Badly disappointed with dSLRs - Canon Rebel XT

[Chaos]

:O

dSLRs have the capability to reward a patient user with amazing results....

but from what I have seen so far (take a look at the photography thread on TE), there are very few users around here who can manage to do that

Erm... absolutely. If you use a DSLR, patience is the key and you need lots of it. At the outset, I used to get roughly one keeper out of every ten images I shot. Now after using the camera for over a year, that ratio has increased to probably 5 out of every ten shot. Its just the luck of the draw and it takes a hell of a time to learn how to compose shots with the right exposure.

A little bit of reading helps as well. I'd highly recommend Understanding Exposure by Bryan Peterson to anyone starting off with a DSLR.

Amazon.com: Understanding Exposure: How to Shoot Great Photographs with a Film or Digital Camera (Updated Edition): Books: Bryan Peterson

Tracers' sis excluded from the consideration set, I would guess 99% + of the folks on TE would end up getting better results with a high grade P&S than a dSLR

I don't agree to this statement at all. Anyone can shoot better with a DSLR if one has the patience and inclination to learn. If you spend a bit of quality time with a DSLR, you won't be able to go back to point and shoots. It just takes time but once you know what to do, it doesn't take any longer to use a DSLR than a P&S.

Technically, that shitty kit lens is supposed to be of better grade than the lenses on the SD870/H1..isnt it?

Instead of spending more dosh on a IS USM lens and get rewarded with more bulk, I'll rather trust the SD870/H1 for subsequent trips...Unless I spend minutes framing a shot (not possible), I really think hi grade P&S will return bettter results even if I get better lenses..

So until the day the babes come calling for a photoshoot, the dSLR shall stay confined to the cupboard

Technically the kit lens is worse than the ones on the point and shoots. Its quite simple... bigger the sensor, bigger the lens must be and correspondingly harder it is to build.

 

[Anish]

I don't see the reason of this thread existing.

First thing people don't realise is that the cost of a dSLR isn't the body alone but 50% body + 50% lens.

@ SC - Why don't you stick a 17-50 f2.8 Tamron on that XT and then re-ru this comparison?

 

[superczar]

Ah Payne,..you got it all wrong....

The idea here was that even a tinny 5K basic digicam will give you fair shots on a brightly lit day under shadow where there isn't too much of contrast in the composition...

the moment shooting conditions start becoming less than perfect, under any set of circumstances, a digi-SLR would give you the best possible result (isn't it obvious...the sensor size, the quaity of the optics at work?)

Esp low light photography is something where a d-SLR should really come out shining since even a ISO 800 pic from the rebel would be far less noisy than a ISO 400 from a Canon S2...

barrel distortion is something that will plague a lens like the tiny one on the SD870 (4.6mm -> 28 mm) much more than the 17 mm -->35 mm ( 1/2 size sensor on the rebel)....

In every way, the Rebel XT even with the basic lens kit is technically superior to the other Cams we talked abt...heck, any P&S for that matter

Now here is the deal....

When i go travelling, I enjoy it to the hilt... If i think of my trips in the last 2-3 months, Coorg was about partying with my friends, Leh was about appreciating the beauty of nature

The last thing I want to do while I am doing something I enjoy is to interrupt the flow (of thoughts/of conversation/of whatever) to pause for taking a shot

Having said that, sometimes, you need to do that coz you want to retain some memories...right?

SO coming back to where we were, let's say I am having a ball with my friends by a mountain stream in Coorg, and I feel like, hey, we should take a shot of this...

Scenario A

Bring out the SLR from the bulky bag...and then...

- think to yoursef ...Hmm, it's getting dark arnd here

- move dial to M

- Set ISO to 400

- Set Shutter speed to 1/2 a second...and f stop to 5.8

- No wait...my subjects are moving around..can't ask them to stand still for the shot...

- Set shutter speed to 1/20, push ISO to 800 , f stop to 2.8

- Focus..now where is the damn focus ring..I can never trust the bloody AF in bad light

- shoot...review

- ewww...overexposed...the histogram is like leaping out man...

- Shutter speed 1/20...ISO 200...f stop 2.8 this time....and so on and and on and on

Scenario B

- Fish out the IXUS from your pocket

- move dial to low light mode

- point-click-shoot

The reason why the dSLR disappointed me was coz I wanted it to behave like scenario B

Having said that, there is absolutely nothing in expecting a dSLR to behave like what I expect

Ocasions where I want to take shots for the sake of photography are once in a rare while....which is the only time I am fine with Scenario A...for every other time (~90% + ), I'll take scenario B over theoretically possible better shots

 

[superczar]

I don't agree to this statement at all. Anyone can shoot better with a DSLR if one has the patience and inclination to learn. If you spend a bit of quality time with a DSLR, you won't be able to go back to point and shoots. It just takes time but once you know what to do, it doesn't take any longer to use a DSLR than a P&S.

Agree and disagree

I am comfy enough with the Rebel to set it up to my liking double quick

It's just that most of the time while shooting, I am not inclined to do it (see reason in my last post )

I don't see the reason of this thread existing.

Think of a kid spending a packet buying a DSLR thinking this uber kit will instantly make me a photographer..or think of regular buyers getting tempted to buy a DSLR after reading reviews on a dpreview.com or imaging-resource only to feel let down later

 

[Vij]

This is a good thread and a possible eyeopener for several members.

All I need is a P&S....

 

[Anish]

Think of a kid spending a packet buying a DSLR thinking this uber kit will instantly make me a photographer..or think of regular buyers getting tempted to buy a DSLR after reading reviews on a dpreview.com or imaging-resource only to feel let down later

If he can actually afford to spend that much without knowing the ABC of photography basics, then I think he can afford to spend a bit more, get a decent lens and use that dSLR in full auto mode.

I think your frustrations are simply due to the fact that you've used the WORST dSLR lens on this planet.

Seriously, try re-doing this with a little more decent lens and your Rebel will blow away the P&S cams in full Auto mode too

 

[-D.Payne-]

@SC: Dude. I do not want to go around quoting you all over the place again cuz it wastes a lot of time.

I did NOT get you all wrong. Please read my post carefully and it addresses all your concerns:

1. Yes, the Rebel XT with kit lens is technically inferior to the SD870/H1.

Lens is the weakness:
1. Widest Aperture
SD870 - f2.8 @ 28mm to f5.8@105 mm
H1 - f2.8-f3.7 f3.7@432mm!!!
KitLens - f3.5 @ 27mm (nearly 2/3rd stop slower at wide) to f5.6 @ 83mm (a massive 2 stops slower than the H1!)

Both have Image Stabilization built-in. Which gives u atleast a stop in shutter speed.
2. It can do EXACTLY what you said - fish out, point, click. Why?

Because if the SD870/H1/ANY digicam is in Auto mode, my friend, it'd immediately turn on the flash and click a perfectly acceptable snap. The XT will give u the same shot - flash and there.

IF the flash if OFF>>
Then this means you're in P-mode at least enough to do an ISO change - that's it an ISO change. Which means you are the same whether you're using a digicam or a dSLR.
Lemme get this right. I'm NOT trying to say you're wrong that a dSLR requires more learning but am also saying that it requires more learning from it ONLY if you ask from it more than a normal digicam.

Point: If you want BETTER shots from your SD870/H1 you'd have to go through the other settings right? If yes, then its the same with a dSLR.

I love P-mode. It leaves every headache to the cam, while I set ISO alone, I can't see how you got it wrong with that then. Dude, the only reason you got shitty shots was cuz you dint change the ISO. hyeah: hyeah: Which you'd have got out of a digicam too.
Out.
Payne

 

[Vij]

What would be the final cost to get a camera like Canon Rebel XT to give good shots in auto/default mode?

 

[-D.Payne-]

This is a good thread and an eyeopener for several members.
All I need is a P&S....

No its not. It's more like a misguiding thread. hyeah:

Vij, since I know you're quite knowledgeable abt PCs and displays lemme give you two examples:

1. Imagine someone upgrading from a 7200GS to a 8800GT and continuing to play with the same graphics settings. And then complaining that the 8800GT is a sucky card.

2. Or buying a 20" S-IPS screen and running it 1280x1024 cuz he can't see the pixels BIG enough on the screen. And then complaining that's its got blurred text.

Out.
Payne

 

[Anish]

What would be the final cost to get a camera like Canon Rebel XT to give good shots in auto/default mode?

Rebel XT Body + Tamron 17-50 f2.8 Wideangle + Canon 55-250 IS Tele

~ 25k + 20k + 13k

1. Imagine someone upgrading from a 7200GS to a 8800GT and continuing to play with the same graphics settings. And then complaining that the 8800GT is a sucky card.

Perfect! Absolutely spot-on!

@ Superczar - I still don't see a reason for this thread mate, loosen up a bit and read the manual once, dSLR's aren't that geeky mate

 

[superczar]

It can do EXACTLY what you said - fish out, point, click. Why?

Hehehe, there's no way I can fish out that behemoth...it's too huge for it

anyway, back to the topic...

I shoot in P mode..all my cams, 75% of the time..10% in Aperture setting mode, 10% in Shutter time mode and very rarely in Manual mode

Payne, I did change the ISO mode too....the night shots were all in ISO 800 while I forced the others at ISO400 as I didnt want mucho noise...

So for the time being, I will accept that the problem lies with the kit lens

having said that, most reviews seem to suggest that the kit lens ain't too bad either...

though I still maintain that the single biggest advantage with dSLRs is their ability to shoot without discernible noise till ISO 800 while the H2/S2/what have you will return near garbage at that sensitivity

But is the ability to shoot at high ISOs so important for a regular user (non photographer/non hobbyist) to discard other desirables like small size, consistent good results and less headaches in general?

Vij,

SLR IS lenses tend to be fairly expensive..something like a 18-55 3.5-5.6 with IS should be around the 9-10K range while a 5X like 28-135 IS USM wold be in the 17-20K range

1. Imagine someone upgrading from a 7200GS to a 8800GT and continuing to play with the same graphics settings. And then complaining that the 8800GT is a sucky card.

2. Or buying a 20" S-IPS screen and running it 1280x1024 cuz he can't see the pixels BIG enough on the screen. And then complaining that's its got blurred text.

And the point is? I don't see how this serves as an analogy!

@ Superczar - I still don't see a reason for this thread mate, loosen up a bit and read the manual once, dSLR's aren't that geeky

mate

Mate, I am comfy enuff with the SLR....

It's more of a philosophy debate ...

Over the years, I have seen myself change from someone who'd love to see 25000 adjustable settngs on a basic TV to someone who appreciates simplicity on the most complex of devices...

Thats the reason why I'd prefer a simple ipod over a uber feature packed Archos PMP

or an iphone over a motoming....

Any gadget I buy is meant to add value to my life...It shouldnt end up sucking value out of it...

I can understand where you are coming from Anish, coz in college, I'd have loved to spend hours playing around tweaking, and experimenting with every possible setting...not any longer though....

Which is also the reason why I would prefer a simple photo shooter over a hazaar complex one as long as the difference in the results is an acceptable one

(and which is the reason why the analogies by Payne are far off the mark because the difference in the results is huge)

Here are two paises at the end:

Next trip I head out for a trip (soon enough), the SD870 it will be

Next time I go taking shots for the sake of photography, it'll be the rebel XT

 

[Anish]

It's more of a philosophy debate ...
Over the years, I have seen myself change from someone who'd love to see 25000 adjustable settngs on a basic TV to someone who appreciates simplicity on the most complex of devices...

Thats the reason why I'd prefer a simple ipod over a uber feature packed Archos PMP
or an iphone over a motoming....

Any gadget I buy is meant to add value to my life...It shouldnt end up sucking value out of it...
I can understand where you are coming from Anish, coz in college, I'd have loved to spend hours playing around tweaking, and experimenting with every possible setting...not any longer though....

Next trip I head out for a trip (soon enough), the SD870 it will be
Next time I go taking shots for the sake of photography, it'll be the rebel XT

Aha, I totally got you point now. That's pretty fair!

And yes, SLR's certainly aren't everyone's cup of tea

 

[KingKrool]

Even in the DSLR, there are some scene modes (you know what I mean - portrait, landscape, sport) etc. They give pretty decent results (not matching manual setting of course). Just using Auto is a way to get screwed, and even P is sometimes not enough. Most people I've seen who want quick photos, tend to use the Aperture setting mode. It gives the best results if you don't want to have to spend a year setting up stuff (just selecting one parameter is pretty painless).

 

[tracerbullet]

Having used all sorts of cameras since I took a liking to photography back in junior college, I pretty much know how to use SLRs, prosumers and compact cameras. So I'm going to generalise here for the sake of making my point clear. No personal offence to anyone. I'm just being emphatic so that my point becomes obvious.

Main purpose of SLRs for me:

1. For full manual control, and aperture and shutter priority modes. I'd have to be an utter idiot to spend 40k on a professional camera only to use it in auto and program modes.

2. To make physical prints of my photos. If I'm not making prints of my pictures and instead going to resize them to 800x600 to upload to Flickr, Picasa, Facebook or the likes, then the picture is going to look shitty regardless of whether it was taken on a compact camera or an SLR.

3. For pure art. to elaborate, if I know exactly what I'm getting into and don't want to be restricted by meagre shutter, aperture and ISO values on compact cameras then of course an SLR is the best option. For instance, if I'm going to be doing high-speed photography then I need a shutter speed of 1/4000th of a second (just an example). Of course at that speed, I'd also need a large aperture so that enough light may enter the lens if I want a photograph to register at all. Same logic for telephoto lenses. If I want nice flares around all light sources, then a narrow aperture like F16/22/32 etc. is required. Compacts aren't capable of closing the aperture that much.

4. For professional work purposes. For instance, if I were working as a photojournalist with a publication or agency and quality needed to be top-notch in order to print correctly. Then yes, an SLR is the way to go.

For my purposes right now, they're too heavy, bulky and tedious to use as compared to compact cameras.

Payne, you need to realise that SLRs aren't the resounding all-encompassing answer to photography. Some people prefer simplicity over technical prowess. Just because SLRs are better in performance than P&S, it doesn't make them applicable to everyone. My mom would rather not shoot at all than heave a mammoth around on her waist, and fumble around with settings before taking a shot.

Okay rant /off now. Hopefully I've made my point clear.

 

[-D.Payne-]

Payne, you need to realise that SLRs aren't the resounding all-encompassing answer to photography. Some people prefer simplicity over technical prowess.

Okay rant /off now. Hopefully I've made my point clear.

Tracer, we are on the SAME page! I'm just coming off as a pro-SLR kind of person because this is not the first thread I've seen complaining about SLRs when the user knew what he was buying himself into. I'd ignore a n00b saying do NOT buy an SLR or someone saying that a McLaren F1 is tough to drive in daily traffic but not someone who knows his technology.

I use a H2 now and I still miss my good ole basic Canon A310 which used to be with me every beck and call. Because to me THAT is photography - the ability to be able to turn daily life into your own story. The fact that I can't carry my H2 everywhere (the same way I used to have my A310) really pisses me off.

I have since bought myself a Sony Ericsson K790i which takes around 300% more photographs than the Sony H2 which btw takes photographs which are 400% better. But I still miss taking a camera with me. I travel a LOT and I dont have the space nor the patience to take along my bulky H2 with me everywhere. I understand what superczar is saying but I'm not exactly blaming my H2 either.

What I want: a wide-angled, great low-light compact camera. Which doesn't exist as of now. The Fuji is not wide-angle enough, and the Canon/Panasonics are horrible at low-light.

What I suggest to everybody starting off and asking me for advice:
1. Do NOT buy a prosumer cam - leave alone a dSLR - for social snaps. You'll only be disappointed and bogged down by it.

2. Always buy a cam which has a decent amount of settings in it and won't leave you hungry for more within the first 2 months.

3. Then reach the limits of that cam and upgrade when you are ready for a dSLR.

My ideal world? A compact digicam accompanied by a mammoth dSLR. I'll take the SLR with me for shoots and the digicam will be my third eye at all times.

Superczar, I agree with your conundrum but I do not believe you should be blaming the camera here dude. It irks me because I see this coming up soooooooooooooo many times on international photography forums as well - day in and day out. "I bought a dSLR, where's the zoom button?!?! Why do I have to squeeze this thing" "I bought a dSLR why can't I see a photo here??!"

You are NOT like that, so I just expect more. hyeah:

Hopefully I've made my vague point clear. I tend to type a LOT.

Out.
Payne

PS: For all the ranting, I do not see a single photograph here. Please to show Coorg.

 

[superczar]

not coorg, but quite a few pics here:

http://www.techenclave.com/forums/742274-post614.html

Superczar, I agree with your conundrum but I do not believe you should be blaming the camera here dude

The reason behind the rant was that I have seen a lot of folks interested in casual photography take the dSLR plunge to be disappointed later

Most dSLR reviews on the net (typically written by people who do know cameras well) tend to highlight the strengths of a dSLR without talking about the innate disadvantages of a dSLR for regular consumers....

LOL..and to clarify, I don't hate mah Rebel XT...I just wish I didn't really need to carry along 2 or more Cams on a trip