Savio

Just curious if you can use lenses from a Canon SLR?

sorry if it is a noob question...

fdl

A Canon Rebel XT IS a Canon SLR

badboy

The rebel xt will accept any canon EF lens. Also it can handle an EF-S lens.

Savio

thanks...that's what I needed...

dom

Get a deal on it?

waTSX

What they said Congrats on the camera. I'm sure you'll love it. Any ideas on which lenses you'll get first?

jon_g

I bought one too thanks to Dan who pointed me to FredMiranda.com. I got the XT with under 2000 actuations, clean body, clean lens, all the manuals, cd's, cables, blank warranty card, and he threw in a 256 CF card and 128 CF card for $587 shipped. I already love this camera.

Osamu

i have an XT too

too bad I have no money for lenses............

danny25

you're going to need bigger CF cards.

I just bought this 4gb card for $70.
http://shop1.outpost.com/product/481...H:MAIN_RSLT_PG

dom

They have the same card up here for $90. Just skeptical about the quality. Ended up odering a 2GB SanDisk Ultra II for $70 from Costco.

Should be getting my XT Dec 13 or 14th.

fdl

Dam thats a great price. Makes moving to the new XTi really hard. The only think I really dont like about the XT is the small LCD display. The question is how much is a 2.5 inch display worth to me

dom

Thats exactly what had me on the fence between the two. But considering you can't take pics via the LCD anyway its not a big deal and probly not worth the price difference.

I hope.

danny25

if you want more 2GB SanDisk Ultra II cards...
http://shop1.outpost.com/product/415...H:MAIN_RSLT_PG

dom

Great price, thanks.

fdl

What do you mean you cant take pictures via the LCD?

ChodTheWacko

It means you can't frame your picture using the LCD, you have to use the optical viewfinder.

Popular request, although fairly impractical in practice for heavy cameras.

fdl

I thought you could use both

waTSX

Not with DSLR's. You frame the shot through the viewfinder like you should. I think there's one DSLR that lets you use the LCD. Not sure why you'd want to.

wackjum

So it doesn't have to be eye level all the time. Can hold it somewhat above your head or real low. Its the Olympus E-330.

But having said that, I still don't think its all that great a feature. And the camera is ugly.

dom

Nope. So although the 2.5" inch screen is great, its really only for reviewing your pics. I havn't used a viewfinder to take in pic in about 5 years so this will take some getting used to.

fdl

Well, I realize that framing the shot through the same lens that is taking the picture is really the whole concept of the SLR (and the ability to interchange these lenses). But I figured they would let you use the LCD if you really wanted to, as there are some situations where it is very convenient.

Dan Martin

Olympus has a "live view" feature that will let you compose with the LCD. It crops the image slightly, but it's functional.

More manufacturers don't have the feature mostly because of sensor design. These sensors are designed to take stills, not video. Keeping them on for long periods can cause them to overheat or create highly noisy images. I'm sure more manufacturers will get on the bandwagon to attract more P&S users into the profitable SLR world.

Canon also has the 20Da that can give a live preview for a very short period of time, but it's not for regular use. It's an astronomy camera.

Billiam

And just to add to that, the reason the short live preview exists on the 20Da isn't for composition. It's to assist focusing.

fdl

Hey Dan, what general purpose lens would you recommend in the $500 range for an XT? Would a good 3rd party lens be the best bet in this price range?

Dan Martin

Speaking of which, I've been waiting for a new version of DSLRfocus to come out so I can use it with my 30D.

Dan Martin

I think my money would go to a Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 in that price range. It's a great length for a walk-around lens and faster for low-light shots.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/cont...ughType=search

LacViet

I got the Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 len few days ago and I love it. Here is the review with more technical information:
http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/len...0_28/index.htm

waTSX

I guess I'm a little old school when it comes to live preview, but I couldn't stand shooting that way with my first digital camera, a compact. It's a good little camera, but I'll take viewfinder composition any day. Couldn't stand EVF's either.

I personally hope SLR's never change in that regard.

Billiam

I'm with you there. At some point though, I'd like to try shooting with a "real" rangefinder for a while such as a Leica M series. I just want to see what it's like. I think rangefinders are still regarded as the kings of "street photography" by many pros. Even though I've never used one, I sort of have this gut instinct that goes along with that sentiment.

wndrlst

I agree 100%. I see on your flickr site that you got the 10-22. (Jealous!) Are you liking it?

fdl

How does Tamron compare to Sigma, because Sigma does have a comparable lens.

Dan Martin

The tamron is the best of the aftermarket lenses in that zoom range. The EF-S 17-55 is better, but it's triple the price.

Bdog

I'd say on smaller lenses Tamron has the edge, but larger lenses like the Sigma Zoom Telephoto 70-200mm f/2.8 EX DG APO HSM Tamron can't touch. Sigma's larger lenses are just shy of Canon L lenses.

Dan Martin

I would hate an EVF, but I think a live preview would be handy in a few situations. SS has a P&S with a tilt and swivel screen and it's really useful for low shots or if you're in a crowd and you want to get a picture over everyone's head. It's not something I'd use all the time, but it would be nice to have.

Focusing at night is much easier on a screen that can amplify the brightness than it is through a viewfinder (especially a cropped one).

waTSX

Yes, very much. It's a lot different than any lens I've had before, but it opens up a lot of possibilities. I read up on the lens before I bought it, but I was still surprised at how sharp it is, and how good the contrast/color is. Very punchy images.

The widest lens I had in my film days was probably 24mm or so. 16mm (35mm equivalent) is dramatically wider, and a lot of fun. The build seems better than my 17-85 also, even though they look the same.

Since the price is coming down now wndrist, you owe it to yourself to snag one. It would add a new dimension to the landscape shots you like to shoot.

Possible Christmas gift?

waTSX

Dan, I agree with you there. Those situations are where I found the A95 to have the edge over a traditional VF. I liked it for low level shots also. Other than that, I don't like it. I found the LCD to be awful in bright sunlight too.

Maybe it'll be developed to the point where it's feasible and effective as an option for SLR's.

waTSX

I don't know a ton about rangefinders, but have read a bit about the Leica M's, which by all accounts are excellent. Kind of legendary from what I gather.

So a rangefinder has a VF through which you are not looking through the lens, correct? And why would they be any better for street photography than an SLR?

wndrlst

It's been mentioned once or twice.

Glad to hear another positive review!

Dan Martin

They're smaller, lighter, quieter, and more discrete than an SLR. The viewfinder is enormous and amazingly bright when compared to an SLR. Although they are manual focus only, they are very easy to focus thanks to the image overlay.

Rangefinders are not as good as SLR's when you're trying to do any of the following:
-shoot with filters
-use long lenses
-shoot sports
-macros

Basically, rangefinders have difficulty with anything beyond the normal compose-focus-shoot technique. They're amazing for a travel camera or for discrete street photography, but you'll find SLR's easier to use for anything that's moving quickly or requiring longer lenses.