Re: 30D Vs Rebel XT help newbie!!
- From: "default" <defaultname@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 31 May 2006 15:40:07 GMT
"Tony Polson" <tp@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:c5sq725jh3tg2q1ejdc0ql5eatviojucl6@xxxxxxxxxx
javamaan@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
Hi folks,
I am currently using a Elan 7 film camera. I am thinking of
switching to Digital camera. I am debating between a 30D and Rebel XT.
The Rebel XT is a fine first digital SLR and there is absolutely no
reason for a newbie to spend an extra $600 on the 30D. There might be
a case for buying one of the last 20D bodies that are available at
heavily discounted prices, but the Rebel XT will probably offer all
you need and more.
However, I would strongly advise you to spend some or all of the $600
difference on a good lens for the Rebel XT. The 18-55mm kit lens is a
very poor performer. Optically, it is so bad that you would probably
wonder why on earth you had traded up to a DSLR.
He already must have EOS EF mount lenses as he has an Elan 7 now. These
will continue to work on the XT so there is probably no need to buy any
lenses. However the 18-55 adds not more than $100 to the kit and is very
small and light and probably better than anything else you can put on for
$100.
Have you actually tried the 18-55? It may feel very cheap but optically is
not that bad. Compare the reviews for the 17-85 and the 18-55 at photozone
and it would appear that the 17-85 which costs about 8 times as much is
worse: more vignetting, smaller aperture at most focal lengths, more
distortion, more chromatic aberrations and also is larger and heavier. The
18-55 also focusses much closer than most of the more expensive lenses and
therefore allows more magnification also. It does not perform as well as a
macro lens but you can get a decent picture in a pinch. It also works quite
well reversed.
http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/lenses/canon_1855_3556/index.htm
http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/lenses/canon_1785_456_is/index.htm
With the 18-55, CA's are small and easy to correct, the bit of barrel
distortion at the wide end is also not hard to fix in the few cases where
you can see it. Flare is a problem if you use a filter, but you can always
remove the filter when it is an issue or use a lens hood. Light fall-off in
the corners is almost never noticible, but is easy to fix as well. And as
for sharpness, maybe I just have a lucky copy where the tolerances fell in
optimal ways, but mine is sharp enough for most purposes. If I realy blow
up the pictures, then I can see that my 28-135 IS and my EF-S 10-22mm
produce better pictures, but certainly for 4x6" prints it is very hard to
tell the difference. Those lenses are much more expensive and much larger
and heavier too.
Do you always carry around your best glass or sometimes do you want a camera
that is smaller, lighter, and not quite so valuable, or appearing so
valuable depending on who is watching you? A 50mm f1.8 fits this usage as
well, but isn't as versatile as 18-55 in most cases.
I think for $100, the 18-55 is worth adding to the kit even if he already
has a bunch of good glass.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: 30D Vs Rebel XT help newbie!!
- From: Tony Polson
- Re: 30D Vs Rebel XT help newbie!!
- References:
- 30D Vs Rebel XT help newbie!!
- From: javamaan
- Re: 30D Vs Rebel XT help newbie!!
- From: Tony Polson
- 30D Vs Rebel XT help newbie!!
- Prev by Date: Re: OT- Buying new computer, which way to go?
- Next by Date: Re: OT- Buying new computer, which way to go?
- Previous by thread: Re: 30D Vs Rebel XT help newbie!!
- Next by thread: Re: 30D Vs Rebel XT help newbie!!
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
