Canon Rebel XT 350D, Nikon D50, Pentax K100

[krzkrzkrz]

Thinking of buying a DSLR,

I was looking at the comparison between the Nikon D50 and the Canon Rebel XT EOS 350D.

So far, most users here have recommended these two cameras. I've also read a review of the two at:
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond50/page23.asp

A third and promising option is the Pentax K100, that should ship on July this year, only a few days away. I'm yet eager to read the reviews on this new camera, especially with its anti-shake feature which the XT 350D and D50 do not offer.

Additionally, I've read that the Pentax has a better feel (grip) when held compared to the Canon Rebel XT. Shutter speeds are also faster as well.

Personally, I would rank, out of personal preference, the 3 cameras as:
1) Pentax K100
2) Canon Rebel XT 350D
3) Nikon D50

Then again this is too early to say.

I would like to know your insights on the three cameras. Any feedback will be gladly appreciated.

Kind regards,
Chris

[jeisner]

It is hard to give any real insights into the K100D as yet as very few people have had the chance to use it... The people I have read reviews from so far (who are lucky enough to have one already) say that the SR is better than AS and easily gives 3 full stops. Sounds good...

The viewfinder is not as good as the DS which is a shame but it is still bigger than the other two cameras mentioned. The Jpeg processing has been updated and is licensed from Silkypics, so I would guess that JPEG processing is a lot better than previous Pentax models (though I tend to use RAW anyway, but plenty of others at that price range will use JPEG).

The focus speed is comparable to the higher end D so a nice improvement from the DS/DL focus speed.. Also from all reports has better low light performance...

I agree regarding the grip but that I guess is somewhat personal..

Add to the already small K100D the three pancakes (21/3.2, 40/2.8 and 70/2.5) and if you like primes you have awesome and VERY VERY small prime kit, that no other DSLR comes near in that regard.. Performance of the 40/2.8 and 21/3.2 are very high too, I have seen plenty of very good samples from the 21/3.2 and below is a review of the 40/2.8 which doesn't compromise on quality to achieve its size..

http://www.popphoto.com/cameralenses/1716/pentax-da-40mm-f28-limited-af.html

I don't know if I am looking forward to the K100D or the DA 21/3.2 pancake more at this point..

I want both today :eek:

[ReF]

with the new stabilized cameras out, the d50 and xt just aren't as appealing IMO, but nikon and canon both offer very large and well supported systems (lenses and accessories, both by the manufacturer and third parties). i think it would really help us to give better suggestions if you could tell us a bit about the subjects and conditions that you shoot in or want to shoot, what your budget is, and what kind of photography you plan on doing in the future.

[Rhys]

I have an XT but I look on in-camera IS and AA power as being wonderful. I wish my XT had those.

[George Riehm]

While it costs a little more, you might also wnat to look at the new Sony (Minolta) 10MP, Anti Shake, Dust Buster, alpha100. First previews look pretty positive, and since it retains the Minolta mount there are plenty of lens options as well. About $200-$300 more than your current choices.

[Rhys]

The only downer with the Pentaxes is that focussing is slower. Pentax opted for a focussing motor built into the body of the camera rather than into the lens. This meant lenses could be made cheaper and lighter. The downside is that focussing is slower. On the other hand, I have a Canon XT and would much prefer to use manual focus as AF doesn't get it right as often as I'd like.

[jeisner]

The only downer with the Pentaxes is that focussing is slower. Pentax opted for a focussing motor built into the body of the camera rather than into the lens. This meant lenses could be made cheaper and lighter. The downside is that focussing is slower.

It also depends on the lens... My smaller prime lenses focus as fast on the D as many of my friends lenses on his 20d as they are very easy I guess for the focus motor in the camera to turn... Also the D has a much faster motor in it than the DL/DS, the K100D is supposed to share this feature from reports I have seen...

Not all Canon lenses are super fast either, that same friend of mine has the Canon L 85 1.2 and focus speed wise it is FAR slower than the Pentax 85/1.4 even on the DS (actually the Canon 85/1.2 is the slowest focusing lens I have ever used on any system)... So it is not always black and white in this regard..

But your right on average in lens motors are faster so that puts Pentax at the back of the pack, but obviously it has the advantages of lower costs and smaller/lighter designs which pentax pretty much leads IME.

[some guy]

If you're considering the Pentax *ist, don't forget the equivalent Samsung dSLRs. They are essentially Pentaxs (Pantii?). Even the Schneider-Kplunkt lenses are rebadged Pentax lenses.

[jeisner]

If you're considering the Pentax *ist, don't forget the equivalent Samsung dSLRs. They are essentially Pentaxs (Pantii?). Even the Schneider-Kplunkt lenses are rebadged Pentax lenses.

Correct!

Though I haven't yet seen an equivelant of the K100D announced yet from Samsung.. Though they did announce an equivelant of the higher end K10D that is coming out towards the end of the year...

[krzkrzkrz]

with the new stabilized cameras out, the d50 and xt just aren't as appealing IMO, but nikon and canon both offer very large and well supported systems (lenses and accessories, both by the manufacturer and third parties). i think it would really help us to give better suggestions if you could tell us a bit about the subjects and conditions that you shoot in or want to shoot, what your budget is, and what kind of photography you plan on doing in the future.

For now it will be used for my travels. Taking pictures of people, places, events etc. Not much for outdoors.

As far as lenses are involved. I dont have the budget to buy bigger/better lenses. Maybe in the next few month when I save up enough.

I am happy with using a basic lense for now. This will give me enough time, hopefully to explore/learn more about the camera and its features.

In future stages (maybe in a year or so), I would like to learn about macro-photography, which may involve getting a specialised lense.

Regards,
Chris

[ReF]

actually the Canon 85/1.2 is the slowest focusing lens I have ever used on any system.

the old canon 85 f1.2 is known to be pretty slow. it's been replaced by a version II that is meant to address this issue

[ReF]

For now it will be used for my travels. Taking pictures of people, places, events etc. Not much for outdoors.

In future stages (maybe in a year or so), I would like to learn about macro-photography, which may involve getting a specialised lense.

Regards,
Chris

events... to me that means indoors and in low light, even if it's daytime. This likely means you will be using the 17-85mm range, or even the ultra-wide range down to 10mm. the problem here is that good zoom lenses are pretty short range, like 10-22 or 12-24, 17-40 or 17-55, 28-105. without knowing what your budget is, all i can give you are some generic suggestions based on a medium to low price range:

canon 17-40
canon kit lens 18-55
canon 28-105 f3.5-4.5
canon 50mm f1.4 or 1.8
canon 85mm f1.8
canon 35mm f2
tokina 12-24

i don't recommend the 17-85 IS or third party lenses that aren't ultra-wide (massive DOF) or equiped with HSM.

i highly recommend a good external flash for indoor/low light photography. learning how to use one properly can mean professional looking results (even with mediocre lenses) and/or images that are well light without the "flash look." in low light your choices are pretty much shooting a large aperture (shallow DOF), tripod or IS (no good for moving subjects), or flash.

good luck

[krzkrzkrz]

events... to me that means indoors and in low light, even if it's daytime. This likely means you will be using the 17-85mm range, or even the ultra-wide range down to 10mm. the problem here is that good zoom lenses are pretty short range, like 10-22 or 12-24, 17-40 or 17-55, 28-105. without knowing what your budget is, all i can give you are some generic suggestions based on a medium to low price range:

canon 17-40
canon kit lens 18-55
canon 28-105 f3.5-4.5
canon 50mm f1.4 or 1.8
canon 85mm f1.8
canon 35mm f2
tokina 12-24

i don't recommend the 17-85 IS or third party lenses that aren't ultra-wide (massive DOF) or equiped with HSM.

i highly recommend a good external flash for indoor/low light photography. learning how to use one properly can mean professional looking results (even with mediocre lenses) and/or images that are well light without the "flash look." in low light your choices are pretty much shooting a large aperture (shallow DOF), tripod or IS (no good for moving subjects), or flash.

good luck

For now I'm not really looking into getting lenses. Maybe in the near future I would looking into investing into them.

When I buy my camera (a DSLR), I plan on buying it together with a kit. Hopefully the lenses that come with it will be good enough for the time being.
It should also give me enough to work with and explore a bit more with the camera itself.

At current, I'm really deciding on getting a Canon Rebel XT 350D or the Pentax K100. That's how much I am willing to consider for my budget.

The Rebel XT has some pretty good reviews and recommendations, while the K100 isn't out until July, so comparison between the two cannot be said for definite.

Im just a bit confused whether I should wait for the Pentax K100 or go ahead and get the Rebel XT instead.

Regards,
Chris

[jeisner]

Im just a bit confused whether I should wait for the Pentax K100 or go ahead and get the Rebel XT instead.

Your the one who has to use it for the next 'x' years, only you can answer this question.. If in body SR interests you maybe just wait a few more weeks until it comes out, and decide then...

[astro]

If you get the Pentax K100D, you can get a lot of old manual focus, very high quality primes for very little on ebay.
This is a very good way to build up very good quality lenses when you're on a budget.
For example, this 50mm F/1.4 costs $50 on ebay (http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic2/238813/0), and easily beats canon's more expensive 50mm F/1.8.

You can easily rack up a good collection of prime lens for $300 or so.
Here's a good list to start off with
Zenitar 16mm F/2.8 Fisheye
35mm F/3.5 S-M-C Takumar or SMC-K mount if you can find one.
50mm F/1.4, S-M-C Takumar is good, but it's screwmount so it'll require an adapter. But any one of the old ones are very good, including the K, M, and A versions.
135mm F/2.5 S-M-C Takumar or the SMC-K mount(not bayonet), extremely high quality telephoto prime. Very sharp even at wide open. here's a test shot, at F/2.5 (http://astroguy.org/135mmtest.jpg)

Here's a good forums for manual focus lenses if you want to know more. (http://oomz.net/mf)

[krzkrzkrz]

Your the one who has to use it for the next 'x' years, only you can answer this question.. If in body SR interests you maybe just wait a few more weeks until it comes out, and decide then...

What do you mean by body SR?

So basically you are saying that the Rebel XT performs almost the same as the Pentax K100, except for some features like the body SR?

I've also learnt that between the 3 cameras, all are good. And you cannot go wrong with any of them. Is this true? Or is there a big significant difference with one camera and the other?

[krzkrzkrz]

Your the one who has to use it for the next 'x' years, only you can answer this question.. If in body SR interests you maybe just wait a few more weeks until it comes out, and decide then...

What do you mean by body SR?

So basically you are saying that the Rebel XT performs almost the same as the Pentax K100, except for some features like the body SR?

I've also learnt that between the 3 cameras, all are good. And you cannot go wrong with any of them. Is this true? Or is there a big significant difference with one camera and the other?

[krzkrzkrz]

Errr. Apologies for posting twice. Thought the connection was cut off

[jeisner]

In body SR means Shake reduction / Image stabilisation in the camera rather than in the lens... It is much cheaper to have all your lenses with Image stabilisation this way, otherwise you pay a hefty premium per lens..

[jeisner]

I've also learnt that between the 3 cameras, all are good. And you cannot go wrong with any of them. Is this true? Or is there a big significant difference with one camera and the other?

In my opinion that is true...

[krzkrzkrz]

In body SR means Shake reduction / Image stabilisation in the camera rather than in the lens... It is much cheaper to have all your lenses with Image stabilisation this way, otherwise you pay a hefty premium per lens..

SR built in the camera is better than have the SR built in the lens?

I understand that it could be cheaper if not in the lenses. But performance wise which do you reckon is a lot better? Or not much different?

[ReF]

SR built in the camera is better than have the SR built in the lens?

I understand that it could be cheaper if not in the lenses. But performance wise which do you reckon is a lot better? Or not much different?

they should be pretty much the same. the problem is that a stabilized sensor requires a small sensor (1.5x crop) and a standard 35mm image circle to shift around in. so this wouldn't work with FF sensors or digital-only lenses that have too small of an image circle. that's why stabilized lenses are not replaceable at this point - for FF sensors and those who still shoot in film. otherwise for those of us who are using cropped bodies the stabilized sensor is an awesome feature.

[jeisner]

they should be pretty much the same. the problem is that a stabilized sensor requires a small sensor (1.5x crop) and a standard 35mm image circle to shift around in. so this wouldn't work with FF sensors or digital-only lenses that have too small of an image circle. that's why stabilized lenses are not replaceable at this point - for FF sensors and those who still shoot in film. otherwise for those of us who are using cropped bodies the stabilized sensor is an awesome feature.

Just one correction.. SR works fine with a 1.5x crop sensor and digital only lenses, it moves less than a mm so any lens (digital only or not) will work with an SR camera..

[ReF]

Just one correction.. SR works fine with a 1.5x crop sensor and digital only lenses, it moves less than a mm so any lens (digital only or not) will work with an SR camera..

hmm, if that's true then i guess canon wouldn't have angry EF-S customers. but then again they might have customers angry about overpaying for IS lenses. hope this is nothing compared to the pressure of keeping up with the stabilized sensor market cuz i would really like to have stabilization with the 400mm :D

as always, glad to have any misinformation corrected

[jeisner]

In body stabilisation seems to be becoming a trend...

It will be interesting to see what Canon and Nikon do?

[some guy]

I'd love to see a comparo review b/t in-body IS and in-lens IS. I feel Canon and Nikon are cop outs for not offering this feature. I bet $$$ invested into their IS/VR technology has something to do with it. See... I am not a Canon fanatic afterall as some may think. :)

[jeisner]

I'd love to see a comparo review b/t in-body IS and in-lens IS. I feel Canon and Nikon are cop outs for not offering this feature. I bet $$$ invested into their IS/VR technology has something to do with it. See... I am not a Canon fanatic afterall as some may think. :)

Pentax SR is not out to review yet though early previews I have seen suggest it is slightly better than KM implementation..

I have seen reviews (will have to find them again) comparing KM AS to the IS system from Canon and IS is more effective, especially at long focal lengths... It also adds weight, size and price to every lens so that is a pretty big trade-off to me. But if your a pro sports photogrpaher and have the money then obviously the IS/VR system is the better choice. Otherwise in body (SR/AS) is much more economical..

[krzkrzkrz]

Lets assume that I already own a Pentax K100 with built-in SR (shake reduction).

Does this mean when I buy lenses I don't need to get lenses that have built-in SR, since the camera already has it? Or built-in SR in the camera and in the lenses is be better than having SR on one device than in both?

[coldrain]

Just one correction.. SR works fine with a 1.5x crop sensor and digital only lenses, it moves less than a mm so any lens (digital only or not) will work with an SR camera..
The sensor actually moves a lot more than 1 mm. When the KM was introduced it was said that the sensor moves upto 4 mm. This does make some digital only lenses not compatible. This is probably why not all digital only lenses are available for KM, and why the ones that are there took so long to be introduced.

[jeisner]

The sensor actually moves a lot more than 1 mm. When the KM was introduced it was said that the sensor moves upto 4 mm. This does make some digital only lenses not compatible. This is probably why not all digital only lenses are available for KM, and why the ones that are there took so long to be introduced.

I didn't realise they moved so much... I can't find actual figures on the movement from Pentax anywhere, only that all K mount lenses (many recently being digital only) are compatable...

[ReF]

The sensor actually moves a lot more than 1 mm. When the KM was introduced it was said that the sensor moves upto 4 mm. This does make some digital only lenses not compatible. This is probably why not all digital only lenses are available for KM, and why the ones that are there took so long to be introduced.

okay so i wasn't that off.

[ReF]

I'd love to see a comparo review b/t in-body IS and in-lens IS. I feel Canon and Nikon are cop outs for not offering this feature. I bet $$$ invested into their IS/VR technology has something to do with it. See... I am not a Canon fanatic afterall as some may think. :)


well, to be fair how could those companies be sure so much of the competition would be offering AS so soon? the smaller companies need to get really aggressive to keep up with nikon and canon sales so of course, the aggressive push to AS. each company's release cycle is also slightly different and it will take time to respond (developing/buying and/or implementing this technology) so to say canon and nikon are cop outs for not having this right away is a bit odd to me