Canon XTi Users, need an opinion pls.

[Village Idiot]

Image stabiliser wount help much in low light, well at least it wount stop movement any better than non-IS lens/camera. It only reduces camera shake, not making the sensor capture the light faster (thats the ISO job...).

The main use of this feature is hand-holding long focal length lenses, as the longer, the higher shutter speed you need to avoid camera shake. I believe for 200mm lens you will need around 1/250th.

As you said there is no point of going for a sony just for this feature. Firstly because you can easily shoot without it, and secondly, you can buy image stabilised lenses for canon. Fine, they might be more expensive, but canons have a lot bigger range of lenses than sony!

Vamks: you probably knew this already, i just wanted to make sure other people didnt misunderstand what exactly image stabilizers do, as it is a usual misconception!

Actually, IS would make all the difference in low light. I do concert photography and sometimes I'm taking pictures at 1600-3200 ISO and shutter speeds of 1/15-1/60. It would really help with camera shake and I could probably get a good shot at 1/50

 

[MacHeadCase]

As a young amateur photographer (i've been doing this for a year and a half), i'm excited and delighted to see someone move into DSLR.

*Snip*

I hope this helps, I fully fully fully support you getting a Canon. You'll fall in love with it. Plus, the accessories, lenses, equipment compatibility and all the support will keep you on your toes for years to come.

Hey vamks! Welcome to Mac-Forums! Enjoy your stay

 

[vamks]

Thanks again for the info. I've been doing a lot of reading on settings, effects and IS, so I'm getting a pretty good foundation in the basics. Actually, Canon's website had a very nice little tutorial on e the basic settings and how they affect the photograph. Someone referred it to me and I'll have to remember to send some rep.

I've also been lurking around www.photography-on-the.net the past few days, and have picked up some additional basic lingo and ideas from there just by reading. It has tons of great photos and commentary too. I'll have to check out Vanks recommended site too.

Welcome to the forum, Vanks! I assume you do, but wondering if/what Mac you use.

to be honest, I just got an iMac a week ago. I love it, have quicksilver, chax, all the good little addons installed already. first Mac too.

Actually, IS would make all the difference in low light. I do concert photography and sometimes I'm taking pictures at 1600-3200 ISO and shutter speeds of 1/15-1/60. It would really help with camera shake and I could probably get a good shot at 1/50

this is true. But, to be shooting at 1600-3200 ISO without any reasonable amount of noise on an XTI is impossible. In referring to the original posters question, however, it all depends on what you shoot and where you find yourself using your camera the most. Even still, giving up the versatility of an excellent starting DSLR camera for a Sony with built in IS is a foolish mistake that I think many of us would agree.

Since you do concert photography, I'm assuming you have a Canon with an L lense with IS? Maybe a 70-200 f/2.8 with IS? And if your shooting 1600-3200, well, the XT line doesn't even support 3200, so i assume you have a pretty high end body too? Becuase either you have a sweet camera body or you're using noise ninja. Just curious, cause i simply can't afford that stuff yet.

 

[vamks]

Oh, and thanks for the warm welcome. I feel at home already.

 

[laimonas.s]

Actually, IS would make all the difference in low light. I do concert photography and sometimes I'm taking pictures at 1600-3200 ISO and shutter speeds of 1/15-1/60. It would really help with camera shake and I could probably get a good shot at 1/50

image stabiliser doesnt stop movement (e.g a persons hand while playing drums etc)... only a faster shutter speed will stop/freeze movement, but yes, IS would help in low light to reduce camera shake.

considering in gigs people play guitars and move around, i find it difficult to understand how you can get crisp/clear/unblurred images at 1/15th! unless they are standing or very still... but hey... you probably have more experience in concert photography than me!

 

[breadfan35]

If you go Canon, I'd get a 30D or find a used 20D over a Rebel (be it XT or XTi) any day. While I understand that they are base entry level cameras, I am very unimpressed with them.

 

[Sa!!yz~Rage]

The biggest plus when shooting in low light is having a fast lens. When I'm shooting inside and it's crappy lighting I try to use my f/1.4 85mm.

For the longest time I had a DigitalRebel 300D with the 85 f/1.2 on it for low light as the DR would go to 3200 iso with the 'hack'. I miss that lens...

Of course if you're shooting in lowlight a lot well, use film. You remember film right? TMax 3200.....sweeeeet ;D

 

[fleurya]

Film??? The only place I hear much about film any more is when I watch "ER". j/k. But even x-rays are going digital these days. Did you know even x-ray analysis is being outsourced overseas? The latest and greatest is for hospitals to send digital x-rays to India (or other) overnight for doctors to analyze during their daytime and send them back in time for doctors at US hospitals to review when they get to work in the morning. Kinda scary IMHO.

Anyway, that's a bit off topic. To what Breadfan said about 30D/20D. I almost went that way, but for some (like me) such a big expense for a DSLR is big enough and adding another $400 at least is just overwhelming. As a beginner, I'd rather not invest quite that much yet, or use that money to get an extra lens or other equipment. If I decide I really like the hobby, I can upgrade to a better model later and keep the lenses/other equipment I acquire.

 

[vamks]

The biggest plus when shooting in low light is having a fast lens. When I'm shooting inside and it's crappy lighting I try to use my f/1.4 85mm.

For the longest time I had a DigitalRebel 300D with the 85 f/1.2 on it for low light as the DR would go to 3200 iso with the 'hack'. I miss that lens...

Of course if you're shooting in lowlight a lot well, use film. You remember film right? TMax 3200.....sweeeeet ;D

what is this hack you speak of? I would like to know

 

[Sa!!yz~Rage]

The Russian Hack.

Loads 10D firmware onto the 300D, allows 3200 iso, mirror lockup and other things. Best of all it doesn't void any warranty. Canon knows everyone uses it if you send it in for repair without resetting it yourself they usually do it. So I'm told.... I've never had a problem with it. ;D

 

[fleurya]

That's pretty sweet! Basically you get the 10D firmware and load it onto the 300D? Could I do this with my shiny new XTi? (on it's way to me now!! )

Actually, I don't think I'll be in need of ISO 3200 if that's the main advantage.

 

[laimonas.s]

For the longest time I had a DigitalRebel 300D with the 85 f/1.2 on it for low light as the DR would go to 3200 iso with the 'hack'. I miss that lens...

a £960 lens on a £300 camera?

 

[Village Idiot]

a £960 lens on a £300 camera?

I'm getting a 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS for my 30D.

$1600 lens on an $1100 camera...

 

[laimonas.s]

I'm getting a 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS for my 30D.

$1600 lens on an $1100 camera...

thats understandable, yours is a high/mid end cam...

 

[fleurya]

a £960 lens on a £300 camera?

I thought it was all about the lenses anyway? If you have a choice to buy a high-end camera or a high-end lens, isn't the lens the better buy? Especially since you can always buy a new camera later when you have the $$.

If I get into the hobby pretty deep, I'm sure I'll upgrade to a better camera. It's nice to know that all the equipment I buy (pretty much all) can easily move right over to the new camera.

 

[vamks]

I thought it was all about the lenses anyway? If you have a choice to buy a high-end camera or a high-end lens, isn't the lens the better buy? Especially since you can always buy a new camera later when you have the $$.

If I get into the hobby pretty deep, I'm sure I'll upgrade to a better camera. It's nice to know that all the equipment I buy (pretty much all) can easily move right over to the new camera.

Hold on a second there. Thats not COMPLETELY true even though it is most of the time. XT, XTi, 10D, 20D, 30D are all 1.6x sensors, meaning the magnification of the sensor is actually magnified 1.6x. Thus, if you have a 70-200 mm lense, its actually 112-320. SOME LENSES ONLY WORK ON THESE CAMERAS Thus, if you move even higher into 5d and the 1d series, then they won't work. If you like photography, you're gonna want to move to that level, or at least dream of it. L lenses all work, however.

And yes, lenses do make a more dramatic difference than a body does. My advice? Read reviews, read reviews, read reviews. Ask some questions, and then read reviews, read reviews, read reviews. And then, test the ones you want from friends, stores, etc. Then you should be good to go. I have a 70-200 f/4 L lense. Dramatic difference. Dramatic. ;D