View Full Version : canon 300d/rebel vs canon350/xt
translumination
11-21-2005, 01:40 AM
Has anyone made the upgrade? I got a chance to play with a friends new 350d and I was so impressed . Just the way it turns on so quickly, processes the pictures so quickly and then displays it so quick. The focus is so much quicker.
But the thing that got me was how much more accurate the exposure was. When I use flash with the 300d it always looked like you were using flash but the 350d just compensates for this. Also shooting outside the 350d seems to get a more pleasing exposure. Sure you can bracket but why would you if the camera can set the correct exposure for you. I was never really happy with the images I got fromt the 300d, particularly the lattitude and overly contrasty look of the images. Is this what others have found or am I just imaging it?
Rick Meyer
11-21-2005, 05:42 AM
I have never used the Rebel 300d so I can't comment on that camera. But, I did pick up a 350D for my girlfriend for her birthday a couple of months ago. It is a great camera. Fast response, great images. I was totally impressed. And, its very affordable for what you are getting. Seriously...
Latitude (or lack thereof) and contrast are problems I've noticed with almost every digital camera out there. Once I started shooting RAW, that changed everything.
The XT is a much better camera than the 300D. I always hated how the 300D felt, too. Just clunky and big...kinda look an aerodynamic brick. The XT is a little small, but overall a nice camera. The image quality seems great. If you've got Canon equipment already and need a sub-$1000 digital SLR, it seems like the natural choice.
Policar
11-21-2005, 10:42 AM
It's all about shooting RAW, I agree. the xt has a nice dynamic range but in some outdoor light, it's not nearly enough. Usually, shooting RAW will help out, or at least setting contrast to -3 in camera.
The camera's great, though. I love mine--so fast and such beautiful images. Sometimes I wish it felt more like a D70, but it's nice that it's about the size of a point and shoot but with all the power and image quality of a full-featured dSLR.
Policar-
If you want the XT to feel more substantial (like the D70), I think you would like the vertical grip that Canon makes for it. Even shooting horizontal, it can make a huge difference.
translumination
11-21-2005, 01:23 PM
I totallly agree with the size. I'm not a big person but I loved the feel of the 300d. The 350 was just too small. If you never shoot regularly you would never appreciate something like that but you need the right shape and size to hold it steady and manoevre it around.
I did shoot in raw with the 300d as well. I shot my brother's engagement and being in Australia on a sunny day it was just so contrasty. The camera never coped with the contrast on exterior and no matter what I do in photoshop with layers and curves I could not improve upon it. Similarly in the dark flash just looked like flash and i wished you could tune it down.
I dont know if the processing has been improved on the 350d but it just seemed to cope with contrast so much better and its metering was just procuced better exposures. Mind you this was only with a brief encounter with the camera. They say a bad tradesman blames his tools. But by analogy would you ever go back to another dv camera after using the dvx? You could make a consumer dv camera look as good as a dvx but how much effort are you willing to put in for it and how much time do you have? Thats why I asked you guys on this post.
I was so frustrated I sold off my 300d and I'm looking at spending some some money on a used medium format film camera and scanner.
Medium format kick ass...I love my Rolleiflex. It takes a lot more time, but film still gives the best results in my opinion.
BTW, I've been very happy with the results from the Nikon CoolScan 8000 or 9000 scanner. It's the only one in the Nikon line that will handle medium format. It'll give you a 120 MB file (at least) off of a 6x6 neg...haven't seen many digitals that can give me that kind of file size!
But still, especially for motion picture purposes, digital is great. I do like my Fuji S2...