The next Canon Digital Rebel?

[jared_kipe]

I think I might be buying a camera in the next 3 months or more, does anybody think there will be a new wave of really cheap DSLR style cameras? Possibly from minolta, or canon. Possibly the new *istDS from Pentax. I've always loved the minolta high end cameras. Nikon's are nice but the D70 is expensive with the lens kit, and that thing is HUGE!! The new Minolta 7D and Canon EOS 20D are sweet, and I think either could make a new cheap camera to blow away the prosumer market.

All Canon has to do to sell a camera here is offer the Rebel II with the DIGIC II image processor and maybe the new sensor from the 20D. But when will it happen??

[bousozoku]

Considering the way the 300D is selling right now, alterations to it aren't necessary any time soon.

The Nikon D70 is somewhat more expensive but comes with a much, much better kit lens. A friend has a Canon 300D and I removed the kit lens to compare it to my Olympus lens and I almost flung it across the room. It seems to be made of components of the quality of disposable cameras, even though the DIGIC processor is of high quality.

[revenuee]

I love my D70 --- much better then the Digital Rebel i found --- at 8x10 and 16 x 20 prints the D70 blew me away --- and thats using the same lens (sigma 105 mm made for different respective mounts)

the D70 is worth the extra i think

[vga4life]

The current EOS 300D already owns the "prosumer" market, so I don't really see a new model on the near horizon. The best thing I could see about a Rebel II that was a stripped-down 20D would be that it might make closeout 300D bodies even cheaper, then I could justify getting my own. :)

My fiancee, an artist, just got a 300D and is already using it more than her large-format gear with more-than-acceptable results. She saw (and I agree) little benefit in spending more money on a 20D or full-frame sensor body over putting together a good lens package. Good, fast lenses make a bigger difference in our experience than slight, evolutionary sensor improvements - and image processing? Just shoot RAW and do it on the computer for best results.

I'm basically of the opinion that nothing revolutionary is likely to come along soon enough to make you regret buying a 300D even now. (But don't blame me if the Rebel II comes out tomorrow with the 1D sensor! :p )

edit: to reiterate - forget the Canon kit lens. It really is junk (though better than what you'd find in an $800 "8 megapixel" consumer all-in-one camera.)

The EF 50mm f/1.8 II prime lens *is* a great lens and is even cheaper the kit zoom lens. If you're on an ultra-tight budget, that's where I'd start.

-vga4life

[dongmin]

Considering the way the 300D is selling right now, alterations to it aren't necessary any time soon.

The Nikon D70 is somewhat more expensive but comes with a much, much better kit lens. A friend has a Canon 300D and I removed the kit lens to compare it to my Olympus lens and I almost flung it across the room. It seems to be made of components of the quality of disposable cameras, even though the DIGIC processor is of high quality.

Well, both Canon and Nikon have announced $100 rebates for the 300D (can now be had for $650 body-only with rebates) and D70. Everyone is making digital SLRs now. The competition is getting thick. Which is good for all of us.

http://www.dpreview.com/news/0411/04110803canonnikon_slrrebates.asp

From the point of view of the manufacturer, there's really no reason the 300D body-only should cost any more to produce than a decent prosumer camera with a nice built-in lense.

[Moxiemike]

I love my D70 --- much better then the Digital Rebel i found --- at 8x10 and 16 x 20 prints the D70 blew me away --- and thats using the same lens (sigma 105 mm made for different respective mounts)

the D70 is worth the extra i think

This guy is absolutely right! :) The D70 blows away the Rebel in every aspect. For example, the d70 may weigh a bit more, and might be a bit bigger (its not that much larger--look at comparsion photos on dpreview) but it also has a 1/500 flash sync, which is a pro feature, it has flash exposure compensation, it has spot metering, you can upload custom tone curves to the camera.

The D70 also shines in AF over the Rebel as well as frame rate. For the first burst, both cameras get about 3fps. But after than first burst, when the buffer starts to the fill, the rebel slows to a snails pace (1.7fps) and the D70 keeps shooting around 2.7-3 fps. This is ESSENTIAL for any sort of action shooting.

Lastly, all Canon DSLR's have a VERY heavy image processing algorithm that, while it makes images seem clean and noiseless, also makes images look "painterly" and soft. The D70 has less anti-aliasing, so images are sharp. Very sharp. One downfall is a bit of moire on the D70 but that can be fixed with photoshop. Lost detail from Canon's smudgey image processing CANNOT be fixed.

For reference, I've extensively tried both Canon and Nikon offerings, ranging from the D100 (which i own) the D70, D1, D2h, and D2x. On the Canon side, I've tried the Rebel, the 10d, the D30, D60.

Canon's UI for me, was a bit kludgey and the absence of FEC and Spot metering on the "prosumer" bodies (sheesh, these things are expensive!) made Nikon a clearer choice for me.

I'd grab a D70 with kit lens for $1199 after rebate if you're really serious about learning photography or whatnot. If you want a glorified P&S camera, get the rebel. If you're an MP junkie, get the 20d. :)

[jared_kipe]

Thats odd, everything I've read about the canon lens kit is good. As for the Nikon D70, I've read reviews that compare it to the digital rebel, and they all say it's a wash. The nikon is feature heavy, but the images are under exposed and not as good at the canon's. The nikon images have more noise at the higher ISO's . I guess I'll see what the *istDS is all about when it comes out, that camera is small in all the right places :D

EDIT: Oh and I don't really like the canon's inability to use the autofocus light (the flash) without taking a flash picture, but I think that could be fixed by using the flash auto focus locking down the focus and then closing the flash to take the picture. I wonder why nobody thought of those solutions.

[dweebert]

If you need the more advanced features that the D70 offers, it is a great deal. The Digital Rebel is a very good introductory Digital SLR, however.

The kit lens feels a bit cheap, and has a "loose" manual focus, but it performs adequately -- certainly better than any P&S camera I've used. A wide range of lenses for both cameras is available in both the retail and used markets.

Both cameras are available as "body only" for very little difference in price. If this were the case six months ago, I probably would have ended up with a D70 instead of a Rebel. However, I don't regret my purchase one bit.

I don't know how much difference there is between the two cameras' in-camera processing. I've compared photographs from the two cameras on <http://www.pbase.com>, and I can't see much difference. In the end, I guess the photographer makes more of a difference than the choice of camera. I happen to prefer the more photographic look of Canon's images to Nikon's super-realistic look, but if one is that interested in the quality of the processing they will be shooting in the camera's raw format and doing all of the processing on the PC later.

From what I can see on dpreview, the Rebel has a little less noise in the higher ISO settings, but the D70 gives sharper images overall. Since I use the camera's raw format and process on my Mac, I would favour less noise to sharper images.

[Moxiemike]

Thats odd, everything I've read about the canon lens kit is good. As for the Nikon D70, I've read reviews that compare it to the digital rebel, and they all say it's a wash. The nikon is feature heavy, but the images are under exposed and not as good at the canon's. The nikon images have more noise at the higher ISO's . I guess I'll see what the *istDS is all about when it comes out, that camera is small in all the right places :D

EDIT: Oh and I don't really like the canon's inability to use the autofocus light (the flash) without taking a flash picture, but I think that could be fixed by using the flash auto focus locking down the focus and then closing the flash to take the picture. I wonder why nobody thought of those solutions.


The funny thing, is that at high ISO's the images are a wash. At low ISOs the canon has less noise, but also less DETAIL. As far as images being under-exposed, do a search on Nikon's forum on dpreview. They underexpose images to keep the highlights. You just do a quick levels adjustment and you're golden. AND you have you highlight detail. :) The Canon tends to overexpose the highlights, so you lose a bit of detail there.

Maybe it's me, but I don't think this D100 image is underexposed, and it has a similar sensor to the D70 (and is the same sensor in the *ist)


http://www.mikemancini.com/DSC_7202.bw.sepia.glow.jpg

[Moxiemike]

If you need the more advanced features that the D70 offers, it is a great deal. The Digital Rebel is a very good introductory Digital SLR, however.

The kit lens feels a bit cheap, and has a "loose" manual focus, but it performs adequately -- certainly better than any P&S camera I've used. A wide range of lenses for both cameras is available in both the retail and used markets.

Both cameras are available as "body only" for very little difference in price. If this were the case six months ago, I probably would have ended up with a D70 instead of a Rebel. However, I don't regret my purchase one bit.

I don't know how much difference there is between the two cameras' in-camera processing. I've compared photographs from the two cameras on <http://www.pbase.com>, and I can't see much difference. In the end, I guess the photographer makes more of a difference than the choice of camera. I happen to prefer the more photographic look of Canon's images to Nikon's super-realistic look, but if one is that interested in the quality of the processing they will be shooting in the camera's raw format and doing all of the processing on the PC later.

From what I can see on dpreview, the Rebel has a little less noise in the higher ISO settings, but the D70 gives sharper images overall. Since I use the camera's raw format and process on my Mac, I would favour less noise to sharper images.

If you're using RAW images get the D70!!! Sharpening in software = artifacts. Nasty jpg artifacts and halos in conversion. The trade-off of those noiseless canon images is painterly, splotchy images. :) Detail is what counts, and you're not gonna get it from the rebel. If you wanna try, you'll need Canon L glass, which equals expensive!!! ;)

[bousozoku]

Thats odd, everything I've read about the canon lens kit is good. As for the Nikon D70, I've read reviews that compare it to the digital rebel, and they all say it's a wash. The nikon is feature heavy, but the images are under exposed and not as good at the canon's. The nikon images have more noise at the higher ISO's . I guess I'll see what the *istDS is all about when it comes out, that camera is small in all the right places :D

EDIT: Oh and I don't really like the canon's inability to use the autofocus light (the flash) without taking a flash picture, but I think that could be fixed by using the flash auto focus locking down the focus and then closing the flash to take the picture. I wonder why nobody thought of those solutions.

I'd be worried about those reviewers. The only reason to get the Canon kit lens is because you can't afford anything else. It doesn't seem to be made of light, strong materials--just light materials. I'd heard various reports of the mount itself breaking off while the lens is attached to the camera.

I don't believe that the D70 produces under-exposed images in greater quantity than the 300D--it's probably a matter of a Canon fanatic not knowing how to adjust another camera since the 300D works in unusual ways, which is usual for Canon. I love how you have to have three hands to adjust the shutter speed and aperture because they're on the same dial and you need to work another dial at the same time for one or the other setting. What were they thinking?

Another thing against Canon, if you want to use less expensive 3rd party lenses, it could be an expensive gamble as Canon keeps playing with the interface to keep their monopoly intact. Canon glass is great--if you can afford it.

If you're worried about size, maybe you should be looking at the Olympus E-300, coming next month. There is no pentaprism, so it's not all that tall. The lenses are great, but expensive; however, alternatives are coming from Sigma.

[dweebert]

If you're using RAW images get the D70!!! Sharpening in software = artifacts. Nasty jpg artifacts and halos in conversion. The trade-off of those noiseless canon images is painterly, splotchy images. :) Detail is what counts, and you're not gonna get it from the rebel. If you wanna try, you'll need Canon L glass, which equals expensive!!! ;)

I don't understand what you mean here. Sharpening is always being done in software, whether that software is on a computer or on the camera itself.

RAW images have had no processing applied prior to leaving the camera; that's kind of the whole point.

Can you show us a comparison between D70 and DR images that shows that the Nikon's RAW images show more detail than the Canon's RAW images? The images on dpreview's review don't count, as they have been processed with the respective manufacturer's software, rather than something like Photoshop or C1. (Of course, both pictures would have to be taken with equivalent quality glass for a fair comparison.)

[Mac|Photo]

I researched this extensively before changing over from film to digital, and I did not for a second consider the current lens I had because I owned mostly manual focus slow lens and I knew I would be heading towards the faster digitally compatible lens systems.
The D70 only goes down to ISO200 but it is a cleaner image than the resultant ISO100 off of the 300D, especially cleaner than the ISO200 image. If you read into the noise of both cameras more, the Nikon has a more managable and film-like noise whereas the Canon has a very odd noise that many say is strange-looking and more annoying.
On the comment of the D70 being large...well look at other cameras of its class (300D only partially included IMO) and you will see that it is not that much larger than others. In comparison to the 10D and D100 it is actually smaller and easier to handle.
Go to a store, pick up the cameras and hold them, feel the construction and it is an easy decision...although both have compositve bodies the 300D is esentially kids plastic whilst the D70 feels more like it would have a magnesium casing like the higher pro models do.
I do strongly support the lens comment though, because whichever body you decide to go with the lens make all the difference. If you go 300D DO NOT get the kit lens, D70 get it if you like the focal range and can live with the aperature (3.5-4.5 if I'm not mistaken). It is a very crisp and clean lens in my experience.
Blah blah blah, sorry to take so long to say it...but once your in your in for good because lenses cost a ton, and photography is a much more expensive hobby than computing (for most at least) so take your time and make a decision then stick with it.

My .02, enjoy whatever you get, take pictures!

[Westside guy]

When I researched both the Digital Rebel and the D70 before buying, it was pretty apparent that all the reviewers thought the D70 was superior - but that both were good cameras.

Note that some peoples' impressions may be influenced by their previous SLR history. My previous SLR was a Pentax K1000, so I was buying into a new system regardless. :) If I'd been a Canon owner I'd probably have bought the Digital Rebel because of my existing lenses. I thought about the Pentax *ist, and it reviewed well, but did seem to have less bang for the buck (and looked to be targeting a slightly different audience anyway).

I was also influenced by the fact that Canon appears to have intentionally crippled features on the DR.

I must say that the D70 kit lens is wonderful. I also have found the way you can just manually focus at will quite cool (although in truth it's probably been unnecessary, the times I've used that feature).

[roadapple]

Maybe off topic, but does anyone have an opinion about using canon FD lenses with a digital body? Are there any technical reasons why Canon or another manufacture could not produce a digital body that would work with FD lenses? I currently use a photo lab that will scan slides for a minimal cost and I have been thinking about buying a slide scanner, but the convenience of a filmless 5-8 megapixel digital body would be worth a $1000-$1500 price tag.

I realize Canon wants/needs to sell EF equipment, but with all of the great FD lenses out there, there must be a market for this.

[Moxiemike]

Maybe off topic, but does anyone have an opinion about using canon FD lenses with a digital body? Are there any technical reasons why Canon or another manufacture could not produce a digital body that would work with FD lenses? I currently use a photo lab that will scan slides for a minimal cost and I have been thinking about buying a slide scanner, but the convenience of a filmless 5-8 megapixel digital body would be worth a $1000-$1500 price tag.

I realize Canon wants/needs to sell EF equipment, but with all of the great FD lenses out there, there must be a market for this.

Canon is like Microsoft in that respect. You'll never be able to use those FD lenses with anyting other than old Canon film SLRs.

Even with a Nikon D100, you can use the old MF Nikkors, but you can;'t meter. Grab a D2h or D1 series and you can use those old MF nikkors just as if they were new AF Nikkors. Kudos.

Sell your FDs and move to a new system is about your only bet. If you REALLY wanna use old MF primes (and believe me, I know why you would) grab a used D1x for 1700 (6mp, 10mp interpolated) and trade the FDs for MF Nikkors. :)

[dweebert]

Maybe off topic, but does anyone have an opinion about using canon FD lenses with a digital body? Are there any technical reasons why Canon or another manufacture could not produce a digital body that would work with FD lenses? I currently use a photo lab that will scan slides for a minimal cost and I have been thinking about buying a slide scanner, but the convenience of a filmless 5-8 megapixel digital body would be worth a $1000-$1500 price tag.

There are adapters available to put your FD lenses onto an EF body. It might be worth it if you have some really good glass and you don't mind the lack of automatic features with the FD lenses, but it is not a good plan to "cheap out" on lenses. (i.e. You won't save all that much money on the low end, and you end up giving up more than it's worth.)

[jared_kipe]

I personally think the image is underexposed. Why? Look at her eye's, if a camera is supposed to take an image of what our eyes perceive, then an observer would see a more neutral brightness all over , and would be able to see the corner in her right eye. Just my opinion, still an effective picture.

dcresource.com has great night shot noise shots, while the monitor is bad here at the college, I do remember the 1600ISO of the rebel being completely useful, not so much on the nikon. As for lenses, I thought the canon's kit was pretty good, but I haven't gotten the chance to use a D70, also I was able to take good pictures of my girlfriend using the Rebel in the apple store with no prior experiance with canon's digital controls. I don't know what you meant about having to use two dials at once. As for the feel of the canon lens... who cares? Shouldn't you treat your camera with respect so it never gets injured? You'd be hard pressed to find a comparable lense for $100, I think I would have to go with the kit lense, unless maybe I got the canon sub kit lens and bought a $400 lens which would be what it would cost to get the D70 with lens kit.

[bousozoku]

...
dcresource.com has great night shot noise shots, while the monitor is bad here at the college, I do remember the 1600ISO of the rebel being completely useful, not so much on the nikon. As for lenses, I thought the canon's kit was pretty good, but I haven't gotten the chance to use a D70, also I was able to take good pictures of my girlfriend using the Rebel in the apple store with no prior experiance with canon's digital controls. I don't know what you meant about having to use two dials at once. As for the feel of the canon lens... who cares? Shouldn't you treat your camera with respect so it never gets injured? You'd be hard pressed to find a comparable lense for $100, I think I would have to go with the kit lense, unless maybe I got the canon sub kit lens and bought a $400 lens which would be what it would cost to get the D70 with lens kit.

I'm the one who mentioned the single dial, three hands method to settings. The dial toward the back on the top of the 300D operates both the aperture and shutter speed, but you have to press a button to change the function. By the time you mess with it, your shot should be gone. Besides, you've taken your eyes away from it and need to re-focus anyway. It's a typical Canon ergonomic coup.

As far as the kit lens goes, it is unlikely to hold up to much stress at all, regardless of the respect you give it. It works but that's all. You might be hard-pressed to find a comparable lens for $100 but why would you want either?

The Nikon is twice the camera and lens for $300 more at retail pricing.

[dweebert]

I'm the one who mentioned the single dial, three hands method to settings. The dial toward the back on the top of the 300D operates both the aperture and shutter speed, but you have to press a button to change the function. By the time you mess with it, your shot should be gone. Besides, you've taken your eyes away from it and need to re-focus anyway. It's a typical Canon ergonomic coup.

It's a one-handed operation for me. Once your thumb can find the exposure button on its own, you don't have to take your eyes off the subject.

If my shot is moving fast enough to be lost in this process, I'm not going to be mucking around with the exposure manually anyway. I'd only be using manual settings for still subjects or in primarily static lighting conditions.

[madmaxmedia]

Lastly, all Canon DSLR's have a VERY heavy image processing algorithm that, while it makes images seem clean and noiseless, also makes images look "painterly" and soft. The D70 has less anti-aliasing, so images are sharp. Very sharp. One downfall is a bit of moire on the D70 but that can be fixed with photoshop. Lost detail from Canon's smudgey image processing CANNOT be fixed.

WRONG. The Canon DSLRs have LESS image processing, which is why images come out typically less sharp. However, any detailed reviews (such as from dpreview.com) will tell you that the Canon DSLR's capture just as much detail as comparable cameras. All digital cameras do in-camera sharpening, the Canons just have a little less. Some prefer to do sharpening on their computers, which adds a step but can deliver cleaner results. Of course, most all DSLRs have adjustable levels of sharpening, so you can pick what's right for you REGARDLESS of the brand of camera.

I'd grab a D70 with kit lens for $1199 after rebate if you're really serious about learning photography or whatnot. If you want a glorified P&S camera, get the rebel. If you're an MP junkie, get the 20d. :)

You're obviously a Nikon fan, which is great. But to call a DRebel a glorified P&S is really WAY off the mark. The DRebel has many significant advantages over any point and shoot digicam, if they're not obvious to you then I would refrain from making such statements.

The D70 seems priced in between the DRebel and the 20D, and perhaps close to the going rate of the 10D. And feature-wise it certainly has more than the somewhat crippled Rebel (Canon deliberately removed some features so it wouldn't take all the sales from the 10D, but still uses the same CMOS sensor and AF sensor.) My suggestion for any is to-

1. Read in-depth reviews rather than anecdotal feedback from indivduals
2. Check out sample images, what you prefer may not be the same as others
3. Try to handle the cameras in a store, or even better borrow a friend's to take out shooting

I have owned a Canon D30 and a DRebel, they're excellent cameras. But obviously the Nikons are great as well, these are the 2 best selling DSLR brands to my knowledge, so obviously both have their great points.

To be honest, the great factor in someone deciding between DSLR A, B, or C is if he/she already owns lenses from one system. If someone had a lot of Nikon glass I would certainly never try to convince them to buy a Canon or Minolta.

[jared_kipe]

It's a one-handed operation for me. Once your thumb can find the exposure button on its own, you don't have to take your eyes off the subject.

If my shot is moving fast enough to be lost in this process, I'm not going to be mucking around with the exposure manually anyway. I'd only be using manual settings for still subjects or in primarily static lighting conditions.

Thats exactly what I was doing. The thumb presses the button and your pointer finger uses the scroll wheel.

[dweebert]

Another thing against Canon, if you want to use less expensive 3rd party lenses, it could be an expensive gamble as Canon keeps playing with the interface to keep their monopoly intact. Canon glass is great--if you can afford it.

The problem is that the interface was not published anywhere, and was reverse-engineered by lens manufacturers like Sigma. Many older third-party lenses stopped working, but old Canon EF lenses still work fine, indicating that the interface was not being played with "to keep their monopoly intact," but that newer cameras are a little stricter in their requirements of the interface.

I believe that Canon has actually licensed some third-partiers (Tamron for one), and their lenses also appear to remain compatible.

[bousozoku]

The problem is that the interface was not published anywhere, and was reverse-engineered by lens manufacturers like Sigma. Many older third-party lenses stopped working, but old Canon EF lenses still work fine, indicating that the interface was not being played with "to keep their monopoly intact," but that newer cameras are a little stricter in their requirements of the interface.

I believe that Canon has actually licensed some third-partiers (Tamron for one), and their lenses also appear to remain compatible.

Interesting that you mentioned Tamron. Fewer than two weeks ago, my buddy with the 300D and I went to the camera store and we were talking about a specific lens that won several awards recently. The salesperson with whom we talked said that it's an amazing lens and works on many cameras but with Canon, it's a guess as to whether it works. He'd seen it work fine on the older models but that Canon has apparently changed things a bit.

I hope they get things worked out. However, as far back as I remember, and I was selling cameras back in the late 1970s, Canon has been very much for not working with anyone else.

[jared_kipe]

Well I love Minolta camera's but they really need a good budget DSLR or SLR type camera. Panasonic is doing lovely things with their Leica Lenses with optical stabilizing, if only they would make a budget DSLR. If money is tight I might just get a panasonic like the FZ20 or FZ7 until I can afford a rebel and the $500 EF-S 17-85mm (isn't the fastest lens out there).

[BakedBeans]

i agree with mad max,

basically

nikon snobs will say nikon
cannon snobs will say cannon

i would probably say the d70 is slightly better than the rebel, but for d70 money you could get a 10D, which is nicer camera than the D70, it really depends what your going to be doing with the camera...

a d70 or 300d/rebel will satisfy most enthusiasts, they both have fair specs,
but to say a digirebel is a glorified point and shoot.... :rolleyes: :eek: ;)

we all have our preferences but woooow

[Moxiemike]

Well I love Minolta camera's but they really need a good budget DSLR or SLR type camera. Panasonic is doing lovely things with their Leica Lenses with optical stabilizing, if only they would make a budget DSLR. If money is tight I might just get a panasonic like the FZ20 or FZ7 until I can afford a rebel and the $500 EF-S 17-85mm (isn't the fastest lens out there).

Why not get the Maxxum 7 Digital??? It should be on shelves soon, 6mp is probably MORE than enough for, especially if you shoot raw, and it has STUNNING image quality (i gotta hand it to Minolta there-- the 7d looks to be nicer, image-wise, than any of the other DSLRs in its range, including the D70) AND it has mage stabilization built it! So no need to buy expensive IS Canon L lenses or VR Nikkor lenses......it's compelling, for sure!

[jared_kipe]

Why not get the Maxxum 7 Digital??? It should be on shelves soon, 6mp is probably MORE than enough for, especially if you shoot raw, and it has STUNNING image quality (i gotta hand it to Minolta there-- the 7d looks to be nicer, image-wise, than any of the other DSLRs in its range, including the D70) AND it has mage stabilization built it! So no need to buy expensive IS Canon L lenses or VR Nikkor lenses......it's compelling, for sure!

Because the 7D is supposed to be like $1600-1700, thats quite a bit more than the D70, thats above the Canon 20D at $1600. That said the 20D would most likely be the camera I would get if I had $1600 to spend, and I don't think I do.

[madmaxmedia]

If you really want a DSLR, you might be better buying a DRebel and just using the kit lens until you can afford another lens. If you buy a compact digicam, you'll just end up losing money later on it when you do buy a DSLR.

Minolta is coming out sometime with a Maxxum 7D digital, but I believe it will be much pricier ($1600 or so for body alone.) Olympus is coming out with their E-300 camera which looks very interesting, based on the new proposed 4/3 format. It seems to be in your price range-

http://www.dpreview.com/articles/olympuse300/

Another option would be to look for older models on EBay, such as the 10D, or even D60 which would save you more money. I personally bought a D30 a year and half ago (loved it!), and just sold it to get a DRebel (the advantages outweighed the disadvantages for me.) You should really consider what you want to do with the camera, only then can you look at the Rebel feature list and determine if it will hamper you in any way. I can live without things like flash exposure compensation, especially because I use natural light as much as possible. Some of these features can actually be restored with a widely available firmware hack... ;)

I'm not familiar with the Nikons so I don't know what options you would have with older Nikons, but I'm sure there are some good ones.

PS- Also, both Nikon and Canon are offering substantial rebates, you should make sure you check them out. For Canon, I got a $100 rebate off the DRebel kit, bringing the price to only $700. If I buy one of the selected lenses (I'm looking at the 50 mm 1.4), I'll end up getting $30 off the lens, and my Rebel rebate doubles to $200. The 50 mm 1.4 normally costs around $300 (too much for me when the 50mm 1.8 is a super, super value), but for essentially a $130 discount it's very tempting...

[dweebert]

Well I love Minolta camera's but they really need a good budget DSLR or SLR type camera. Panasonic is doing lovely things with their Leica Lenses with optical stabilizing, if only they would make a budget DSLR. If money is tight I might just get a panasonic like the FZ20 or FZ7 until I can afford a rebel and the $500 EF-S 17-85mm (isn't the fastest lens out there).

The Rebel's kit lens isn't *that* bad. It's obviously not as good as other lenses, but it's not really going to be any worse than you find on a $500 P&S.

The way I see it, if you spend $500 on a P&S camera, that's $500 more you have to save before you can get your SLR, and you have no upgrade path. Why not buy the Rebel (or D70) with whatever lens you can afford now, and then start saving for the better lens? (There are some great deals available on used lenses BTW.)

[madmaxmedia]

The Rebel's kit lens isn't *that* bad. It's obviously not as good as other lenses, but it's not really going to be any worse than you find on a $500 P&S.

Most reviews say it is better than most compact digicams (at least under $500 or so.) It's cheap because it's not a full-frame 35 mm lens, and is made of cheaper materials. Just like consumer digicam lenses.

[lasuther]

Here is a review of the lens that comes with the Digital Rebel.

http://www.photo.net/equipment/canon/efs18-55/review/\

As stated before, there is a rebate out on the digital rebel. You get double or triple the rebate if you buy multiple products. If you buy two additional lenses, you’ll get $300 off of the price. That makes the Digital Rebel about $480. I was looking at getting the Digital Rebel ($780-$200 rebate) and the 28-135mm IS lens ($410-$30 Rebate). Both will run me about $960. I think that’s a good deal.

lasuther

[bousozoku]

...
Olympus is coming out with their E-300 camera which looks very interesting, based on the new proposed 4/3 format. It seems to be in your price range-

http://www.dpreview.com/articles/olympuse300/
...

The 4/3 format hasn't been just a proposition for almost a year. If my experience with the E-1 is indicative of what is coming with the E-300, it's going to have a bright future. The pricing should be good and they've delivered on lower cost lenses.

[madmaxmedia]

The 4/3 format hasn't been just a proposition for almost a year. If my experience with the E-1 is indicative of what is coming with the E-300, it's going to have a bright future. The pricing should be good and they've delivered on lower cost lenses.

Sorry, bad choice of words. I actually knew that it was a real system, I guess I meant "new 4/3" format...It's just the E-300 camera that isn't out yet.

[jared_kipe]

If you really want a DSLR, you might be better buying a DRebel and just using the kit lens until you can afford another lens. If you buy a compact digicam, you'll just end up losing money later on it when you do buy a DSLR.

Minolta is coming out sometime with a Maxxum 7D digital, but I believe it will be much pricier ($1600 or so for body alone.) Olympus is coming out with their E-300 camera which looks very interesting, based on the new proposed 4/3 format. It seems to be in your price range-

http://www.dpreview.com/articles/olympuse300/

Another option would be to look for older models on EBay, such as the 10D, or even D60 which would save you more money. I personally bought a D30 a year and half ago (loved it!), and just sold it to get a DRebel (the advantages outweighed the disadvantages for me.) You should really consider what you want to do with the camera, only then can you look at the Rebel feature list and determine if it will hamper you in any way. I can live without things like flash exposure compensation, especially because I use natural light as much as possible. Some of these features can actually be restored with a widely available firmware hack... ;)

I'm not familiar with the Nikons so I don't know what options you would have with older Nikons, but I'm sure there are some good ones.

PS- Also, both Nikon and Canon are offering substantial rebates, you should make sure you check them out. For Canon, I got a $100 rebate off the DRebel kit, bringing the price to only $700. If I buy one of the selected lenses (I'm looking at the 50 mm 1.4), I'll end up getting $30 off the lens, and my Rebel rebate doubles to $200. The 50 mm 1.4 normally costs around $300 (too much for me when the 50mm 1.8 is a super, super value), but for essentially a $130 discount it's very tempting...

OMG I had no idea people were selling the 10D for less than the digital rebel on ebay, usually when I look I only see basically the same price as if you went out and got one yourself. And thanks for the heads up on the firmware update. I know about the rebates, and since canon has theirs till end of january, maybe thats what I'll do.

Yet, the reason I started this I forgot about, with both manufacturers having the rebates it would make sense that they are getting rid of stock to release an update to the line. Does anybody know of any canonrumors.com or something that could shed some light on this matter?

[MacBandit]

OMG I had no idea people were selling the 10D for less than the digital rebel on ebay, usually when I look I only see basically the same price as if you went out and got one yourself. And thanks for the heads up on the firmware update. I know about the rebates, and since canon has theirs till end of january, maybe thats what I'll do.

Yet, the reason I started this I forgot about, with both manufacturers having the rebates it would make sense that they are getting rid of stock to release an update to the line. Does anybody know of any canonrumors.com or something that could shed some light on this matter?

It's unlikely that Canon plans on replacing the 300D anytime soon as they just announced a black body model. The rebates are most likely simply promotions to sell Christmas presents.

http://www.dpreview.com/news/0411/04110201canon_rebelblackus.asp

But if you are truly a rumor and speculation fan read this thread at DPReview.com.

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1000&message=11006182

[madmaxmedia]

OMG I had no idea people were selling the 10D for less than the digital rebel on ebay, usually when I look I only see basically the same price as if you went out and got one yourself. And thanks for the heads up on the firmware update. I know about the rebates, and since canon has theirs till end of january, maybe thats what I'll do.

Well, I don't know what the going prices are, I just meant that it was another option. I would expect that the D60 could be found for cheaper, but not too much if you end up using the Rebel rebate and buying a lens to double the rebate.

The Rebel has better AF than the D60 though (same AF system as the 10D.)

[jared_kipe]

Well, I don't know what the going prices are, I just meant that it was another option. I would expect that the D60 could be found for cheaper, but not too much if you end up using the Rebel rebate and buying a lens to double the rebate.

The Rebel has better AF than the D60 though (same AF system as the 10D.)

That in mind, I think the rebel with the firmware hack would be the best option.

Oh and the black one has been available for quite some time, just not in america, there was even a guy on macrumors selling one he bought from canada a while back.

[madmaxmedia]

That in mind, I think the rebel with the firmware hack would be the best option.

Oh and the black one has been available for quite some time, just not in america, there was even a guy on macrumors selling one he bought from canada a while back.


I pretty much agree, especially if you can take advantage of the double and triple rebate offer.

Even if you only want 1 extra lens, if you have some experience/feedback on EBay, you can sell the extra lens as brand new and get almost full retail value. You thus net another $100 back from Canon.

I am going to buy the 50 mm 1.4, and 85 mm 1.8. I will be keeping the 50 mm 1.4 as an upgrade over my 50 mm 1.8 (will sell that too for a little extra cash), and will be selling the 85 mm 1.8 as well (I'm not going to even try the lens out, so I can sell it as brand new.)

My total rebate from Canon? An eye-popping $390!!! (3x $100 for the Rebel, 3x $15 for each of the 2 lenses.)

[iGary]

I'm a 300D owner.

If you are buying in the next three months, bite the bullet and spend the extra bucks for the EOS D20 - I'll be buying one soon and keep the 300D as a second body.

The D20 is close in price, has a magnesium body (versus plastic), a larger sensor, larger burst rate, mirror lockup etc etc etc

If you can afford it, go with the D20.

[efoto]

Interesting that you mentioned Tamron.

From my experiences and from many many reviews, you might want to walk, or preferably RUN away from Tamron lenses. Some third party vendors make some decent glass (Sigma in some cases) but it is lens specific, so make sure to read reviews on it prior to purchasing it. I have not read many good reviews of Tamron however, so there is my warning...proceed at your own risk.

[bousozoku]

From my experiences and from many many reviews, you might want to walk, or preferably RUN away from Tamron lenses. Some third party vendors make some decent glass (Sigma in some cases) but it is lens specific, so make sure to read reviews on it prior to purchasing it. I have not read many good reviews of Tamron however, so there is my warning...proceed at your own risk.

Yes, and in the old days, I would not have recommended any 3rd party glass. Vivitar sold pretty well in the small telephoto range but that was a long time ago.

The Tamron lens is question had won some important award but I was not familiar with it since I don't have a camera to which it would mount. The salesperson at the store is knowledgeable and made his assessment over all 3rd party lenses and their ability to work with Canon bodies. Nikon, Minolta, Pentax--yes, Canon--don't bet anything on them working.

[jared_kipe]

I'm a 300D owner.

If you are buying in the next three months, bite the bullet and spend the extra bucks for the EOS D20 - I'll be buying one soon and keep the 300D as a second body.

The D20 is close in price, has a magnesium body (versus plastic), a larger sensor, larger burst rate, mirror lockup etc etc etc

If you can afford it, go with the D20.

You've gotta be kidding right?? I can find the Digital Rebel for $730 without kit lens, and the 20D for $1500, last time I checked that was more than twice as much. Thats like saying, if you're going to be getting the high end 17" imac right now, you might as well bite the bullet and get a Dual 2.5GHz Powermac. Some of us have $1500 to blow on a camera, and the rest WISH they had $1500. But they aren't the same people, not by a long shot.

[jared_kipe]

On second thought, maybe I could make your 20D price lighter, say... by 600-700 depending on color and the inclusion of the kit lens.