This will sound like a broken record

[Steev]

Hi to all--
I'm a newb to the forums, and I HATE to sound like everyone else with the typical "Tell me what camera to buy!", or "Help me choose what camera!" etc, etc, BUT I'm afraid I fall into that category...

Here's my deal--
Aspiring photographer (but a rookie) that is about to upgrade to a dSLR... I will try to start my own business doing this so my hardware is crucial...
I have no lenses, so body and lens kit is needed...
Becuase of price, it's narrowed it down to Rebel XT, Nikon D70, and Nikon D50 (the Evolt E300 didn't really impress me with the sample shots in the review-- just too soft)... I'm not sure about the size and feel-- I like big and heavy, but the small and light is cool too... I've read the reviews of each of these a million times, but still can't decide... The Rebel has a couple cool things that I would like to have, but the D70 is the same way.... It seems that the shots from the D50 are sometimes better than the D70 (especially ISO)... The Rebel XT supports USB 2, AND is 8MP... The sample shots from the reviews were all excellent... The D50 seems more like a 'junior' model of the D70 and is good for beginners, like me...
I will be buying lenses as time goes by, so that is another factor...

Man, I just don't know... I know that it comes down to what feels good to me and what I want, AND no one can choose but me!

Thanks!
Steev

Also, from anyones personal experience, how does blowing up to 11X14 or even 20X30, with 6MP compared to 8MP?

[ReF]

hey there. if you're planning to blow up pictures to that size, it would probably be a good idea to get as many MP as you can. who knows when you'll need to crop. sometimes you might have to crop A LOT. you should be able to get by pretty well with interpolation, but not if it's one of those "small detail shots."

what are your lens needs?

[TheObiJuan]

something I just realized is if you do like to crop to get the image to be composed the way you like it after you shoot it, then you want to print it at 8x10, you have to crop it again!

How high is your budget? The KM 7D ain't bad, and at 1300 it's IS makes it a great value.

[ReF]

i was thinking the same about the KM a while ago. it's a little expensive compared to the 6mp nikons, 10d, 300d, and pentax, but you buy one nice tele lens without the IS and the extra cost of the KM pretty much pays for itself already. plus it "makes" ALL of your lenses stabilized! :eek: can all you 24/28-70/75mm f2.8 lens users imagine it with IS?!

for example, i've been shopping for a IS tele lens. what i really want is the canon 70-200 f2.8 IS with a 1.4x extender but can't afford it. if i bought the KM with a Sigma 70-200 f2.8 i'd save $800 on the lens :eek:

the KM sounds great if you've got the cash and can live with lower MP.

[cwphoto]

If your business aspirations are high it would make sense to start with a brand which has a pro-grade platform as well as a consumer line. Realistically, this leaves you with only Nikon or Canon.

Even though the other brands make fantastic consumer systems, if this business turns into something serious you will most likely want to switch to a platform with more grunt one day.

Name your poison, both companies have great products to offer. I would have thought that the D70s would be a more logical choice than the D50 though, although the cheaper camera may allow you to afford better lenses.

[jamison55]

If you are planning to go "pro", than the Nikons offer two advantages over the XT: The infallible Nikon flash metering system, and a more professional appearance. If Canon if your choice (as it was mine) you are better off saving for a 20D for the more professional appearance. As someone who started his business with a Digital Rebel, I was the "pro" at a few weddings where guests had better equipment. 8mp vs 6mp doesn't make much of a difference when it comes to enlargements. I presently shoot with an 8mp 20D and a 6mp 10D, and have made wonderful 11x14 enlargements from both. Keep in mind, the body is only the starting point, good glass makes the difference (i.e. a Digital Rebel with "L" glass will take better pictures than a 1DsMkII with a cheap lens), so make sure you leave some money for the lenses. And as always, it's the photographer...not the camera! Good Luck!

[Rhys]

If you are planning to go "pro", than the Nikons offer two advantages over the XT: The infallible Nikon flash metering system, and a more professional appearance. If Canon if your choice (as it was mine) you are better off saving for a 20D for the more professional appearance. As someone who started his business with a Digital Rebel, I was the "pro" at a few weddings where guests had better equipment. 8mp vs 6mp doesn't make much of a difference when it comes to enlargements. I presently shoot with an 8mp 20D and a 6mp 10D, and have made wonderful 11x14 enlargements from both. Keep in mind, the body is only the starting point, good glass makes the difference (i.e. a Digital Rebel with "L" glass will take better pictures than a 1DsMkII with a cheap lens), so make sure you leave some money for the lenses. And as always, it's the photographer...not the camera! Good Luck!

I have an XT with Canon 18-55 f3.5 and Canon 50 f1.8. I'm waiting for the Tamron 28-70 f2.8 to return to the shops. The Canon lenses are quite capable but neither are stunning. Oddly enough, when I used Nikon, the most stunning lens I had was my Tamron f2.8 135mm lens.

I think you have to think lenses firsts then bodies. Personally I use an XT and disagree that 8 vs 6mp isn't a big difference. It's enough of a difference to make it worthwhile to get the extra oomph.

[D70FAN]

Hi to all--
I'm a newb to the forums, and I HATE to sound like everyone else with the typical "Tell me what camera to buy!", or "Help me choose what camera!" etc, etc, BUT I'm afraid I fall into that category...

Here's my deal--
Aspiring photographer (but a rookie) that is about to upgrade to a dSLR... I will try to start my own business doing this so my hardware is crucial...
I have no lenses, so body and lens kit is needed...
Becuase of price, it's narrowed it down to Rebel XT, Nikon D70, and Nikon D50 (the Evolt E300 didn't really impress me with the sample shots in the review-- just too soft)... I'm not sure about the size and feel-- I like big and heavy, but the small and light is cool too... I've read the reviews of each of these a million times, but still can't decide... The Rebel has a couple cool things that I would like to have, but the D70 is the same way.... It seems that the shots from the D50 are sometimes better than the D70 (especially ISO)... The Rebel XT supports USB 2, AND is 8MP... The sample shots from the reviews were all excellent... The D50 seems more like a 'junior' model of the D70 and is good for beginners, like me...
I will be buying lenses as time goes by, so that is another factor...

Man, I just don't know... I know that it comes down to what feels good to me and what I want, AND no one can choose but me!

Thanks!
Steev

Also, from anyones personal experience, how does blowing up to 11X14 or even 20X30, with 6MP compared to 8MP?

Not to put too fine an edge on it but...

I see a lot of full-time professional photographers using D70's and 20D's. I have yet to see one buying or using an XT. There are reasons for this, not the least of which is overall ergonomics and opperation.

The D50 would serve you well, but lacks several features that you will find necessary for professional photography, and at this point the D70 with the very nice 18-70 DX Nikkor is the same price (while they last) as the D50 or XT ($999 after $100 Rebate).

I own a D70, and gave very serious thought to the 20D, but for the cost difference I could not justify it, but then, like most here, I am an amature.

Both the D70 and 20D are great cameras to use, but I think that the D70 is the best value out there.

[Ray Schnoor]

I have an XT with Canon 18-55 f3.5 and Canon 50 f1.8. I'm waiting for the Tamron 28-70 f2.8 to return to the shops. The Canon lenses are quite capable but neither are stunning. Oddly enough, when I used Nikon, the most stunning lens I had was my Tamron f2.8 135mm lens.

I think you have to think lenses firsts then bodies. Personally I use an XT and disagree that 8 vs 6mp isn't a big difference. It's enough of a difference to make it worthwhile to get the extra oomph.
Weren't you saying a year or two ago that unless you at least double the MP, it isn't worth the fuss?;) I believe that this was when you were comparing 2MP to 3MP or maybe 3MP to 5MP.
Ray.

[Rhys]

Weren't you saying a year or two ago that unless you at least double the MP, it isn't worth the fuss?;) I believe that this was when you were comparing 2MP to 3MP or maybe 3MP to 5MP.
Ray.

Yes. Unless you double the MP from 4 to 8, it's not worth the fuss. Now a nice 8 megapixel camera will produce a 150dpi image of 23 x 15. Drop the dpi a smidgeon (maybe down to 144 dpi) and yoou have a 24 x 16 print. Now a Nikon D70 just can't do that and at the same quality.

[Ray Schnoor]

Yes. Unless you double the MP from 4 to 8, it's not worth the fuss. Now a nice 8 megapixel camera will produce a 150dpi image of 23 x 15. Drop the dpi a smidgeon (maybe down to 144 dpi) and yoou have a 24 x 16 print. Now a Nikon D70 just can't do that and at the same quality.
So I assume that 6 to 8 is not worth the fuss, only if you go from 6 to 12?
Ray.

[timmciglobal]

I'd just like to disagree on the XT not being used by pros. In fact the XT + grip is pretty effective and very good hand support with nearly identical image quality to the 20D. The reason you don't see it being used is the shutter life duration isn't up to "pro" stanards and once you factor in grip + replacing a shutter you might as well buy the 20D.

Keep in mind though if an average person took 1,500 pictures a month and the shutter fails at half at 25K clicks that 17 months without needing a new shutter. Canon can replace shutters for as little as 200$ it's not the end of the world either.

Tim

[aparmley]

something I just realized is if you do like to crop to get the image to be composed the way you like it after you shoot it, then you want to print it at 8x10, you have to crop it again!

How high is your budget? The KM 7D ain't bad, and at 1300 it's IS makes it a great value.

Unless, you know you want an 8x10 before hand and just crop it with an 8x10 cropping tool.... one crop ready to print... :D

What I like to do and really this is personal preferrence, I never edit an orginal and save it as the orginal file name... if I want to print something or post something I edit the original to fit the bill and then save it with an alternate name so I can keep going back to the original and not worrry about getting an 8x10 out of a crop of the original file that was resaved after a crop of 4x6...[if you follow that LOL]

:|[Edit]|:

As far as adding my two cents towards the topic of the thread... I think if you are going to seriously consider making money off of it you can make it work with the XT - but if you can afford the 20D then its a no brainer really. But if $1100+ is too high for your "body-budget" then I can recommend the XT + battery grip + plus great lens (maybe the Tamron 28-70) + 2 - 1 GB CF cards and you can get going and start making great images that can sell. I have sold a few images I took with my Canon A95 5MP Point and Shoot at 8x10 crops... so one should be able to assume you could do the same with XT, enough in a year, if you work at it, to afford new, better equipment. then you have a solid back up you know intimately and can be confident with... Thats my plan anyways..

[D70FAN]

Yes. Unless you double the MP from 4 to 8, it's not worth the fuss. Now a nice 8 megapixel camera will produce a 150dpi image of 23 x 15. Drop the dpi a smidgeon (maybe down to 144 dpi) and yoou have a 24 x 16 print. Now a Nikon D70 just can't do that and at the same quality.

I think you were better off using the lens as the primary quality factor. To print anything over 11 x 14 you need to upsample to 300dpi anyway. If you consider 150dpi prints as professional grade, then good luck on selling those wedding shots, or any other print.

When I go in to my local camera store print lab, for a 16 x 20 or larger, I have to upsample to 300dpi, or they will charge me extra to do so. But then I even do that with 11 x 14's and 13 x 19's on the 2000P, so it's nothing new.

I'll ignore the D70 comment as it shows how much you have yet to learn.

[Steev]

First-- Thank you all SO much for the input! Each of you that replied have helped and gave me more to think about, so I really appreciate it....

As far as lenses, I'm thinking a nice 200 to 300 tele, and a nice macro, to begin with in the near future...

As far as 'pro', all I mean is the 'money making' end of it within my local settings doing minor stuff like portfolios, sports stuff, or maybe even portrait stuff, and NOT some hotshot with a massive gallery opening or being the lead photo guy at some big company...

Also let me add that I'm restricted to buying from this one store because that's the only place I have credit for the range up to $2000... I know, that totally sucks, but I don't have credit cards or the flat out cash... Being only one store also limits me to models, seeing how they only have 8 SLRs...

Thanks again!

**EDIT**-------------
I just realized the the KM Maxxum 7D is also a possiblity....
I read the review just now and it's got some really cool stuff on it, and takes some GREAT shots!!
The place where I have to buy from has it for $1600, but that's WITH the 28-100 lens kit!
Geez, something else to think about..........ugh!

[aparmley]

Not to confuse you any more but what I said earlier about the XT, making money with it, upgrading etc... That could be said just the same with the D50 or D70(s) as well... Like OBI said, its the person behind the camera... but either way I don't think you'll be disappointed.

[erichlund]

I think you were better off using the lens as the primary quality factor. To print anything over 11 x 14 you need to upsample to 300dpi anyway. If you consider 150dpi prints as professional grade, then good luck on selling those wedding shots, or any other print.

When I go in to my local camera store print lab, for a 16 x 20 or larger, I have to upsample to 300dpi, or they will charge me extra to do so. But then I even do that with 11 x 14's and 13 x 19's on the 2000P, so it's nothing new.

I'll ignore the D70 comment as it shows how much you have yet to learn.

I think I finally have Rhys figured out. Whatever his current purchase is will determine his current position. Facts have very little to do with it. Remember, last year about this time, it was Rhys proclaiming that 3 megapixels was all anyone ever needed. Now that he has 8, it seems that 6 isn't good enough anymore. And Nikon is the evil empire because his lenses don't work well enough with the D70. Therefore, Nikon's are bad cameras. Solid becomes too heavy, when in reality, it's the glass that will contribute the most weight, especially if you buy good glass, and the difference in the camera weight becomes trivial. C'est la vie.

Cheers,
Eric

[Steev]

Like OBI said, its the person behind the camera... but either way I don't think you'll be disappointed.

Yea, I think you're probably right.... Thanks!

[cwphoto]

I'd just like to disagree on the XT not being used by pros. In fact the XT + grip is pretty effective and very good hand support with nearly identical image quality to the 20D. The reason you don't see it being used is the shutter life duration isn't up to "pro" stanards and once you factor in grip + replacing a shutter you might as well buy the 20D.

Keep in mind though if an average person took 1,500 pictures a month and the shutter fails at half at 25K clicks that 17 months without needing a new shutter. Canon can replace shutters for as little as 200$ it's not the end of the world either.

Tim

The life of the shutter is perhaps number ten on the list of reasons why pros don't use XTs.

More important (but in no particular order and dependant upon use and manufacturer):
* Frame rate
* Media write speed
* Focusing speed
* Focusing flexibility (number of points, AF with slower lens combos etc)
* Media redundancy (multiple slots)
* Weather sealing
* Sensor size
* White balance (eg; direct input of Kelvin values)
* Ruggedness/Strength
* Ergonomics
* Personal customisation
* Professional manufacturer support (CPS etc)
* ISO range
* Image compression levels

This is why cameras such as the EOS-1 series and Nikon D1/D2-series exist. In some cases, a D20 or a D70 may prove adequate - but I'm yet to see anyone serious using XTs or D50s (unless you were starting out).

[D70FAN]

The life of the shutter is perhaps number ten on the list of reasons why pros don't use XTs.

More important (but in no particular order and dependant upon use and manufacturer):
* Frame rate
* Media write speed
* Focusing speed
* Focusing flexibility (number of points, AF with slower lens combos etc)
* Media redundancy (multiple slots)
* Weather sealing
* Sensor size
* White balance (eg; direct input of Kelvin values)
* Ruggedness/Strength
* Ergonomics
* Personal customisation
* Professional manufacturer support (CPS etc)
* ISO range
* Image compression levels

This is why cameras such as the EOS-1 series and Nikon D1/D2-series exist. In some cases, a D20 or a D70 may prove adequate - but I'm yet to see anyone serious using XTs or D50s (unless you were starting out).

Most of the reasons above really don't hold much water. Unless you have a pole of professional photographers it's not valid.

Probably the only big difference between the XT and every other camera is it's size and arguably poor control interface. Beyond that, it's technically as good as any and, in many cases, better than several others in the consumer dSLR ranks and even some of the older pro cameras.

Had Canon retained the original 300D ergonomics the XT would be a runaway hit with pros, but at $500 less, the 20D would have been orphened. As it is, the XT is a hit with the all-in-one shooters and the 20D remains as a Canon low cost pro favorite.

You can't argue with the success the XT has had in the market, and when people get tired of the poor ergonomics they will have to have a new mount for thier lens collections... and it may be the 20D. Not a bad stategy. ;)

[TheObiJuan]

You and others keep mentioning poor ergonomics, what are some examples?
It doesn't have a big jog wheel like the 20D, but neither does the d70 or 300D.
The cd door is stronger with the 350D. The camera makes it easier to view photos or delete 'em. I find that a good part of ergonomics.
The grip added on to the camera make it a lot easier and more comfortable to hold longer lenses, but with small primes and zooms, the small size makes the camera a breeze to hold. Shooting is not akward.
The camera may be fiberglass reinforced polycarbonate, but it is solid. The mamiya dz's exterior is made of the same stuff. ;)

The LCD panel gives a lot of info, and what is needed. Including a nice button for LCD backlighting. ;)

The viewfinder is brighter, gives more magnification, and is slightly more accurate than the more 'pro like' d70. To me the viewfinder is the fundamental interaction between the photog and camera.

The metal knob to change camera modes is a real nice touch, it clicks and makes you sure you are in the mode you want. I really like the feel and finish too.

[Bluedog]

Has there ever been a camera that takes it on the chin more than the 350D/XT ... :rolleyes:

Some of these comments you guys are posting are getting funnier each time you post 'em ... sooner or later your drums gonna get a hole in it ... :D

[aparmley]

while Obji and Blue are making valid arguements I feel I must add this to the pot as well. I feel like it really has been overlooked due to the many attributes that become targeted as either one of two things, a pro or a con. The camera is fun to use. Plain and simple. Its fun... ;)

[D70FAN]

while Obji and Blue are making valid arguements I feel I must add this to the pot as well. I feel like it really has been overlooked due to the many attributes that become targeted as either one of two things, a pro or a con. The camera is fun to use. Plain and simple. Its fun... ;)

Comon' guys... one little observation about pros not using the 350D and you go nuts. Yes the list from cwphoto was off-the-wall, and the majority were not valid. But full-time pros just like the 20D... Who wouldn't?

I'm glad you like your XT's. Have fun. ;)

[cwphoto]

Most of the reasons above really don't hold much water. Unless you have a pole of professional photographers it's not valid.

Probably the only big difference between the XT and every other camera is it's size and arguably poor control interface. Beyond that, it's technically as good as any and, in many cases, better than several others in the consumer dSLR ranks and even some of the older pro cameras.

Had Canon retained the original 300D ergonomics the XT would be a runaway hit with pros, but at $500 less, the 20D would have been orphened. As it is, the XT is a hit with the all-in-one shooters and the 20D remains as a Canon low cost pro favorite.

You can't argue with the success the XT has had in the market, and when people get tired of the poor ergonomics they will have to have a new mount for thier lens collections... and it may be the 20D. Not a bad stategy. ;)

I thought the question was about suitable cameras for someone wanting to start a business in photography.

The 350/XT is a fantastic consumer DSLR - nobody is arguing with that.

But it ain't no pro camera - and no-one can argue with that either.

You XT owners - no-one is knocking your cameras OK? Stop being so bloody defensive.

[Bluedog]

George I've come to the conclusion your not a man of your word. A while back you stated on this very forum you wouldn't make anymore jabs or negativity toward the Canon EOS Digital Rebel XT ... now most recently I've discovered you've been back in the camera store fondling or admiring it again ... so come on and give it before you need therapy for this ... ;)



You XT owners - no-one is knocking your cameras OK? Stop being so bloody defensive.

Not that it matters to me cause I'm getting good use with mine and could care less what non owners think about it but when you make comments as you have owners tend to take offense to the remarks.

[TheObiJuan]

I thought the question was about suitable cameras for someone wanting to start a business in photography.

The 350/XT is a fantastic consumer DSLR - nobody is arguing with that.

But it ain't no pro camera - and no-one can argue with that either.

You XT owners - no-one is knocking your cameras OK? Stop being so bloody defensive.

George & Cwphoto, it is not presented, marketed, or advertised as a pro camera.
The commercials have a little leage football mom shootin' her kid!

The camera is liked by many pros as a great backup because it's cheapness to quality ratio. The size and weight are a huge advantage too. One I know keeps a 35L on it permanently. With an optech pro loop strap he doesn't even feel the camera, at all. :)

[cwphoto]

George & Cwphoto, it is not presented, marketed, or advertised as a pro camera.
The commercials have a little leage football mom shootin' her kid!

The camera is liked by many pros as a great backup because it's cheapness to quality ratio. The size and weight are a huge advantage too. One I know keeps a 35L on it permanently. With an optech pro loop strap he doesn't even feel the camera, at all. :)

Backup, sure I can handle that - fair choice.

Prime tool - no way.

[aparmley]

I could care less if a pro used my camera model. I didn't buy the camera cause I knew or thought pros used it. If we limited all those so called PROs out there to using on the XT and D70 could they make photographs that they'd be happy with, yes. Do I think a pro would consider a sub $1,000 camera after he has been speading $2,000+ on his bodies over the past few years, probably not. In fact, I am glad it is said PROs don't favor the XT, its not marketed to them, the cameras they owned prior to the XT hitting the market are most likely to be equally as good but most likely better so who in their right mind would think they'd take a step backwards?? Do I think the XT will provide an aspiring photographer the tool he needs to develope into a photog who makes money at it, YEP. I have read places there have been plenty of people who have started their Photography business on the 300D, the 350D is not going to be any different. Just like most pros don't use the D70, some may use it as a back up and I'm sure there are plently of aspiring photog out there getting their start with it. So How does any of this help out Steev, the self acclaimed aspiring photographer who started this thread looking for the right entry level DSLR to give him a start?? I'm sure he is not interested in what the pros are using any more than he would be in using it to help him decide which entry level DSLR. Goodness. :rolleyes:

[erichlund]

I'm a D70 user (isn't admitting the truth the first of the 12 steps?). Honestly, I haven't even had the time to go see a 350XT. This whole "mine is better/bigger/faster/etc. than yours" argument is so rediculous. They are different, that is all. Each has it's advantages and weaknesses. The same can be said for the top of the line pro cameras. I can't imagine wanting to schlep one of those monsters around all day, but the features are needed by the pro. I'd also bet that, given the same glass, you could tweak both a D70 and a 350XT to produce the same image, right out of the camera, though one or both may be at some limits of latitude on some settings.

A (long) while back, a guy named Carver made a challenge. He invited any of the really high end amp makers to compare their sound to the Carver M1.0T and see if they could find any difference, with an impartial magazine staff acting as judge. Part of the challenge was that the Carver amp could be tweaked to match. MacIntosh accepted the challenge and the magazine staff had to agree that, after hearing both, the Carver amp had indeed sounded just like the MacIntosh. Asked why he didn't have the Carver Amp set up that way in the first place, he responded "I like the way mine sounds better."

Buy the camera that works and feels the way you like it and quit worrying about which is better. The one that works better for you is, in fact, better, but it may not be better for me.

Cheers,
Eric

[Warin]

Veritas!

I think (hope) that 99% of the ribbing that goes on between Canon and Nikon shooters is just typical one-upmanship, and not representative of true maturity levels. I've shot both (although my Canon experience is with AE-1's) and I can honestly say that when I changed, there was not a huge amount of difference between my photos before and after.

It is just a tool. I took two pictures last night with a Crown Graphic to test processing large format film at home. As far as black and white goes, my negatives were far sharper and much higher resolution (under my loupe) than any digital photo I have desaturated to black and white.

Lets stop getting hung up on the names embossed on our gear, and just do what we love!

(I know. No one will actually listen to reason. Camera guys are worse than car guys!)

[Rhys]

I see all the arguments for and against the XT for professional use and have a few observations:


If the shutter does fail after 12,000 exposures then so what? If you're a pro and haven't made enough to cover buying another camera by that time, perhaps it's time to choose a new career.
Ergonomics are a personal thing. I like my XT without the grip but I also like it with the grip. I bought the grip because it gives me the option of AA batteries when Canon stops making and selling the XT's funky battery.
8 megapixels is 2 megapixels better than 6 megapixels or 33% better than 6 megapixels. I see no compelling reason to go for something that gives 25% less of a photograph so I went for the 8 megapixel XT.
Who really cares what other pros think of your gear? I happily shot airshows with a mechanical, manual Cosina with a 600mm Sigma mirror lens. My photos sold well. Other photographers sniffed at my gear but I had the images needed.

[Warin]

Why ther perverse belief that Canon will stop carrying the li-ion batteries for your XT any time during the reasonable life time of the camera? I can and have ordered various packs for cameras made circa 2001, and not had a speck of trouble getting them.

Some people seem to change systems for the silliest of reasons, so why on earth would a manufacturer take the risk of having someone jump ship over an obsolete battery pack?

[D70FAN]

But it was a good thread title wasn't it? ;)

[TheObiJuan]

But it was a good thread title wasn't it? ;)

I agree George. :D

On another forum a pro glamour/portrait photographer used a canon g2 instead of his 1d mark II to shoot a model. He had perfect lighting and the picture looks amazing. I would post the link, but the redheaded model ( :p ) is a bit naked. ;)

Lighting, skill, and the model make the pictures, atleast in his field. Since he is not printing billboards, MP don't really matter. Excellent color rendition, a great lens, and flash sync are all he needs.

[Rhys]

Why ther perverse belief that Canon will stop carrying the li-ion batteries for your XT any time during the reasonable life time of the camera? I can and have ordered various packs for cameras made circa 2001, and not had a speck of trouble getting them.

Some people seem to change systems for the silliest of reasons, so why on earth would a manufacturer take the risk of having someone jump ship over an obsolete battery pack?

The XT battery is not the same as used by the Rebel or 20D. It's some silly variant which is highly unlikely to be produced by Canon for more than two or three years - which is about the life of a battery. Thus, when Canon stops making the batteries, the camera will be useless without my AA alternative. Past experience has proven this to be the case with mobile phones and most recently it has become impossible to acquire a replacement charger for my Nikon 995's funky enel1 battery. In our house there's a growing collection of electronic equipment for which batteries/chargers are now not available - most of which will go in the garage sale we'll have in the autumn. I have never had good experiences of longevity with funky batteries/chargers.

[Warin]

The XT battery is not the same as used by the Rebel or 20D. It's some silly variant which is highly unlikely to be produced by Canon for more than two or three years - which is about the life of a battery. Thus, when Canon stops making the batteries, the camera will be useless without my AA alternative. Past experience has proven this to be the case with mobile phones and most recently it has become impossible to acquire a replacement charger for my Nikon 995's funky enel1 battery. In our house there's a growing collection of electronic equipment for which batteries/chargers are now not available - most of which will go in the garage sale we'll have in the autumn. I have never had good experiences of longevity with funky batteries/chargers.

Ah. If you dig a little deeper, you will find that that particular battery is also used on the ZR series of camcorders from Canon. Digipower and Optex also make aftermarket packs which are compatible. I suspect you'll be whinging about the battery pack on your next DSLR before you will actually be unable to find that particular pack :)

[aparmley]

But it was a good thread title wasn't it? ;)

Indeed George ... Many layers of the broken record are present. LOL :D

IDK - I hope I don't come of that im a 1upper, mines bigger, faster, smarter, louder etc... I thought I was being as fair, impartial, and as realistic as possible saying that either the Nikon or the Canon could proof to be an exceptional tool for anyone, in an attempt to help ease Steev's buying decision. Maybe if I made those statements without my XT signature it would be read in a different tone??

[erichlund]

The XT battery is not the same as used by the Rebel or 20D. It's some silly variant which is highly unlikely to be produced by Canon for more than two or three years - which is about the life of a battery. Thus, when Canon stops making the batteries, the camera will be useless without my AA alternative. Past experience has proven this to be the case with mobile phones and most recently it has become impossible to acquire a replacement charger for my Nikon 995's funky enel1 battery. In our house there's a growing collection of electronic equipment for which batteries/chargers are now not available - most of which will go in the garage sale we'll have in the autumn. I have never had good experiences of longevity with funky batteries/chargers.

Rhys,

Check in your area for a place called Batteries Plus. They don't really advertise on the web, but they have about 175 franchise stores nationwide, so there may be one near you. One thing they do (or at least used to, I haven't used their service in a while) is make high quality custom batteries and chargers. If your battery type ever becomes "unavailable", these guys should be able to set you up.

Cheers,
Eric

[Ray Schnoor]

The XT battery is not the same as used by the Rebel or 20D. It's some silly variant which is highly unlikely to be produced by Canon for more than two or three years - which is about the life of a battery. Thus, when Canon stops making the batteries, the camera will be useless without my AA alternative. Past experience has proven this to be the case with mobile phones and most recently it has become impossible to acquire a replacement charger for my Nikon 995's funky enel1 battery. In our house there's a growing collection of electronic equipment for which batteries/chargers are now not available - most of which will go in the garage sale we'll have in the autumn. I have never had good experiences of longevity with funky batteries/chargers.

Have you placed an order for a charger, or are you waiting for them to get in stock. This seems like an item that there wouldn't be much demand for, so unless an order is received, it may not be stocked. Regardless, if you don't find one in the near future, PM me and I could probably spare one. I might have an extra one lying around.

Ray.

[Steev]

Thanks aparmley! :)

I'll probably buy in the next few days, I hope....
The salesman guy I've been talking with the last few weeks, Roberto, or as I now call him, Roberto the Gearbox, was supposed to email me about a price because the only D70 they have now is the display model and I asked him if he'd check to see if the price could be lowered because of that fact, but lo and behold the gearbox never did (it's been 4 days now)... They ARE on commission...

So anyway, the D70 would probably be it...who knows though, I might jump up to the D20 for the hell of it...

[Bluedog]

So anyway, the D70 would probably be it...who knows though, I might jump up to the D20 for the hell of it...

I doubt you'd reget it ... ;)

[eastbluffs]

Very entertaining thread. Quite a hornet's nest, I hesitate to weigh in, particularly with the high caliber of members offering such good advice.

I just recently had a similar delima and wound up with a 20D. A friend got the XT. I'd just like to offer some some tidbits from my long deliberated decision process.

* For light collection; Canon uses CMOS, everyone else CCD. CCD is tried and true. CMOS holds huge promise that Canon seems to have just unraveled. I don't pretend to be able to compare the merits, but the XT has version 1 and the 20D (and the expensive 1D MkII) have version 2 of the CMOS. The new version captures more of the available light, is faster, and has various processing improvements to cut down on noise, improve color, etc.

CORRECTION (Thanks BlueDog). The Rebel XT does have the 2nd generation CMOS according to many reviews (but not clear on Canon's press release), albiet different than the one used in the 20D and more expensive 1D Mark II.

* The XT is smaller, which would be more suited to a woman or smaller man's hand. I'm 6'3 and my hand cramped. My friend (a woman) loves the XT feel.

* The Canon 17-55 kit zoom lense, although serving me pretty well as a rank amature, is reputed to be "total junk" on the forums. I don't think its overly capable of producing stunning results. I got a cheap ($75) Canon 50mm f1.8 and I have to say I'm stunned. Far superior results, and at f1.8, much more versital. I rather like having to fit my photos to a fixed focal length.

* Canon and Nikon seem to have about 85% of the digital SLR market. As far as upgrade path, support, buying/selling used equipt., etc, its the way to go. The forums seem to have more Canon "traffic", if that's any measure.

* I compared the spec sheets for the XT and 20D line by line. There are not a huge number of differences, but I have noticed a few that I'm starting to like that I don't believe were on the XT. I really like the large menu selection dial on the 20D, and all the easy-reach buttons. It seems to have been designed by people who've talked and listened to a few thousand people who use it for a living. Every time I learn something new its conveniently located. Some complain that its overwhelming.

I did read a magazine review that compared the two and it pointed out about 10 fairly significant differences, but I couldn't tell you what they were.

I believe the 20D has much more growth potential, and if you shop the difference is more like $300.

* The $100 rebate on the 20D expires on July 15th.

* Another friend has the Nikon D70 and absolutely loves it - he's had it for quite a while. For him, the decision was due to existing lenses - and a devotion to Nikon lenses in general. The Canon "L" lense certianly rivals Nikon - but that's a religious topic for some so I'll leave it at that.

* Having used the 20D for a few weeks (probably 2000 shots, even rented a high end "L Glass" last weekend), I'm still amazed at the build quality, speed, accurate auto-focus, low light capability, ....

* There is a noticable build quality difference. Plastic vs. metal. I really get the feeling I can keep using this for several years.


All that said; I'm obviously satisfied with my choice, but it really boils down to ergonomics and a few features, and maybe some microscopic photo quality improvement.

(Sorry for the long windedness)...

If you must choose between the Rebel XT and Nikon D70 - personally; I'd probably go D70. But choosing between D70 and 20D, hands down, I'd pick the 20D again.

Cheers,
Brad

[Bluedog]

* For light collection; Canon uses CMOS, everyone else CCD. CCD is tried and true. CMOS holds huge promise that Canon seems to have just unraveled. I don't pretend to be able to compare the merits, but the XT has version 1 and the 20D (and the expensive 1D MkII) have version 2 of the CMOS.

Where'd you get that from as the XT has the Second generation CMOS sensor and the same Digi Logic II processor as the 20D although the 20D handles lower lighting a little better.

[jamison55]

If the shutter does fail after 12,000 exposures then so what? If you're a pro and haven't made enough to cover buying another camera by that time, perhaps it's time to choose a new career.


Been trying to stay out of this one. Some of my best "Pro" shots have been with my 300D. I have no doubt that I would be able to take great pictures with the XT (or any other DSLR on the market today - they are ALL very capable). Since I shoot an average of 1200-1400 frames per wedding, however, I would have to buy a new XT every 9-10 weddings. Not quite hearty enough for my tastes...

[eastbluffs]

Where'd you get that from as the XT has the Second generation CMOS sensor and the same Digi Logic II processor as the 20D although the 20D handles lower lighting a little better.

I shall stand corrected if I am wrong, however this was pointed out from one of the reviews in a photo magazine, so I kept my eyes pealed for mention. Canon would surely have mentioned such a significant item.

I did fnd some comparison of the two that specifcally mentioned that the XT had the old one but I didn't bookmark it (a Google search), so I went to Canon's site. Paragraph 1 of the 20D features touts all about the new CMOS features. The Rebel XT feature set doesn't announce "hey, this is that old CMOS" as they do about the new DIGIC II processor.

From the Canon web site's specification page.

XT feature page says:
http://consumer.usa.canon.com/ir/controller?act=ModelFeaturesAct&fcategoryid=139&modelid=11154

"The EOS Digital Rebel XT features Canon's 8.0 Megapixel CMOS (Complementary Metal Oxide Semiconductor) sensor, which captures images of exceptional clarity and tonal range and offers the most pixels in its class. This APS-C size sensor (22.2 x 14.8mm) has the same 3:2 ratio as film cameras, creating an effective angle of view that is 1.6x the normal EF Lens focal length. Featuring an on-chip Noise Reduction Circuit with an expanded ISO range, the Digital Rebel XT's sensor offers professional sophistication in a consumer package. "


where the 20D says:
http://consumer.usa.canon.com/ir/controller?act=ModelFeaturesAct&fcategoryid=139&modelid=10464

"Canon's all-new large area CMOS (complementary metal oxide semiconductor) Sensor captures images with exceptional clarity and tonal range, and offers the most pixels in its class. This 2nd generation APS-C size sensor (22.5 x 15.0mm) has the same 3:2 ratio as film cameras, enabling an effective angle of view that is 1.6x the normal EF Lens focal length. The EOS 20D has an extensive ISO range (from 100 to 1600 plus ISO 3200 in extended mode),and the sensor features a newly developed set of narrow-gap microlenses and noise reduction circuits to improve performance at high ISOs, and optimized photodiode configurations for improved performance at all ISOs. This results in larger, clearer, sharper and more detailed photographs right from the start."

I am curious if I am misinformed here. Would you be able to direct me to some official mention of the XT having the new CMOS?

Of course, we all assume newer is better.

As for the other point, I'm sure many small handed persons also like the 20D and large handed persons like the XT, man, don't put me the cross hairs of that one!

Cheers,
Brad

[Bluedog]

Certainly as one has an 8MP and the other an 8.2MP COMS sensor:

"8.0 megapixel CMOS sensor: Not exactly unexpected but what is surprising is that Canon has developed a new sensor for the EOS 350D. This one has 8.0 million effective pixels, compared to the EOS 20D's 8.2 million. This sensor is 'second generation' (the EOS 300D's was considered first generation) which is the same as the rest of the sensors in the current digital SLR range."

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos350d/page3.asp


As for the other point, I'm sure many small handed persons also like the 20D and large handed persons like the XT, man, don't put me the cross hairs of that one!

Cheers,
Brad

I like them both but the XT fitted my needs for what I was looking for in a DSLR ... your comment was funny ... ;)

[Ray Schnoor]

Certainly as one has an 8MP and the other an 8.2MP COMS sensor:

"8.0 megapixel CMOS sensor: Not exactly unexpected but what is surprising is that Canon has developed a new sensor for the EOS 350D. This one has 8.0 million effective pixels, compared to the EOS 20D's 8.2 million. This sensor is 'second generation' (the EOS 300D's was considered first generation) which is the same as the rest of the sensors in the current digital SLR range."

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos350d/page3.asp


I may be wrong, but by official mention I think that Brad means a press release or link to Canon's website, not a link to a review of the camera. A review could possibly come to the incorrect conclusion that since the 20D and 350D both have an 8.2/8.0 MP sensor, they both must be of the same generation. This may be true, but unless it comes from Canon, this could just be speculation or wishful thinking.
Ray.

[eastbluffs]

It would be odd to have 2 versions of the same revision, both approximately the same MP. One of the main features of the new revision is in the larger pixel lense size (to capture more light from the gaps) and smaller gaps due to smaller processors, so a slight change of overall MP would be in order.

I would speculate that both are more expensive to manufacture, and would offer a better result (more light).

However; I do stand corrected! Thank you Bluedog for setting me straight.

I've looked at review after review, and unless they all simply copy each other's mistakes (unlikely), the Rebel XT definately does have a 2nd generation CMOS, albiet a different one from the 20D and 1D MKII (which are the same).

Since Bluedog has seen ample output from both and has a professional eye, and he's in a position to compare the output far better than I ever will be.

On this one technical point now, my curiousity is really peaked. Why Canon, Why? Was it cheaper or impoved - or simply to keep the 20D's edge (marketing)?

My instinct says that Canon figured out that the extra cost of the extra small pixel processors wasn't worth the fractional improvement of result, or compensated otherwise, but that the underlying improvements of 2nd generation CMOS exist in both versions.

[Rhys]

Have you placed an order for a charger, or are you waiting for them to get in stock. This seems like an item that there wouldn't be much demand for, so unless an order is received, it may not be stocked. Regardless, if you don't find one in the near future, PM me and I could probably spare one. I might have an extra one lying around.

Ray.

I'm not desperate for one. I tend to use my Nikon 3100 and Canon S1 IS more than my Nikon 995 so at the moment I'm OK with 2CR5 batteries. I do have a charger but it's on the other side of the Atlantic at the moment. I did try to order one from Amazon but they seem to be one of those dodgy places that waits until they have enough orders before they'll place an order. Needless to say, they have the lowest price and doubtless work on the same line as shops in South Wales where they advertise at very low prices when they're out of stock and then raise them when the goods are in stock. If I could've got it for $20 then I'd have had one. But I'm not that bothered yet. I'll probably hang onto the 995 as it does the best macro photos I've ever seen. If - when I get a macro converter - for my XT and that produces better macro photos then I might sell it.

[Rhys]

Been trying to stay out of this one. Some of my best "Pro" shots have been with my 300D. I have no doubt that I would be able to take great pictures with the XT (or any other DSLR on the market today - they are ALL very capable). Since I shoot an average of 1200-1400 frames per wedding, however, I would have to buy a new XT every 9-10 weddings. Not quite hearty enough for my tastes...

1200 - 1400. Is that alone or combined with your mate? My wedding photographer took maybe 30 photos immediately before and after the ceremony and about 270 (mostly junk) photos at the reception. Personally, I find 1200 - 1400 to be a somewhat staggering number. How do you achieve that many photos and how many CDs does that span - do you use JPEG or RAW?

[Warin]

He only took 30 shots?? Was he shooting on film?

If I was shooting a wedding (the one job I will virtually always refuse, especially if it is for a friend) I could see a lot of bracketing, both exposure (during the ceremony) and white balance (posed shots of bride, wedding party, etc). So that 1200 shots could easily be 400 bracketed shots, right?

[Steev]

Alright, check this crazy garbage out--

Since Roberto the salesman with a gearbox for a brain didn't get back with me, I called the sales manager just now to see what his problem was, and to see what kind of price reduction can be made for the D70... You know what he told me? 'Oh sorry man, that model's been sold"....My response-- WHAT?!?! (mulitple expletives) I told him that I was focusing in on that one!!

So they won't get back in any more D70s since it is a cancelled item...
The sales manager dude offered me the 20D for 50 bucks less, so instead of 1600, it would be 1550.... Gee thanks, ya jackass....
The $100 rebate would still be in effect though....
The manufacturer warranty is one year, but if I wanted another year of coverage, that would cost me another 100 bucks (for a total of two)...

So Gentlemen, what do you think?

[Rhys]

He only took 30 shots?? Was he shooting on film?

If I was shooting a wedding (the one job I will virtually always refuse, especially if it is for a friend) I could see a lot of bracketing, both exposure (during the ceremony) and white balance (posed shots of bride, wedding party, etc). So that 1200 shots could easily be 400 bracketed shots, right?

She was using a Pentax *ist D.

[Steev]

New development--

So the sales manager guy just called back and said that he was wrong and they DO have the display D70 there...
He said they could take off a hundred bucks since it is a display model....

So, I can go with the 20D stuff from the above post, OR go with the display model D70 for 1100 instead of the usual 1200...
Hmmmmmmmm......

Again, what do you think......?

[eastbluffs]

Alright, check this crazy garbage out--

So they won't get back in any more D70s since it is a cancelled item...
The sales manager dude offered me the 20D for 50 bucks less, so instead of 1600, it would be 1550.... Gee thanks, ya jackass....
The $100 rebate would still be in effect though....
The manufacturer warranty is one year, but if I wanted another year of coverage, that would cost me another 100 bucks (for a total of two)...

So Gentlemen, what do you think?

Again; my main expertise is recent shopping, not technical, that said ....

*Ritz offers no cash for 6 months and it was $1450. Don't know their credit requirements although if you don't have a credit card maybe that won't work.

*Costco was $1395, or was it $1350, and they have an unbeatable return policy if you save everything (full refund up to 1 year after they stop selling it) ... and they are on-line too.

* I would consider a "body only" and buy the 50mm lense separately. (however; for some extended warranties, the lense will be covered if it came with the camera and the difference in warranty price may not differ). If you really want that 17-55 kit lense, they are a dime a dozen used online since many people upgrade and get stuck with it. $50 is not uncommon on the various online sites and many individuals take personal check, money orders, etc.

Check out http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/board/10 for used equipment. They're audiofile types who want near full price for 2 or 3 year old quality stuff, but sell what they consider junk for half price.

* You can get a 5 year Mack warranty for not much more than your $100. I'm still shopping that one.

* The Nikon D70 is discontinued? Hmmm, have to check that out. Wonder what's coming down the pike?

* (dare I venture another technical observation) If you're still considering the Rebel XT, make sure you'll be happy with its flash handling and external device capabiliity. That was one area of difference between the Canon Spec pages for the two cameras.

[Ray Schnoor]

* The Nikon D70 is discontinued? Hmmm, have to check that out. Wonder what's coming down the pike?
I assume that the D70 is discontinued since the D70s has been released.
Ray.

[Steev]

Thanks for the heads up eastbluffs! But I HAVE to shop at this one store because its the only place I have credit with for 2 grand...



* The Nikon D70 is discontinued? Hmmm, have to check that out. Wonder what's coming down the pike?


It's not discontinued, it's just this store is not going to carry it anymore...

[Warin]

Thanks for the heads up eastbluffs! But I HAVE to shop at this one store because its the only place I have credit with for 2 grand...



It's not discontinued, it's just this store is not going to carry it anymore...

the D70 certainly is discontinued (in Canada ;)), replaced by the 70s. I am pretty cetain that Nikon USA is not planning on continuing to carry both the 70 and 70s models.

[eastbluffs]

Alright, check this crazy garbage out--
So they won't get back in any more D70s since it is a cancelled item...


Not up on the Nikon model numbers. Remember now them showing the 70s in the store as a recent replacement. Guess I though that's what we were talking about.

Glad you found a store to work within your purchasing limitations. Gee, you did say that the first time didn't you.

[cwphoto]

He only took 30 shots?? Was he shooting on film?

If I was shooting a wedding (the one job I will virtually always refuse, especially if it is for a friend) I could see a lot of bracketing, both exposure (during the ceremony) and white balance (posed shots of bride, wedding party, etc). So that 1200 shots could easily be 400 bracketed shots, right?

If you need to bracket that much you seriously need to do a proper photography course.

I do weddings and take anywhere from 200-500 images depending on the size and ethnicity of the people (European weddings usually mean more shots). I have never bracketed in fifteen years, and this was (until now) all film.

Why you would need to bracket when you can check both exposure and WB immediately is beyond me - especially as you can adjust both when shooting RAW in post-processing anyway.

I suspect that Jamison's 1200-1400 images are not due to bracketing - which is a hell of a lot. I've never heard of anyone taking so much. What an editing nightmare!

[TheObiJuan]

I shall stand corrected if I am wrong, however this was pointed out from one of the reviews in a photo magazine, so I kept my eyes pealed for mention. Canon would surely have mentioned such a significant item.

I did fnd some comparison of the two that specifcally mentioned that the XT had the old one but I didn't bookmark it (a Google search), so I went to Canon's site. Paragraph 1 of the 20D features touts all about the new CMOS features. The Rebel XT feature set doesn't announce "hey, this is that old CMOS" as they do about the new DIGIC II processor.


I am curious if I am misinformed here. Would you be able to direct me to some official mention of the XT having the new CMOS?

Of course, we all assume newer is better.

As for the other point, I'm sure many small handed persons also like the 20D and large handed persons like the XT, man, don't put me the cross hairs of that one!

Cheers,
Brad

When the 20D came out last year, the Chipset was NEW. Now it isn't. Despite being a whole new chip, the concept and technology is not new. It is basically a smaller version of the 1dsmk II. The 350D handles highlights like the 1dsmkII, whereas the 20D's dynamic range processing is just like the 1d mark II.

[TheObiJuan]

It would be odd to have 2 versions of the same revision, both approximately the same MP. One of the main features of the new revision is in the larger pixel lense size (to capture more light from the gaps) and smaller gaps due to smaller processors, so a slight change of overall MP would be in order.

I would speculate that both are more expensive to manufacture, and would offer a better result (more light).

However; I do stand corrected! Thank you Bluedog for setting me straight.

I've looked at review after review, and unless they all simply copy each other's mistakes (unlikely), the Rebel XT definately does have a 2nd generation CMOS, albiet a different one from the 20D and 1D MKII (which are the same).

Since Bluedog has seen ample output from both and has a professional eye, and he's in a position to compare the output far better than I ever will be.

On this one technical point now, my curiousity is really peaked. Why Canon, Why? Was it cheaper or impoved - or simply to keep the 20D's edge (marketing)?

My instinct says that Canon figured out that the extra cost of the extra small pixel processors wasn't worth the fractional improvement of result, or compensated otherwise, but that the underlying improvements of 2nd generation CMOS exist in both versions.

All of canon's dslrs use different chips. The 20D and 1D mark II use different chips. It is perhaps easier for canon to manufacture a chip specifically taylored for each camera. They do afterall, make their chips in house.

[TheObiJuan]

Alright, check this crazy garbage out--

Since Roberto the salesman with a gearbox for a brain didn't get back with me, I called the sales manager just now to see what his problem was, and to see what kind of price reduction can be made for the D70... You know what he told me? 'Oh sorry man, that model's been sold"....My response-- WHAT?!?! (mulitple expletives) I told him that I was focusing in on that one!!

So they won't get back in any more D70s since it is a cancelled item...
The sales manager dude offered me the 20D for 50 bucks less, so instead of 1600, it would be 1550.... Gee thanks, ya jackass....
The $100 rebate would still be in effect though....
The manufacturer warranty is one year, but if I wanted another year of coverage, that would cost me another 100 bucks (for a total of two)...

So Gentlemen, what do you think?


And why can't you get the 20D from buydig.com for 1179 with rebate?

[TheObiJuan]

New development--

So the sales manager guy just called back and said that he was wrong and they DO have the display D70 there...
He said they could take off a hundred bucks since it is a display model....

So, I can go with the 20D stuff from the above post, OR go with the display model D70 for 1100 instead of the usual 1200...
Hmmmmmmmm......

Again, what do you think......?

New D70's can be had for under 800 body only. Don't blow your money at a brick and mortar.

[Warin]

If you need to bracket that much you seriously need to do a proper photography course.

I do weddings and take anywhere from 200-500 images depending on the size and ethnicity of the people (European weddings usually mean more shots). I have never bracketed in fifteen years, and this was (until now) all film.

Why you would need to bracket when you can check both exposure and WB immediately is beyond me - especially as you can adjust both when shooting RAW in post-processing anyway.

I suspect that Jamison's 1200-1400 images are not due to bracketing - which is a hell of a lot. I've never heard of anyone taking so much. What an editing nightmare!

I dont shoot weddings, and I am a third year student doing all the photo courses my uni offers (which isnt a lot) so I have taken a "proper" photography course. :)

I dont bracket with my film SLR.

The point I was trying to make is that unlike film, where every frame shot costs the photographer money, digital allows the photographer to burn through an entire memory card at (virtually) no cost. So why not bracket those once in a lifetime shots? Whitebalance bracketing in partiuclar seems sensible when shooting a wedding (white dress anyone?).

One of my instructors did commercial photography, and even when shooting film exposure bracketed virtually every shot she made. Is there something inherently bad about bracketing??

[Steev]

And why can't you get the 20D from buydig.com for 1179 with rebate?

The store that I am going to buy from is the only place that I have a high enough credit line with..... I don't have any credit cards and certainly can't cut a check for it....
I'm just a poor working stiff :) ....poor for now, at least ;)

[cwphoto]

I dont shoot weddings, and I am a third year student doing all the photo courses my uni offers (which isnt a lot) so I have taken a "proper" photography course. :)

I dont bracket with my film SLR.

The point I was trying to make is that unlike film, where every frame shot costs the photographer money, digital allows the photographer to burn through an entire memory card at (virtually) no cost. So why not bracket those once in a lifetime shots? Whitebalance bracketing in partiuclar seems sensible when shooting a wedding (white dress anyone?).

One of my instructors did commercial photography, and even when shooting film exposure bracketed virtually every shot she made. Is there something inherently bad about bracketing??

If you know what you're doing you don't need to bracket.

With digital you can adjust WB in RAW processing later if required - why bracket?

I need around 3GB worth of memory cards to handle a wedding. Bracketing means doubling my investment in cards.

I take once-in-a-lifetime images every week of the year - never bracket, they always come out (but I'm a fifteen year veteran for weddings). If someone is starting out there may be a little sense in this for film, but not digital.

By the way, when I said "you", I didn't mean you :confused: I meant the person/people in your example ;)

By proper course I meant a diploma/degree devoted entirely to photography, not just a few subjects wrapped up in a general visual arts or similar (like what I suspect your Uni offers).

If someone has done a "proper course" and still needs to bracket regularly then maybe they need to redo the course!

[D70FAN]

All of canon's dslrs use different chips. The 20D and 1D mark II use different chips. It is perhaps easier for canon to manufacture a chip specifically taylored for each camera. They do afterall, make their chips in house.

Eventually it's going to catch up with them. AND it's costing you, the consumer, more in the long run. They do make the CMOS imager in-house, but I believe the Digic II is made both in-house and by Toshiba. At least the 20D version (of the Digic) is a Toshiba 32 bit core. Toshba was touting yhis at the Embeded Systems Conference in March.

With Sony (Semiconductor) now into the CMOS imager business (thanks to Nikon) the world of dSLR's is about to change... dramatically.

[eastbluffs]

Eventually it's going to catch up with them. AND it's costing you, the consumer, more in the long run. They do make the CMOS imager in-house, but I believe the Digic II is made both in-house and by Toshiba. At least the 20D version (of the Digic) is a Toshiba 32 bit core. Toshba was touting yhis at the Embeded Systems Conference in March.

With Sony (Semiconductor) now into the CMOS imager business (thanks to Nikon) the world of dSLR's is about to change... dramatically.


I think my curiosity regarding Canon's CMOS strategy is satisfied. Each model is diferent, makes sense. CMOS was originally touted as being cheaper to manufacture. If they've still held that line, I can't wait to see where this all takes us in 5 years from now.

Of course that's just 1 piece of a good camera, but its still very exciting. Maybe we'll see full format (or more) super fast and accurate D-SLR's for under $1000 - and consumer cameras that rival them. Very exciting (for us consumers)!

[jamison55]

1200 - 1400. Is that alone or combined with your mate? My wedding photographer took maybe 30 photos immediately before and after the ceremony and about 270 (mostly junk) photos at the reception. Personally, I find 1200 - 1400 to be a somewhat staggering number. How do you achieve that many photos and how many CDs does that span - do you use JPEG or RAW?

1200-1400 alone. Mind you, that is usually spread out over two bodies (though I usually shoot 2/3rds of them with my primary 20D. PJ is the name of the game these days, with the photographer commissioned to tell the story of the day. I do so with the camera to my eye all of the time. Also are you sure your photog only took 300 photos, or are those the ones she delivered to you. I typically pick out the best 400-500 to deliver to my clients.


I suspect that Jamison's 1200-1400 images are not due to bracketing - which is a hell of a lot. I've never heard of anyone taking so much. What an editing nightmare!

Quite right, the only thing I bracket are the formals...and that's not for exposure or WB, but for blinks...which I have an uncanny talent for capturing! I shoot 1200-1400 for two reasons. First of all, I usually shoot for 10 hours, from the getting ready to the last dance. Digital gives me the freedom of experimenting more. Since the shutter clicks are practically free, I can take a shot that I like, and then try it from a slightly different angle...call it "composition bracketing". This experimentation allows me to find new and exciting ways of looking at each couple's wedding. Reason two is that, I'd be bored if I wasn't shooting, and memory is cheap! I'd think I was crazy myself, but I belong to an organization of professional digital wedding photographers, most of them PJ in style, and many of them shoot just as many shots as me...and some shoot more!

[TheObiJuan]

Eventually it's going to catch up with them. AND it's costing you, the consumer, more in the long run. They do make the CMOS imager in-house, but I believe the Digic II is made both in-house and by Toshiba. At least the 20D version (of the Digic) is a Toshiba 32 bit core. Toshba was touting yhis at the Embeded Systems Conference in March.

With Sony (Semiconductor) now into the CMOS imager business (thanks to Nikon) the world of dSLR's is about to change... dramatically.

eagerly waits for more options to appear.
Perhaps Nikon will market a FF CMOS sensor?? :confused: :D

[D70FAN]

eagerly waits for more options to appear.
Perhaps Nikon will market a FF CMOS sensor?? :confused: :D

From everything I've read, in interviews with Nikon executive staff, they plan to stay with APS-C size in the forseeable future.

I don't really care what any of the camera guys do, as long as it makes the product better and lowers the cost of admission. ;) Just because I like the D70 (and to some degree the D2X) doesn't mean that I'm joined at the hip with Nikon. On the other hand the more Nikon mount lenses I get, the less likely I am to jump brands. It's the whole idea behind these guys having a low cost dSLR on the market...

[D70FAN]

1200-1400 alone. Mind you, that is usually spread out over two bodies (though I usually shoot 2/3rds of them with my primary 20D. PJ is the name of the game these days, with the photographer commissioned to tell the story of the day. I do so with the camera to my eye all of the time. Also are you sure your photog only took 300 photos, or are those the ones she delivered to you. I typically pick out the best 400-500 to deliver to my clients.

Quite right, the only thing I bracket are the formals...and that's not for exposure or WB, but for blinks...which I have an uncanny talent for capturing! I shoot 1200-1400 for two reasons. First of all, I usually shoot for 10 hours, from the getting ready to the last dance. Digital gives me the freedom of experimenting more. Since the shutter clicks are practically free, I can take a shot that I like, and then try it from a slightly different angle...call it "composition bracketing". This experimentation allows me to find new and exciting ways of looking at each couple's wedding. Reason two is that, I'd be bored if I wasn't shooting, and memory is cheap! I'd think I was crazy myself, but I belong to an organization of professional digital wedding photographers, most of them PJ in style, and many of them shoot just as many shots as me...and some shoot more!

It's why I get to do tag alongs occasionally (unfortunately it's been a while since I moved). I learn and the photographer adds a better chance at a "money shot" or two. The biggest challenge in people photography is to get that one or two shots that will get you glowing recommendations.

There is also a lot of self-satisfaction in knowing you have helped preserve an age, an occasion, or some family history.

[Rhys]

1200-1400 alone. Mind you, that is usually spread out over two bodies (though I usually shoot 2/3rds of them with my primary 20D. PJ is the name of the game these days, with the photographer commissioned to tell the story of the day. I do so with the camera to my eye all of the time. Also are you sure your photog only took 300 photos, or are those the ones she delivered to you. I typically pick out the best 400-500 to deliver to my clients.



Quite right, the only thing I bracket are the formals...and that's not for exposure or WB, but for blinks...which I have an uncanny talent for capturing! I shoot 1200-1400 for two reasons. First of all, I usually shoot for 10 hours, from the getting ready to the last dance. Digital gives me the freedom of experimenting more. Since the shutter clicks are practically free, I can take a shot that I like, and then try it from a slightly different angle...call it "composition bracketing". This experimentation allows me to find new and exciting ways of looking at each couple's wedding. Reason two is that, I'd be bored if I wasn't shooting, and memory is cheap! I'd think I was crazy myself, but I belong to an organization of professional digital wedding photographers, most of them PJ in style, and many of them shoot just as many shots as me...and some shoot more!

Ah... blinks... Generally, I'd have said there's maybe a dozen or so shots that need to be taken - bride + groom + priest, bride + groom, bride with bride's parents, groom with groom's parents, groom's parents + bride's parents, parents plus couple, groom with best man, bride with maid of honour, group of assembled participants (flowergirls etc) and various combinations including the priest. These are what I call the core shots.

There're the after shots such as bride + groom dancing, bride + groom cutting the cake, the best man's speach, the groom's speach that are important.

The before shots could be the bride waking and being given a cup of tea by her mum, getting ready for the wedding, waiting in the girl's room just before the ceremony. (I remember my wife had to be restrained from leaving that room as she wanted to come to the men's room to give me a good slapping because I forgot the rings and the wine, beer and champagne. They had to be brought by my wife's brother but got there in the end and the wedding was only 5 minutes late starting). There could also be the same for the groom.

I'm not a fan of reception photos as these are generally just too chaotic. A photo of the reception room, the cake and so on before anybody gets there could be good. A photo of a filled reception room with loads of people dancing could be good too.

I still can't make more than 100 photos out of that lot though.

[Ray Schnoor]

Ah... blinks... Generally, I'd have said there's maybe a dozen or so shots that need to be taken - bride + groom + priest, bride + groom, bride with bride's parents, groom with groom's parents, groom's parents + bride's parents, parents plus couple, groom with best man, bride with maid of honour, group of assembled participants (flowergirls etc) and various combinations including the priest. These are what I call the core shots.

There're the after shots such as bride + groom dancing, bride + groom cutting the cake, the best man's speach, the groom's speach that are important.

The before shots could be the bride waking and being given a cup of tea by her mum, getting ready for the wedding, waiting in the girl's room just before the ceremony. (I remember my wife had to be restrained from leaving that room as she wanted to come to the men's room to give me a good slapping because I forgot the rings and the wine, beer and champagne. They had to be brought by my wife's brother but got there in the end and the wedding was only 5 minutes late starting). There could also be the same for the groom.

I'm not a fan of reception photos as these are generally just too chaotic. A photo of the reception room, the cake and so on before anybody gets there could be good. A photo of a filled reception room with loads of people dancing could be good too.

I still can't make more than 100 photos out of that lot though.
That may be good for your wedding, but if you are going to be paid for taking wedding photos, I'll wager you won't have many happy customers if you aren't seen taking photos during the reception.
Ray.

[Rhys]

That may be good for your wedding, but if you are going to be paid for taking wedding photos, I'll wager you won't have many happy customers if you aren't seen taking photos during the reception.
Ray.

The problem with wedding reception photos is that you're competing with Aunty Flo and her Olympus d350 who'll send the pics to everybody, free.

[Warin]

The problem with wedding reception photos is that you're competing with Aunty Flo and her Olympus d350 who'll send the pics to everybody, free.

Yes, but Aunty Flo's Olympus pictures will be blurry (slow shutter, poor max aperature), poorly composed (Aunty Flo has astigmatisms!), and fuzzy (poor high iso performance on the teeny sensor).

Your reception photos will be tack sharp, well composed, and clear. And even if they arent, you can show them to the happy couple and they can say "no, lets not print those" rather than them wondering where all the candid shots are from their happy day.

These are all the reasons that I have no intention of ever shooting a wedding. :D Unreasonable expectations often abound, and with so many (and I would fall firmly into this category) advanced amateurs out there shooting weddings at a cut rate price, I suspect that until you are very well established you cant make what you deserve.

I like shooting for my own edification and tastes, which lately seem to be leaning to photos of things that dont express a negative opinion if your picture makes them "look fat" :o So that lets people out all together :D

[Steev]

Well, guess what gentlemen, I did it today--

I bought me a 20D!!
Of course after much research, and debate in my head, I just went out and did it!
I want to get in the manual before I start ripping off shots, but once I do I'll post them in the gallery...

Thanks again for everyones input, I appreciate very much :)

[erichlund]

Rhys, if you're concerned about Auntie Flo and her P&S camera, then perhaps you've chosen the wrong career. The model for profitable weddings is clear. Establish a package of shots, charge a fixed price for that package and don't rely on any other shots selling. Take the other shots, because they might sell, but don't count on them. Still there are lots of shots at the reception that many people would want. For intsance, the Bride and Groom may very well be interested in getting shots of all the guests, and candids at the reception would be the most memorable. Never, ever forget that you are providing a service, and the only thing you have to sell is better service than the next guy.

OTOH, wow, 100 - 140 shots per hour. Knock that down by a two-thirds due to eyeblink bracketing and it's still 33-47 shots per hour. Jamison55, you are one busy dude at a wedding. How do you manage to remain unobstrusive?

Not that I really need to know. I would never even think of doing a wedding, less so for someone I knew. I'm a pro software engineer and amateur photog. I'll leave weddings to the pros.

Cheers,
Eric

[Bluedog]

Well, guess what gentlemen, I did it today--

I bought me a 20D!!
Of course after much research, and debate in my head, I just went out and did it!
I want to get in the manual before I start ripping off shots, but once I do I'll post them in the gallery...

Thanks again for everyones input, I appreciate very much :)

Welcome to the family and you should or should I say, you will be happy ... ;)

[aparmley]

Indeed Steev congrats on your purchase...

Jamison is right the PJ style is huge these days.
Just as an example to justify the nearly constant shooting, I was hanging out over at a friends house with my dog and his son and they were playing and I sat there and snapped off 300+ pictures in the span of one ice cold Budweiser ok the last gulp was not ice cold. =) Not a one of them was in drive mode either... You just never know what will happen next when your shooting... if you stay shooting you are more than likely going to be ready to capture that unplanned perfect shot, thats my theory anyhow... I am bad at being able to see the formation of a truely rare photo opportunity. I think I have about 15 images that were fantastic from my 300+ sequence and probably 8-10 of those were a result of the constant shooting... if I sat waiting for that great moment, I wouldn't have been ready to catch it.

[Warin]

Congrats on the purchase! A very capable camera (in spite of that C label on the top ;)).

As much as I will say RTFM to someone asking me how to change the ISO on their new camera, I think you shouldjust fire the battery in and start shooting! No matter how many times I read the manual, I learn more in half an hour of clicking pictures of my living room.

I need to get some digital pictures online... but I am too lazy :D

[Cold Snail]

Nine pages later, the usual arguments, various tips on taking wedding photos, more battery talk and you have bought a camera.

Well done that man.

[Steev]

Thanks again guys, I'm pretty damn excited about it!

Warin, I hear you about just start firing....but in this rare case I kind of want to RTFM lolol...

[Warin]

Thanks again guys, I'm pretty damn excited about it!

Warin, I hear you about just start firing....but in this rare case I kind of want to RTFM lolol...

:D Great feeling, isnt it? I love opening a new bit of kit. I'd played with the D70s for months in the shop I work at before getting mine home, but when I slipped that plastic bag off the body and knew that this time I didnt have to return it in a few days, it was a sublime moment.

As you can tell, I am single. :D heheh

[cwphoto]

That may be good for your wedding, but if you are going to be paid for taking wedding photos, I'll wager you won't have many happy customers if you aren't seen taking photos during the reception.
Ray.

If I do receptions (it's pretty rare these days), I usually whip around the tables, get a nice shot of the cake, wedding rings on certificate (macro), speeches (including some 14mm shots of the whole reception during this time), reaction to speeches, cake cut, bridal waltz, then any family/friends plus throw bouquet and leaving.

There can be lots of time at the reception where I am idle and it's one reason why I try and talk them out of having me there. There really are very few saleable creative photos to be had at the reception (maybe 2-3 pages worth in the album tops. I charge by the hour so those that really want me there will pay.

I find my clients have the opposite attitude (maybe it's the market I'm in) - I get paid to provide a quality, unobtrusive service - not shoot massive quantity and "be noticed".

The reception is my "break" in a way (time to check gear or images/film and go through the day to see if there's anything I've missed). There are really only a handful of saleable opps so you sometimes can't help but be seen not-clicking.

[eastbluffs]

Well, guess what gentlemen, I did it today--

I bought me a 20D!!


Nice!

OK, I have to offer just one more purchasing tip (that I'm sure will initiate a new line of discussion:>)

If you're considering a cheap extended warranty, I shopped around and got a 3 year Mack warranty at B & H for $79. That's 3 years after the 1 year from manufacturer, and they will clean it annually if you want to trust sending it to them in NJ. That is the exact same warranty nearly everyone else is charging $149 to $179 for. Mack concurred that B & H is a huge reseller and the price disparity is very feasible. They also verified that thery're selling the right product. If a repair is needed, they have many authorized repair centers. They've been in business since 1934.

Most advice said that extended warranties weren't worth anything. I have to disagree that at about 6% of the total purchase price, a 3 year warranty extension may become very worth it.

If you do; you must purchase that warranty within 30 days.

Have lots of fun filling up your hard disk with lots of photos!

[jamison55]

Most of the brides I shoot for these days are more interested in shots of all of their friends having fun at their wedding, than they are about stiff, traditional formals. And while I try to blend into the woodwork during the events of the day, I have been known to join the guests on the dance floor and work my moves while I'm taking the shots. It's about not getting in the way, not necessarily hiding in a corner. I get compliments every wedding on how I was everywhere, capturing everything. Brides spend a lot of time planning every detail of their weddings. I try to make sure they have a photo memory of each one! When you approach a wedding that way, it is very easy to click the shutter 1400 times!

[cwphoto]

Most of the brides I shoot for these days are more interested in shots of all of their friends having fun at their wedding, than they are about stiff, traditional formals.

Yeah sounds like a different market to me. More like event photography.

BTW, stiff traditional formals are an American thing - our creative photography in Aus is nothing like this. Try these:
http://www.classiccolor.com.au/page/the_wedding_gallery.html
http://www.davidoliver.com.au/
http://www.dekker.com.au/color1.htm
http://www.pmphoto.com.au/
http://www.donwoodphotography.com.au/weddings.html
http://www.gmphotographics.com.au/

You're not serious about dancing with the guests are you??? In all honesty, those fun, wacky reception dance-floor type photos are very poor sellers and can be taken just as well by anyone with a decent SLR and flash.

What distinguishes the guys like in the above links is that they use lighting (no flash), composition, timing, and posing skills to create images that event photographers doing weddings can only dream of. This is what sells (here) and those skills are in relatively short-supply.

David Oliver usually uses only a Leica M6 (not even an SLR) and takes maybe 200 images on average. But he is one of our premier wedding photographers with demand so massive he can just about name his price.

[Ray Schnoor]

I find my clients have the opposite attitude (maybe it's the market I'm in) - I get paid to provide a quality, unobtrusive service - not shoot massive quantity and "be noticed".
I think you misunderstood me. I don't think people expect to pay a photographer 1-2 thousand dollars to be at the church for an hour and then disappear. I have never gone to a wedding and not seen the photographer attend the reception. I don't mean that you have to get in everyones face, but at least keep an eye out for some casual shots. My wedding lasted all of 30 minutes tops, followed by the reception. The photographer was at my wife's parents house before the wedding, at the ceremony, and at the reception. I don't remember seeing him at the reception, but if I didn't have several photos from the reception, I would think that I was grossly overcharged. Some of the best photos I have seen from some weddings have been from the reception, including a groom along with his 7 brothers and sisters, several cousins, parents, aunts and uncles all doing some kind of Irish Jig dancing.
Ray.

[cwphoto]

I think you misunderstood me. I don't think people expect to pay a photographer 1-2 thousand dollars to be at the church for an hour and then disappear. I have never gone to a wedding and not seen the photographer attend the reception. I don't mean that you have to get in everyones face, but at least keep an eye out for some casual shots. My wedding lasted all of 30 minutes tops, followed by the reception. The photographer was at my wife's parents house before the wedding, at the ceremony, and at the reception. I don't remember seeing him at the reception, but if I didn't have several photos from the reception, I would think that I was grossly overcharged. Some of the best photos I have seen from some weddings have been from the reception, including a groom along with his 7 brothers and sisters, several cousins, parents, aunts and uncles all doing some kind of Irish Jig dancing.
Ray.

That's interesting and it may be a market thing, because I am finding less and less interest in reception photography. I suspect it's because it's where the margin between what the pro can produce compared to that which a keen amateur can is the least - and often the client's can save a few hundred by disregarding the reception.

I agree you can get some great reception shots - but for me it's relatively little compared to the images I can work with elsewhere.

[Rhys]

That's interesting and it may be a market thing, because I am finding less and less interest in reception photography. I suspect it's because it's where the margin between what the pro can produce compared to that which a keen amateur can is the least - and often the client's can save a few hundred by disregarding the reception.

I agree you can get some great reception shots - but for me it's relatively little compared to the images I can work with elsewhere.

The key is to work to a list of required photos. Get the required list and then work from that. Anything extra could be a bonus or a waste of time.