Comments Locked

56 Comments

Back to Article

  • meanjean - Wednesday, September 3, 2008 - link

    Anyone had trouble with memory cards not recording pictures because of being dislodged from contact points for some reason?
  • thepieces - Saturday, May 10, 2008 - link

    Cool review, but the samples are horrible. A little more effort than images from your back yard please :) Half of which are out of focus
  • Midwayman - Friday, May 9, 2008 - link

    "Early testing shows the new 18-55mm IS to be a superb lens with performance comparable to top-line Canon lenses."

    So you're saying the kit lens is up to L quality. Right.

    Also that Nvidia test target you are using is really a pretty poor choice. Almost no fine detail. Noise is only have the story when comparing high iso. You also need to look at detail retention. The only thing that could possibly qualify is the TM. Alot of camera that appear to have low noise do it through destroying detail.

    I know a couple other folks have mentioned the lighting. You're doing all this in a low light setting. What about outdoors? People take an awful lot of pictures outside. I know you complain about "studio lighting" but since you can't control outside conditions, at least you can bring the light level up to a reasonable level. For under a $100 you can pick up some work lights at home depot and a couple yards of white muslin to make a large softbox. Test shots are test shots and I'd rather see them at more normal exposures. (and then you can stop down to f8 to get max resolution)


  • m61376 - Friday, May 9, 2008 - link

    I have been trying to decide between the D60 and the XSi for several days, reading everything I could find. The two stores I went to were very Nikon biased. This is one of the best comparative articles for a newbie to digital SLR, upgrading from a point and shoot.

    I appreciate the XSi comparison to the D60 rather than the D80. I think there are many people like me who are reticent to upgrade to the SLR's because of their size and the larger size and weight of the D80 and the like just take it out of consideration.
  • iamatrix - Friday, May 9, 2008 - link

    Looking at samples from the D60 and Rebel, the D60 images at high ISO look better - better contrast, color rendition, and noise handeling. Canon suffers from high ISO chroma noise, which has been noted by dpreview time and time again, Nikon on the other hand has higher luminance noise. Chroma noise is much harder to deal with in the post processing stage and leaves a blotchy 'digital' look to high ISO images whereas the Nikon grain is more film like and easier to deal with using noise reduction software.
  • Deadtrees - Thursday, May 8, 2008 - link

    Though many reviewers and users have been complaining about Canon's yellowish WB under tungsten light, it is, in fact, Canon's policy to keep it that way.

    It's true that there're times when I want the pictures to look yellowish as it captures the mood of the scene such as in Cafe and restaurant. But at the same time, there're times when I want the pictures to look not yellowish at all.

    Having said that, I understand where they're coming from and why they decide to keep it that way. However, it'd be much better if Canon, at least, gives two options in that situation: #1 for true to the eye, yellowish WB. #2 for absolute WB.

    Sure, I get around with this 'problem' by having 3 slightly different tungten lighted gray card pictures in the memory card and using them accordingly. It pretty much solves the 'problem' but having that option built-in would be just better and eaiser.



    I tried to find the link of the interview talking about this issue but failed. It was an interview done by a Japanese camera magazine with the president of Canon camera. If anyone has the link, providing would be more than greatful.

  • mikett - Wednesday, May 7, 2008 - link

    I meant the shutterbox as the external construction is obvious.
  • Wesley Fink - Wednesday, May 7, 2008 - link

    Canon rates the 40D shutter for 100,000 actuations. We can not find a published spec for the XSi (450D) shutter, but it is presumably less than 100,000. The XSi shutter is more likely designed for 50,000 acttuations.
  • punchkin - Wednesday, May 7, 2008 - link

    You're talking out of your a**. There's no reason for such a claim.
  • Wesley Fink - Thursday, May 8, 2008 - link

    Actually there is a reason. As stated we could not find a spec for the rated shutter life of the XSi, but the 40D does have a specified rated life of 100,000. However a few other entry SLRs have a rated shutter life of 50,000 actuations, and we would expect the XSi to be competitive. That is an assumption and not a hard fact.

    The rated life for the Olympus E-3 is 150,000 shutter actuations and is specified, but many DSLRs do not specify a rated shutter life.
  • punchkin - Thursday, May 8, 2008 - link

    So the upshot of it is that it is not PRESUMABLY rated at 50,000. You don't know, and pulled a number out of your butt.
  • mikett - Wednesday, May 7, 2008 - link

    Can anyone indicate the relative lifespan rating on the XSi vs the 40D?
    I once recalled that the 40D class ( 20D, 30D ) had a significantly higher rating than the Rebel class and their construction was sturdier but maybe that has changed.
  • mmusterd - Tuesday, May 6, 2008 - link

    In fact in many ways the XSi is a much more exciting new camera than the 40D was when it was introduced just 6 months ago.

    Well, yes. It means the 40D is dropping in price, and op top of that, here in Europe, Canon is giving a substantial cashback om the 40D (of 150 euros). This means that the price difference between the 40D and 450D has practically vanished (at a randomly picked shop the 40D body now comes at 750 euros, whereas the same shop charges 660 euros for a 450d body).

    This means that at about the same price (or at least a small premium) you can get the 40D instead of the 450D. Now tell me the reasons why I should buy the 450D instead.

    For myself, I couldn't think of any, so I bought the 40D. For the article, in light of the very small current price difference, perhaps more thought could be given to the comparison between the two canons.
  • Wesley Fink - Tuesday, May 6, 2008 - link

    You make a very good point. At the same price I would also select the 40D, but that is likely an anomaly due to the fact that the XSi was just introduced and its price is staying stubbornly at a higher price, while the 40D is now more than 6 months old. That pricing is certainly because resellers are having no problem selling the XSi at the higher price.

    We fully expect prices to settle down to a 20% to 40% price premium for the 40D. At that price difference it is easier to justify the XSi instead.

    I do believe the size and weight of the XSi will appeal more to some users. Even with the grip the XSi is smaller and much easier to carry around all day than a 40D. Ergonomics are also the best so far from an entry Canon.
  • n4bby - Wednesday, May 7, 2008 - link

    even with the improved ergonomics of the rebel, there is a huge advantage of the 40D: the scroll wheel control on the back. Canon uses this control on all their pro models as well and i cannot overstate what a huge usability difference this makes when you're shooting... i have the old 10D, and when i tried using a friend's rebel i was constantly frustrated by the tiny little cursor button controls on the back... when you're trying to quickly adjust your exposure on the fly it's hopelessly clumsy compared to the wheel. i seriously would pay $$ for that advantage alone.
  • PokerGuy - Tuesday, May 6, 2008 - link

    Wes, good work on this article. Most AT readers including myself are technically oriented and interested in all sorts of technology. We use cameras like the ones you review but we are not photography pros. Your kind of review is exactly what I like to see, not the ones done at the photo-pro kind of sites, those have a different target audience.

    Keep up the good work.
  • punchkin - Tuesday, May 6, 2008 - link

    ... and I don't mean it's aimed at third graders, either.
  • kiii - Monday, May 5, 2008 - link

    Thanks for another camera article Wesley, they are getting better and better.

    One thing that you have already touched on, but might want to investigate further are the noise reduction algorithms that different manufacturers use. For out of camera jpegs, Nikon tends to eliminate chrominance noise, while Canon leaves small amounts of chrominance noise. The result are small colored specs on high ISO Canon jpegs, while Nikon jpegs look more like "film grain". On the other hand, Sony seems to implement very aggressive (for DSLRs anyway) noise reduction in the a350, leading to the jagged edges you mentioned. Since this is AnandTech, there are definitely power users here and these users may want to shoot in raw. Perhaps for future DSLR reviews, you can do a raw comparison, using the same raw converter for all cameras. This way, you can bypass the camera's noise reduction and see the sensor's true performance. I know that the majority of first time DSLR users will not shoot in raw, but then again, not everyone overclocks their system either.

    Either way, I did get a chance to play with the XSi myself, and it is quite the camera. I look forward to your XSi comparisons with the K20D and D300.
  • cray85 - Monday, May 5, 2008 - link

    Your article mentions that the Sony A350 is better then the XSi at higher ISOs. However, your sample image is "too simple". A more challenging image (especially one with more in-focus low-contrast details) would clearly show the excessiveness of the noise-reduction routines employed by the A350. You'd then be able to see some significant smudging of the aforementioned low-contrast details and also some more of the jagged artifacts you mentioned.

    By contrast, the Canon and Nikon cameras employ a much more conservative approach. Noise is less of a problem at smaller print sizes but the detail loss due to heavy-handed noise reduction is an issue at all print sizes.

    Also, while it's not a bad idea to compare the white balance accuracy of different cameras, sensitivity tests should always be performed with manually set white balance so that noise comparisons are consistent.

    Finally, it's a good thing you've begun to stop your test lenses down to F4. However, an even better idea would be to use F8 to further increase the lens resolution and also to bring more details into focus.

    I do understand the need for you to keep things simple for readers. However, this does not imply that cutting corners on crucial tests is acceptable. A beginner might decide to buy a Sony for reasons other then JPEG image quality. However, your testing should make clear the trade-offs he will have to make.
  • Wesley Fink - Monday, May 5, 2008 - link

    I did NOT say the A350 was better at high ISO than the XSi. I said the A350 held up better than expected in comparison to the XSi. The A350 noise reduction was set to low in our image tests, and while the A350 is not superior, neither is it trounced by the Canon XSi or Nikon D60.

    At F8 and low ISO in our low-light tungsten setting the shutter speeds would be so low that we would create a new noise issue with long exposures. If we increased light to make F8 work better for the test range we would no longer be testing a typical interior lighting situation with high potential noise. We are not trying to determine noise in a studio lighting environment which would be a next to useless test for a typical XSi user.

    F4 is a reasonable compromise that gets the f1.4 lenses in their best performance range without creating a new set of concerns that would skew the tests. Aperture is at F4 in all test shots.

    I don't know too many amateurs who set manual white balance before shooting indoor available light. Most just leave it on Auto WB, but we know most of the DSLRs do a pretty poor job on Auto WB in Tungsten lighting. Our concession to that reality is to set the WB to Tungsten.

    The user might know enough to set the WB to Tungsten for inside lamps and frankly the Canon is pretty awful in color balance even when we went to the trouble to set Tungsten WB. Nikon and Sony get it right under these conditions so we have to ask why Canon Tungsten WB is so biased to warm red. I think the poor Canon color in indoor Tungsten lighting is important info to provide to readers.
  • pinto4402 - Monday, May 5, 2008 - link

    Your observation about Canon's overly warm/red WB in tungsten lighting is shared by many camera reviewers/users. It's a "problem" that has been noted for a long time. Some people actually prefer the overly warm colors, though. I'm sure this is the reason why Canon has never fixed their WB.

  • Deadtrees - Monday, May 5, 2008 - link

    "Working range AF specifications are the same EV range of -0.5EV to 18EV. However, the 40D adds an additional diagonal cross-type sensor with greater precision for f2.8 lenses, providing better support for fast Canon L lenses."

    - Not trying to be picky or anything but that is somewhat misleading as not all L lenses have aperture values faster than f/2.8.

    -------------------------------------------------------------------

    "Overall, the Sony A350 actually does better against the Canon XSi than we really expected and acquits itself quite well for a higher resolution sensor that should be showing greater noise than the Canon XSi. Resolution and noise control to ISO 1600 on the Sony holds its own against a sensor maker than has been the low-noise standard since DSLRs began."

    - Keep in mind that A350 utilizes quite agressive noise deduction algorithms resulting smudged water color like images. If you think less noise is good no matter what, I guess it's not so bad. But, what about details that are lost? Do you really want over 10mp dslr images to show details as cell phone cameras? Hell, in that case, even point-and-shoot panasonic cameras that are known for crazy noise reduction algorithm can compete head to head with Nikon D3.

    ---------------------------------------------------------------------
    BTW, I really suggest you to change the test subject. It's glossy coated hardboard papers which makes it virtually impossible to see the loss of details caused by insance noise reduction algorithms.



  • Lord 666 - Monday, May 5, 2008 - link

    Wes,

    If you are comparing the XTi vs. XSi vs. 40D, why not include the D300 as well to compare against?
  • Wesley Fink - Monday, May 5, 2008 - link

    We will include the D300 results in Part 2 of our Digital Sensor article. We will be comparing resolution and noise in different sensor categories, such as 14 megapixel, 12 megapixel, and 10 megapixel.

    I did toy with the idea of including the D300 in comparisons in this review, but I figured Canon to past Canon XTi to top Canon prosumer 40D was a bit more logical than a $800 body to a $1800 body. I'll leave that comparison for the digital sensor article.
  • complectus - Monday, May 5, 2008 - link

    Is that a Frank Lloyd Wright house in 2 of the Sample Images?
  • Wesley Fink - Monday, May 5, 2008 - link

    Yes it is Frank Lloyd Wright. I am fortunate that a real Wright house is in my neighborhood. The furniture was also custom built for the rooms in th eWright house, as was typical of many of his home designs.

    It was built in the early 1900's and is contemporary to the other homes in the photographs. I figured someone would catch it.
  • pinto4402 - Monday, May 5, 2008 - link

    For about five minutes, I was interested in the Xsi as a lightweight backup camera body for event photography. However, the lack of a CF card slot completely nixes this idea. It doesn't make any sense for Canon to switch from CF to SD, other than to attract P&S owners who want to migrate to a DSLR. By doing so, however, Canon effectively excluded us existing DSLR owners who already have many of their lenses and who would be more likely to purchase. I can tolerate the Xsi's plastic body, but I'm not going to invest in new storage media just to use this camera.
  • Wesley Fink - Monday, May 5, 2008 - link

    You can buy a 16GB class 6 hi-speed SD card for $55, a 4GB Class 6 for about $20, or an 8GB for around $30. I can't believe that small expense would keep you from buying and using the XSi if you really wanted to.

    Nikon uses SD on the D80 and D60, Pentax uses it on the K20D and K200D. Sony still uses CF, but new Sony lenses cost a lot more than today's cheap SD and CF memory.
  • RDaneel - Monday, May 5, 2008 - link

    I have no problem with AT doing camera reviews, I think it's a valuable perspective for hobbyists and prosumers. Obviously AT isn't going to review $1500 lenses...

    That being said, this review reads more like Canon ad copy than a real comparative review. There isn't any serious examination of the image quality, and it feels like more effort is spent in comparing the number of AF points and megapixels than really looking at the camera as a DSLR system or really talking about IQ. Just kind of a disappointment, normally the objectivity on AT is a bit better. Did the author get to keep the free press sample? ;)
  • Wesley Fink - Monday, May 5, 2008 - link

    There was no Press sample - not even a loaner. We had to buy the XSi that was reviewed. The same goes for the Nikon D60 and Sony A350 that were compared to the XSi. Since we bought them all we owe nothing to any manufacturer.

    The XSi won't replace my D300 or my Pentax K20D, but it is a really superb entry camera.
  • Devo2007 - Monday, May 5, 2008 - link

    I've been quite happy with Anandtech's camera reviews so far, along with the articles on digital photography (terms, sensor info, etc.)

    I'm still torn between the Rebel XSi and the Sony A350. Live View isn't extremely important to me (even on my current camera, I don't use the LCD that much), but I also want something that's going to be relatively easy to use. I've never used an SLR before (film or digital), though I have worked with the manual controls on my existing camera a bit.
  • haplo602 - Monday, May 5, 2008 - link

    I personaly would go with Canon in this case. You will find a huge supply of cheap used lenses and other accessories on ebay :-)

    Go check ...

    As fo ease of use, the only option is to visit a larger camera store and try out. There is no substitute for experience.
  • casteve - Monday, May 5, 2008 - link

    I wonder if Sony provides free rootkit malware with their cameras, too!
  • n4bby - Monday, May 5, 2008 - link

    but i never quite understood why anandtech started reviewing photo gear... i appreciate the considerable effort that went into this review, but quite frankly i think cameras are better reviewed by professional photographers and/or specialists in the field. again, not meaning to rag on you but the sample photographs are really quite sub-par from both a technical and aesthetic standpoint and in no way show what this or really any camera/lens is capable of. i think without an adequate photographic background, it is hard and perhaps somewhat misguided to critically evaluate the merits of the gear beyond the merely technical, which i understand is what the majority of people come to this site for. but photography being an art goes much beyond the technical and i think the subjective element of it is often very relevant to the judgment of equipment.
  • Sunrise089 - Monday, May 5, 2008 - link

    Super-elitist arguments are funny in posts that refuse to capitalize words.

    I have seen professional camera review sites and magazines, although I am by no means an expert in the subject. Besides reaching a different audience, Anandtech seems to bring two things to the table with these reviews: 1) Objective and numbers-based analysis, and 2) Clear conclusions. Many reviews of high-end products, be they cars, home theater gear, or cameras, seem to lack clear "this product is better than this product for this type of user" conclusions (probably their tiny audiences cannot sustain their publication costs without free sample gear, and so they avoid hard conclusions because they don't want to piss off any company and stop of flow of free gear. Anandtech provides a refreshing and readable change of pace, that for this user at least the reviews are exactly what I desire.
  • Justin Case - Monday, May 5, 2008 - link

    [quote]Anandtech seems to bring two things to the table with these reviews: 1) Objective and numbers-based analysis, and 2) Clear conclusions.[/quote]

    And that is precisely the problem, because most of the times the numbers are wrong (or inconsistent, because the reviewer didn't understand what he was actually measuring), which means the "authoritative sounding" conclusions are also wrong, and misleading.

    There's nothing worse than an ignorant who's sure of himself. No, wait, there is. An ignorant who's sure of himself and gives authoritative advice to thousands of other people.

    Photography, like so many other fields where art meets technology, is not about clear conclusions. Some of the greatest photographs in the word were taken with cameras that would rank at the bottom in any "number based analysis" (just look at anything by Cartier-Bresson, for example).

    Describing a camera's performance in (objective) numbers and writing requires a lot of experience, and so does understanding it. For "average users" the way to go is look at a lot of samples (with different lighting conditions, different subjects, etc.) and read people's pondered (subjective) opinion about their experience with the camera, and how it compared to other cameras.

    "Number-based clear conclusions" are like trying to define Van Gogh, John Lennon or Jesus Christ by their IQ score and shoe size. Those are certainly useful pieces of information, but if you draw a "clear conclusion" from them, you are missing the point.
  • Wesley Fink - Monday, May 5, 2008 - link

    The Canon XSi is an entry DSLR. 99% of its buyers will be consumers like readers at AnandTech. I would venture a guess than the great majority of those potential buyers really don't care how the entry priced XSi performs with a $2000 Canon L lens in a studio setting.

    Using your logic none of us would ever build a computer since it is a task best left to Pros like Dell and HP, and reviewing home PCs should be left to IT professionals.

    Not.
  • Justin Case - Monday, May 5, 2008 - link

    We are talking about reviewing a product, not building it, so your criticism of the poster's "logic" makes no sense. Certainly people shouldn't build PCs professionally without knowing how a PC is built. You don't write just for yourself, you write for Anandtech as a professional journalist. To use your analogy, you _are_ (supposedly) the "Dell and HP" of product reviews.

    Cameras should be reviewed by people with experience (preferably photographers) for the same reason that cars should be reviewed by experienced drivers, guitars should be reviewed by experienced musicians, and so on. Because people with more experience (with different situations and different products) are more likely to have relevant insights about how the product they are reviewing compares to the rest.

    If I'm clueless about, say, air compressors, the last thing I need is advice from an equally clueless person, just because he's an "average user". The expression "expert advice" carries weight for a reason. I don't think this is so hard to understand.

    The section for the "average guy review" is the "comments" section at the bottom. Anadtech's readers expect the actual _articles_ to be written by experts, and to follow a professional, relevant methodology. And (some of) the IT articles actually do (Anand's and Johan's, mostly).

    Taking pictures of a bunch of boxes on top of a desk (often with nonsensical camera and lens settings, different settings for different cameras, etc.) is something that might meet the standards of a private blog, but not really the standards of a site like Anandtech.

    If you can't do something at least _half_ as good as the main photography websites and if you're reviewing a product that has already been reviewed ad nauseum by all those sites... why bother? I guess it increases the number of ad impressions, and maybe you get paid by nVidia, Corsair and Intel to use their logos as your "test images", but is that really worth the impact on Anandtech's reputation?

    If you don't have the knowledge, time or resources to make a proper _technical_ evaluation of the camera and lens, just write an _opinion_ piece. Photography magazines are full of them, and they're quite useful.

    Take a few photos (of different things: people, buildings, sunsets, flowers, cars, night scenes, indoors shots, etc.), post your results and write about your experience using the camera for a week or two. Less press-release, less spec sheet, less "hacked together" photographic tests, more real-world samples and more subjective opinion about real-world photos, clearly identified as such. That might actually have some relevance, and would complement the more technical articles found in photography websites.
  • JarredWalton - Monday, May 5, 2008 - link

    I can attest to the fact that Wes knows *FAR* more about cameras than the rest of us at AnandTech. Some of you may not feel that way from reading some of his articles, but I wonder how much you're actually reading and how much you're assuming. He's done photography work professionally in the past, and we all tend to discuss things with him when we need camera advice. To pretend that he lacks knowledge of a subject just because you disagree with some aspect of an article is typical of anonymous internet users.

    Why does he use a setup where he's photographing a bunch of computer hardware boxes? For one, I'm sure the fact that it's inside in a controlled environment and has a bunch of stuff that doesn't change constantly helps. Taking a picture of some outside scene is fine, but it doesn't allow apples-to-apples comparisons. It really would be great for Wes to include some other sample images, I agree. You know, sort of like he does on page 12.

    I'm sure he can add more photos there showing other shooting environments, but it's pretty easy to take a few shots under specific conditions and come up with a conclusion that "this camera is AWESOME!" That's what a lot of people tend to do. A great photographer taking pictures can make even lousy cameras look good, which is why we need a controlled environment.

    For me, being able to easily take a quality picture under tungsten lighting is in fact one of the best ways to separate average cameras from great cameras... it would be quite entertaining to see some point-and-shoots try out his test. I say that because I upgraded from a point-and-shoot to a DSLR purely for the fact that after trying three PAS cameras I still couldn't manage to capture good quality photos of products.
  • Justin Case - Tuesday, May 6, 2008 - link

    It has nothing to do with his opinions. It has to do with inconsistent (and plain wrong) methodology, lack of varied samples (all the "sample photos" seem to have been taken in 20 minutes, at the same place), and poor quality of the photos in general (all but two have bad framing, bad exposure and bad use of DOF - they're fine as holiday snaps, but not really the work of an "experienced photographer").

    In fact, about the _only_ thing about his articles worth reading is his opinion (which, sadly, he insists on basing on fundamentally flawed "technical" tests, instead of basing it on real-world experience with the cameras - you know, the kind that really matters for people who are going to use it instead of sit at home "measurebating").

    Outdoors photos don't allow for an "apples to apples" comparison? So you'd rather compare just the apple seeds, because the rest of the apple might be different? You think 50 photos of an nVidia box give you more information about how two cameras perform in the real world than, say, 20 photos taken in different conditions? Or is this review aimed at that very specific market niche of people who photograph nVidia logos on boxes that happen to be on their desk?

    If he knows *FAR* more about cameras than anyone else at Anandtech (and I'm starting to think that might be true, which is scary), that makes it pretty clear that Anandtech shouldn't be doing camera reviews. For one thing, how will the rest of the people at Anadtech know that he's not publishing nonsense (answer: clearly, they don't)?

    Seriously: _You_ (Jarred), spend two weeks taking pictures (indoors, outdoors, day, night, portraits, babies, flowers, cars, sports, dogs, landscapes, clouds, flash, no flash). Pick the 20 or 30 photos you consider more relevant (because they came out right or because they came out wrong or just because they came out different from what you expected). Write an article about your experiences with the came and comment on each photo. Skip the technical "camera" stuff; it's been done properly by people who know how to do it at specialized websites, and "average users" don't understand it anyway, even if they think they do. Give us your opinion and different samples taken in different conditions. If you can take similar photos with multiple cameras, even better. If not, nevermind, just try to photograph many different situations. I'm sure the end result will be a million times better (and more relevant) than Mr. Fink's "let's test sensor sharpness by setting lenses to f/1.2" pseudo-technical articles.

    PS - FYI, P&S cameras will generally perform *better* than dSLRs under tungsten lighting, if you have both set to full auto (certainly better than Canon dSLRs, which have very crappy auto WB under tungsten). As long as you do in-camera white balance (or shoot raw) and expose correctly, both P&S and dSLRs should perform fine (as far as white point is concerned; P&S cameras are still noisier, have worse lenses, less control over DOF, etc).
  • JarredWalton - Wednesday, May 7, 2008 - link

    While I do understand what you're suggesting, trust me on this one: I would make a HORRIBLE reviewer for cameras. At least initially, anyway - give me a couple years and a bunch of different cameras to use and I could begin to make some headway. But we don't have a couple years, and even with time I would never know as much as a lot of other people. As it stands, I have personally used exactly three DSLR cameras: an original Canon Digital Rebel EOS, and then last month I upgraded to a Rebel XTi. (Love the XTi, incidentally - I'm thinking an upgrade every two or three generations will work out well.)
  • n4bby - Tuesday, May 6, 2008 - link

    hi all,

    i appreciate the replies, and again i am not trying to belittle the time and effort put into these reviews. but i think Justin Case understood the point i was trying to make. and the reason i bring this up is that i too went about learning about DSLR's and photography the "wrong" way.

    i too used to analyze gear very much the same way Wesley did in this review - taking endless test shots, playing the numbers and features game, etc... much like Anandtech reviewers and readers, i come from a technical background (EE in college, internet developer since then), and this seemingly quantitative evaluation method made sense to me. i have my own collection of box shots that are uncannily like Wes's. i spent a lot of time reading reviews and user opinions on DPReview, Fred Miranda etc. etc. that took a similar approach.

    the problem is, it didn't really help me size up the true value of gear for its ultimate purpose - taking pictures - and while i don't really regret my purchases (Canon 10D and various prime lenses - Canon was the only real game in town at the time), i do not feel they were well-advised. since then, i have had the good fortune of working with professional photographers at a digital photography startup - i'm talking people who shot for Sports Illustrated, US News, the NY Times, etc. - not to mention having exposure to clients who shoot for a living. and let me tell you, it turned my perspective on photo gear upside down... now, you may say ok, these guys are pros but anandtech readers are consumers, so that's not relevant. but the perspective i gained from these pros helped me improved my photography immensely, and also made me look at gear in a much more constructive fashion than "pixel peeping." i realized that the merit of gear was not so much about absolutes, but about context and finding the right gear for the job - and i think that is something that is often missing from these reviews.

    again, i think the work you guys do here is excellent - this is one of the truly great resources of information on the desktop computing industry on the internet. and if the readership likes the camera reviews, more power to you. i just thought i would throw another perspective out there... apologies for the rant!

    cheers,
    n4bby
  • n4bby - Tuesday, May 6, 2008 - link

    incidentally, i just re-read the review very carefully, and i find a *lot* of statements and judgments that i take issue with, and that i think many knowledgeable photographers would as well - some things have already been pointed out by other anandtech readers. and i stand by my original statement that the quality of the test and sample shots is rather poor and may not be a good basis for comparison between the cameras.
  • casteve - Monday, May 5, 2008 - link

    It might be time to retire my 2.1MP now. :)

    Seriously, thanks for the camera reviews. I might come to the site for PC info, but all things electronic draw my interest.

    I've got a point and shoot digital camera for casual shots and a trusty Canon A-1 for when I care about quality/enlargements. I've been waiting for prosumer prices to drop or consumer builds to meet the quality bar. Looks like we are starting to get there.
  • haplo602 - Monday, May 5, 2008 - link

    I think the comparison with Nikon D60 is not the correct one. D60 is a followup on D40 - crude AF system, no lens drive screw, no DOF preview button etc.

    Both have the same sensor, but D80 is a more usable camera:

    11 AF points, DOF preview button, 2 command dials (way better handling than with one), battery grip ...
  • Wesley Fink - Monday, May 5, 2008 - link

    The D80 was introduced at the time of the XTi. It was priced higher than the XTi and aimed more at the 30D than the XTi. Comparing it to the entry Canon did not seem appropriate. The real Nikon competitor to the XSi will likely be the D80 replacement as I mentioned.

    Canon does not really have a camera as basic as the D60 (D40x/D40), but the XTi is continued and actually costs less than the D60 right now. In my opinion the XTi trounces the D60 in a head-to-head and it costs less.

    I expected some would claim the D80 the better compare, but I don't believe it is. BTW, IMO the Nikon D300 trounces the Canon D40 in every way as I mentioned in the review. I am definitely not biased toward Canon. It is just the situation changes at the entry level and Nikon does not really have a convincing competitor right now for the XSi.
  • haplo602 - Monday, May 5, 2008 - link

    I did not say you are biased either way (the general oppinion would be you are biased towards Oly 4/3 :-))

    If you claim that Canon does not have an equivalent to the D60/D40 line why then compare them with the latest Rebel? And if D80 is older, well bad for Nikon as they don't have an up to date competitor to the Rebel. But D80 should be the direct opponent for 450D until the next generation is introduced.
  • DailyYahoo - Monday, May 5, 2008 - link

    I remember those Rebel ads with John McEnroe. Back then, John was a hippie and spelled his name Andre Aggasi. Image was everything back then :)
  • Wesley Fink - Monday, May 5, 2008 - link

    Thanks for catching this. At least we got the Ad reference corrected before McEnroe caught it :) I seem to recall Agassi was dating Brooke Shields at the time.
  • DailyYahoo - Monday, May 5, 2008 - link

    You are very welcome. I should point out that at least one of us knows how to spell Agassi ; ) By the way, excellent article. I have a 350D and it is really starting to look so very long in the tooth with all of these new releases. Too bad I'm poor. : )
  • AtaStrumf - Monday, May 5, 2008 - link

    The last table I believe is a comparison of the XSi and the Sony A350 not:

    ISO Comparison - Canon XSi vs. Nikon D60

    As the name of the table suggests.
  • Wesley Fink - Monday, May 5, 2008 - link

    The table has been corrected.
  • viqarqadir2 - Monday, May 5, 2008 - link

    The first digital rebel had a 5.3 (5.1 effective) CMOS sensor and not the 6.3 you mentioned.
  • Roy2001 - Monday, May 5, 2008 - link

    Do you have a Rebel? Stop misleading!
  • viqarqadir2 - Tuesday, May 6, 2008 - link

    Yes I do have a digital rebel. Its been put away for a while now so I seem to have forgotten the pixel count on it. It does indeed have a 6.5 Mp sensor. I dont know how I got it into my mind that it has a 5.3 MP sensor but I have believed that for years now :)
    Sorry about the mistake
  • Wesley Fink - Monday, May 5, 2008 - link

    According to Canon the original Digital Rebel had 6.3 effective megapixels (6.5 total megapixels) as detailed in our tables. These specifications are still available on their website.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now