Bought a Canon Rebel XT

[henning]

can you send me your cheat sheet?

thanks,

henning

[Robbo]

Resurecting an old post... thats relevant...

I'm in the same boat you folks were a few months ago.. seems like
many picked the Canons which is what I'm used to with my ancient
AE -1 /tamron combo (black metal one no less!) But it jammed up
as the cranking spool broke at the udvar hazy just over a week ago...

So.. the big question of D-slr's is hot on my mind... I just posed a
question on the dust/cleaning issue of late.. but I'd like to open it up
and see if anyone considered the olympus E300 at all? it has the
digital lenses w/ upgradeable firmware, the ccd dust cleaning and
seems built like a rock... one of the camera shop pro's was really
big on it but I wanted to check out more. In many of the reviews
I've seen the 20D is tops, but much more $$$.

any thoughts or comments?

henning

these were some of the reviews I've been looking at for those who
may be interested:

http://www.wrotniak.net/photo/oly-e/e300-rev.html
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/olympuse300/page29.asp

http://www.steves-digicams.com/2004_reviews/e300.html
http://reviews.cnet.com/Olympus_Evolt_E ... 29719.html
http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/E300/E30A13.HTM

I've read and heard a great deal of negative comments about the Canon 20D. I wouldn't buy one.

[TimAPNY]

Several members here have 20D and love them.

I went with the Rebel XT and it has been working out pretty well, But I still have to get use to using it.

[Scott Rose]

From what I understand dust is an issue with all cameras with removable lense. Just with film the dust is usually confined to a single frame as the film moves. With digital the CCD is stationary and thus accumulates dust over time. I don't really see how this would be better or worse depending on manufacturer. Just one thing you have to deal with I guess.

[Tulio]

Okay, time has come for me to purchase a telephoto for my Canon Rebel.

Price range would have to be up to $2000, and I am looking at a fast lens that would work nicely, no color aberrations, no distortion, and preferrably a Canon, or . . . ??

Suggestions?


Saludos,


Tulio

[Tulio]

As they say, the difference between men and boys, is the price of their toys . . .

I bought today my Cannon EF 7-200mm f/2.8L IS USM lens! : ) : )

Will begin field testing tomorrow.

Saludos!


Tulio

[mrhenniger]

Will begin field testing tomorrow.

Looking forward to your report!

Mike

[Tulio]

A little pressed for time, these two were probably two of the best shots with the new lenses:





Saludos,


Tulio

[mrhenniger]

I bought today my Cannon EF 7-200mm f/2.8L IS USM lens!

You did mean 70-200?

A little pressed for time, these two were probably two of the best shots with the new lenses:

Looks like you had fun with the depth of field. So is it thumbs up or down?

Mike

[bdk]

Are those cropped or right out of the camera? How far away from the wingtip were you?

[Tulio]

70-200. Just look at the posting time of my message:

"Posted: Sun Nov 20, 2005 5:17 am"

A lot of things go wrong that late in the day, when I am just getting ready to go to bed.....

The photos are not cropped [but I re-sized them in order to make them load here; each photo is some 25Mb, since I am shooting and storing RAW files); distance was approx. 60ft, taken in between people walking in front of my shot.

Saludos,


Tulio

[Scott Rose]

Wow, I'm impressed. Those are great shots under those conditions.

[Tulio]

I love the detail that digital photos bring; you can actually see the screw heads and the scratches on the lamp housings.

Only thing bad that I have to say against the 70-200 is weight. It is a heavy MoFo! I will have to buy a harness for the camera, so that the weight will not be carried all the time by the lens-mount structure.

Later on, I will probably seek a 28-300 or similar, although those lenses aren't as fast as the 70-200.

Does anyone know about using teleconverters with the 70-200? I used to have a 3x with my old Canon AT-1, and worked all right, but light was usually a really big issue, and a tripod, a must.

Saludos,


Tulio

[Tulio]

One of the best features of this particular lenses, is the "sharp-er" out of focus depth-of-field (when compared with other lenses I have owned).

Knowing this, I tried these shots to see how they would come out, and alas, the effects are very much to my liking.

So, so far, the lenses are OK; I plan to go later today to the desert East of San Diego / West of the Salton Sea, and shoot some photos while the sun is setting.

Saludos,


Tulio

[Robbo]

Tulio, I treated myself to a 70-200 f2.8 L IS earlier this year and it's a very sweet lens indeed. It works well with the Canon 1.4x Extender II and still focuses faster than my 100-400. From what I've heard and read, the 2x extender doesn't perform as well.

From a weight point of view, I'd recommend an Optech neoprene strap to take some of the weight off your neck.

You're going to have some fun and some good results with this lens.

Rob