I've shot wonderful photos with the Rebel.
The difference that you'll find in these cameras is that the Rebel (300D) won't fire nearly as fast as the other. If you need to fire off a few shots, the Rebel will take much longer to write to the card and the buffer fills up fast.
The Rebel also has an annoying thing in that it won't write to the card until you take your finger off the shutter button. I got pretty annoyed at this as I often like to pre-focus then leave my finger on the button.
The other thing you'll notice is that the sensor is better in the 20D and 1D Mark II. You can go up to 1600 in these cameras and still be OK, but the Rebel will really start to show noise at 800, even 400 sometimes.
So if you are shooting ISO 100 or 200, don't need a lot of rapid firing, then your end product will be pretty similar between these cameras.
For the price, I'd go with a 20D personally if you are looking to buy a new (used) camera. I think it's the best bang for the buck.
2007-10-24 04:23:39
·
answer #1
·
answered by DigiDoc 4
·
1⤊
0⤋
For a beginner, the Canon Rebel is much better suited.
It has a couple of automatic settings that the other two pro cameras dont have. Portrait, Macro (which isnt really macro without a macro lens), Sport, Night and Night No Flash. (not too sure about the specific names) If you didn't know too much about aperture, ISO, shutter speed, and white balance you should get the Rebel (I assume you are talking about the digital Rebel and not the film Rebel).
Without going into too much detail, the 20D and Mark II are alot of camera, but if you dont know what to do with it you will just get frustrated. Yes they are faster and more rugged, but they are more manual too.
Yes Rebels will shoot pro images, but in the end its more about the person clicking the shutter than the camera itself.
Just a side note. Better lenses would be a better choice than an overpriced body. Taking pictures with a $3k camera and a $200 lens would make worse pictures than taking pictures with a $700 camera and $2500 lens.
2007-10-23 23:12:24
·
answer #2
·
answered by cabbiinc 7
·
3⤊
0⤋
Camera body machine is just one of the tool to get superb photo; you need suitable lens, suitable lightings, some knowledge of exposure setting, timing, ambience, angle and photoshop minor retouching on some area that are over or under exposed. You can get similar superb picture with 1D Mark II or Rebel provided you have balanced all the other factors.
If you have all supporting tools to get superb picture then 1 D may push the image quality beyond what rebel can do. Otherwise with no adequate supporting tools rebel and 1D auto focus standard lens just make the same ordinary sharp picture that 10 year old boy can do by simply pressing the button.
Camera is like a car, you need to know your needs, the road conditions before you buy the car.
I think a hyundai or toyota wagon will be enough fer me to take my family for holiday on weekend and buy some groceries.
But I may just rent a 4x4 Land Crusier to do hunting; the fastest way to go will be renting a 5000cc ferrari driving from Amsterdam to Paris highway. Unless you heve deep pockets then you buy Land Cruiser or Ferrari to go buy your groceries; the fuel cost may be more than your groceries.
2007-10-23 23:54:31
·
answer #3
·
answered by kenzo 2
·
1⤊
0⤋
Short answer, yes. I don't know why the first guy got dinged for saying it. As others have said, the camera is a tool and the skill behind it is what is most important about composing a good photograph. Technology can only help us in our endeavors to become the next Ansel Adams, but you should remember that he never had either of those cameras. The difference between the two is simply longevity and durability which increases ones ability to capture images more efficiently, but to shoot with either professionally is usually subjective to you.
2007-10-24 12:53:37
·
answer #4
·
answered by Joe Schmo Photo 6
·
2⤊
0⤋
It might not hold up as well or as long under heavy use. But a skilled photographer could produce professional level work with either. The professional nature of the image is made mostly in the eye and brain of the photographer. Just having a nice camera will not make a "professional" image.
2007-10-23 22:02:32
·
answer #5
·
answered by Ara57 7
·
2⤊
0⤋
cameras are tools, the biggest factor is the skill of the fotog
a
2007-10-23 20:25:21
·
answer #6
·
answered by Antoni 7
·
3⤊
0⤋
yea
2007-10-23 20:23:25
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
3⤋