheaper on craigslist. </p>

<p>The 400D is still a fine camera. I own one and use it often even though I also have a 7D. I'd stay away from the 300D and 350D, they are getting a bit long in the tooth, and your budget allows for a newer model.</p>

<p>I can't believe how that people will actually give advise like most of this.</p>

<p>The short and simple answer is: No.<br>

Is a DSLR (even this modest model) an improvement over a compact? Yes.<br>

Will it give you better photos? Most likely not.</p>

<p>The camera obviously plays a huge part in image quality, but knowing how to use it, is infinitely more important. <br>

The SD1400 is by no means a bad camera. It is in fact capable of producing some really great photos, in most conditions (even poor light). In fact, a good photographer could take much better photos with that, than a bad photographer with a 1Ds mk3, 10 out of 10 times.</p>

<p>If you buy a DSLR and expect to instantly get better photos, I guarantee that you will be disappointed.</p>

<p>Please don't take this personally, but if your photos keep turning out bad, the problem is most likely your technique. "upgrading" to a DSLR will not improve that.<br>

The best way to consistently get better photos, is to learn.</p>

<p>It is also worth remembering that the DSLR investment only starts with the camera. The standard kit lens is about the most useless thing ever build, and will have to be changed right away. There are fairly cheap options like the 50mm. f/1.8, but even that ads another $100 to the price.<br>

And trust me. One lens is not going to be enough for long, if you want more shooting options.</p>

<p>I have the "Sony equivalent" to the SD1400. Even with a very nice lineup of pro DSLR's, the tiny sony sees use every single day. And I have never been unhappy with the image quality.</p>

<p>My advise? Learn. The better you get, the better your photos get.<br>

If you want to take your photography a step further and perhaps get into it as a hobby, a Rebel could be a good leaning tool. But if you just want to be able to take better photos of your kids, dog, vacation etc. the camera you have is more than capable of doing that. You just need to learn how to get the most out of it.</p>

<p>I really hope you don't take any of this personal. It was meant in the best possible way. <br>

We were all beginners at some point and we all had to start from square one.<br>

If you give your SD1400 a chance, and spend a bit of time learning some tricks of the trade (this site has plenty), I have no doubt that you will be pleasantly surprised with the results sooner time than you might imagine.</p>

<p>Sorry Morten, a SD1400 is a serious impediment to anyone's learning curve, especially in low light. If she knows enough to know that her camera is giving her poor low light performance, has taken a camera course and understands the basics, then a dslr will make for better IQ, more control, and ultimately, better pictures. </p>

<blockquote>

<p>3) Is Rebel the best way for someone like me, or should I be looking at other models too?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>My advise is always -- go for an older, better model than a currently entry-level camera where corners were cut to make them as cheap as possible. Unless you want specific features only the latest model has, I can recommend the EOS 40D. Get the IS kit zoom, a <a href="../photodb/folder?folder_id=783085"><strong>50mm</strong></a> prime and a Speedlite flash unit (e.g., an Mk.1 430EX) and you have a very versatile, inexpensive kit that produces awesome pictures and is fun to learn with.</p>

<p>And I also second what Morten said: You need to understand the basics of photography and camera operation to be able to take the pictures <em>you</em> want (and not that the camera's auto features are set to). This includes understanding exposure, dynamic range and stuff like white balance, exposure compensation, AF modes, custom parameters...</p>

<p>But I do not agree with his assessment of the standard kit zoom. It is a very capable and decent lens that produces good images within its technical limits! Many here have published works shot with it.</p>

<p>@ Andrew Morton:</p>

<p>That all depends on what she wants to do. If the goal is "just" to get good photos in of birthdays, the family and such, she really doesn't need to spend a lot of money on equipment that is ultimately not necessary.</p>

<p>If she wants to pursue photography as a hobby, I agree that the upgrade to a DSLR will be a good start.</p>

<p>Any halfway decent photographer knows that great photos can be taken with any camera, if you know how to use it. Even the average cellphone can do things that might surprise you.<br>

The SD1400 is a good compact. There is no way around that fact. If use correctly, it will consistently produce great images. Even for relatively large prints.</p>

<p>The fact that you believe that a DSLR will automatically give better photos, tells me that you really are not qualified to give this sort of advise. </p>

<p>no offense at all taken. I actually read exactly the same thing on this site a few months ago. So I printed out the whole users manual and tried each suggestion. I searched for tips on this site. I adjusted my exposure, light settings, white balance, iso speed and still just got blurry, off color photos, no depth, no sharpness. Yes, good enough for everyday stuff and email and such, but not for prints.<br>

I make home movies using video and photo so it is a hobby for me and worth the investment. I also like to make scrapbooks/framed photos with nice prints.<br>

I think I will invest in the T1i as suggested, so I can shoot video and I can learn more too. Plus, I trust the Dutch guy! :)<br>

I think I can get a XTi with low light lens on CL for around $500 and sell my three other cameras to make up some of the difference. that's reasonable.<br>

i feel like I know alot more now what I want and what I'm looking for.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>I think I can get a XTi with low light lens on CL for around $500</p>

</blockquote>

<p>What's a low light lens?</p>

<p>The 50mm lens is so often suggested as a way to take photos in low light. Can't disagree with that. BUT using the lens at its widest aperture of f/1.8 to take low light photos of active children will result in very little depth of field. If you want a dreamy shot of a child where only its eyes are in focus, and the rest is out of focus, then its the way to go.</p>

<p>I have a Canon DSLR (XSi) and half a dozen lenses for it. But you know what I use all the time for photographing our 21 month old grandson when he visits? A Canon Powershot XS30, with a Canon 430EX flash and a diffuser. Sure, I do miss the occasional moments because of the slow focusing and shutter delay, but the small sensor in this camera gives a reasonable depth of field so that it usually doesn't matter. Anytime I've used my DSLR and 50mm, I'm disappointed in the lack of depth of field.<br>

<br />While the 50mm is great, it isn't the be all and end all. <br>

<br />And the SX30 shoots HD and regular video and has a 24-840mm equivalent lens too! I use it way more than my DSLR.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Maybe I will start with a 50mm lens and then see if I need something else?<br>

If i make this investment in the camera, I am willing to learn more.<br>

It's very important to me to have better quality photos and that is why I took the class. I became very good at using my 35mm, even can do macro with manual focus, etc..<br>

But I'm trying to find something digital that will give me good results, if I put in the effort.<img src="/i95.photobucket.com/albums/l133/gardangels/thnks3.jpg" alt="" /></p>

<blockquote>

<p>Maybe I will start with a 50mm lens and then see if I need something else?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>No, a <a href="../photodb/folder?folder_id=783085"><strong>50mm</strong></a> is a short telephoto on APS-C which is not that versatile. It makes a fine portrait lens but if you buy an expensive camera, it makes sense to have a few more options. That's why I say get/keep the 18-55mm kit zoom, it is fine for wide angle duty until you can afford/need dedicated super-wide zooms.<br>

However, if you want a one prime lens kit, get the Sigma 30mm f/1.4 which is a more "allround" lens.</p>

<p>Nicole - I have a T1i and it's been a great camera. I bought the 50/1.8 to take pictures of my daughter indoors, but I always have my back against the wall. Getting close wide open to keep shutter speed up meant DOF was razor thin. I eventually added a manual flash so that I could make use of the wide end of my 18-55 kit lens indoors by bouncing off the ceiling. A T1i, several different lenses, and an external flash will open up a whole world for you...</p>

<p> </p>

Any moderately recent rebel is a fine upgrade to a powershot. No comment there.

 

Using a flash, preferably bounced will greatly improve technical quality of indoor/lowlight pictures. Again no comment.

 

If you don't want to use flash you'll want one or more fast lenses. O.K.

 

However, bluntly stating that a 50 is too long is too simple.

 

What's too long or too short is entirely an issue of personal taste and circumstances.

 

If you like upper body / headshot or if you have a big house a 50 is probably good for you, maybe even too short.

If you like full body / group shots and you live in a trailer then a 24 might even be too long.

 

Personally I love the look of a 50 on a rebel and can heartily recommend one. If that's too long a 28/2.8 might be a

low budget alternative. (maybe you can borrow before buying? that way you can get a feel for what you like.)

 

Depending on your budget I'd say a 400D/XTi if budget is low, a T1i if you can stretch it or the latest (T3i) if you're

willing to get the latest technology in rebels.

 

Hope this helps, good luck,

 

Matthijs.

<blockquote>

<p>Maybe I will start with a 50mm lens and then see if I need something else?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Sure, the 50mm makes for a great portrait lens. Set the camera to portrait mode (or aperture priority with the lens at f2.8.) Frame the composition so that the face is emphasized and have the subject be at least a few feet away from background clutter. Focus on the nearest eye. Shoot (and shoot, and shoot.) You will get results that the SD1400 can't give.</p>

<p>Here's another worthwhile item that won't break the bank - pick up a Sunpak 383 flash, about $50 used. Bounce the supplemental lighting off of white ceiling or walls. Tack a white index card to the flash head for on-camera diffusion. Use NiMH rechargeable AA's for faster recycling time. Once you get a taste of how much better the results are relative to the built-in flash, SD1400 or Rebel, go to the <a href="http://strobist.blogspot.com/">Strobist</a> to learn more technique.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Maybe I will start with a 50mm lens and then see if I need something else?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Sure, the 50mm makes for a great portrait lens. Set the camera to portrait mode (or aperture priority with the lens at f2.8.) Frame the composition so that the face is emphasized and have the subject be at least a few feet away from background clutter. Focus on the nearest eye. Shoot (and shoot, and shoot.) You will get results that the SD1400 can't give.</p>

<p>Here's another worthwhile item that won't break the bank - pick up a Sunpak 383 flash, about $50 used. Bounce the supplemental lighting off of white ceiling or walls. Tack a white index card to the flash head for on-camera diffusion. Use NiMH rechargeable AA's for faster recycling time. Once you get a taste of how much better the results are relative to the built-in flash, SD1400 or Rebel, go to the <a href="http://strobist.blogspot.com/">Strobist</a> to learn more technique.</p>

<p>You can find used a used 20D or 30D and a nifty fifty for 350 to 400 bucks on some of the forums. You might need to add a wider angle lens at some point but that should take care of any quality issues you might have. Now just shooting with a 20-30D and the 50 is half the battle. To get great results you need to shoot raw and add in some post processing work. <br>

The photo below isnt mine but it illustrates what the 20D/30D sensor is capable of capturing with a good 50mm prime.<br>

<a href="../photo/10923292">http://www.photo.net/photo/10923292</a></p>

<p>@ Dan:</p>

<p>What kind of BS is that to be telling a beginner?<br>

Just shoot away and fix your crappy photos in PS?</p>

<p>The best thing any beginner can do, is to stay as far away from photoshop as humanly possible. Relying on post processing is one of the easiest ways to become a crappy photographer. </p>

<p>Learning the trade and focusing on getting it right in-camera, is the only way to achieve any real skills. Relying on photoshop will only make you sloppy and mediocre. At best.</p>

<p>Nicole, I think you are ready for the move up to a DSLR. You are obviously serious about photography and taken a class. One poster mentioned anything from a Digital Rebel XT (350D) on up. I agree. The 40D is a good solid camera and can be found at a great price and it has a few advantages over the Digital Rebel XT, the larger LCD is one that many appreciate after making the move. Once you are into the DSLRs moving up from a 350D to a 40D or 450D on up will not make you take better pictures. When I moved from a 350D to a 40D, I did not take better photos, but I did like the features I upgraded to. Moving up to any DSLR will improve what you can do over the Powershot.<br>

A fast lens and good external flash like 580 EX II will be great for indoor low light.<br>

The 50mm F/1.4 lens is a great fast lens, but using one on a crop sensor camera, it will be an 80mm.<br>

Any Canon Crop Sensor Camera, these would be models from the 350D all the way up to the new 7D, you can take the mm number of the lens and multiply by 1.6 to get what it will be on a crop sensor camera.</p>

<p>50mm x 1.6 = 80mm on Crop Sensor Camera.</p>

<p>Andrew wrote that using the 50mm, he has to back up to the wall to get shots. (lol, been there) That is because that 50mm is an 80mm lens on any crop sensor. On a full frame sensor camera like a 5D, the 50mm is 50mm.</p>

<p>My Sigma 50mm is an awesome lens, but on my 40D it is a lens that needs some room to stand back. 80mm is not a great indoor snap shot lens if you live in an average home. But the lens does have it's uses.</p>

<p>Sigma makes a 30mm f/1.4 lens that runs between $300-$400. On a Crop Sensor Camera it will be a 48mm and more practical for indoor low light in an average home.</p>

<p>I also recommend a monopod to keep that camera steady in low light longer exposures with no flash.</p>

<p>You have a lot of options and have fun shopping. Read reviews and comments, take your time making this next move to upgrade so you know what people are saying and have said about the gear your considering, there is a lot of great stuff out there.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Ok, I pipe up one more time.</p>

<p>Some folks have mentioned a used 20D, 30D, or 40D. Think of it like buying a new Honda Civic (new T1i) versus a used SUV (xxD). Which one suits you best depends on your own tastes. Either will get you from A to B. Looking at a photo you won't be able to tell with which camera it was shot. A used 300D is like a used Chevy Nova, gets the job done but not much luxury there, and there's a risk of getting stranded by the side of the road.</p>

<p>Some folks have mentioned the 50/1.8, aka nifty fifty. It's a nice lens and at $100 it's a bargain. I've taken some really nice photos of my nephews and niece with this lens. However it is a specialty lens. It's a nice lens to have in addition to the kit zoom lens. It's a good future purchase or bday gift. Ditto for a hotshoe flash that tilts and swivels.</p>

<p>As always, the key to success is good light - whether natural or flash. Improving your light (e.g. moving your baby towards a window with soft light streaming in) trumps SLR technology. But - all things being equal, the DSLR will produce sharper photos than a point-n-shoot, with better colors, in every circumstance. For best results you want good light <em>and</em> a DSLR. When the light is good, a DSLR allows you to explore and exploit it more creatively. Have fun.</p>