 [Larger view] | Canon Digital Rebel XT 8MP Digital SLR Camera with EF-S 18-55mm f3.5-5.6 Lens (Black)
| ||||||
Average user rating:  | |
 Best per buck | |
| - Excellent quality of photographs straight out of the box
- Very fast in all departments - Intuitive (easy) menu system - Quiet operation I also experienced very good battery life (with preview turned off, which in my opinion for fast shooting should be off anyways) As a side note: no matter how big/small your hands may be: get the vertical grip (BG-E3). It's extremely well built, gives the whole set up nice heft without feeling too heavy. It also gives you a choice of power (rechargables - one or two, or AA batteries). Overall, I don't see anything else in this price range that's even remotely close to what the Rebel XT represents; in built quality and the actual photographic output. | |
| Not perfect, but a great camera | |
| This is my 2nd D-SLR, after the Pentax *ist D. I switched because more lenses are made for Canon, the lenses are easier to find, and Canon also has USM focusing available. I've had the camera for a little over a month, and don't regret buying it at all. It IS small, and light. The 20D looks better on paper and feels more solid, but it's also larger and heavier-about half a pound more than the Rebel XT. After using the Rebel XT for a few days the size didn't seem like a disadvantage anymore. It isn't weather-sealed, but neither is the 20D.
Like others have noted, the LCD is hard to read in direct sunlight. Here is where we see the advantage of having most information (ISO level, etc) in the small grey LCD--it's readable in all lighting conditions, whereas the color LCD washes out in bright sunlight. The camera also rattles a little, due to the hinges on the pop-up flash. It doesn't sound broken or worrisome, but you are definitely aware that this isn't a professional-grade, durable camera. The XT doesn't feel as durable and substantial as the Pentax *ist D, or the Nikon D70, or some of the offerings from Minolta and Olympus. But at the same time, it doesn't feel cheap to me. Frequently the heft and density of cameras gives the illusion of quality. The Rebel XT, though it feels superficially a little flimsy, is much more of a camera than any point-and-shoot superzoom made by Sony, Canon, or anyone else. SLRs give you much faster focus, much better low-light performance, and the advantage of interchangeable lenses. That being said, you may be disappointed if you expect to get the Rebel XT and only the kit lens. The kit lens isn't a good indoors or low-light lens. If you absolutely don't want to spend any more money past the initial investment, stay away from SLRs. You'll still get some advantages, granted, such as the faster focus, but overall it might be a disappointing experience for you. I like the XT's kit lens, but it has its limitations. There is no one do-it-all-well perfect lens. If you shoot under good lighting conditions from f8-f11 you'll get good pictures with the kit lens and have nothing to worry about. In a dimly lit room you'll need either a faster lens or something with image stabilization, like the Canon 17-85mm. Overall, this is a great camera, and the kit lens is a perfectly serviceable beginning lens, which is also small and light enough for travel. I would prefer a more solid build, but I opted for the lighter weight and smaller size of the XT over the better build and durability of the 20D. Both take about equivalent pictures, though there are some specs that are different, like more frames per second and ISO 3200 capability on the 20D. Ultimately SLRS are more about lenses than the camera, and really all photography is more about the photographer than the equipment. The XT, with the right lenses, is as capable as anything else on the market. Unless you need ISO 3200, or 5 frames per second, or a heavier, sturdier build, I see little reason to opt for the 20D. Put the $500 difference into lenses instead, and you won't regret it. | |
| Greeeaaat Camera !!! | |
| This camera makes photography more fun. All the positive things that have been said are true so I'll spend my time with some ideas for those who are on the "fence" or who are not sure if a DSLR is for them.
If you are new to DSLRs and/or photography, this camera (and any dslr) takes more knowledge than a standard p&s camera. The biggest complaint I hear is it is not as sharp as my old P&S and the pictures are softer. DSLRs do not apply as much in camera sharpening so your images may not be as sharp straight from the camera (you can change that in the camera). Best results will always come if you do some post image processing (pp). If you do not like PP, this is a negative, however, you can set the in-camera options to apply pp to your liking. It is just better controlled in pp software. Knowledge of photographic concepts such as Depth of Field(dof) and exposure control are needed. People sometimes complain about the cameras soft images when in actuality it is user error due to the concept mistakes above. Plan to spend more money on lenses!!! The 18-55 is very good for the money ($80-$100 market) but is nowhere near the quality of other options that you have. Plan to spend more on at least 1-2 quality lenses for best results. There is really, really a noticeable difference. A few reasons I rated this camera 4 instead of 5: 1)The eyepiece view is a little smaller than other DSLRs. This makes composing a little more challenging, espec. for manual focus. 2) the viewfinder is too dim and gets washed out in the sun. In the end, image quality is king and the images from the 350D arethe kings crown. |
