pablo_s

Enjoy!

Ohhh...this is a british shop and your prices are pound sterling. Then these prices are maybe not so out of touch with reality (they are more expensive than the US, but so are electronics in the UK). Still, the resellerratings feedback doesn't look good.

Their rating on <a href="http://www.resellerratings.com/seller4731.html">resellerratings</a> is scary. Maybe you got lucky before, but that doesn't mean you'll get lucky the next time. Of course, only you can decide if you can take the risk. But the prices you quote are definitely too good to be true... shops can barely keep the 20D in stock at $1500, so why would anybody sell it at less than $1000?

<p>

Back to your question, I have only used a DRebel and I'm waiting to receive my 10D, but from what I've read autofocus has not been significantly improved and the DRebel autofocus is very good. Which lenses are you using? Lenses can be a bigger factor than body in autofocus speed.

<p>

Good luck with your purchase.

Well, AFAIK, the 10-22 is the widest zoom ever made (please correct me if I'm wrong). Even with the smaller circle, I guess it poses some new technical challenges and Canon has to recoup the R&D costs. It's not terribly slow either... fast wide angle zooms are even more expensive (16-35/2.8 L) and not as wide.

 

I was hoping the 18-85 IS to be cheaper, about the same price range as the 28-135 IS. Again, it's not really slow for a decent consumer lens.

 

The main problem for me is that so far the reviews for these lenses haven't been great. For that money, I would expect some good glass... they're more expensive than some L glass. So I think it's a combination of high R&D costs and market analysis that Canon has done. If you're a wide angle photographer, film is probably still the way to go.

Just in case my previous post wasn't clear, $300 isn't a bad price either (AFAIK). If you trust the person and the camera looks good, go for it.

I don't think $300 is such a great price for a used G3, so relax... even if you miss this oportunity, you'll be able to get a G3 at a similar (or lower) price here on photo.net or, in the worst case, on the auction site.

 

I think that sensors last a long time. Sometimes digital cameras fail relatively early, but usually it's not the sensor. Of course, buying anything used is always some kind of gamble. But if the difference in price (to the G6) is very important to you, and the camera looks good and performs basic operations, it should be ok. I've used a few digicams and found the G series to be the best out of the DSLR world.

 

Good luck with your purchase.

Thank you all for taking the time to reply. I generally agree with your opinions. However, I think that the market works best when both sellers and buyers are informed (though it should be their own responsibility to get informed). I was thinking of cases when the item was very clearly overpriced with respect to market conditions, not gray areas. If I want to do something I'll probably just e-mail the seller as Dave suggests.

Person who goes by the name of Art Vandelay on photo.net, you only need to buy 2 lenses to get triple rebate (Digital Rebel + 2 lenses = 3 items).

If the price looks too good to be true, then it probably is. If it's an online seller, you should check its reputation (www.resellerratings.com) or let us know what's the name of the store. Never give out your credit card number after you've investigated thoroughly. Good luck.

I have a moral dilemma. When I see someone selling an item for way

over the market value (as defined by either photo.net or eBay

average pricing) I feel tempted to add a comment alerting potential

buyers. But on the other hand, it's a private transactions between

parties where I don't have any particular interest, so I'm not

really sure what to do. I think it's definitely correct to add a

comment when a post seems to be a scam, but if it's just overpriced

it's not so clear... what do you think?

 

This isn't photo.net feedback but I didn't find a more suitable

forum. Mod, feel free to move it or expire it.

 

Thanks in advance.

If you have some extra money and time available, you can get the DRebel new for well under $500: buy the Digital rebel with two qualifying lenses and get triple rebate for each ($300 rebate for the DRebel). Then sell the lenses here on photo.net or the auction site. Many people will be happy to buy them at a slightly discounted price and avoid the rebate process.

Kevin, the dpreview of the 20D contains lots of comparisons to other cameras. You can find it <a href="http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos20d/">here</a>. Another excellent review is Bob Atkins'; you can find it <a href="http://www.photo.net/equipment/canon/20D/">here</a>.

<p>

In short, the main improvements in the 20D (compared to the 10D) are 8mp vs 6mp and that the 20D takes EF-S lenses (a new line of lenses who only fit the DRebel and the 20D so far; there are 3 of them so far). I don't see 8mp as being a huge improvement over 6mp, although of course it's better. None of the EF-S lenses are getting rave reviews, but if you're a wide angle photographer then the EF-S 10-22 may be the only realistic option to get true wide angle coverage. Of course, if you buy a used 10D, you'll likely have no warranty and an unkown number of shutter actuations, and those are important factors.

<p>

The DRebel does take EF-S lenses, but it's a more basic camera. There's a russian hack that restores some, but not all, of the functionality of the 10D. I'm not a pro by any means, and still felt the DRebel limiting at times, for example with respect to exposure options and lack of AI servo. Still, I got some pictures with the DRebel and the 85/1.8 lens that I would have never gotten with a better body attached to an average zoom lens.

<p>

Choices, choices.

Kevin, I'm surprised nobody has mentioned this before. Good glass is just, if not more, important than a good body; it also depreciates less both in monetary and funcional terms. I think that buying a new DRebel or a 10D and spending the savings in lenses (and a good tripod, if you don't have one), could be a better investment.

 

Right now Canon is running a rebate program that makes this even more attractive. If you buy the DRebel and 2 qualifying lenses, you get triple rebate on each (for a $300 rebate on the rebel and around $50 for each lens). So you can buy a great lens setup (like the 17-40/4 L, the 50/1.4 and the 70-200/4 L) and still have some money to spare (but you do have to hope that Canon will honor the rebate... they usually do or so I'm told, but there are also the horror stories).

 

It has been said uncountable times that attaching a poor lens to a great body is like attaching lousy speakers to the latest and greatest audio system. There's no question that the 20D is a better camera than the DRebel, but there's no question either that the DRebel is capable of amazing pictures; and in fact you'll get better pictures with the DRebel and a great lens than with the 20D and an average lens. And in a few years time you'll be able to update to a newer, trendier, more capable body -compared to which the 20D will be a kids toy- and keep your lenses. If the DRebel doesn't offer enough flexibility for you (for example if you're an action shooter and need a big buffer), the 10D is selling for $700-$800.

 

Hope this helps, and good luck with your decision!

I'm with the others in that a DRebel with good lenses (like the 70-200/4 L) is better than the 20D with bad lenses, and also makes more economic sense. But since you seem to be set on the 20D, let me at least clarify what seem to be some misconceptions:

 

* I don't know of any Canon 90-300 lens. May be you are referring to the 75-300 and/or 100-300 lenses?

 

* Even though the Sigma say "macro" on them, they ARE NOT macro lenses at all. They probably have a somewhat smaller minimum focusing distance (as compared to other lenses you mention), but they won't get you anywhere close to the real macro range. If you want to do real macro on the cheap, buy the 50/1.8 and a macro filter set.

 

* All those lenses are soft and slow at the long end, and therefore not ideal for (good) bird photography. You can certainly use them to practice and learn, but don't expect to get publishable results in this area.

 

* You say that you are considering the 35/2 and 50/1.8 as "wide angle" and normal lenses. However, taking into account the 1.6 crop factor, these lenses aren't wide at all; the 35 is a "normal" lens and the 50/1.8 a moderate telephoto. The short end of the 18-55 is closer to a real wide angle lens but, although good for the price, don't expect miracles from a $100 lens (a DRebel with a 17-40 will produce better pictures than a 20D with a 18-55).

 

Although this is certainly more subjective, I think that for an inexperienced (amateur, or bad) photographer, having a good lens doesn't make a big difference because his/her likely problems with technique will offset whatever advantage ghe better lens may offer. On the other hand, an experienced (pro, good) photographer will make the most out of his/her good lenses because s(he) knows how to extract the best out of them.

 

Good luck with your purchase!

Iain, this question has been asked zillions of times. A search will help. It would also be useful to have an idea of your budget and interests in order to make recommendations. If there was only one answer to "which lenses I need?" there would be just 2 or 3 lenses instead of many dozens.

With the current rebate program, you can get a new DRebel for less than $500, as long as you buy two qualifying lenses. You also get triple rebate for the lenses. Since you're just venturing into digital and have plans to upgrade in the future, I think this is the way to go. For example, you can buy the DRebel + 17/40 L + 50/1.4 for $480 + $600 + $230 = $1350 after rebates. That leaves plenty of room for flash and card.

Thank you all for the replies. I'm quite sure that the rebate people will look with a big loupe (or a very long telephoto lens, since it's a Canon thing) for formal errors in the rebate forms (even to the point of seeing one when there isn't) but it looks that as long as one is very careful and keeps good records it should be ok...

I think they are welcome. What is not so clear is what is the relation between your question and the Canon EOS system :). There's a <a href="http://www.photo.net/bboard/forum?topic_id=1562">photo.net site feedback</a> forum where this type of enquiries may be more appropriate.

The rebates Canon is offering are quite attractive, especially for

the digital rebel and if tripled with the addition of two lenses. I

know the general point of view is that one should think that the

price is what one is paying, and then take the rebate, if it comes,

as a nice surprise. However, in this case the rebate on the DRebel

($300) is a very substantial part of the price. If I can count on

the rebate, I'll buy the DRebel and a lens (and another lense\ for

the triple rebate which then I'll sell); otherwise, I'll consider a

used 10D and no new lenses at this time.

 

In general, how trustworthy is the Canon rebate program, assuming

that I do my part on time and as indicated, and keep copies of all

documentation?

 

Thanks in advance!

Thanks a lot for the advice. It seems that the f/4 version is much easier to get, but based on your comments I'll stay away from it. The f/3.5-4.5 seems to be a good compromise between the 75-300 and the 70-200/4 L; I certainly don't expect it to be in the same league as the latter. KEH asks $126 for a 70-210 3.5/4.5 in LN condition, but is not currently selling it.

Canon EF 70-210 lenses seem to be selling rather cheaply on the

auction site. From what I've heard, they're among the best consumer

lenses Canon has made. I have a few questions.

 

First, it looks like there are 2 such lenses: a 3.5/4.5, and a fixed

f/4 aperture. Are these lenses very different? How do they compare?

 

Second, what would be a fair price for these lenses? I don't want to

end up overpaying. I can't afford an L telephoto right now, so my

alternative would be a cheapo 75-300 (I've had one of those before

and although it wasn't too terrible for my amateurish use it looks

like the 70-210 is overall a better lens, true USM, faster, sharper).

 

Thanks in advance!

Hi Ayal. Here's my take:

 

1) RAW is good because as you say it gives you some additional exposure latitude. By using the LCD *and* the histogram you can check your pictures quite effectively, but many shots can't be repeated and that's where RAW is important. Whether that's worth $100 only you can decide. RAW is useful, but you can live without it.

 

2) If your main use will be snapshots, the internal flash will be ok. For anything more serious, you'll definitely need an external flash. Since you say you want to improve your skills and will be shooting your family (so you'll shoot indoors a lot), I'd say that the external flash is an important feature, so you'll want a hotshoe.

 

3) How many megapixels you need depends on how large you want to print. The difference between 3.2 and 4 mp isn't huge, and there's much more to image quality than megapixels, so I wouldn't worry too much about this. For trips and family, I don't think a 10x zoom would be that important to you, unless you plan on shooting sporting events (but none of this cameras is good for sports photography anyway, because of the shutter lag). If you do get a 10x, you'll need a tripod whenever you shoot using long focal lengths.

 

4) I don't know much about the C-5050, but I know the G3 well (I own one) and also the A80 (my girlfriend owns an A70). There are several differences besides the faster lens. The G3 has a 4x zoom, the A80 is 3x. The A80 uses AA batteries, the G3 uses a proprietary but quite standard battery. The G3 comes with a number of gadgets that can be very useful: wireless remote control, built-in neutral density filter (when you need slow shutter speeds), and may be others that I'm forgetting. And it's likely that the image quality of the G3 is slightly better, though I haven't seen any direct tests. So I'd say that if you can afford the G3, go for the G3, but if not or if the price difference is very important to you, the A80 is a nice camera as well.

 

By the way, don't expect to focus manually with any of these cameras. They do have a manual focus mode but it's close to useless. Also, the aperture range is quite limited and there are lots of DoF compared with an SLR camera. So it'll be a very different experience than your Canon AE-1.

 

Good luck with your decision, Pablo.

I agree that manual zoom may be an important factor to consider. Few digital cameras have it.

Jeffrey, you can set everything manually with some digicams (at leasy you can with the G3 I have). Unfortunately even after setting everything manually, there's still some shutter lag. B

 

I don't think there exists a camera that satisfies all of your requirements: the smallest ones don't have enough manual configuration or image quality; the best digicams will allow you to preconfigure all the settings but they're not so small and as I said they still have some shutter lag. And a (D)SLR is too big. Probably something like the G5 would be the best compromise. Remember that because digicams have so much DoF, if you select an aperture of, say, 5.6, you can rest assured that everything will be more or less in focus (unless you're close to the macro range of course).

 

DPReview does have some speed measurements. May be not exactly what you want, but you can infer some valuable info from there (look in the "Timings & Sizes" part of the reviews).

 

Good luck with your decision, Pablo.

This is funny... the google ads I was served next to the forum thread included digitalliquidators!!! And other total scam offering the 10D for less than $1000.

 

I think that PopPhoto, google and all companies allowing avertisements from all these scammers are just as responsible as the scammers themselves.

 

ALWAYS check resellerratings before shopping online, or stick with reputable sellers like B&H.

 

Regards, Pablo.