I am currently new to the world of DSLRs but have spent countless hours researching them in the past few weeks. As a result, I have come to the following conclusion: Thinking that this is a cheap solution for a beginner is a myth. Sure the camera is a great entry level body. But, as you realize from the multitude of posts here, making good use of it requires spending hundreds, perhaps even thousands on the accessories, mainly additional lenses.

Sure the 15-55mm kit lens will get you started, but one of the main reasons to actually move from a point and shoot to a DSLR is learning how to utilize multiple lens that all take different types of shots. Lenses are NOT cheap (aside from the great value of the $100 Canon 50mm 1.8 lens). I view this as similar to selling printers on the cheap to suck you into their system of buying expensive inks. Once you pick a brand, it is quite difficult to change.

So what have I come to understand as a better solution for beginners? Sony DSLRs. Why? For those wondering what happened to Minolta, they were purchased by Sony back in 2006. As a result, Sony has decided to adopt the Minolta standard for A mount lenses for their current lineup of alpha DSLR cameras. What I have also come to realize is that you can get a TON of high quality, inexpensive used Minolta lenses from Ebay or camera shops. Terrific used glass can be had for $100-$300 vs similar Canon glass for $500-$1000 and beyond. This is a MUCH better solution for beginners as you can acquire and learn on many different lens that take great photos before finding the types you like best and perhaps investing in higher end lenses in the future (if at all). For the price of 1 or 2 Canon lenses, you can grab 4 or 5 Minolta on Ebay.

The other nice thing about Sony DSLRs is they have image stabilization built into the body, as opposed to Canon or Nikon which require that the lens have image stabilization. This again results in increasing the costs for Canon lenses, by requiring this additional technology in EACH LENS (or forgoing the feature). Again, with the Minolta lens, you don't need the IS because it is BUILT INSIDE THE CAMERA BODY.

So take a look at some of the entry level Sony solutions like the A35. Sure you might spend $300 more on the body. But unless you never plan to buy any more lenses, my research has led me to understand that I will spend much less in the long term on my lens investment as I grow with the camera. Plus it will simply be more fun to learn on different types. I would also argue if you plan to just stick with the 15-55mm kit lens, you are much better off going with a higher quality point and shoot. Your DSLR essentially becomes a point and shoot if you never change the lens anyway (yes a bit of an oversimplification - you gain more customization etc.).

Great camera!!! if all you want to do is take pictures.

Does not take movies and this very nice camera is no longer made. It has been replaced.

I bought this camera before Christmas, and I love it. I also added a 10speed 32g flash card. It's simple to use right out of the box. My old 32mm Canon Rebel zoom lens fits and works great with this new digital model - thanks for allowing interchangability. Ths camera itself takes great pictures - the sports setting is super fast; low light (now flash) is terriffic. The price was a clincher. 10MP is more than enought for printed 5x7 pictures - 16MP and 18Mp gives you no better pictures at 5x7 - only less money in your pocket. Don't be fooled by MP count unless our're producing poster-sized quality pictures.

A tip o' the tam' to the forum moderator is in order at this point.

Now back to the topic at hand.

RHaas wrote: 10MP is more than enought for printed 5x7 pictures - 16MP and 18Mp gives you no better pictures at 5x7 - only less money in your pocket. Don't be fooled by MP count unless our're producing poster-sized quality pictures.

Good point. I just recently replaced my Nikon D50 (2005 vintage, 6.1 MP), and over the years I made quite a few nice 11" x 14" prints from pictures taken with it. While I probably wouldn't have been happy using them to make a large coffee-table book or anything else meant to be viewed up close, they look great framed and matted on the wall.

While the replacement I got (Nikon D7000) has a lot more features, a bigger display, and better exposure metering and focusing than the D50, the switch from 6 megapixels to 16 megapixels really didn't make a world of difference, at least until I start making really big prints.

I have an older Canon Rebel that was purchased with the 100mm macro lens and ring flash for taking close-up digital dental photography. Will that lens work with this body? The older Rebel uses compact flash card storage which is cumbersome to say the least. I'm looking to upgrade the body while still using the lens/flash combo.

I shoot semi-pro. This little baby doesn't have all the bells and whistles the newer ones do, but I have had this model for 5+ years as a backup body and it's served me well.

RHaas wrote:I bought this camera before Christmas, and I love it. I also added a 10speed 32g flash card. It's simple to use right out of the box. My old 32mm Canon Rebel zoom lens fits and works great with this new digital model - thanks for allowing interchangability.

it maybe interchangeable but does it focus AUTOMATICALLY?

My daughter is going to college next year. She wants to study art and would like to try photography.

It sounds like this could be a good choice for her first SLR camera, she's never used anything but a point and shoot before.... and neither have I.

I didn't want to spend a ton of money on an SLR for her in case she doesn't end up really getting into photography.

So, I'm thinking this looks like a good buy for her, unless someone wants to counter with a better choice.

starmanbackwards wrote:it maybe interchangeable but does it focus AUTOMATICALLY?

"Specifications"

I've been looking for a great entry level one for my wife and the Rebel 3 (I think) was on my radar. This would definitely suffice, but I have one question for those who have it...

"Bright 2.5-inch TFT color LCD monitor with 230,000 pixels and a viewing angle of 170°. It’s perfect for Live View composition or viewing camera settings like AF, ISO, Metering, AF Point selection and flash options"

Does this mean the viewer in the back does not support 'live view' of the pictures you are taking? (i.e. - can you only shoot pictures using the viewfinder and lens)

jatoha wrote:My daughter is going to college next year. She wants to study art and would like to try photography.

It sounds like this could be a good choice for her first SLR camera, she's never used anything but a point and shoot before.... and neither have I.

I didn't want to spend a ton of money on an SLR for her in case she doesn't end up really getting into photography.

So, I'm thinking this looks like a good buy for her, unless someone wants to counter with a better choice.

I used to carry multiple lenses with my old film camera.....now i only carry the Sony (not DSLR) HX100V ....this thing has tons of bells and whistle for the wannabe photographer and yet simple to operate. The telephoto range is outstanding. IT does have Macro capabilities. I have noticed that now they have very expensive point and shoot style cameras.

Narg wrote:More MP does NOT make a better camera...

And, 18 is the current, not 16.

Your right about that. Also just because you own an SLR does not make you a photographer. This is a good camera for $400. What are people looking for? If you want a good camera get a 5d mark II $2000 or hold out for a 5d Mark III might be about $2800 body only.
.

poppap wrote:A cheap must-have fixed lens for Canon DSLR

Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II Camera Lens

Have it love it was the first lens we bough many moons ago. And still always use. It is in our vacation bag right now.

billrhea wrote:Your right about that. Also just because you own an SLR does not make you a photographer. This is a good camera for $400. What are people looking for? If you want a good camera get a 5d mark II $2000 or hold out for a 5d Mark III might be about $2800 body only.
.

Yes but this goes to the full frame to crop sense=or debate. If you are doing more portait type stuff yes 5d is better. But you can get a lot of the same stuff with the 7d. I know personally we have done a
lot of wedding and travel with the 7d. Now my feeling on this is. You want to try it out but spend money on good lenses. I think the lenses matter more than the body in the long run. My husband shoots a 7d and I have a xsi ( just not as into it) I will tell you picture I have taken using L glass rival pictures taken with cheaper glass on a better camera.

For the price this is a fantastic camera. It will take great shots, you can get some great lenses and do some wonderful stuff with it. Maybe you will want to upgrade the body later maybe not. Just be picky and read reviews on the lens before you buy them.

I'll second that motion! That EF 50mm f/1.8 II lens is fantastic.

If your wondering 'why', especially if your new to SLR / DSLR photography, you might be thinking "But I have an 18-55mm, why is one that doesn't zoom and is stuck at 50mm any good?"

Well, for starters, it's what's called a 'prime' lens. By not having zoom in and out capabilities, it has very precise optics and will have very sharp images.

Also, by being prime, it's easier for it to have a WIDE open aperture, of 1.8 (Smaller the better, for reference, the kit lens is variable 4.5-5.6), meaning it will let in a ton of light, and have AWESOME low light performance, even without flash. It's really the best portrait or macro lens you can buy without spending a ton of money.

Now, you might say "Well what about a zoom lens with an aperture that big?"

http://www.adorama.com/CA702002ISR.html

Well they tend to get a little pricey


So anyway, just seconding what was said above. If you pull the trigger on this, you've got a great camera. The kit lens is quite capable, but you will find yourself at 50-55mm most of the time anyway, and you may find (like I did) that this 50mm prime lens is the lens you use the most. Remember, it's 18 megapixel, meaning you've got a lot of room to crop while maintaining high quality images, and even being capable of making large prints while cropping a big chunk of the image!

ALSO- I wanna say this to everyone talking about the 'megapixel myth'. It's true if you don't want to crop your pictures, but consider this. I have a 21.1MP Canon and I LOVE to take pictures of wildlife. I don't have alot of lenses, my farthest zoom is a 70-300mm Canon. However, I can take a picture of a bird or an animal quite far away, crop it IMMENSELY, and then still get a fantastic print out of it. In the world of DSLR photography, megapixels definitely do represent a significant advantage. Not necessarily with un-cropped imaged, but definitely so with having alot of freedom with your subjects.

FINALLY, On "Canon lenses being expensive". That's true! However, there are third party lenses that are great for beginners, as well as lots of good ol' used lenses online. You can also get adapters cheap for older lens mounts and buy used lenses from other brands! There are lots of ways to be frugal with a Canon DSLR, and you get much better image quality and more camera body features than a Sony DSLR. (No comment on Nikon, I chose Canon, but I think those two are equal. What one has superior to the other, the other has something superior to something else. Really hard to genuinely debate which is 'better')

If you live in Jersey, Cannon's repair center is only a couple exits away on the turnpike! I doubt you'll ever need it though. Decent price for this camera.

The D90 is better in pretty much every respect, but it's not really an entry-level camera. This is a good entry DSLR, for almost anyone, unless sports photography is your goal. For that, you'd want something with better low light sensitivity so you can use a faster shutter speed- Nikons seem to rule the roost in that area, with the D5100 (which replaced the D90) being the best for under $2000. For "normal person" uses, this would be great- particularly since Canon is know for well arranged, user-friendly menus and settings.
Short version: This would be a good camera for your first-time DSLR husband.

When it comes to buying an SLR, the key is to choose a lens (or a set of lenses), and then purchase a body that works with it. Each manufacturer's lens selection has pluses and minuses. I liked Pentax because of the wealth of old manual focus glass out there, the fact that the IS is in the body, reducing the cost of new lenses, and that all the AF glass from the late 80's to today works great. The selection of used AF glass on eBay is excellent, and I've picked up several great lenses for under $100.

Sony also has the same benefit, except that you're unfortunately buying a Sony.... I personally dislike Sony as the UI for their cameras is not consistent, the menus change from model to model and each camera takes FOREVER to figure out how to properly set up.

That being said, the Sony has one distinct advantage... the only 500mm autofocus mirror lens in existence. And both reasonably priced and currently in production to boot.

Canon and Nikon have a distinct advantage for a pro -- they both have a selection of FAST sports zooms and camera rental shops that rent to pros pretty much only carry Canon and Nikon. If you ever decide you want to rent a $6000 lens, Canikon is the only way to go.

But... I'm no pro. I wanted a lens package with an inexpensive, yet sharp and excellent quality zoom, a sharp as hell 50mm f1.7, a fast portrait zoom, and a short tele macro lens. The Pentax 55-300 DA is amazing quality for the price, and comes as a kit lens in the better kit package, the SMC-F 50mm f1.7 cost me $150 off of eBay (There's a f1.4 if you want even faster), the Tamron 28-75 f2.8 (continuous) was $300 used, and I picked up a Promaster 100mm f3.5 macro for $100.

I have a bunch of others too, experimenting with what I like, but these are what are in my bag most of the time. (Actually, the Tamron gets left out more often than not to tell the truth, it's heavy)

Choose the lenses and the price point you want to pay is what I'm getting at. You can get amazing quality with any system, it's what you want and how much you're willing to pay for it that makes the difference.

Just don't justify your choice of a more expensive system by bashing the cheaper ones!

Charles.

Want to see the output from this camera? Check out its flickr group (the XS is/was sold in asia as the 1000d).

misguidedsoul wrote:If you live in Jersey, Cannon's repair center is only a couple exits away on the turnpike! I doubt you'll ever need it though. Decent price for this camera.

Jamesburg, NJ

Jamesburg, NJ
100 Ridge Road
Jamesburg, NJ 08831
Phone: 866-510-1335
Hours of Operation: 9:00AM to 4:30PM EST, M-F

For gps info:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/wmliu/2235452901/

I have an older Canon Rebel that was purchased with the 100mm macro lens and ring flash for taking close-up digital dental photography. Will that lens work with this body? The older Rebel uses compact flash card storage which is cumbersome to say the least. I'm looking to upgrade the body while still using the lens/flash combo.

If the old lens is an EOS lens it will work fine. I've used Canon EOS lenses from 1989 on a new camera body.

Another question for you experts:
This camera or a Pentax K-X? (I think that model was a consumer reports best buy ~$500)

*feel free to correct me if I am wrong I don't have the buyin guide in front of me.

I got this for Christmas and am very pleased with it so far. Great deal.

Will this camera take a sexy enough self-shot mirror pic for my Myspace default?

look at how many times this camera has been for sale on woot for the same price. Woot suckers are the only ones paying $400 for 6 year old technology.

If you shop around, the T3 (not the T3i, different camera) can be had for the same price, new.

$280 or so should get you an XS refurb (could be new store return). I don't see a reason to insist on new when the camera is 3 years old.

They are selling for over MSRP on Amazon because the camera has been long discontinued, that does not mean this is a good deal.

I have to agree, it's not the megapixels, it's the skill of the photographer and the post processing. I have taken and used for print pics with a iPhone (original and 3gs) in a pinch and processing with PS!

edluv1 wrote:look at how many times this camera has been for sale on woot for the same price. Woot suckers are the only ones paying $400 for 6 year old technology.

If you shop around, the T3 (not the T3i, different camera) can be had for the same price, new.

$280 or so should get you an XS refurb (could be new store return). I don't see a reason to insist on new when the camera is 3 years old.

They are selling for over MSRP on Amazon because the camera has been long discontinued, that does not mean this is a good deal.

Still a great price for the XS.

john27 wrote:

ALSO- I wanna say this to everyone talking about the 'megapixel myth'. It's true if you don't want to crop your pictures, but consider this. I have a 21.1MP Canon and I LOVE to take pictures of wildlife. I don't have alot of lenses, my farthest zoom is a 70-300mm Canon. However, I can take a picture of a bird or an animal quite far away, crop it IMMENSELY, and then still get a fantastic print out of it. In the world of DSLR photography, megapixels definitely do represent a significant advantage. Not necessarily with un-cropped imaged, but definitely so with having alot of freedom with your subjects.

FINALLY, On "Canon lenses being expensive". That's true! However, there are third party lenses that are great for beginners, as well as lots of good ol' used lenses online. You can also get adapters cheap for older lens mounts and buy used lenses from other brands! There are lots of ways to be frugal with a Canon DSLR, and you get much better image quality and more camera body features than a Sony DSLR. (No comment on Nikon, I chose Canon, but I think those two are equal. What one has superior to the other, the other has something superior to something else. Really hard to genuinely debate which is 'better')

____________________________

Thanks for your thoughts on "megapixel myth" - I absolutely agree and always seems to be overlooked as an advantage of more megapixels. However I do disagree with thought that Sony has less features. You can argue all day long about image quality, but it seems pretty clear to me that Sony has many more features than their Canikon competition in the entry to mid level segment. Whether it is class-leading frames per second speed (7-10), special functions such as panning panoramic, auto HDR mode, or its revolutionary SLT series with their impressive EVF, usefulness of Live View mode, and HD video auto focus....Sony is ahead of the curve on features. Canonikon on the other hand conitinues to get by on their following and reputation. That is fine for now, but Sony is quietly taking the lead from an innovation perspective. Look closely at sites like dpreview.com and you will find that no other brand is taking home anywhere close to the awards for their cameras as Sony in the past 2 years.

poppap wrote:A cheap must-have fixed lens for Canon DSLR

Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II Camera Lens

Wow, it's about twice as expensive as it was two years ago. Or was it three? My years are starting to blur together :\

I have had the xsi version of this camera for several years now and its plenty good. it has a full auto setting and everything in between. you can add to it with wonderful gear or learn to take great shots as is.

Here's my portfolio.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/smibbo/sets/72157622731789882/with/6020415565/

As you can see, sometimes the blowing up of the picture shows the grain, that's the biggest sign of the cost-value of the camera itself. If you aren't planning on blowing up your pictures then this camera will take outstanding shots (provided you have a good eye)

http://www.steves-digicams.com/camera-reviews/canon/eos-digital-rebel-xs-slr/canon-eos-digital-rebel-xs-slr-review-7.html

I believe I saw a T3 available today for just $30 more. Id recommend that. I bought this the last time Woot had it up about three weeks ago. I like the camera but regret not waiting for the T3. Ultimately another retailer had it for slightly less. But no returns on Woot, so buyers remorse. Oh well.

I ordered this the last time it was on Woot.

VERY happy with it.

rsethre wrote:I bought this camera for the same price refurbished about one year ago. It was considered "obsolete" and "ancient for a DSL" even then, and I bought it anyhow because I wasn't concerned about having all of the current bells and whistles- I wanted a cheap DSL to learn on and as an entry into the DSL world. It has wildly exceeded my expectations, and I love it. It takes consistently great pictures. I have bought several additional lenses and am have a blast with my new DSL kit.

I assure you that this is a single lens reflex camera, not a digital subscriber line. If you're looking for a good one, though, I'd suggest the VDSL U-verse service, if available.

Decent camera. If you are not sure you want to get into photography then this is a good deal. Also, 10 megapixels is more than enough for almost anyone.

I second getting the 50mm 1.8, if you are serious about picking up the hobby. IMO, you should learn photography using "only" this lens. It will make learning thinks like DOF very easy. Choosing a lens to upgrade to will also be easer after using the 50mm 1.8.

Also, don't worry too much about the DSLR body. The quality of your images weigh mostly on the lens, but even more heavily on your skill with the SLR and your artistic eye. Work on that and you'll be capturing better images than all the posers with cameras costing 4x times more.

T3 kit at Amazon Today for $ 435 and free shipping:

http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=eos+T3&x=17&y=22

T3 = MUCH BETTER VALUE !!!

jalgal wrote:How does this compare to a Nikon D90? (my sister's camera)

I currently am a point and shoot person, and want to upgrade for a gift to my husband. Is this camera gift worthy?

At the date/time of the review (Jul 22, 2008), the camera was highly recommended. Read the Pros, Cons, and the Overall Conclusion to make your own assessment.

1 - Go to http://www.dpreview.com (Digital Photography Review)
2 - Move mouse over Cameras on top bar.
3 - Select Side-by-side camera comparison
4 - Select cameras to compare

Here's the link for the comparison to the Nikon D90...
http://www.dpreview.com/products/compare/side-by-side?products=canon_eos1000d&products=nikon_d90

So far they've only managed to sell 20% of the amount they have for sale at this price so I suspect this will be about 10% cheaper during the next wootoff.

Wish they would put up a Nikon one of these days (not old but one of the new 7000's).

I've got a D90 and I would like a second for big shots but rather than getting a lesser second it would be nice to upgrade and still be able to use all the same lenses.