Canon Rebel XT? Any good?
 

Anyone use this thing? I tried it out at Ritz Camera the other day and it seemed like a pretty sick little camera for how cheap it was.

From what I have heard from others its great.

YARGH! CMOS? I thought CCD be the better sensor.

quality: I've been checking stuff out, quality wise... it's up there, still no D70 but it is the higher res camera at 8 mp.

speed: It snaps off more shots faster per second however after the initial burst of 2.4 seconds or so, it then tapers out... the D70 snaps shots at regular intervals, could make for a good gif. The Rebel XT snaps shots at random intervals, no real rhyme or reason and would make for a very crappy gif.

Those are 2 points for the D70 over the XT. The big selling feature for me on the XT is the size and weight. It's a tiny camera for a pro-sumer choice, which rocks if you plan on taking it to family events and places where you're not doing a real "shoot"

The XT doesn't come with the lens set that D70 does either, so if you were to pick up the items that the D70 comes with by default, the price would be comparable, if not, the XT would be a bit more. If you already have canon lenses or have no need for them, then the XT is the cheaper choice.

It is absolutely the best digital camera for the price. In my opinion, it's better than the 20D (backfocusing problems) and the only canon better costs over 4000 dollars.

I've used it on about 4 photo shoots so far and haven't run into any problems. The auto-focus is dead-on... and the color balance is good if you do a custom white balance. The battery lasts forever. I always use it on manual exposure so I can't really critique the in-camera meter. The LCD is about 1/3 stop too bright out-of-the-box. Shoot everything so the LCD looks just a tad dark and the actual exposure should be perfect.

I use it with the L series 24-70 but think that the lower end "cheap" lens is very good. If you use the lens that comes in the kit at about F8.5-F11.5 you should have good sharp pictures

This canon xt rebel is the first time that a consumer camera has really gotten into the pro-level (my opinion) I used to work in a high end commercial photography studio before the porn world... so I spent a lot of time with high end gear. I'd rather have this camera than any of the others. With the exception of photojournalism or sports.... then you'd need something faster... everything else this camera handles no problemo

Of course there is always the NIkon / Canon debate

Nikon probably makes a superior lens and picture. But Canon's autofocus is much better (my opinion)

backfocusing problems? care to put up some side by sides to show what you are talking about? We've taken around 5k shots with ours, not seen any problems. Unless of course you rely on the autofocus, which you really shouldn't.

Yes, I'm talking about backfocusing in the autofocus mode.. I never shoot in manual or it would take me twice as long to do a shoot :-)

I used to own the 10D and it was atrocious... Completely the worst camera I've ever owned. I tested the 20 D and it has the exact same problem but not as bad. There are a lot of people that say it's a matter of calibration etc... but that's BS. I've tried 2 20D's in the store and 2 of my friends with various L series and regular lenses. Each one focused consistently to the back of the subject.

The average person is probably happy especially if you're shooting at a decent depth of field like F11. But I processed film and focused 4x5 and 8x10 cameras as a PA for 2 years and can see the difference like night and day. An old employer of mine works for Canon and told me that they are aware of the problem.

But if you're having good luck in manual than more power to ya! It takes EXCELLENT quality digital pictures... my only complaint was the autofocus...

Best camera out there for under $1K and the image quality if you pop a nice Canon lense is as good as camera's in the $5K and up range.

I had my 300D (original Digital Rebel) stolen. Something seems to have bitten me because I replaced it with a 1Ds Mark II.

Canon glass is by far better.

for videos there is the best choise of today and its sony HDR-FX1 - shooting in miniDV , DVcam , HDV.
For pics I think nothing beats canon but you must use 1D serie (doesn't matter if 1D , 1Ds or any of markII) - those Charly Markham's D20 semiproffesional cameras are just a toys for kids.No offense Charly ok.Once you compare the results of D20 and 1D markII you will know what I am talking about. Also don't forget that the most important part of final result is lens not the camera body or CCD/CMOS

I agree with you on this one, there is nothing out there that compares to the 1ds mark II, this camera is far superior to any digital i have ever shot with. The detail and speed make it a joy to shoot with. And at 16 mega pixels you can actually shoot digitally now for magazines (at least we have put some in mags with this camera and they couldnt tell the difference between film and digital) But i also love the 20d