vassil_mihov

The answer to your dilemma is, Digital Rebel.

"just looks and feels a bit cheap"

 

As Rick above said, you should not make your decision based on looks, as opposed to features that you may need (or not), unless money is not a problem.

Aljaz,

 

in the manner of adding a telephoto that tania's current line up does not appear to include, and that is likely to be added down the road.

I concurr with Borge. 85mm is excellent, and 135 may be even better. I personally have the 100mm macro, it's very sharp and fast enough for me.

 

An alternative (I can't believe I am advising this, being a prime fan) is to buy a 70-200 as a telephoto and use it for portraiture as well, that way you can save some bucks. It will not be as good as the primes, but may be good enough, depending on your needs. ("good" is very relative when we are talking about excellent lenses). Having said that, I have both the 100 macro and the 70-200.

Howard,

 

Maybe this interview sheds some extra light on the issue:

 

http://www.digitalreview.ca/cams/CanonRebelDinterview.shtml

 

"Does Canon have a full-frame consumer digital SLR in the wings?

 

No. The EOS 1Ds has a 35mm sensor but this is a camera which suits the highly specialised requirements of a very select group of professional photographers. The strategy for Canon is to design cameras to suit our customer�s needs. So what does full frame really mean? With 6.3 million pixels, the EOS 300D sensor has a resolution which, in most situations, would meet the needs of many professional photographers. At the same time, this sensor size has allowed us to meet our design objective of putting high-end technology into the hands of the consumer. From a technical perspective, putting a 35mm sensor into the EOS 300D would, in most cases, give no advantage to our customers. Yet in doing so we would force the price well out of our target range."

 

Unless the cost of technology drops, I take that to mean that even a 10D with full sensor is out of question, let alone digicams. I hope he's wrong.

I did not even know Canon made cards. I use a 512mb and a 1G Lexar card with my D Rebel and can't be happier.

Corwin, if you are considering a refurbished one, why not a used one? It still may be in warranty, and if you buy it from a reputable person/place (e.g., a professional photographer who upgraded), it may serve you just fine. I anticipate the availability of the 10D used to increase with the release of the new 1D and/or other alternatives from Canon competitors. You may be taking a chance, but it may be well worth it.

Thanks for your responses. They really provide a number of viable alternatives.

Thanks, guys. I agree with you, I personally have the Rebel. However, the Rebel aside, the other DSLR are significantly more expesive than the cited budget. So, what would you recommend as the best choice for a price lower than the Rebel's?

Hi,

 

What is the best digital camera that you would recommend for up to

1000 euro? My sister who lives in Europe is considering the Canon

PowerShot Pro1 and the Panasonic DMC FZ 10.

 

Also, does the Canon PowerShot Pro1 use an LCD viewer, or a lens-

reflex viewer? I could not find that information.

 

I appreciate your suggestions.

just did a screen print from the ad window. If you blow it up, you can make out the the Canon EF 55-200mm 1: 4.? - 5.6.<div></div>

Here is the link to the add.

 

http://www.canoneos.com/digitalrebel/

 

if you freeze the frame when the first time a lens appears, you can see that it is NOT the kit lens, but rather EF 55-200 (he adds the kit lens after that). From the angle, the guy sits somewhere around the 30th yardline, so to the 10th line close to the sideline where the catch occurs it is no more than 25 yeards or so. Note that the two teams are the Bears and the Packers, i.e., neither stadium is a monstrousity where you'd be far away from the action. I do not see anything that unrealistic about getting that shot at 200mm.

 

They do say "all images simulated". I am curious if anyone with detective-quality gear can back out what the reflection of the lens looks like, i.e., is it at all a footbal game.

 

So, Jean-Philippe, you may have a point in are in spirit, but you are factually wrong.

"from something like 200m away... "

 

You mean from the parking lot outside the stadium? Do you realize what the dimensions of a football field and a football stadium are?

In general, I'd match the lens and the converter from the same brand. However, the Sigma 2x does not appear to support your lens:

 

http://sigmaphoto.com/html/pages/ConvComptChart.htm

 

I also do not think that even if it were possible to match it, it'd be a good idea. For the price of the converter, you can buy a cheap consumer zoom, such as 70-300 (generally around $169, and obtain much better results.

Dear Chip,

 

Hotdigital on ebay, brand new for $585. Or call the guys at focuscamera.com. Don't _you_ know anything about the marketplace or economics?

 

Vassil

"Sigma 70-200 2.8HSM is no match for a Canon EF 70-200 2.8L IS"

 

Yes, it is no match in terms of costing three times less. If you care about optical performance as opposed to IS and USM, the Sigma matches very well.

Webb,

 

All I was saying is that the appropriate benchmark (optically and pricewise) is the generic non IS non USM 70-300, as opposed to the other lenses (mostly L glass) with IS. There are a bunch of them for around $169 (Canon and others). You have to decide how important is IS for you, and of not that important, save yourself $200.

 

If it is important, however, ask yourself why, and whether optics is even more important, and spend more $$$ on a lens with IS and better optics.

 

Choice is good, no central planning committee to force that decision for you.

 

Regards,

 

Vassil

The right question is, why does this consumer, crappy optics lens ("crappy" is very relative, of course) cost so much more than its $169.95 sisters? Answer: because of USM and IS. Ultimately, you'll be taking pictures with the glass, not with the focusing mechanism or the IS.

Tim,

 

The place to go is Hill Country. Go to Fredericksburg (a 45min drive northwest of San Antonio) and enjoy the beautiful fields of bluebonnets and peach orchards in bloom. A bonus will be some interesting (and decent quality) wineries, if you are into that. I recommend highly Becker Vinyard, about 5 miles east of Fredericksburg.

 

Make sure and visit Luchenbach, a "town" consisting of three or four buildings, the biggest one being a bar, a place that is a constant magnet for Willie Nelson-type Texas hippies (sometimes Willie himself), bikers, etc. This is 2-3 miles southwest of Frederickburg.

 

You'll se plenty of cattle, fences, cacti, etc. Check out the Enchanted Rock, about 10 miles north of Fredericksurg. The road actually goes through private ranches, so you'll see free-roaming cattle.

 

We love thas part of Texas and go there (and SA) a number of times each year.

I'd stick with the 70-200 2.8 as it is more versatile. Having said that, I own both the 70-200 2.8 and a 100 macro (which is a different 100 lens, I assume your friend has the 100 2.0). So, if you need a specialized portrait lens, go for it. You may also consider the 85mm one. Are you shooting film or digital, i.e., is a crop factor involved?

re: divorce photography. subject do cooperate, it looks like: http://www.photoaltering.co.uk/divorce_photo_services.html

"...though it could happen if the market makes that sensor size a permanent feature with high volume demand, rather than graduating to full frame in due course across the range of DSLRs. Maybe a 50% chance 10 years from now..."

 

This is not exactly what the following interview indicates:

http://www.digitalreview.ca/cams/CanonRebelDinterview.shtml

 

Conversely, with respect to the sensor, he says "Does Canon have a full-frame consumer digital SLR in the wings?

No. The EOS 1Ds has a 35mm sensor but this is a camera which suits the highly specialised requirements of a very select group of professional photographers. The strategy for Canon is to design cameras to suit our customer�s needs. So what does full frame really mean? With 6.3 million pixels, the EOS 300D sensor has a resolution which, in most situations, would meet the needs of many professional photographers. At the same time, this sensor size has allowed us to meet our design objective of putting high-end technology into the hands of the consumer. From a technical perspective, putting a 35mm sensor into the EOS 300D would, in most cases, give no advantage to our customers. Yet in doing so we would force the price well out of our target range."

 

He is much less commital on the EF-S issue, though, so I agree that we are unlikely to see a full range of lenses.

I also own the canon 100 2.8 and the 50 1.8. My vote for wide is Sigma 24 1.8 or 28 1.8 ($299 and 229 new, I own the latter). In direct comparisons, I have yet to see a review that has not considered Sigma 28 1.8 better than its Canon counterpart.

 

If you don't need the 1.8 (for light and low DOF), then go with Canon 24 or 28 2.8.

I have photos like that with single _hairs_ visible (as opposed to guitar strings). I have to dig it out when I get home.

Pat, no kidding: http://elseware.to/products/koozie.htm

 

Cheers!