Apologies - My Explanation

[TheAviator]

Ok sorry guys for all the crazy post about "which camera, this one or that one, why not this one, etc etc".

The fact is, is that I want to take a camera with me to Europe that will take REALLY good sharp images, while keeping a good resolution. I've heard tons of good things about the Rebel XT and was curious as to why people were telling me not to purchase it. The S3 also looks good, but the Rebel XT is obviously better than the S3 in some ways correct? If I am wrong, please tell me, if not, could you tell me why the Rebel XT is better? Or Vise Versa.

Size. Size does not concern me. I am not just looking for something that I can keep in my pocket or what have you. I love taking pictures, and when I go to Europe, I want to take tons of pictures, good ones with sharp quality.

At the moment, I have enough money for the Rebel XT with the default lens 18-55. This seems like a really good camera, based off reviews I've read. So with disregard to Size, could someone say why I should not buy this camera and instead I should buy the S3? Is the Canon Rebel XT more money for something that is "not" that better than the S3?

So once again, sorry for all the quick post, I was just getting ahead of myself. I will do more research, and thanks everyone for your advice and comments, I do appreciate it. Also, These are not the only cameras I'm looking into, anything that has a decent price and takes good professional pictures is what I am into.

Thanks guys, I appreciate it.

[T06]

You are to me asking genuine questions but the obvious bad markers are being loaded at the same time. One gets a touch cynical after 10+ years on the net.
To answer your question about a DSLR compared to a point & shoot, well, obviously this has to be short.
Bottom line is to get the pics you want from the XT you will need to have some experience with said & any dslr for that matter. The point & shoot can be an easy as in a given & some serious camera too no less. Its your choice, if you want to pull the old camera out that weighs a ton & you think you'll take a photo within five seconds, as in dslr you won't, you have to check what the last settings were to reset it et alone take a photo. If you want something that primes up right smart & loves to drop a photo real snappy, P&S.;)

[TheAviator]

Is it possible to get a link of some Canon S3 Pictures, besides the one's that were earlier posted by XaiLo. Thanks.

[greggh]

Is it possible to get a link of some Canon S3 Pictures, besides the one's that were earlier posted by XaiLo. Thanks.

Here's 15,070 S3 IS photos for you to browse through :)

http://flickr.com/groups/canonpowershots3is/

[Riley]

heres a sample gallery for S3

http://www.dpreview.com/gallery/Canon_s3IS_samples/

if you are looking for comparisons check the list

http://www.dpreview.com/gallery/

[DonSchap]

If you want, perhaps Canon representative can drop by your house ... and show you a catalog ... oh, good grief!

Will you just go to a store and grab one for a trial, already ? :mad:

[mattdm]

The fact is, is that I want to take a camera with me to Europe that will take REALLY good sharp images, while keeping a good resolution. I've heard tons of good things about the Rebel XT and was curious as to why people were telling me not to purchase it. The S3 also looks good, but the Rebel XT is obviously better than the S3 in some ways correct? If I am wrong, please tell me, if not, could you tell me why the Rebel XT is better? Or Vise Versa.

"Better" must be answered with "better for what?". In your earlier post, you said "I want to be able to take my camera out of my backpack, point it, and shoot." This is not the Rebel, or any other dSLR. The S3, on the other hand, is basically designed to be a non-compact camera which fits this need.


So, here's a question: are you intending to enjoy this vacation primarily as a photography exercise? In that case, I'd say forget the "get it out and shoot" idea and instead get the dSLR and the accompanying paraphernalia and enjoy yourself. You'll definitely need to also bring a laptop so you can upload the pictures every night and look through the day's shooting and see what you like and what you could have improved. (The LCD screen isn't good enough for this.) If you go this route and can only afford the kit lens, I'd suggest getting the Nikon D40 instead of the Canon XT -- by all reports it's got a much nicer kit lens.

On the other hand, if your primary goal is to experience the countries rather than record them, get the S3 (or another "bridge" camera from Panasonic or Fuji). Or even better, rethink the compact issue and get the Panasonic TZ1. If you've not been out of the country for an extended time before, I think this is really the best way. Then maybe buy the dSLR when you get back home, spend some time going around your own area getting really used to it, and then go back to Europe for a photo trip later sometime.

[Karl Rove]

Here's 15,070 S3 IS photos for you to browse through :)

http://flickr.com/groups/canonpowershots3is/

I notice notice on all the low-light shots in these two galleries, including Fishing Boat Harbour by user p.du.v on flickr and the dpreview indoor shots. Does this random sampling mean the S3 is not a good low-light shooter or does it al have to do with individual user settings?

Karl

[Riley]

I notice notice on all the low-light shots in these two galleries, including Fishing Boat Harbour by user p.du.v on flickr and the dpreview indoor shots. Does this random sampling mean the S3 is not a good low-light shooter or does it al have to do with individual user settings?

Karl

pretty much any superzoom is crap beyond iso400, although the fuji holds up at iso800. Really if this were me (and it isnt) i would look at something a lot more portable. Top of my hunting list would be Fuji's F30

[Karl Rove]

pretty much any superzoom is crap beyond iso400, although the fuji holds up at iso800. Really if this were me (and it isnt) i would look at something a lot more portable. Top of my hunting list would be Fuji's F30

Oops, it was suppsoed to read, "I notice noise on all the low-light shots..."

[Honest Gaza]

The ability for a DSLR to outshine a P&S in low light conditions will still depend on lenses used.

As an example, in the weekend I was using my Canon 400D (DSLR) and Sigma 17-70mm lens for an evening Birthday Party and was outdoors under an awning with small spotlights....using a flash. Of course, the flash doesn't help you to focus so I missed out on a couple of shots where the camera just simply couldn't auto focus (with the lens I was using).

Later on in the evening I brought out the trusty Panasonic FZ-20....and focusing was effortless.

While the argument about ISO may be valid....the photo is nothing if you can't focus in the first place :) .

[Riley]

does that mean 400D is without low light focusing ?
did it hunt for focus or do nothing ?
can you manually focus it ?

[Honest Gaza]

does that mean 400D is without low light focusing ?
did it hunt for focus or do nothing ?
can you manually focus it ?

There isn't any "auto focus assist beam" and the Sigma lens went in and out like Robot's arm from Lost in Space :D .

Note : I was using an external flash (I realise the internal flash would have fired off pre-flash for this purpose).

I tried using the MF but the viewfinder is rather small in size making it difficult in low light.....(my eye patch probably didn't help either, but it makes the sunglasses more comfortable).

As mentioned, the FZ-20 had no trouble at all (I guess because of the smaller physical focal length and constant f/2.8)

[Riley]

yeah well
i cant hide my surprise at that Gaza
seems like Canon have a very stratified presentation of features

i do agree that one really shouldnt make sweeping statements about one type vs the other, and im as guilty of that as anyone i guess
but i really didnt expect to see an example as vivid as that

[Honest Gaza]

In true DSLR fashion, I could have taken time out to swap the lens to my 50mm Prime (f/1.8) to solve this problem.

But this in turn is also the reason why DSLR's are a pain in the backside....having to change the lens depending on the situation (which could be lighting or required focal length).

[TheAviator]

That's just real Photography man...

[David Metsky]

That's just real Photography man...
Photography is about taking pictures. Everything else is technique.

[speaklightly]

Without a doubt, there is a rather large rush to DSLR cameras. I understand that. However, suppose there was a lesser cost option that would take photos that were NEARLY as good as a DSLR camera, at a FRACTION of the cost, would you be interested?

Well, that is still possible. Take a look at the Panasonic FZ-7, selling for less than $(US) 260.00. That is a good deal less than any DSLR camera you might think of, when scrolling through all of the DSLR cameras now available.

Please just take a good look at this Panasonic FZ-7 photo. It was taken handheld, using ISO 200, without flash. It look nearly as good as any DSLR shot for a lot LESS money.

You make the judgement. I happen to think that it is a photo that is quite comparable to a lot of DSLR photos.

Speaklightly