Cheap Camera

Check out my full T3i review video, video clips, sample photos and time lapse on YouTube. On YouTube search "2012 T3i Best DSLR"Okay, now let's take a fresh look at the Canon EOS Rebel T3i (600D) DSLR and compare it to the 60D and T2i. In this review I'll also talk about some "MUST HAVE" accessories for this camera.The Canon EOS Rebel T3i DSLR was release in March of 2011 and has quickly become one of the most popular DSLRs available.As if the Rebel line wasn't popular enough with budding photographers... The introduction of the T3i has captured the imagination of thousands of aspiring videographers... with it's ability to capture FULL HD video... bright, articulating 3 inch LCD screen (which comes in really handy when shooting video in the field), and the ability to select from a host of lenses... which is common to DSLRs in general.Professionals prefer DSLRs because they allow for an accurate preview of what they are shooting, at the moment they push the shutter button. DSLRs also have larger sensors than compact point-and-shoot digital cameras (which means a better quality and high-resolution image)...Full HD video and interchangeability of lenses are particularly attractive to wannbe videographers (especially in a sub-$1000 DSLR... like the T3i)... because NOW they can shoot amazing HD video footage for a fraction of the what it would have cost... just a few years ago... PLUS they end up with a great camera for still photography...The Canon T3i (600D)…

I think this question is one that most of us ask ourselves when considering a purchase of this magnitude. The question is not an easy one, and I'm not sure I made the correct decision in purchasing this marvelous piece of technology. Let me put it in perspective; I am a prosumer camera user. I love photography and take a variety of photographs including family pictures, sports photography (see photos at smugmug for gatorowl), and casual street photography. I have owned lots of cameras including film, digital P&S and DSLRs. The 7D is my sixth DSLR (including a DReb XSI that I sold after two weeks). Before the 7D, my main camera was a 40D, which I found to be satisfactory especially the image quality (IQ). The negatives of the 40D are lack of weather sealing, 6.5 frames per second (fps) repeat rate, 1600 ISO max (can be pushed higher) and some focusing issues especially in sports photography. Of course, when comparing with the the DReb series, these "negatives" immediately become positives. The 40D has better construction, much faster repeat rate, and much better focussing (the T1i has, arguably better high ISO capabilities). The 40D compares well with the Nikon D90. Both cameras are very close. The D90 has video, better high ISO performance, and is a little more compact. However, it is a little slower in repeat rate, and I found selecting D90 focus points a bit on the clumsy side. Anyway, because of lens choices, I decided to go Canon. The 50D held no allure mainly…

This is a fantastic camera, and a great first DSLR. I say that because if it is your first, you will not be comparing the control layout with your old XXD or XXXD, and that seems to be an issue with some.Most of my shooting is in M or Av mode. I find the controls easy to work with, and use the top LED and control buttons almost exclusively, but now and then I'll use the q-menu. Over all, I find the controls easy to use.The 18-200 kit lens is useful for outdoor shooting, but for indoor stuff you will want a better prime. I went with an older version of the "nifty fifty" with the metal mount and range meter. Since this is a crop sensor camera, a 50mm lens behaves like an 80mm, so I find myself needing to back away from my subject often. I think a prime in the 20-30mm range and f/1.4 would be useful in a lot of situations. In general, you should determine why you are buying the camera. If you want to take lots of outdoor shots (birds, wildlife etc) get the body only and buy a nice 300M zoom. If you are going to take lots of indoor shots (family gatherings, baby etc) get the body only and a wide aperture prime in the 20-50MM range (a wide aperture lets more light in so you don't need a flash as often, and yields that nice soft focus "bokeh" effect). If you want to be ready to shoot a variety of situations right out of the box and don't mind using the flash indoors, then pick a kit lens and go with it. I would not recommend the 18-55 kit lens though...you will…

Instead of waffling on, I figured I would get a pros and cons list up here, and then conclude with my personal opinion as a wedding photog.PROS- Only a small bump in resolution (because more MPs doesn't equal better pictures!)- Style and body closer to the 1D series, which I much prefer. It looks sleeker and handles better and is more weather-proof- Boosted ISO (although I haven't tested 102,400 if we're being honest)- Exposure compensation has been greatly increased (+-5!!!)- FPS is now at 6, which for any wedding/sports/action photographer is a HUGE plus- The AF system is much faster and more accurate (the old system was EIGHT yrs old!)- 29.97 and 23.976fps video modes are beautiful - just wonderful!- 4GB file partitioning up to 30 minutes!!! This is a HUGE improvement!- CF AND SD card storage/backup, again something taken from the 1Ds, and a LONG time coming and I can still use my (faster) CF.- Full audio control, including headphone jack!NEUTRAL- Slightly larger LCD (by 0.2")- Slightly heavier, but not noticeably- No on-camera flash (which I never use anyway)CONS- HDR mode, really?Overall there is a lot I have to learn still about the new technologies this Mark has to offer. Not all of them will make you a better photographer, and I would highly advise not running out to purchase this as an upgrade to the 5D MkII JUST because you want the latest technologies. That said, some of the improvements made such as the 6FPS shooting and the video improvements make this a fine…

Pros: Extremely fast, very sharp images, very cool features & picture effects.Cons: Would have liked a CF slot as well as SD, noise issues above 3200 iso.I have shot with an a700 for almost 5 years and was very skeptical when the a77 was announced in August as it's replacement. My skepticism was based on 3 things: 1) the image quality of 24mps on a "C" sensor (lots of mps on a small sensor); 2) the quality of the OLED viewfinder; 3) the buffers ability to keep up with the speed of the camera in RAW and 12fps.My concerns were put to rest when I tested the camera and saw the results.1) With the high quality Sony and Tamron lenses I use, the 24mps makes the images extremely sharp and crisp without any noticeable edge distortion. WOW! Just amazing quality.2) The OLED does take some getting use to and can become very pixelated in low light with the "Live View Display - Setting Effects is ON" but the advantages of what it can do when setting the proper exposure, shutter speed etc so that "what you see in the OLED viewfinder is exactly what you get on the card" has changed the way I shoot for the better. When using the camera with my studio lights in Manual mode, I Turn OFF the Live View Display in the menu and OLED operates like a DSLR with all the settings in complete manual mode without any pixelation in the OLED viewfinder or Live View Display.3) The buffer speed when shooting in RAW or in the 12fps mode is not an issue WHEN YOU use a SD 92mb/s…

A little background to give you perspective on the review. I'm an advanced amateur shooting for about 10 years. I also own a Canon 5D Mark II with some L Zoom lenses (24-70 F2.8 and the 70-200 F2.8) and the very good 50mm 1.8 prime and a Fuji X100.I spent a lot of time (probably over 40 hours) researching this camera, reading reviews etc. before buying it on Amazon from a third party seller. I've had it about a week now and shooting with with the Sony 18-200 Zoom Lens (SEL18200). Below are my observations:Good:1. Very small camera body, smaller than my X100 and feels a lot like my old S90 compact in terms of size (this is of course without the lens). With the 18-200 lens its no longer pocketable but still small and very manageable compared to a SLR.2. Great build quality, tough body, I like the styling and I love the handgrip. Just the right size.3. Probably the fastest shutter I have ever used, very little shutter lag.4. Easy to use menus/interface etc. Lots of options and things like sweep panorama and other "gadget" type things work well although unlikely that I will use them much.5. Good battery life. I'm easily getting the 400 or so shots per charge its rated for.6. Electronic viewfinder - The good part is that it works really well, focus is fast even in low light, for the not so good part relating to the viewfinder see below.Not so good1. The electronic viewfinder that gets rave reviews is simply not as good to my eyes as looking through glass. Its a far cry from…

This is very simple, if you are a Nikon shooter looking for a new camera then stop reading and buy this camera. It's that good.HandlingThis camera is brilliant to hold and use. Nikon has done it again and has made the user interface more usable and streamlined. What to change flash modes. Press the flash pop-up button and rotate the control wheel. Sweet. Want to change create and use a User defined mode? There are two. Set your mode up. Go to the menu and save it. To use it rotate the shooting mode dial to U1 or U2. Presto you are there. In the D300 and D700 you to have to setup things in the menu and switch in the menu. Also, there were 2 sets of things you could change and they were not all inclusive. It was all horribly confusing and I never used it. Speaking of shooting modes. There is now one position on the shooting mode dial for scene mode shooting. You change through the different scene modes with the control wheel and the type scene shows up on the back screen. Sweet. I can go on and on but needless to say Nikon have really improved their interface. One caveat, I don't think it is quite up to par with the GH1 to change exposure compensation (IMO the most important control) but still a huge step in the correct direction in handling. I like the handling of the D7000 better than either the D700/300.Low Light ShootingThe D300 wasn't that great for Hi ISO. It shoots clean at 400 ISO and usable up to 1600. (The D90 and D300s were better) The D700 was fantastic. Clean at 1600…

I've been looking at the Canon 5D Mark II for a long time - since before it came out in late 2008. It's taken a while but I finally pulled the trigger.My first Canon SLR was the EOS 650 - the autofocus SLR that "started it all". Then in early 2000's I got the Digital Rebel, then an XTi and quickly after that the Canon 40D.I've liked all the digital SLR's I've used to date but only the 40D reminded me of the build quality and "heft" that my original 650 had. And although you get used to it, the 1.6 crop factor of the sensor size is really a big difference on the wide-angle side.Over time I also upgraded my lenses to the 17-40 F4L, the 24-105 F4L, the 70-200 F2.8L and the 100-300 F4.5-5.6L - with IS in all but the 17-40.I guess I'd call myself an "advanced amateur". My usual approach to photography is to compose a good shot and then crop later to a better composition to get my "keepers".With the 40D and my outfit of lenses I can pretty much do it all - especially on the telephoto side. However, I noticed that when you crop significantly a 10.1MP image, the end result can have significantly reduced image quality.So - I determined a little more megapixels to work with would be helpful.Next, the 40D's max ISO is 1600 but at 800 the noise can be a bit of a distraction. The simple solution is to stay below 800 but that requires a flash or photos of stationary objects in darker settings.So - I determined that something with better light sensitivity…

Some background: I have been an avid photographer for 35 years. My days shooting film are still fondly remembered. I've owned nearly every Canon and Nikon DSLR ever made. I am (was?) a Nikon shooter and a Leica rangefinder shooter, but decided about 6 months ago to give mirrorless systems a try. My first was a Sony NEX-5N and then a Sony NEX-7. Both do well, but are very "digital." My hopes for the X-Pro1 were that it would be a "Leica with digital on the side."It isn't. Unfortunately, it does neither "digital" well nor "analog" well.On the digital side, the autofocus is ... bad. I returned a Sigma SD-1 for similar reasons. It can't focus in all but the best light. When the light gets poor, it hunts.The hybrid optical/electronic viewfinder is a nice idea in theory. But Fuji blew it. The EVF has far too slow a refresh rate. So what you see when you press the shutter isn't what you're going to get at the end. Furthermore, the optical finder's display goes strangely cloudy/foggy when the brightlines are illuminated. This is worse in the dark.The digital side some more: the central control dial is, as Amadou Diallo said on his dpreview "First impressions," "strangely under-utilized." I can't agree more. In most modes, the control dial does nothing. Also, the "Q" menu is a nice idea, but it only goes away if you press the "Q" again. If you press the shutter half way, it does not go away. That's not the…

Don't be fooled; this is NOT an overpriced 5D Mark II upgrade. It's an underpriced baby Canon 1DX.I just got my 5D Mark III and 24-105L today and spent the better part of the afternoon shooting everything in sight. I can safely say, after only a single day, that the 5D Mark III is like a 5D Mark II, Canon 1DX, and Canon 7D had a love affair and this is their child that only got the good genes.I've been a very happy Canon 7D owner for some time. I needed the speed of the AF and all those cross type AF points and the high fps for action shots occasionally and couldn't find anything that came close to the 7D in terms of performance. IQ was never an issue but DOF was for portrait shoots; that buttery bokeh that we love and crave was good but not exceptional regardless of beautiful and expensive L glass. Also, having to calculate in the crop factor was not that fun but I couldn't go to the 5D Mark II because of the slow fps and the slow AF. I didn't want two cameras; I wanted one... And it's here.This camera may not be targeting the 1DX community but I can promise that anyone looking at the 1DX will likely look at the 5D Mark III as a cheap baby 1DX with many overlapping features. I look at it as the camera that convinced me to just sell off my beloved 7D entirely because you can't go back. You can only go forward. This is Australopithecus; we are walking upright.I considered going to Nikon and I tried on the D800 and it's a great camera but ergonomically the 5D Mark III feels great…

I am going start by saying that I rate this lens as five stars _except_ for vignetting on full frame digital sensors at wide open apertures. I use this lens as my standard lens on a 5d. I find this angle of view to be perfect for general all around photography where I will "step in" to the subject to get the shot. This lens requires more interaction with the subject, but I think it results in more dynamic pictures. This lens is razor sharp, visibly sharper than my mainstay 24-70 f2.8 L zoom. On the 5d, I can shoot at f1.4 ISO 400 indoors without a flash which is pretty cool.Now the downside. All wide angles at wide open aperture have light falloff and even this lens demonstrates this tendency. You may not even notice this on many shots, but under some conditions it is very obvious and this condition is more noticeable on digital than film. You can fix this using the distortion filter in PhotoshopCS. If you shoot at f4 or better, the light falloff is not noticeable even under the worse of conditions. The falloff is not visible when you use this lens on an APS digital sensor like the 20d where it has a "normal" angle of view.

Simply put, this is the best all-around lens that Canon manufactures. It produces razor-sharp images with startling color and saturation, and at f/2.8 across the zoom range is capable of shooting in all but the dimmest of lighting conditions. The "L" glass (Canon's professional line of lenses) is simply the best out there, bar none, from any manufacturer. It's pricey, but well worth it.I use this lens for portrait and wedding photography, landscapes, sports, and anything else that doesn't require extreme telephoto. In concert with my EF 70-200mm f/4 L USM lens, I find that these two lenses cover just about everything I ever want to shoot. Of the two lenses, if I could pick only one, it would be the 24-70mm, because it's so versatile and can shoot so many situations (the 70-200mm is also a marvelous, invaluable lens, but at 70mm is limited in wide-angle situations).I can't recommend this lens highly enough. If you can afford the entry fee, you'll have no hint of buyer's remorse once you see the spectacular images this lens produces.

It depends! If you are looking for a comparison between the 5D and the 7D, or if I would have a recommendation of one over the other, this is not for you. This is written from the perspective of someone who upgraded from the xxD series to the 7D. Before I go into a detailed review about the 7D and whether you should upgrade or not, a little background about me to help you guys compare it to your situation. I'm an amateur photographer who does the occasional paid gig, more because I enjoy it rather than for the money. I have been taking pictures for 4 years now, went through 35mm learning curve and then switched to 20D in Mar 06. I have shot with the 40D, but never owned the 30/40/50D. Current lenses include 17-40mm f/4L, 24-70mm f/2.8L, Tamron 28-75 f/2.8, 70-200mm f/4L IS, 50mm f/1.4, 85mm f/1.8, 135mm f/2L & 100mm f/2.8macro. I still have my 35mm EOS 3 which I love and use rarely.Am I happy I upgraded from the 20D?You bet! I believe that one should invest in lenses first and keep the camera for the last (unless of course, if you are a pro). It has been a real upgrade from the 20D. The 7D feels like a slightly bigger and definitely heavier camera than the 20D and I am still getting used to carrying it (this is a review after 24 hrs of the purchase). When I put the 24-70 2.8L on to it, it balanced just beautifully, yes, both are heavy, but they just beautifully balance each other. I could carry the 20D with battery grip in one hand. However, the 7D+24-70L is definitely a…

Pros: Lightning fast AF, Incredible Sharpness, Build Quality, Hood Design, Excellent ISCons: Price $$$$$, a bit big, a little heavy- not too bad.WOW is all I can say. After getting over that I spent so much on a lens, this new machine is absolutely amazing. The image quality is top notch. 100% crops can be printed large and I can see every detail. I was in Miami and took some pictures of the big hotels, and was wondering what the names were. I looked at some of the pictures, zoomed in, and saw everything. Even small signs hundreds and hundreds of feet away. The IS adds a new feeling of confidence. No longer do you have to worry about shaking a tiny bit and the shot being out of focus or a bit blurry. Canon has really created an astounding piece of technology surpassing others(Nikon) in the lens market. The build quality, as expected from an L series lens, is made to withstand extreme conditions. The zoom ring is large and easy to use. The buttons for different IS and af/mf are easy to use/see. The new focusing distance allows you to get closer to your subjects, and can get quite close if some cropping is done. The Af is also excellent, and focuses very fast even in low light. Now, price... yes... I recommend thinking about this purchase for a while. 2500 - as of now, is a lot to spend, but if you have the money and really really want it, I highly recommend it. The pouch that it comes with is very nice and the hood is easy to put on and is a better material than other hoods. It…

This was my first full frame camera. Prior to it I had owned and operated a 40D, 30D and Rebel XTi. I am a wedding and sports photographer primarily, so I have been able to test the 5D Mark II out under both of these conditions.For basketball I used it with AI Servo, Center Point focus, but went into custom settings and enabled the AF assist dots. It worked like a dream, focusing faster and more accurately than my 40D ever had. While no, the FPS aren't ideal for sports, if you can lock on focus like this from the start, you can still achieve amazing sports photographs. Plus the fact that I was able to shoot at ISO 4,000 and not have noticeable noise was just incredible. The shots auto-white balanced correctly too which normally in the arena I shoot at is not what happens on my 40D.My first wedding all I could say all day was wow. I was getting available light photographs I never would have dreamed of before. The new screen also made it incredibly easy to determine if something was in focus or not. When I would switch between my 40D and 5D2 I found out just how spoiled that screen had made me, since the 40D screen looked terrible to me now when previously I thought that had a great screen. I sure was wrong! 920,000 pixels is definitely the way to go on this LCD. I primarily shot with center point (one shot) for my focus and it nailed focus every time. I did a mix up of manual, aperture priority and some program (Program mostly for the formals)What else do I love about it? The…