Canon Digital Rebel - What's Next?

[Mike Butler]

A simple suggestion...if you are getting paid to take pictures, get the 10D. You'll forget the $600 in a real hurry. Especially if you drop it just once (God forbid), but more importantly if you are covering some action that has no opportunity for re-takes or missed shots--the 10D is just a lot faster. If not, the Rebel is head and shoulders above what most casual shutterbugs are toting.

Jeff--
>>>> For speed of shooting (fps) - if something is moving that much I'll be using my GL2 :-) <<<<
I'd be inclined to agree, BUT...not if you are shooting for a magazine (or any other print work)! I have had the "pleasure" of pulling stills from footage--even broadcast-quality stuff--for some layouts that required it, and it was pretty clear even to the untrained eye that these shots were pulled from video....hopefully that's the look that they want.


Funny, it's all relative. I stood on the camera line at a red carpet event between a young fellow with a Rebel who was shooting for a local publication and a celeb-shooter who was using a Nikon D2x and made me feel like a pauper to own a 10D (which I wasn't using -- I was shooting video). Both of them will have their pictures published, and I'm sure each will fit the respective requirements.

[Steven Digges]

Professional cameras are defined by what a pro needs. Image quality is a given it must be there. This is what camera manufacturers and pros know:

1. All of the hot new technology in cameras is always released in a high end consumer model first; this has been the case for many years, not just in the digital age. Changes in the top of the line pro models lags behind significantly. Why? Because the manufacturers are well aware that there is eagerness among the hardcore armature to run out and buy the latest technological improvement because he may believe it will improve his photography. They covet the equipment as much as the medium and that drives sales.
2. To most professionals a camera is a sizable investment. A tool that must create a return on the investment. The longer the tool can create income the greater the return. Pro bodies are the last to be released as new models because there better be “significant upgrades” or professionals won’t buy them. They are not going to buy an expensive new release unless it will impact their ability to produce quality photos.
3. The needs of a professional photographer are different than the amateur. For example, Canon has made major improvements in weatherproofing their top line lenses and body’s. Did you know or care that there is a rubber gasket that seals the “L’ series lenses to the body? It matters to pros. I shoot in rain, snow, and the dustiest conditions imaginable. A little thing like that gasket matters to me, I have to get the shot, I can’t put the camera back in the bag just because it is getting abused, and I need it to keep working under those conditions. Most people don’t. The body construction thing? I need a camera that can be dropped, or at least take a beating, most people don’t.

The digital rebel is a beautiful piece of technology that will allow professional quality pictures to be taken by anyone with the talent to take them. Is it a professional camera? No, and I was just getting started. The beautiful thing is, unless you are getting paid to get the shot your needs may not be the same as mine (who cares about a little gasket). I have to spend a lot of money on equipment and I sometimes resent it. Digital rebel owners should take pride in their investment and enjoy it. Professionals want to spend as little as they can get away with and amateurs want to spend as much as they can possibly afford to be professional. Not my opinion, that is the marketing strategy behind the industry. Get what you need, enjoy what you have, and remember, shutter speed and aperture still matter.

Steve

[Peter Moore]

Great suggestions, Steven. My question is simply if I want the camera to last FOREVER (something I can give to my children just like my parents gave me their all-manual Olympus), aren't I better off with the sturdier body of th 10D, for example?

[Jeff Donald]

No camera you buy today will last forever. I would expect a seven to 10 year life span at best. When you buy a TV, do you say to yourself that your buying the TV that will last forever? My guess is probably not, so why expect your camera to last a lifetime?

[Steven Digges]

Peter,

Jeff is correct (he always is), save the Olympus for your kids. You will never get 2 generations out of today’s stuff.

This is why body construction matters or may not matter:
It has nothing to do with how long the camera will last in years; it has everything to do with durability.

In 1991 I shot primarily with Nikon F3s, I bought a Nikon N8080 to check out the latest technology. The N8080 was similar to the digital Rebel at the time, consumer oriented, new and loaded with electronics. A week later I was ascending a 50 rope to reach a perch in a big tree. As I went up the rope I spun gently around in circles and the flash head on the camera hit the tree, rather softly in my opinion. Instead of the small wings on the flash breaking as you would expect, the whole hot shoe ripped out of the plastic camera body. There was broken plastic and wires spilling out of my decapitated Nikon as the speed light dangled unharmed by wires. The repair cost me almost as much as the camera. Down the rope and back to the truck for the F3s, the most indestructible camera ever made.

So once again I pose the question, what do you use your camera for? You may not have a need for a magnesium body, I do, I can not afford equipment failures. I am not the only pro in the world that is hard on equipment; that is why body construction is hyped much more at the higher end.

Steve

[Mike Butler]

Steve, you said it better than I could. An equipment failure is just not acceptable. If my gear is not 100% ready to rock-n-roll, I risk extreme embarrassment and loss of reputation, financial loss and loss of future work, etc. in addition to the expense of replacing the item. My wife always says "buy cheap, buy twice." It's true.

In the case of the 10D, I didn't have the time to research exhaustively comparative specs and writeups, what I did was to observe what other working folks were using. It seemed that a lot of guys who were coming out of 35mm SLRs had gone to the Canon EOS D30, so I figured I'd get one of those, which were chronically back-ordered. (and I will NOT pay in advance for an indeterminate delivery date!) Pretty soon that was replaced by the D60 (see, the supply shortage was a blessing in disguise) which was--you guessed it--endlessly back-ordered. Finally they came out with the 10D, and after several unsuccessful attempts to find it in stock at the usual suspects, I stumbled on one at a local camera shop (Milford Photo, great bunch of guys), same price as B&H and I jumped on it with not a second thought.

So far it's working out. Since I don't shoot stills 24/7, there's no way I can justify $8000 for a high-end digital body, but with 3K exposures to date on the 10D (and BTW a similar number on my little pocket digicam, a Canon Powershot S400 which is always with me when I am not carying the 10D) I have no complaints and it has more than paid for itself.

Now, as for the Olympus and lasting forever and such, I just have one "yahbut"...I still have an old OM2 from the early disco era (when Nixon was president?), all made of metal, and you could probably hammer nails with it. Pretty hefty with the motor drive. Still works perfectly. Who knows, it may go on forever?? Although it hasn't been fired off once since I got the digital! :-)

[Peter Moore]

Jeff, I expect a 10D to last forever because it's $1600!! :) Plus my Olympus is over 30 years old and still taking gorgeous pictures.

Steven, so is what you're saying, basically, they don't make 'em like they used to? :) If so that's a damn shame.

I wouldn't use it professionally, or in harsh environments, except maybe in the cold in Chicago. As I said, my main concern is it lasting as long as possible and, of course, having all manual features. But I certainly don't plan on climbing ropes carrying it. :) I guess the Rebel is the way to go then?

[Jeff Donald]

The 10D will expire much quicker because of the electronic nature of the beast. It will seem very slow and outdated in a few years (just like an older computer). I would buy the Digital Rebel and invest in better lenses.

If you want to hand something down to your children, consider handing down a set of lenses. The lens industry has reached a maturity and lenses are not going to radically change or improve in the next few decades. You'll see minor improvements and modifications, but nothing like the last two or three decades. Lenses, if well cared for, can last a lifetime. The current crop of DSLR's will be dinosaurs in just a few years.

Mike, the first OM2's came out in 1978. We were in the Carter Era. I was a big Olympus fan in those days and anxiously awaited it's introduction.

[Steven Digges]

Peter,

Like I said - Jeff is always correct.

Steve

[Mike Butler]

Jeff--
Ah yes, Carter...I must have just blocked him out of my head..."malaise days!" Hee hee!

Yeah, I had already had an OM1 at that point and was pretty psyched too about the 2. Actually the 2 held up better than the 1. But they are both museum pieces now for all practical purposes, in my current world. I also have some very old audio equipment that still works, but I don't use it either.

I am sure that the 10D will last much longer than I want it to...meanng that like you pointed out it will feel slow and outdated like an old computer, and will have similarly low resale value. By then I'll be ready to strap my lenses onto the new 1000D or whatever they will call it, with 15 MP for $700.

:-)

And yes Steve, Jeff is always correct.

[Peter Moore]

:) Thanks for the great advice, everyone! I guess I'm leaning toward the Rebel, then, and investing more in the lenses than the body is a good idea. Plus I suppose camera bodies will get cheaper in the future as technology improves (bigger, cheaper chips, etc.) but lenses will always be lenses, always be expensive, and always work the same way.

[Dorothy Engleman]

Is the Canon Digital Rebel a good camera to learn basic photography? Or is there another digital camera that offers better manual control?

Dorothy

[Robert Mann Z.]

Dorothy,

I can't think of a better one if you want to learn on a digital camera with removable lense.

[Helen Bach]

Dorothy asked 'Is the Canon Digital Rebel a good camera to learn basic photography? Or is there another digital camera that offers better manual control?'

Leica are about to release the Digilux 2 which looks like it was designed to be used by old M-type sticks-in-the-mud like me. Manual controls instead of menus. No noisy mirror slapping up and down. Unfortunately it's at a price your dealer will love.

Best,
Helen

[Mike Butler]

Haha, that "mirror slap" was one of the things I used to love about the old Nikon F, it kept telling you it was a "real" SLR!

Of course, I always used to find the Leica aficionados a bit on the snobby side. (Sorry. That's my blue-collar roots coming out.) I guess it came with the price, which like Helen said, only a dealer could love. Plus I always personally preferred an SLR to a rangefinder.

What I would really love to see would be something like that old F, manual controls for everything, basic basic basic and no frou-frou...in digital. Guess I'm dreaming.