stephen_lutz

Here is the link to the hacked software. I have it on my Digital Rebel, and it works. Install at your own risk, blah, blah, blah, however.

 

http://satinfo.narod.ru/en/download.html

I installed the firmware upgrade, and, yes, it is a significant improvement. Screen freezes are almost entirely eliminated, the zoom action is better, and (though it may be my imagination) AF accuracy seems better. I really disliked the performance of my Pro1 when I first got it, finding it sluggish, maddenly slow to respond to the shutter, and in general fit only for static shots like studio portraits or still lifes.

 

However, the camera is much more useable now for "real world" situations and as a "carry around" camera. My grade for the Pro1 has been upped from C- to B as a result of the firmware upgrade.

 

Strong recommendation: upgrade the firmware, and, you don't need the original CF card.

I shoot jpgs almost exclusively, but I also a) don't shoot weddings (very often) and 2) usually shoot fast moving events, like concerts, burlesque shows, athletic events, etc.

 

The write times for RAW files are much longer than for jpgs, and it takes a while for the buffer to be flushed. If rapid bursts are your thing, then jpgs might be a better choice than RAW. Obviously, if absolute highest quality is the paramount concern, then RAW is the way to go.

I upgraded the firmware on my Pro1 a couple of days ago, and performance (AF speed) is definitely improved both in single shot and continuous mode. The zoom action seems improved, as well. These are very significant improvements, and I definitely recommend that any Pro1 owner upgrade their firmware. The maddening screen freezes are now, almost entirely, gone. If they occur now, it is only for the briefest instant, just a flicker. This makes the camera much more of a pleasure to use.

 

It may be my imagination, but it seems AF accuracy is also improved.

Well, this is a highly subjective question, with considerable financial implications as well. I own both the 18-55 Rebel kit lens and a 16-35 2.8L. Here's my take...

 

1) If you shoot manual, f/8 with flash, the kit lens is fine. Sharp, colorful, nice pictures for 90% of all shooting situations.

 

2) If, on the other hand, you shoot a lot of available light, then the 16-35 shot wide open (or close to it) is a good choice.

 

I don't do many weddings, but do a lot of events. I have found that small, light zoom lenses work fine if you use a big old honking flash (550EX) and shoot aperture priority or manual at between f/6.3 and f/8. I shoot at ISO 400 too, mostly.

 

Here's a picture of a belly dancer, shot with a kit lens at ISO 400, probably f/7.1 and 1/200 of a second in Aperture priority with a Digital Rebel (I have the hacked Rebel software what allows Custom Functions). I threw in some glow effects in PS CS too.<div></div>

The kit lens is fine for general purpose photography. It is also a cheap wide angle solution, out of the box, with the Rebel. I use mine quite a bit for general photography in dark bars. I shoot lots of "friends who want snap shots with the band" at concerts, etc. and I use a 220EX with the Rebel and the kit lens. Pictures turn out well, and the whole set up is light and small. Just buy it. You'll use it far more than you would have imagined.

I have all three, the 220EX, 420EX and 550EX. I suggest you go with the 420EX because it bounces. If you want flash exposure compensation, download the software hack that turns the Rebel into a mini-10D. You get flash compensation, ISO 3200 and a few other goodies.

 

Go here for more details:

 

http://www.bahneman.com/liem/photos/tricks/digital-rebel-tricks.html

 

The 220EX is a good unit with the Rebel and kit lens. It is a small, light combination that performs well at parties where you want to do "nothing fancy" point and shoot photos. I use -2/3 FEC and ISO 400 with my Rebel, kit lens and 220EX and get ooohs and ahhhs from the subjects when they see the prints.

Marc, that's a very impressive response to an intolerable provocation. Well done!

The Canon Pro1 can take excellent photos, but it is slow to focus. Much, much slower than the Digital Rebel and kit lens, which I also own. The main drawbacks to the prosumer point and shoots (at least Nikon and Canon's) is that they don't use the flash assist lamp on an external flash! This, to me, undermines the whole reason to have a hotshoe on a point and shoot digital camera. In the dark, P&S digital cameras don't focus very well. You can mount the external flash, but not use the flash assist? That, to me, is just stupid. There must be a very good technical reason why they don't, but I haven't heard it.

 

Anyway, for moving children, action of any kind, forget it. Any P&S digital I have ever used is not up to the challenge of capturing decisive moment photographs. Also, be aware that ISO 400 and ISO 800 is very useable on a digital SLR. Even ISO 1600 (or 3200, as on my 10D) is useable for some things. ISO 400 on the Pro1 is pretty useless. Far too noisy.

 

That being said, here is a photo that shows the merits of the Pro1. Taken with a 420EX, bounced off the ceiling, ISO set to "auto."

 

It can take nice photos, but you have to work around its limits.<div></div>

I have the Canon CP 220, which I have used for this exact purpose. It worked well, and the clients liked the "on the spot" photos. I printed directly from a Canon 10D.

I went to a wedding, not as the official photographer, but basically

to shoot the banquet setup before the reception. A local nightclub

I contract with also hosts wedding receptions during the afternoon

hours. While I was there, the bridal party arrived. Out of idle

curiousity, I shot some of the bride, with no flash, using my Canon

Powershot Pro1. I thought you might find this interesting. A hard

crop of the bride, ISO Auto, 1/30 of a sec, f/3.2, 16.8mm.<div></div>

AF assist with external flashes doesn't work with the Powershot Pro1 either. Given that the Pro1 has no focus assist of any sort, this means it is essentially a useless camera in low light for anything other than shots at 28mm. I have zoomed into to 85mm in low light, tried to use a shoe mounted flash and got exactly zero photos in focus. Every single one was blurry. The Pro1 is a good camera in good light, but it is unreliable and unsatisfactory in any low light situations. Just and FYI if you're thinking about buying one.

The Pro1 is NOT a good choice for weddings or events. I have a Pro1, a digital Rebel and a 10D. Even the digital Rebel with kit lens is a far better choice than the Pro1.

 

Here's the deal:

 

1) the Pro1 has dreadful AF in poor light, such as the light you will find in a church or at a wedding reception.

 

2) the Pro1 can be used with external flashes, but the camera does not make use of the flash's IR autofocus assist light. Thus the flash doesn't help the camera focus!

 

3) Image quality at anything above ISO 100 is unacceptably noise.

 

4) It is impossible to be sure if the camera has properly focused on exactly what you want it to focus on. Not good for wedding photography.

I have the Pro1 and if I knew then what I know now I wouldn't have bought it. The AF is simply unreliable in low light. Any light levels that would require flash are too low for this camera to AF on a subject with any dependable degree of accuracy. Worse, there is no focus assist light, and the IR flash assist on an external flash doesn't work with the Pro1. I have the 220EX, the 430EX and the 550EX and frankly they are useless with the Pro1. I end up just using the pop up flash because at least the redeye reduction light provides some help with focusing.

 

In good light, at ISO 50, the photos from the Pro1 are excellent. Even with flash, in good light, with the camera stopped down to f/4.5 and the flash bounced off the ceiling, the photos are excellent. But, if you are using this camera in low light, forget it.

 

Vignetting: heavy and embarrassingly obvious when the lens is wide open and at 28mm. Vignetting is uneven, asymetrical and obvious. Really a disappointment from an L lens.

 

EVF and shutter lag: simply ghastly when compared to my 10D or Digital Rebel. I have plenty of shots of people half in and half out of a picture. You see the smiling face of a 4 year old child in the EVF, click the shutter, and you get a picture of.... the back of the child's head running out of the frame. Over and over again, this camera lets me down with anything other than a static subject.

 

Any decisive moment you capture will be through sheer luck, not any decision you, the photographer, has made.

 

Pros: 1) excellent photo quality at ISO 50, acceptable at ISO 100, still marginally acceptable at ISO 200, but there is obvious noise. Unusable at ISO 400. 2) small, light, easy to carry, 3) lens is sharp, extremely sharp. Color is vibrant but natural, 4) exposures are generally accurate.

 

Con: Vignetting, slow to focus, shutter lag is dreadful, no focus assist of any kind is available. The use of external flash is limited by no focus assist. What good is proper lighting if the freaking picture is blurry?

 

Recommendation: if you enjoy being frustrated and love blurry photos of people moving out of the frame of your shot, then this is the camera for you. If you want sharp, responsive and dependable AF, particularly with an external flash, buy a Digital Rebel and kit lens.

Canon

 

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&A=details&Q=&sku=347912&is=REG

 

Minolta

 

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&A=details&Q=&sku=341040&is=REG

 

Nikon

 

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&A=details&Q=&sku=285703&is=REG

I like my 16-35 2.8L. I use it on a Rebel digital or 10D. It is a good wide angle solution for those cameras. Image quality is very good, and 2.8 allow shooting in dark bars at ISO 1600.

I actually have the 28mm 1.8, and used to have the 35mm f/2. The 28 has better build quality, and manually focuses much better. The lens also has exceptionally fast autofocus performance.

 

In terms of optical quality, I would rate them at about the same. The 1.8 max aperture is very valuable in low light situations like bars, dance clubs, etc. where you want to use available light. 1.8 is also useful for selective DOF for spectacularly unusual shots because the 28 1.8 has a very close minimum focus distance. Example, I shot a hood ornament on a classic car at a car show, from less than a foot at 1.8 and the ornament was pin sharp on the head of the figure, but nicely blurred down the length of the ornament. The car hood was a complete blur. It was a very nice photo!

 

When stopped down, the 28 1.8 is exceptionally sharp, as is the 35 f/2. If you need the extra stop and a half over the 28 2.8, the 28 1.8 is an excellent choice. I highly recommend it, for specialized, low light use.

If I had to choose one, it would be the Digital Rebel with kit lens. The reasons? 1) Image quality at high ISO is far better than the Pro1. ISO 400, 800 and 1600 are all useable on the Rebel. ISO 400 is marginally useable on the Pro1. 2) The Rebel takes SLR lenses. 3) The EX series flashes are FULLY compatible with the Rebel. With the Pro1, there is NO FLASH ASSIST from the IR emitter on the EX series flashes. 3) The Digital Rebel has far better Autofocus, and is a speed demon compared to the Pro1 in terms of being ready to shoot the "decisive moment." LCD freezes and shutter lag are terrible with the Pro1 for anything other than static/posed shots.

 

The image quality of the Pro1 is exceptional at ISO 50, but anything faster than that and the Rebel is superior.

 

So, get the Rebel.

I bought a Powershot Pro1, and enjoy some aspects of it, but find

others irksome, particularly for a "flagship" product like this one.

 

What I like is image quality at ISO 50. Superb. I also like that

it has a big LCD, an EVF that displays all the info that the LCD

does, and that it takes Canon flashes.

 

What I don't like, and what I found out only after I bought the

camera, is that AF performance in low light is dreadful. When I

say "low light" I mean REALLY low, like in a dark bar/dance club.

For some reason, I thought the focus assist beam on Canon flashes

would be useable with the Powershot Pro1. I "thought" that if I

used a flash, the IR beam would flicker (like with an EOS) and

provide adequate focus assist. Wrong. The flash DOES NOT activate

its IR beam with the Powershot Pro1. (Unless I'm doing something

wrong.) So, while the flash works, one of its main advantages is

not functional with this camera. GRRRR.

 

Silly me, I thought that with a highend camera like this, that full

functionality would be provided with the flash, particularly in the

critical area such as focus assist. You've been warned.

 

Q: is this true? Am I missing something? Can the focus assist on

Canon flashes be activated on the Powershot Pro1?

 

Oh, a couple of other things.... It is still slow, like any other

P&S digital. Don't believe the hype. This is a terrific

studio/static shot camera. For any sort of action, it is dreadful.

You WILL NOT capture the decisive moment with this camera, except as

a fluke. You will be a prisoner to shutter lag, focus lag and

little LCD screen freezes before and after you take a shot. If you

want a much better handling camera, with comparable image quality

(arguably BETTER image quality) the Digital Rebel with kit lens

(which I also own) is a far better choice.

I once left a 128MB CF card in the pocket of a pair of pants. It went through the washer and the drier. The plastic on the edge was literally partially melted from the heat of the drier. I filed it down a little so I could get it in the card reader, and it worked fine. It went in the camera, and worked fine there too. Oh well, CF cards are pretty tough, I guess. :)

My 10D is very tempermental in re: focus with my 28-70 2.8L. I have to be very careful to lock focus, then recompose. If I move just a little, or if I lock focus on the nose instead of the eyes I ruin the whole shot. The focus square in the viewfinder of the 10D seems too large to me. I prefer the dot used by the Rebel. Here is one I shot last Sunday, and there about three others of this series that are just ever so slightly out of focus in the eyes. Be careful with your focus point selection!<div></div>

I have a 220EX, 420EX and 550EX and they all work correctly with my digital Rebel. If you are using an EX model flash, and it doesn't work with your digital rebel then one (or both) are defective.

I returned it today. The AF performance was simply not up to par, and I was afraid it would die on me. I went back to my non-IS 70-200 2.8L. It has served me well for years, and the AF works flawlessly. Except for a minor abrasion on the front element (that does not affect photo quality) my non-IS lens is in perfectly fine shape.

I did a 16x20 of a shot I took with my Canon G-2 (4 mp) and the print was fine. No problems at all. I shot in RAW mode, converted it to a TIF, and had the lab print it.

 

With my Digital Rebel and 10D I routinely print jpgs shot in large/fine mode all the way to 13x19 on a Canon i9100 and Photo Paper Pro and they also turn out spectacularly well. I can't say they are better than a MF drum scan, but they are pretty damn good. Generally, I don't even do interpolation. I just print the image, choose, "print to fit media type" and choose 13x19, and print it. It's really cool how well these image files hold their resolution. I can well imagine that with proper care a 16x20 should be completely possible.

I did use the FL on the lens, and it made no difference in AF performance. The repair in question was made by a local camera repair person, not a Canon authorized facility. The lens was steeply discounted, and labeled as "Been dropped, six month return." With a trade in lens of mine, I laid down about $300 cash for it. I polled the forum out of curiousity from those who have bought similar "been dropped" lenses. I would say that, except for the issue I discuss, the lens appears to function normally. The gentleman with the 300 f/4 seems to have had a similar experience to mine.

 

In any event, I do like the lens a great deal. Super for portraits, and very, very sharp even at f/2.8. Thanks for the input everyone.