After 30+yrs of Canon (F1/T-90) mostly b&w shooting, I've decided to try digital. I need an affordable, good quality dSLR which will sync with studio flash (White Lightenings). I am leaning toward the Canon Rebel XT which should allow me to put more money toward a good lens. Does anyone have any suggestions or advice? Any lens recommendations (18--55 or 18--85mm)? Thanks very much.
Michael Jhon
Full Version: entry level dSLR for studio flash use--Advice?
If you get a Rebel XT, get a decent lense! I'm always borrowing my friend's one and hate the plastic POS. Everyone here talks about the 17-40 f4 L You'll want something more on the telephoto end and my prior experience with Canon primes has been that they are great!
The Olympus E1 is highly regarded as a studio camera. I've never been in a studio but I own an E1 and pretty well love it. I moved to olympus when my EOS 1 was stolen. The E1 has many similar qualities and is a squillionth of the price of a Canon 1 series. The lenses can be less too. You might find you don't need the tanklike build and want more MP for less $$ so look down the range. Depending on your work, you may only need the 14-54, it's fast and sharp. The 11-22 is better though if you can afford that and a 50mm macro instead.
The Olympus E1 is highly regarded as a studio camera. I've never been in a studio but I own an E1 and pretty well love it. I moved to olympus when my EOS 1 was stolen. The E1 has many similar qualities and is a squillionth of the price of a Canon 1 series. The lenses can be less too. You might find you don't need the tanklike build and want more MP for less $$ so look down the range. Depending on your work, you may only need the 14-54, it's fast and sharp. The 11-22 is better though if you can afford that and a 50mm macro instead.
A Rebel XT is a fine choice. I bought the original Digital Rebel soon after it came out (and i used the hacked firmware, but that's beside the fact), and I echo the suggestion to avoid buying the kit (which includes the 18-55 EF-s lens). The kit lens is very light and compact, but the image quality is only so-so (not as bad as some insist, i think), and the build quality is questionable in terms of autofocus and the way the lens feels when you're manually focusing/zooming. Save yourself even more money and just buy the body. For a lens, I would suggest the Canon 50mm f/1.8 II. It's a compact, light, high quality glass, fast lens. While this lens is plastic as well, it has a "solid" feel to it, and the ergonomics are much better than the 18-55mm. It's an astounding deal for 150 or so Canadian dollars, and the 50mm on a 1.6x DSLR such as the Digital Rebel (or XT in your case) translates into a nice focal distance for portraits. It also has comparable image quality to the much more expensive Canon 50mm f/1.4. The f/1.4 has slightly better bokeh and so on, straight from the camera, and it's allegedly better build quality, but the image quality is nothing that can't be equalled through some minor post-processing adjustments. The internet provides several reviews comparing the two lenses, so try googling both lenses. That's it... my suggestion is the 50mm f/1.8 II. I've been very happy with my lens.
Thanks for the response. Yeah, I had planned to upgrade the glass--probably to the 17-85 USM. But since I'm still at the research stage, I'll follow your advice and give a look at the Olympus E1. Thanks for the suggestion.
Michael
Michael
QUOTE(situgrrl @ Jan 31 2006, 01:41 PM)
If you get a Rebel XT, get a decent lense! I'm always borrowing my friend's one and hate the plastic POS. Everyone here talks about the 17-40 f4 L You'll want something more on the telephoto end and my prior experience with Canon primes has been that they are great!
The Olympus E1 is highly regarded as a studio camera. I've never been in a studio but I own an E1 and pretty well love it. I moved to olympus when my EOS 1 was stolen. The E1 has many similar qualities and is a squillionth of the price of a Canon 1 series. The lenses can be less too. You might find you don't need the tanklike build and want more MP for less $$ so look down the range. Depending on your work, you may only need the 14-54, it's fast and sharp. The 11-22 is better though if you can afford that and a 50mm macro instead.
The Olympus E1 is highly regarded as a studio camera. I've never been in a studio but I own an E1 and pretty well love it. I moved to olympus when my EOS 1 was stolen. The E1 has many similar qualities and is a squillionth of the price of a Canon 1 series. The lenses can be less too. You might find you don't need the tanklike build and want more MP for less $$ so look down the range. Depending on your work, you may only need the 14-54, it's fast and sharp. The 11-22 is better though if you can afford that and a 50mm macro instead.
QUOTE(oldcsar @ Jan 31 2006, 03:00 PM)
A Rebel XT is a fine choice. I bought the original Digital Rebel soon after it came out (and i used the hacked firmware, but that's beside the fact), and I echo the suggestion to avoid buying the kit (which includes the 18-55 EF-s lens). The kit lens is very light and compact, but the image quality is only so-so (not as bad as some insist, i think), and the build quality is questionable in terms of autofocus and the way the lens feels when you're manually focusing/zooming. Save yourself even more money and just buy the body. For a lens, I would suggest the Canon 50mm f/1.8 II. It's a compact, light, high quality glass, fast lens. While this lens is plastic as well, it has a "solid" feel to it, and the ergonomics are much better than the 18-55mm. It's an astounding deal for 150 or so Canadian dollars, and the 50mm on a 1.6x DSLR such as the Digital Rebel (or XT in your case) translates into a nice focal distance for portraits. It also has comparable image quality to the much more expensive Canon 50mm f/1.4. The f/1.4 has slightly better bokeh and so on, straight from the camera, and it's allegedly better build quality, but the image quality is nothing that can't be equalled through some minor post-processing adjustments. The internet provides several reviews comparing the two lenses, so try googling both lenses. That's it... my suggestion is the 50mm f/1.8 II. I've been very happy with my lens.
Thanks for the very helpful suggestions. Looks like a long night of hom-e-work ahead.... I just got back from handling the XT and had a very similar take on the feel and apparent quality of the kit lens.
Thanks for the very helpful suggestions. Looks like a long night of hom-e-work ahead.... I just got back from handling the XT and had a very similar take on the feel and apparent quality of the kit lens.
If you have Canon equipment (or Nikon) and specifically wish to shoot in a studio, check around for a used Kodak SLRc (Canon) or the essentially identical SLRn (Nikon.) These are 14mp full-frame cameras which had problems when they first came out, though most of the problems were resolved in firmware upgrades. Still, they are not as good for *general use* as the new pro Nikons or Canons -- but for studio use, I believe they are every bit as good. They can be shot either tethered or untethered using CF cards. You can get shots of sensational quality with them -- better than you'd get with a Rebel XT. Because they are no longer made (though Kodak still provides support, I believe) you should be able to get a used one relatively cheaply. There is a forum specifically dedicated to these Kodaks on the Galbraith website. Look here:
http://forums.robgalbraith.com/postlist.php?Cat=0&Board=UBB2
JC
http://forums.robgalbraith.com/postlist.php?Cat=0&Board=UBB2
JC
With the Rebel XT, you will need to get an inexpensive Wein hot-shoe to PC adapter for the flash cord going to the White Lightening. The Rebel series (and most low-end DSLRs) don't have PC flash connectors.
Another alternative is radio wireless. It works very well.
I favor the 17-85 for versatility. You didn't mention what you will be shooting, so we can't be more specific.
Another alternative is radio wireless. It works very well.
I favor the 17-85 for versatility. You didn't mention what you will be shooting, so we can't be more specific.
I have the XT and 17-40 L / 70-200 F4 L. The L makes a great difference and is an amazing quality lens.
You definitely want to spend the money on the lens. The Rebel XT is an amazing body. What detoured me away from the 20 d is that, for 500 more I didn't need the extra 1600 ISO or the 2 more fps. I spent the 500 towards a lens instead and am happy.
My girlfriend followed the same philosophy, except she's about to buy the 24-105 L which is supposed to be amazing.
You definitely want to spend the money on the lens. The Rebel XT is an amazing body. What detoured me away from the 20 d is that, for 500 more I didn't need the extra 1600 ISO or the 2 more fps. I spent the 500 towards a lens instead and am happy.
My girlfriend followed the same philosophy, except she's about to buy the 24-105 L which is supposed to be amazing.
QUOTE(situgrrl @ Jan 31 2006, 04:41 PM)
If you get a Rebel XT, get a decent lense! I'm always borrowing my friend's one and hate the plastic POS. Everyone here talks about the 17-40 f4 L You'll want something more on the telephoto end and my prior experience with Canon primes has been that they are great!
The Olympus E1 is highly regarded as a studio camera. I've never been in a studio but I own an E1 and pretty well love it. I moved to olympus when my EOS 1 was stolen. The E1 has many similar qualities and is a squillionth of the price of a Canon 1 series. The lenses can be less too. You might find you don't need the tanklike build and want more MP for less $$ so look down the range. Depending on your work, you may only need the 14-54, it's fast and sharp. The 11-22 is better though if you can afford that and a 50mm macro instead.
The Olympus E1 is highly regarded as a studio camera. I've never been in a studio but I own an E1 and pretty well love it. I moved to olympus when my EOS 1 was stolen. The E1 has many similar qualities and is a squillionth of the price of a Canon 1 series. The lenses can be less too. You might find you don't need the tanklike build and want more MP for less $$ so look down the range. Depending on your work, you may only need the 14-54, it's fast and sharp. The 11-22 is better though if you can afford that and a 50mm macro instead.
If you're considering replacing lenses while picking up the body, you should look into a good used Fuji S2 (which has a Nikon lens mount). They have superb image quality for portraiture and product shots, and with all the newer DSLRs on the market, good used ones can be found for under $1k. Considering cost versus image quality, a good S2 might give you the most bang for your buck. They function very well with studio lights, and their custom white balance does a great job.
Our most prized lens for studio work with this body is the 35-70 f/2.8. Nice range for portraits and tack sharp. We have D2Xs now, but my wife still uses the S2 instead in the studio simply because it's a lot lighter, while image quality stands up in enlargement to 20x30 for portraits. We have 4 of them and even with the D2Xs in the rack, we are unwilling to part with them. They have made us a lot of money over the years and built a nice bank of repeat customers for our studio, so they definitely have a lot going for them.
Our most prized lens for studio work with this body is the 35-70 f/2.8. Nice range for portraits and tack sharp. We have D2Xs now, but my wife still uses the S2 instead in the studio simply because it's a lot lighter, while image quality stands up in enlargement to 20x30 for portraits. We have 4 of them and even with the D2Xs in the rack, we are unwilling to part with them. They have made us a lot of money over the years and built a nice bank of repeat customers for our studio, so they definitely have a lot going for them.
You might also look around for a good deal on the 20D over the next few weeks.
Prices are coming down very nicely, and paired with the 17-85 lens, and perhaps the 50mm f1.8 you will have a reasonably priced solution in a solid and reliable camera body.
Prices are coming down very nicely, and paired with the 17-85 lens, and perhaps the 50mm f1.8 you will have a reasonably priced solution in a solid and reliable camera body.
The suggestion to consider used equipment is an extension of your original question, but a good one. We have had exceptional results with KEH, and there are other reputable sources.
Following up my recommendation for a used Fuji S2 and Nikkor 35-70 f/2.8, KEH is currently asking $789 for an S2 and $310 for 35-70 f/2.8 (both in Excellent condition, and KEH's ratings are very honest). That's simply a whole lot of excellent image quality for not much money, compared to new prices for the latest models. Look up the prices for Peripatetic's recommendation, and I suspect you will find similar savings and great value in terms of image quality delivered per $.
Hmmm. Those prices are so good for the S2, perhaps it's time for us to grab another for backup.
Following up my recommendation for a used Fuji S2 and Nikkor 35-70 f/2.8, KEH is currently asking $789 for an S2 and $310 for 35-70 f/2.8 (both in Excellent condition, and KEH's ratings are very honest). That's simply a whole lot of excellent image quality for not much money, compared to new prices for the latest models. Look up the prices for Peripatetic's recommendation, and I suspect you will find similar savings and great value in terms of image quality delivered per $.
Hmmm. Those prices are so good for the S2, perhaps it's time for us to grab another for backup.
The Rebel, as Bob stated, is missing certain "pro" features, but you can get around that. The Rebels also have sloppier controls that are harder to use under many conditions. However, since you want it for studio work, you will not have to cahnge the settings much, except for ISO, Shutter, and Apeture settings, which are not as easy to adjust as other Canons--but big deal.
Although similar, the 20D does have a different sensor chip.
You can see a comparison bet2ween the two with images here:
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos350d/page23.asp
As for a lens, on my 20D I use the 24-70L 99% of the time, and it allows me to get within 11 inches of the subject and the zoom is nice too. The effective zoom is 38.4-12, wihch you can see is a nice range. To get down to around 31mm effective, you'll incur a BIG hit in max zoom with other lenses.
I think the Rebel XT has a 200 sync rate, which is the same as the 5D, whereas the 20D has 250. The pixel load of the XT is 8.0 compared to 8.2 for the 20D also.
If you want the camera for all jobs, including studio work, the 20D hands down. If you want it only for studio work, the RebelXT is a good choice to save money and possibly get near the same quality images as the 20D.
Although similar, the 20D does have a different sensor chip.
You can see a comparison bet2ween the two with images here:
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos350d/page23.asp
As for a lens, on my 20D I use the 24-70L 99% of the time, and it allows me to get within 11 inches of the subject and the zoom is nice too. The effective zoom is 38.4-12, wihch you can see is a nice range. To get down to around 31mm effective, you'll incur a BIG hit in max zoom with other lenses.
I think the Rebel XT has a 200 sync rate, which is the same as the 5D, whereas the 20D has 250. The pixel load of the XT is 8.0 compared to 8.2 for the 20D also.
If you want the camera for all jobs, including studio work, the 20D hands down. If you want it only for studio work, the RebelXT is a good choice to save money and possibly get near the same quality images as the 20D.
QUOTE(Hank @ Feb 1 2006, 03:37 PM)
The suggestion to consider used equipment is an extension of your original question, but a good one. We have had exceptional results with KEH, and there are other reputable sources.
Following up my recommendation for a used Fuji S2 and Nikkor 35-70 f/2.8, KEH is currently asking $789 for an S2 and $310 for 35-70 f/2.8 (both in Excellent condition, and KEH's ratings are very honest). That's simply a whole lot of excellent image quality for not much money, compared to new prices for the latest models. Look up the prices for Peripatetic's recommendation, and I suspect you will find similar savings and great value in terms of image quality delivered per $.
Hmmm. Those prices are so good for the S2, perhaps it's time for us to grab another for backup.
Following up my recommendation for a used Fuji S2 and Nikkor 35-70 f/2.8, KEH is currently asking $789 for an S2 and $310 for 35-70 f/2.8 (both in Excellent condition, and KEH's ratings are very honest). That's simply a whole lot of excellent image quality for not much money, compared to new prices for the latest models. Look up the prices for Peripatetic's recommendation, and I suspect you will find similar savings and great value in terms of image quality delivered per $.
Hmmm. Those prices are so good for the S2, perhaps it's time for us to grab another for backup.
QUOTE(Hank @ Jan 31 2006, 09:19 PM)
If you're considering replacing lenses while picking up the body, you should look into a good used Fuji S2 (which has a Nikon lens mount). They have superb image quality for portraiture and product shots, and with all the newer DSLRs on the market, good used ones can be found for under $1k. Considering cost versus image quality, a good S2 might give you the most bang for your buck. They function very well with studio lights, and their custom white balance does a great job.
Our most prized lens for studio work with this body is the 35-70 f/2.8. Nice range for portraits and tack sharp. We have D2Xs now, but my wife still uses the S2 instead in the studio simply because it's a lot lighter, while image quality stands up in enlargement to 20x30 for portraits. We have 4 of them and even with the D2Xs in the rack, we are unwilling to part with them. They have made us a lot of money over the years and built a nice bank of repeat customers for our studio, so they definitely have a lot going for them.
Our most prized lens for studio work with this body is the 35-70 f/2.8. Nice range for portraits and tack sharp. We have D2Xs now, but my wife still uses the S2 instead in the studio simply because it's a lot lighter, while image quality stands up in enlargement to 20x30 for portraits. We have 4 of them and even with the D2Xs in the rack, we are unwilling to part with them. They have made us a lot of money over the years and built a nice bank of repeat customers for our studio, so they definitely have a lot going for them.
Sorry to be so late in responding to you, Hank--And to anyone else I've not thanked specifically. Thanks for all the helpful advice. My life at this moment is very chaotic. Please forgive me for not answering sooner.
Michael
QUOTE(John Camp @ Jan 31 2006, 04:18 PM)
If you have Canon equipment (or Nikon) and specifically wish to shoot in a studio, check around for a used Kodak SLRc (Canon) or the essentially identical SLRn (Nikon.) These are 14mp full-frame cameras which had problems when they first came out, though most of the problems were resolved in firmware upgrades. Still, they are not as good for *general use* as the new pro Nikons or Canons -- but for studio use, I believe they are every bit as good. They can be shot either tethered or untethered using CF cards. You can get shots of sensational quality with them -- better than you'd get with a Rebel XT. Because they are no longer made (though Kodak still provides support, I believe) you should be able to get a used one relatively cheaply. There is a forum specifically dedicated to these Kodaks on the Galbraith website. Look here:
http://forums.robgalbraith.com/postlist.php?Cat=0&Board=UBB2
JC
http://forums.robgalbraith.com/postlist.php?Cat=0&Board=UBB2
JC
Thanks (belatedly, sorry...)for the suggestion, John. It's my fall-back plan.
QUOTE(boku @ Jan 31 2006, 04:24 PM)
With the Rebel XT, you will need to get an inexpensive Wein hot-shoe to PC adapter for the flash cord going to the White Lightening. The Rebel series (and most low-end DSLRs) don't have PC flash connectors.
Another alternative is radio wireless. It works very well.
I favor the 17-85 for versatility. You didn't mention what you will be shooting, so we can't be more specific.
Another alternative is radio wireless. It works very well.
I favor the 17-85 for versatility. You didn't mention what you will be shooting, so we can't be more specific.
Thanks, Bob. My current plan is to get the Rebel XT and (packaged or separately) the EFS 17-85mm IS, and--for the studio--the EF 50mm 1.8. I've already got the Wein Safe Sync. I'm intrigued by (and unfamiliar with) wireless, but there won't be any leftover "discretionary funds." (My studio work is largely figure studies, portraits and artwork.)
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.