NEW! Canon Rebel XTi/400D with 2 new L lenses

[Clix Pix]

I paid almost that much for the 350D.

The price of the 50mm f/1.2L is going to be $1600 according to DPreview.

That's pretty steep.....you can buy a Nikon f/1.2 lens for a heckuva lot less! (Don't remember now what I paid for mine.) True, it doesn't have image stabiization, but, hey, does one REALLY need image stabilization in a small, lightweight, easily hand-holdable lens?

 

[Mike Teezie]

That's pretty steep.....you can buy a Nikon f/1.2 lens for a heckuva lot less! (Don't remember now what I paid for mine.) True, it doesn't have image stabiization, but, hey, does one REALLY need image stabilization in a small, lightweight, easily hand-holdable lens?

I don't think the 50mm f/1.2 has IS....

 

[Clix Pix]

I don't think the 50mm f/1.2 has IS....

Guess I'd better go read the specs on this lens, then....maybe i"m confusing it with the other new lens they're offering.

 

[snap58]

That's pretty steep.....you can buy a Nikon f/1.2 lens for a heckuva lot less! (Don't remember now what I paid for mine.) True, it doesn't have image stabiization, but, hey, does one REALLY need image stabilization in a small, lightweight, easily hand-holdable lens?

Is that manual or auto focus? And I agree, IS is probably not a big plus for this type of lens.

 

[Clix Pix]

It's an older (AI-S) manual focus lens, still in production.

 

[Mike Teezie]

The IS is only on the 70-200 f/4L.

 

[snap58]

It's an older (AI-S) manual focus lens, still in production.

The Nikon 50mm 1.2 runs about $570, so the $1600 list is pretty steep for the extra speed, USM auto focus, and weather sealing. It has a 72mm thread, verse the 52mm on the Nikon. I would guess that Canon stuck a bunch of expensive glass in it just to run the price up. : )

It will be interesting to read some reviews when they are out. I suspect the serious portrait photographers would go for it if the quality is there.

 

[MacSA]

400D is £720 with kit lens in the UK... you can get the 30D with kit lens for another £100

 

[Grimace]

400D is £720 with kit lens in the UK... you can get the 30D with kit lens for another £100

I'd still take the 30D for the extra framerate and build quality. Shutter life is an important factor too - does anyone know whether it's been pushed past 50,000 cycles?

 

[Mike Teezie]

I'd still take the 30D for the extra framerate and build quality. Shutter life is an important factor too - does anyone know whether it's been pushed past 50,000 cycles?

I read on the DWF that it's been upped to 100,000, but the person didn't provide a link. I'll see what I can find.

The Nikon 50mm 1.2 runs about $570, so the $1600 list is pretty steep for the extra speed, USM auto focus, and weather sealing. It has a 72mm thread, verse the 52mm on the Nikon. I would guess that Canon stuck a bunch of expensive glass in it just to run the price up. : )

It will be interesting to read some reviews when they are out. I suspect the serious portrait photographers would go for it if the quality is there.

I'm itching for the 50mm f/1.2L badly now, but I won't be able to get it for a while since I'm getting a 5D soon.

 

[extraextra]

I read on the DWF that it's been upped to 100,000, but the person didn't provide a link. I'll see what I can find.

It's here. (under shutter). It says "Shutter durability: Approx. 100,000 exposures".

 

[snap58]

I read on the DWF that it's been upped to 100,000, but the person didn't provide a link. I'll see what I can find.



I'm itching for the 50mm f/1.2L badly now, but I won't be able to get it for a while since I'm getting a 5D soon.

You will love the 5D and will notice significant differences in the color and contrast with better lenses.

The 50 1.2 won't be out until November and will probably drop in price some after a few months, so may be worth the wait. The 50 1.4 works nice on it too.

 

[jared_kipe]

The more I read about it, the more pissed I am about the stupid 400D. I want the dust reduction thing. I want a doubled buffer, the 400D's buffer now holds as many burst RAWs as my 30D does, and its 10MP.

 

[pdxflint]

The more I read about it, the more pissed I am about the stupid 400D. I want the dust reduction thing. I want a doubled buffer, the 400D's buffer now holds as many burst RAWs as my 30D does, and its 10MP.

That's one of the issues when digital meets photography - technology always improves and gets cheaper (computers, tvs, dvd players/burners, etc... and digital cameras.) With film, refinements in cameras always involved the subtle things like metering, flash technology, and the ability to add capability via lenses, accessories, flashes, motordrives, grips...etc., yet when the film technology improved, it improved for everyone, and your old camera always could benefit. In 1998, I shot with a brand new 35mm SLR, a 5 yr. old backup body and a 20 yr. old rangefinder. All could use the same film choices, and produce images equally useable. Now, this year's digital king-of-the-hill advanced SLR is next year's discontinued model, and the entry-level units will exceed it's technology on the electronic side. The lenses still make a difference, but bodies are now the latest electronic piece of 'computing' gadgetry that attach to analog lenses (the last of the old technology - optics..) Thus, Sony, Samsung, HP, etc are in the game, and anyone who can buy a sensor, design a fairly ergonomic body, and perhaps contract the software from someone (license DigicIII??) can concievably enter the fray as camera manufacturers. Can you say, DELL?? (sorry, had to throw that one in as a joke... )

I'd say just don't get all upset if your camera is immediately upstaged by the next model, or even lower model, as long as it does what you bought it for in the first place. Just don't expect the resale value to hold up like in the 35mm days.

-pdx - (happily getting familiar with his mere 6 megapixel D50, while p/s miniatures are over 10 megs now... so what!! @#$&$! )

 

[snap58]

The more I read about it, the more pissed I am about the stupid 400D. I want the dust reduction thing. I want a doubled buffer, the 400D's buffer now holds as many burst RAWs as my 30D does, and its 10MP.

I would love the dust reduction too, but I still wouldn't buy it over the 30D. You can tell the difference between 3 fps and 5 fps, if you want the bigger buffer then you must be in the habit of burning rapid sequences.

Save it, you will be more depressed when the 30D replacement comes out.

 

[andiwm2003]

.................................................................Thus, Sony, Samsung, HP, etc are in the game, and anyone who can buy a sensor, design a fairly ergonomic body, and perhaps contract the software from someone (license DigicIII??) can concievably enter the fray as camera manufacturers. Can you say, DELL?? (sorry, had to throw that one in as a joke... )
................................................

you make a good point there.

i was wondering already for quite a while why nobody throws together a dslr body with a generic mount that would allow the sigma/tamron lenses and sells it in the low price market. the margin would be like point and shoot cameras, quality low but high megapixels.

there are lots of people who want to move beyond point and shoot but are not willing to pay $700 or more for a body only.

you can see from the sony-r1 or similar cameras that there is a market niche between point and shoot and nikon/canon dslr's.

 

[jared_kipe]

I would love the dust reduction too, but I still wouldn't buy it over the 30D. You can tell the difference between 3 fps and 5 fps, if you want the bigger buffer then you must be in the habit of burning rapid sequences.

Save it, you will be more depressed when the 30D replacement comes out.

I'm not in the habit of doing more than 3-4, and I certainly like being able to choose 3 or 5fps. My point is that stuff like this isn't supposed to happen. Camera manufacturers are not supposed to release a moderately high end camera body then 6 months later turn around and offer a cheaper model that has better specs and features. Obviously the 30D still has features that are better than the 400D, but the point is that its never been like this before. Historically, Canon releases something like the 10D or 20D and then a year later out comes the 300D/350D with downgraded specs. I'm sure that 20D owners would have been pissed if 6 months after the 20D came out, Canon released a 350D that was cheaper and had features the 20D didn't. So I guess Canon set me up for this **** by releasing a only slightly upgraded 30D. And I bought it.

 

[snap58]

I'm not in the habit of doing more than 3-4, and I certainly like being able to choose 3 or 5fps. My point is that stuff like this isn't supposed to happen. Camera manufacturers are not supposed to release a moderately high end camera body then 6 months later turn around and offer a cheaper model that has better specs and features. Obviously the 30D still has features that are better than the 400D, but the point is that its never been like this before. Historically, Canon releases something like the 10D or 20D and then a year later out comes the 300D/350D with downgraded specs. I'm sure that 20D owners would have been pissed if 6 months after the 20D came out, Canon released a 350D that was cheaper and had features the 20D didn't. So I guess Canon set me up for this **** by releasing a only slightly upgraded 30D. And I bought it.

I hear you, but with the increased competition in the low end market, I think this will become the norm. Also according to some other forums (DP) Canon will sometimes test new stuff out on lower end cameras before putting them on the higher end equipment?

The 30D is a great camera, would love to have in in lieu of the 20D, but that does not make sense for me. If I upgrade the crop camera in the future, it will be when the dust cleaning feature makes it's way.

 

[Abstract]

I'm not in the habit of doing more than 3-4, and I certainly like being able to choose 3 or 5fps. My point is that stuff like this isn't supposed to happen. Camera manufacturers are not supposed to release a moderately high end camera body then 6 months later turn around and offer a cheaper model that has better specs and features.

I'm in complete agreement with you. I can't help you, but believe me, I don't think it's right either.

I think Canon messed up with this decision, and if I was looking at a Canon camera, I may go for the 400D if I could afford either camera. The only reason I'd get the 30D is if the small size of the 400D really annoyed me that much (and it might).

I'm sure lots of people interested in the 30D before are now waiting for the 400D.

 

[snap58]

I'm sure lots of people interested in the 30D before are now waiting for the 400D.

They will be waiting along time for the 400D. : )

I think Canon did what they had to do in light of the D80 and the Sony Alpha. May be bad for those that just bought the 30D, but overall probably a good business decision and I respect that.

 

[Mike Teezie]

You will love the 5D and will notice significant differences in the color and contrast with better lenses.

The 50 1.2 won't be out until November and will probably drop in price some after a few months, so may be worth the wait. The 50 1.4 works nice on it too.

I've been considering upgrading to the 1.4 version of the 50mm, only for the 8 bladed aperture versus the 1.8's 5. The blocky bokeh I'm getting with my 1.8 annoys me to no end.

The thing I'm most excited about with the 5D is being able to realistically shoot portraits with my 70-200 f/2.8L IS due to the FF sensor. Right now, the crop factor makes it really difficult.

On topic - I think Canon was in a rather hard spot due to the fact that:

A. Nikon and Sony released some seriously sweet entry level DSLRs
B. The 30D is pretty damn new - and is now rivaled by it's little brother, the XTi/400D.

I guess they thought it would be smarter to cannibalize 30D sales a little than have Nikon or Sony own the entry market. Besides - with this strategy, they are still selling Canon cameras, just maybe not as evenly as they would like.

At any rate, Canon's line is going to be looking syrupy sweet in the coming months.

 

[sjl]

The thing I'm most excited about with the 5D is being able to realistically shoot portraits with my 70-200 f/2.8L IS due to the FF sensor. Right now, the crop factor makes it really difficult.

I've heard some rumours - and please consider these third- or fourth-hand - that Canon might be releasing an update to the 5D (maybe called the 7D) soon. If that happens, and if I find myself in a position to get a 5D for less than $3k Australian, I could be very strongly tempted to make a jump from the 20D. (I have a Speedlite now - the 580 EX - so the lack of a built-in flash is not a concern for me, as it was when I bought the 20D.)

The only problem I'd have as a result is that I'd have the 100-400mm, and the 50mm f/1.8, as my only lens options (I'd have to sell the 20D to get the 5D, and since the 17-85mm wouldn't fit on it, that would go too.) At that point, I'd be very strongly inclined to get the 70-200 f/2.8 IS, and the 24-70 f/2.8. Possibly even the 17-40mm f/4 to go with them. Which basically is another way of saying that I can't afford to get a 5D at the moment, even for $AU3k.

Boys and their toys ...

On topic - I think Canon was in a rather hard spot due to the fact that:

A. Nikon and Sony released some seriously sweet entry level DSLRs
B. The 30D is pretty damn new - and is now rivaled by it's little brother, the XTi/400D.

I guess they thought it would be smarter to cannibalize 30D sales a little than have Nikon or Sony own the entry market.

Bingo. You know, and I know, that the difference between 8 MP and 10 MP is as little as makes no difference (an extra 10% in any given [single] dimension ... big whoop.) But for somebody coming in cold, they'd see the bigger number and be asking questions about why they should pay the money for an 8 MP camera when they can pay the same for a 10 MP camera ... and the answer would take longer than most people would be willing to listen for.

 

[snap58]

I've been considering upgrading to the 1.4 version of the 50mm, only for the 8 bladed aperture versus the 1.8's 5. The blocky bokeh I'm getting with my 1.8 annoys me to no end.

I am a shallow (DOF) person too, have the 1.4 and love it. The 8 blades and full time manual focus are really worth the extra over the 1.8. Cookie1105 has done some nice pictures with his. I just ordered the Ee-S focusing screen for the 5D which is designed for 2.8 and faster glass to aid in focus at large apertures (new glasses may help too), will let you know what I think. BTW Love the pictures on your blog.

The thing I'm most excited about with the 5D is being able to realistically shoot portraits with my 70-200 f/2.8L IS due to the FF sensor. Right now, the crop factor makes it really difficult.

Plus the FF gives you a shallower DOF that a crop sensor, you will notice that right off with your portrait work.

On topic - I think Canon was in a rather hard spot due to the fact that:

A. Nikon and Sony released some seriously sweet entry level DSLRs
B. The 30D is pretty damn new - and is now rivaled by it's little brother, the XTi/400D.

I guess they thought it would be smarter to cannibalize 30D sales a little than have Nikon or Sony own the entry market. Besides - with this strategy, they are still selling Canon cameras, just maybe not as evenly as they would like.

At any rate, Canon's line is going to be looking syrupy sweet in the coming months.

My thoughts exactly

 

[macbookprouser]

Saw a news article this morning on the 400D.

Looks like its MSRP is going to be $775.


It will be interesting to see if there's any other announcements... "today's the day".



-hh

******, i just bought my rebel xt last month. oh well. i have no idea how to even use it properly. off to my photography class right now actually.

 

[silence]

Will this mean that the older Rebel 350D will drop in price??

I've been waiting a while for a good time to buy an entry level SLR..!! I don't think i need 10 mega pixels at this stage...