Why does everyone hate the Rebel Ti's finish so much?

[fj5]

OK, I know that it's a really big change from the older "classic"

body styles and yes, I admit, I would have liked to see a black body

but what's so wrong with the silver? I find many benefits for black

of course (won't attract too much attention, match lenses better,

match bp-220 nicer too, won't see scratches easily, etc.) but it's

kind of a downer how everyone seems to come down on the Ti's flashy

silver finish so much. To be honest, I actually like just looking at

it a lot of times. It was probably an attempt to look more digital

than anything to attract newbies to photography (such as the sony

f717, all the other digi pt and shoots, etc). People often ask me if

it's digital and I'm somewhat getting tired of saying "No, it's film,

I didn't want to go digi just yet."

 

But anyway, back to defending the finish, it's nice. I find it

really does attract those who don't know much about slr photography.

The new ergonomic design not only feels good, but also looks more

familiar to today's youth, thus, they won't feel so intimidated by

the older manual look and say "I don't know... looks hard to use."

 

I have to admit, this is actually my first SLR (first "really mine"

camera too) and I'm trying to protect the dignity of my investment

too. =) I do think that I'll probably be more respected with the

traditional look but I'm loving the right hand oriented controls as

well as the big backlit LCD on the back. I actually like it's silver

tone more than the 2000's mix and the mix tones with the G. (not

as "plasticky" looking)

 

Plz feel free to take a look at some pics I took with it on my

webpage (click on my name and then the link =p). I'd love some

comments too since I can't seem to upload any on here... server

problem? Anyway, I actually like how it looks like with the black EF

USM lenses too. =) I got a 50mm f/1.8 II recently, and it's a nice

light package that, I think, looks nice too! =) So come on... be

nice! =D

 

Take care! I'm a newbie to photo.net but I love it here!<div></div>

[fj5]

Composition:

well, I positioned my hand that way for a reason... it`s supposed to emulate a man... a lonely man... he`s holding his arms behind him as he walks down that "lamp lit pathway"... I wanted to create a sense of loneliness with his arms being held back and his shadow along on the keys... and it sorta looks like he`s looking down. That pathway he`s on (the white keys) is either a street sidewalk or a boardwalk (which is what my friend saw - which works wonderfully). There`s a reason why I only had one hand in the pic... not just cuz I was holding the camera with the other one... but because having a second hand would change the mood completely... a second hand would resemble companionship, not lonliness. I titled the image "A Lonesome Song". A lot of people just see it face value... a pianist about to play a song... some see the sad context but... I wanted a deeper meaning... my friend said it reminds him of the classical movie man walking down the street sides under the lamps in his dark trench coat... the front part and the rear aren`t in focus to emphasize that the man is only worried about the present... his current loneliness... nothing behind or in front of him... if u look, u`ll notice his right leg is on the black key... this represents his motion... "dancing" if u will to the song being played by the "piano"... =) u see it? =) I went a bit deep there, I know, but hey... it`s all imagery! what did u see???

 

any comments would be greatly appreciated!<div></div>

[fj5]

Canon Rebel Ti w/ BP-220

Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II

Polaroid 200 film

Skylight (1A) Filter

[ben_rubinstein___mancheste]

Hey man, if you like it then to hell with everyone else. To be honest, if everyone's taste was the same then this world would be very boring. Enjoy. BTW nice pic though I find it hard to see exactly where the point of focus is.

[edlark]

<p><i>"The new ergonomic design not only feels good, but also looks more familiar to today's youth..."</i>

 

<p><i>"I'm loving the right hand oriented controls as well as the big backlit LCD on the back..."</i>

 

<p><i>"I got a 50mm f/1.8 II recently, and it's a nice light package that, I think, looks nice too!"</i>

 

<p>Um... what kind of teenager talks like this? Your post reads like ad copy, your web site is hosted by a fee/anonymous service, and you've been a photo.net member for a total of three days. So are you real or simply a marketing construct for Canon to sell its ugly-as-sin camera?

[the the]

The Rebel Ti is ugly. The shiny plastic looks and feels cheesey. Nikon got it right with the N/F65: Classic design with controls that everyone needs at that price.

[lee_shively]

I handled one of these cameras yesterday for the first time. It lived up to my expectations which were quite low.

 

I actually really like chrome/silver/light finishes. I prefer silver to black in most cases. In other words, I have no problem with a silver EOS body. It's simply that this particular camera looks goofy. It's in good company, however. I think the Leica R8/R9 looks goofy and it costs about 10 times as much.

 

But my opinion's not important if you're happy with the camera. And "goofy" doesn't present any problem to the camera's function anyway.

[chad_h]

Get used to the look. I think the Ti is the last film SLR and Canon is just bridging the gap in design and looks for the new consumer DSLR. That's just speculation of course but why else would it have the big rear LCD? If you own the Ti then upgrading would be a breeze. That�s just good marketing practice. Make it new and exciting but keep some things familiar to the user. Only time will tell. I'm not much of a rumor person but working photo retail and listening to some rumor we might be seeing a new Canon consumer DSLR in the next few months.

[fj5]

Hehe, I'm actually kind of touched that you'd think I was a marketing agent. If you don't believe me, look at my webpage and you'll see who I really am. I've just past my teenage years (I'm now 20) and well, I do like to think I'm mature for my age so thank you. I'm an engineering student too and I'm supposed to sound this way in a professional environment (rather than just, "it's cool, hype, wicked, yo!"). I didn't want you guys to think that I was basing all my photography decisions on aesthetics. I wanted to show that I too, knew what I was talking about. As for my knowledge about photography (considering I just started)... well:

 

I've been interested in photography ever since I was in elementary school but I just couldn't afford it - until recently. Two months ago I didn't even know what SLR stood for and one day, I passed by a website discussing how filters make colours brighter and more vibrant than the human eye could see. I was intrigued. I looked up what SLR meant and then I was hooked! Photography had taken a firm grasp on me and now it won't let go. I first looked for the cheapest slr I could find (at that time, Nikon F55 or Rebel G) - thinking I'll just need a beginner cam to learn from and we'll see what happens. About a month later I had saved enough money to move up. I then laid eyes on the Rebel 2000. At that time I still didn't know much about photography but instead of purchasing, I decided to wait it out a little longer and read about photography some more. I went through this website's (among many others) "how to's" and the step by step descriptions of shooting different subjects, and the importance of light... etc... you know where I'm going with this. I read a lot!!! Believe me, before I even bought my camera, I knew how to use it and what to look for. I ended up with (just two weeks ago) a Rebel Ti (with BP-220, EF 28-90mm F/4-5.6 II USM, 75-300mm F/4-5.6 III USM, EF 50mm F/1.8, and some filters, tripods, bags, lens hoods, and even a cable release). I know it seems like a lot for a beginner but I knew what I wanted and I got some great deals! It's not the best glass, I know, but hey, they'll serve their purpose. I love my system! I'm just looking to save up for a 420ex speedlite for a better flash. I've read enough about photography that I want to shoot all types of subjects but I didn't need anything higher than a consumer body since I'm only beginning.

 

As for this posting again... sure, I bought a Ti... and of course I'd back it up! No, I'm not a Canon marketing construct. I wish I were though, that would mean that I'd get discounts from them! As I've read throughout all these forums, buying a camera isn't just about the camera... it's a whole system, right?

 

Anyway, I really hope I didn't offend anyone. I was just sharing what I thought of MY camera. Really, take a look at my webpage... I'm not lying. It may be "fee/anonymous" service as you mentioned but I prefer free webhosting services, who wouldn't? As for "what kind of teenager talks like this?" - well, for one... I'm no longer a teenager! =) But I assure you, E S Livingston, I'm real. Thanks for your reply though! I just don't think it's reall an ugly-as-sin camera! (that was a bit harsh) =p

 

In response to to Clarke, I do agree with you that the N/F65 looks great and has that classic look. The Ti is just new a lot of ways, I guess... and hey, I guess Canon did target people like me.

 

Thanks, Lee Shively! =)

 

OH, but please, any comments towards my posted pic? =) I just can't seem to upload it on here.

[fj5]

Thanks a lot man! I didn't even see your post in the beginning there. I was immediately caught up in the "negative" remarks. =p No offence of course towards anyone. As for the pic, ya, sorry about that, the pt of focus is actually at my finger tips. I most likely had a bit of camera shake since the pic was taken handheld and it was a bit ackward to place my hand far enough from the lens for that particular placement. =) Thank you again!

[jrphotos]

Hello, I would say you have a very good equipment! So forget the comments above! As the camera is the machine that lets the light fall on your film, a good photo is a result of a good lens and a good feeling for framing. Therefore, especially with your 50/1.8 you have all devices a photograper needs. So it is up to you to improve your experience.

 

Enjoy! ;-)

 

And as you can see above, some photographers don't have any social intelligence - but don't worry about that.

[fj5]

Hehehe, thank you! I sorta saw that! =p

 

As for my 50/1.8, I hope to exchange it soon, there's a bubble in the rear element! =( BUT, thanks for the wonderful encouragement! I look forward to seeing the rest of what photo.net has to offer!

[the_macman]

SLR manufacturers have established a reputation of silver = entry-level.

People complaining about the finish are perhaps more concerned about who

looks at them while taking pictures than taking pictures. They're probably

Leica users :)

[k_t1]

Hey If you like the Rebel Ti thats great. But IN MY OPINION the Ti is one of the ugliest camera's I've ever seen. The designers must of been smoking pot and watching star wars when they design this thing.

[the_macman]

Well, it's intended to be highly ergonomic for the most of us... if human hands

are ugly and poorly designed, blame the big boss :)

[fj5]

Hahahaha! Nice comment! Ok ok, in total honesty, the camera is growing on me. It caught my eye in the beginning, then, I sorta didn't like the look, but the more I use it, the more I like it. It really does feel good. I've held the F65, R2K, G, Elan 7, and well, I just like the higher shutter release button. Still... could you imagine a black body? That might be better! And I wish I could exchange mine! (just so I can look more pro with a black body! hehe)

[edlark]

FJ,

 

Sorry if I sounded a little harsh, but companies do engage in these kind of tactics, especially over the web. Your gushy post, combined with the other factors I mentioned, plus a couple of other items that popped up on your web site - untraceable web host, very ad-speak kind of language, a Canon link leading your "interesting sites" list, a photo of your all Canon brand film setup complete with Canon branded scanner - raised red flags. All of the above can easily, and it seems authentically, be chalked up to a budding photog excited over his new toys, but can also signal that the forum is being used to dishonestly promote a product.

 

So fine, you're you and you love your Rebel Ti. I'm happy for you and hope that you have much success with your photographic endeavors. I, personally, think it is an ugly-as-sin camera, but that's just my opinion and since you are the one who has to use the camera and be happy with it, it should count for exactly zilch in your own estimation. I'm sure it performs quite well as a light tight box.

 

Now your photo: Barring the technical problems already mentioned above, I'd say it is an image with a lot of potential. You have a tripod and a cable release, I think, so use them and reshoot to clean up the focus and sharpness. I might also push the hand slightly left in the composition to make the keyboard/path connection even more obvious, but that's debateable.

 

One other comment as to your description: it's too long and detailed. Beyond the old concept that, "If you have to explain what you were doing you didn't do it good enough," descriptions that are too explicit as to what the photographer is trying to convey often turn people off. As stated above photographers are a cantankerous bunch - I'm obviously living proof - and don't respond well to being TOLD what they should see in a photo. You also lose the possiblity for independant interpretation by your viewer. Great photos lend themselves to multiple readings - those intended by the photographer as well as those that might just be happy coincidence. Trust your audience and they will reward you for it - and by reward, I also mean telling you when you've got it wrong as well as when you've got it right.

 

My $0.02, for what it's worth. Good luck.

[fj5]

Well, I do feel much better but I really do appreciate your second post. As for the pic, I debated whether or not to even give a description for my picture. I do realize it was a mistake to do so, however. My previous experiences with responses to that photo were from those not very "interested" in photography so I found myself trying to define too much. Thanks! I will learn to keep my mouth shut next time (in this case fingers off the keyboard!) =p I was thinking about retaking the photo, but it just seemed so much of a spontaneous decision that I feel it might lost it's sentimental impact if I take it again with my tripod. I will definitely rethink it though and take your suggestion into deep consideration! May I ask, what do you have? I'd love to own an EOS 3 or 1v someday (hopefully with the LCD on the back)... when I'm a millionare! hehe!

[d_l1]

I kinda agree with Chad here.

 

Ti doesn't have the conventional SLR look, I don't think that makes it ugly. It's just unique.

[edlark]

FJ,

 

I guess it is my day to back-pedal. I wouldn't say long explanations of photographs are "wrong," but that a less is more approach is just better - especially here on photo.net Sometimes an explanation, even a long one, is a necessary addition. Photojournalism or documentary photographs, for example, often don't do much of anything by themselves, but can have a large impact when the context of the image is known. But, for me, fine art images are always best served by a minimalist approach in titles and descriptions.

 

As to what I use, I'll tell you, but I don't want you to take it as advice. After dabbling in photography in high school and then taking only snapshots for the decade after, my interest in photography as a hobby came back a few years ago. I consider myself an "advancing" amateur, with a primary interest in street, photojournalism, and documentary photography. For the moment, you seem to be heading more toward the artistic side. What kind of photography you want to shoot, and your own personal shooting style which will evolve slowly over time - after a little over three years of "serious" photography, I think I'm just now beginning to understand my own style - will profoundly effect what equipment you will end up buying and using. My setup wouldn't necessarily be what is best for you or anyone else. The important thing is whether or not the equipment you choose is an aid or a hinderance to getting the type of images you want.

 

The other thing is that everyone seems to go through the "gear-head" stage, where you start to focus more on the equipment than on actually taking pictures. I had my own, and like to think that I've calmed down a bit in that regard, but everyone loves toys. My advice to you is to shoot with the equipment you have until you begin to feel yourself seriously constrained by it. (You'll know when it happens.) When you do decide to add to your kit buy slowly and buy quality, you'll actually end up spending less money in the long run. This is the voice of experience here, learned the hard way.

 

I also own Canon, and have been very pleased with the system, although I don't subscribe to the religious battle that rages between the two major systems - Canon vs. Nikon is a wash, use what you like. My first "real" camera was a Rebel II - I shot the 1999 Seattle WTO protest with it, a crappy 35-80mm kit zoom, and a bag full of Tri-X. I've gone through a couple of different bodies since then, trying some SLR alternatives along the way. My current kit, which I am very happy with includes: an Elan 7e as my main body (an excellent full-featured camera that is a lot lighter, smaller, and cheaper than an EOS 3 or 1v), an Elan IIe for a second/backup and night shooting body (excellent camera, and the IR sensor makes low light work a lot more pleasant than the god forsaken strobe on the 7e and Rebel models), Canon 50mm f/1.8 (you made a very good decision with this lens, it's the best deal in glass around and my standard "walk-around" lens), Canon 28-135mm USM IS (unless you are going to spend $1,400+ this is the best mid-range zoom available IMHO), Tamron 19-35mm (Tamron makes very good glass for the money, don't let the brand snobs fool you), and the Canon 200mm 2.8L II USM (excellent glass, much smaller and more discreet than the 1.8 version, and the filter size matches the 28-135mm which is very convenient). This setup should serve me for the next few years at least. I would greatly like a DSLR, but am not willing to spend thousands of dollars for what amounts to a glorified Rebel body. When they get a full-frame, 8-10MP+ sensor, Elan 7/EOS 3 based body DSLR on the market for less than $1000, I'll be seriously tempted. Until then, I get great scans from my low-end Minolta Diamage Dual Scan II and Vuescan.

 

So that's what I use, for what it's worth. Now I should probably get back to work before my boss catches me surfing photo.net and throws my can out on the street rendering me unable to afford film and leaving my life meaningless. ;)

 

Good luck.

[edlark]

I forgot to mention. If you have a good camera shop near you, you should be able to rent anything fancy that you might need. This is great, I have done it a number of times and is a great way to try out equipment before you buy it or have access to expensive equipment that you will only need from time to time, but that would break the bank to purchase.

[adam_hemphill]

In response to to the questioned authenticity of this post: Somehow I find it hard to believe Canon would even think of such low and impractical marketing strategies, not to mention engage in them. Have a little pride in your company.

[fj5]

Thanks for sharing! You know, the more I've read about the art of photography, the more respect I develop for those who define the art: photographers. Even when reading about a photographer's system, one can get a pretty good idea about the care and effort a photographer puts in his or her photos. Of course, those with a lot of money may throw it all around but I don't think that's the case with the photographers here in photo.net. I've read forums regarding flash purchases, lens purchases, and of course, body purchases and the replies (mostly) aren't weighted on personal systems choices on brand (ie. not "get a nikon" or "get a canon"). Where am I going with this? NO where really. I'm just glad to see that photographers take care of each other! It's not always about competition... it's art!

 

As for me, right now, I am working on more impressionistic pictures (you called it "artistic"). I would like to take more landscapes but all I see outside is the colourless cold of winter! I also want to shoot more portraits but I've yet to find my subjects. I want to try everything, and as you said, as time passes, I will begin to settle.

 

Two months ago, I didn't know anything about photography other than... pt and shoot! Through www.webslr.com , www.photonotes.org , and here www.photo.net as well as MANY MANY other sites (including www.photographyreview.com) I've learned so much! I feel like I've taken a class! =p

 

About your comment on an 8-10 MP DSLR less than $1000, well, I think in a few years. Also, I don't think I'm going through the gearhead stage too badly. If I did, I'd have a couple USM IS's by now with an Elan 7e as well as a 420ex or maybe a 550ex! =p We'll see, in due time! I'm just trying to direct my money towards film and developing now!

 

Anyway, it was nice to "meet" all of you and E S, you've been a great help. I hope to hear more from you in the future and hey, if you have any other pointers, feel free to point them this way! =p (just curious, how old are you?)

 

DROP by my portfolio, I got to add some more pics! It finally works! =) (FYI, I used mainly my 50mm/1.8) =p

[the the]

When we hack the Revel Ti, it's not and insult on you FJ, it's an insult on Canon.

 

I almost bought the Ti based on its features over the Nikon F65, but I couldn't bear to buy either, so I spent more money on something a little better. The Ti was just too plasticky and whacko looking for me.

 

If you are happy with it, then good for you! That's the way it should be. But don't be surprised if some of us don't like it. That's what's great about the world. There is something for everyone here. Our loss and your win.

[canon man]

Since you appear to have the ability to teach yourself how to do things by reading and practicing( i too do this ,it drives my wife nuts) then I would suggest Black and White. I garage saled my dark room and wound up with a nice Omega Enlarger, and everything else for a botu 200 I have invested. I set the darkroom up in my bed room. Until then all I did was sleep, and make babies there anyway. When you shoot Black and White and then develop it your self you gain the ability to manipulate the exposure and find the errors in your methods and how to correct them faster. I found it allowed me to get in touch with my talents and I use it as a stone in which to hone my skills. Also in the grey drab Oregon winter its not like I have a lot of color to inspire me either! You will also gain an understanding of the latitude of your film and what it is and is not capable of.

 

Shooting chromes(slide film) will give you discpline. Print film can be corrected if the exposure is off by 2 to 3 stops. Slide film is not as forgiving. What you shoot is what you get. You can see if your college has a Phtotography class and if so sign up. You will start shooting chromes. The projects will bore you, but you will atleats learn exposure.

Daniel Sandlin