Help with camera cecision

[Kristi2k]

My current camera just stopped working, it's out of warrenty I tried to fix it with no avail.

I'm thinking about purchasing either the Canon S3 IS or the Canon Digital Rebel XT. The XT is $200 more, which isn't bad for an SLR. BUT, the XT does not have the zoom distance or image stabilizer that the S3 has.

I'm trying to think of all the pros and cons. What are your opinions?

 

[shortylickens]

You'll probably get more help in the Peripherals section but......

The Digital Rebel is worth the cost all around.
The S3 has a handful of nice features and for 200 bucks less, thats probably what I would get. If I needed something really nice, I would go ahead and splurge on the 10D.

 

[tfinch2]

Originally posted by: shortylickens
You'll probably get more help in the Peripherals section but......

The Digital Rebel is worth the cost all around.
The S3 has a handful of nice features and for 200 bucks less, thats probably what I would get. If I needed something really nice, I would go ahead and splurge on the 10D.

Are you kidding? LOL

 

[pontifex]

Originally posted by: Kristi2k
My current camera just stopped working, it's out of warrenty I tried to fix it with no avail.

I'm thinking about purchasing either the Canon S3 IS or the Canon Digital Rebel XT. The XT is $200 more, which isn't bad for an SLR. BUT, the XT does not have the zoom distance or image stabilizer that the S3 has.

I'm trying to think of all the pros and cons. What are your opinions?

isn't that all handled by the lenses? at leats the zoom anyway?

 

[pontifex]

Originally posted by: tfinch2

Originally posted by: shortylickens
You'll probably get more help in the Peripherals section but......

The Digital Rebel is worth the cost all around.
The S3 has a handful of nice features and for 200 bucks less, thats probably what I would get. If I needed something really nice, I would go ahead and splurge on the 10D.

Are you kidding? LOL

thats what i was thinking too

 

[Ika]

If you want to get into serious photography, pick the XT. This is assuming you're making an investment and have lots of money to drop on lenses, of course.

If you don't have a whole lot of money, the S3 is a good choice - but the S2 would probably be a better choice. You can get it for around $100 less, and image quality is nigh the same. The only real advantages the S3 has over the S2 are 1 more megapixel, black color, better video quality, and other random things.

 

[Kristi2k]

I looked into the S2, it's not worth the $100 less to me. I take a lot of outdoor photos, I like how I can focus easier with the XT, but I'm turned off by the $400 lense I'd need for the anti-shake and zoom.

 

[fuzzybabybunny]

Originally posted by: Aflac
If you want to get into serious photography, pick the XT. This is assuming you're making an investment and have lots of money to drop on lenses, of course.

If you don't have a whole lot of money, the S3 is a good choice - but the S2 would probably be a better choice. You can get it for around $100 less, and image quality is nigh the same. The only real advantages the S3 has over the S2 are 1 more megapixel, black color, better video quality, and other random things.

Key phrase here.

 

[shortylickens]

Originally posted by: pontifex

Originally posted by: tfinch2

Originally posted by: shortylickens
You'll probably get more help in the Peripherals section but......

The Digital Rebel is worth the cost all around.
The S3 has a handful of nice features and for 200 bucks less, thats probably what I would get. If I needed something really nice, I would go ahead and splurge on the 10D.

Are you kidding? LOL

thats what i was thinking too

Well, so far I'm right. Out of 5 responses only one was actual advice.
EDIT: Nevermind. We finally got some helpful discussion going.

 

[torpid]

If you can live without IS you can get a decent starter 75-300mm zoom for $150 or less. Plus the canon mega rebate deal is still good through tomorrow. I'm not sure what you will be using it for, but I rarely find that I wish I had IS. I don't use the 75-300 in low light situations much, so I can just up the shutter speed and IS becomes somewhat less necessary.

 

[pontifex]

Originally posted by: shortylickens

Originally posted by: pontifex

Originally posted by: tfinch2

Originally posted by: shortylickens
You'll probably get more help in the Peripherals section but......

The Digital Rebel is worth the cost all around.
The S3 has a handful of nice features and for 200 bucks less, thats probably what I would get. If I needed something really nice, I would go ahead and splurge on the 10D.

Are you kidding? LOL

thats what i was thinking too

Well, so far I'm right. Out of 5 responses only one was actual advice.
EDIT: Nevermind. We finally got some helpful discussion going.

10 posts in peripherals about cameras...6 pages of posts in ot about cameras...yeah...

 

[Feldenak]

Originally posted by: Kristi2k
I looked into the S2, it's not worth the $100 less to me. I take a lot of outdoor photos, I like how I can focus easier with the XT, but I'm turned off by the $400 lense I'd need for the anti-shake and zoom.

Get. A. Tripod.

 

[Feldenak]

Originally posted by: Aflac
If you want to get into serious photography, pick the XT. This is assuming you're making an investment and have lots of money to drop on lenses, of course.

If you don't have a whole lot of money, the S3 is a good choice - but the S2 would probably be a better choice. You can get it for around $100 less, and image quality is nigh the same. The only real advantages the S3 has over the S2 are 1 more megapixel, black color, better video quality, and other random things.

You don't have to drop a ton of cash to get a couple decent lenses and a body. I think I've spent ~$1500 for my D50 kit

 

[Kristi2k]

Originally posted by: Feldenak

Originally posted by: Kristi2k
I looked into the S2, it's not worth the $100 less to me. I take a lot of outdoor photos, I like how I can focus easier with the XT, but I'm turned off by the $400 lense I'd need for the anti-shake and zoom.

Get. A. Tripod.

When I'm hiking or in the woods that's not always the best choice.

 

[Ika]

Originally posted by: Feldenak

Originally posted by: Aflac
If you want to get into serious photography, pick the XT. This is assuming you're making an investment and have lots of money to drop on lenses, of course.

If you don't have a whole lot of money, the S3 is a good choice - but the S2 would probably be a better choice. You can get it for around $100 less, and image quality is nigh the same. The only real advantages the S3 has over the S2 are 1 more megapixel, black color, better video quality, and other random things.

You don't have to drop a ton of cash to get a couple decent lenses and a body. I think I've spent ~$1500 for my D50 kit

Perspective, perspective. I got my S3 for $400 and I have a 38-432 lens on it. For me, $400 was a lot, so people like me can't justify spending over $1k on photography.

I'm a big urban photography and landscapes fan, and the S3 has been a real gem for me thus far. If I took bug pics I would be suffering, but it's a good thing I hate bugs.

 

[shortylickens]

Originally posted by: Kristi2k

Originally posted by: Feldenak

Originally posted by: Kristi2k
I looked into the S2, it's not worth the $100 less to me. I take a lot of outdoor photos, I like how I can focus easier with the XT, but I'm turned off by the $400 lense I'd need for the anti-shake and zoom.

Get. A. Tripod.

When I'm hiking or in the woods that's not always the best choice.

Carry around a beanbag.

 

[Feldenak]

Originally posted by: Kristi2k

Originally posted by: Feldenak

Originally posted by: Kristi2k
I looked into the S2, it's not worth the $100 less to me. I take a lot of outdoor photos, I like how I can focus easier with the XT, but I'm turned off by the $400 lense I'd need for the anti-shake and zoom.

Get. A. Tripod.

When I'm hiking or in the woods that's not always the best choice.

Monopods are relatively lightweight and not unconvenient to carry around.

 

[Kristi2k]

Originally posted by: Aflac

Originally posted by: Feldenak

Originally posted by: Aflac
If you want to get into serious photography, pick the XT. This is assuming you're making an investment and have lots of money to drop on lenses, of course.

If you don't have a whole lot of money, the S3 is a good choice - but the S2 would probably be a better choice. You can get it for around $100 less, and image quality is nigh the same. The only real advantages the S3 has over the S2 are 1 more megapixel, black color, better video quality, and other random things.

You don't have to drop a ton of cash to get a couple decent lenses and a body. I think I've spent ~$1500 for my D50 kit

Perspective, perspective. I got my S3 for $400 and I have a 38-432 lens on it. For me, $400 was a lot, so people like me can't justify spending over $1k on photography.

I'm a big urban photography and landscapes fan, and the S3 has been a real gem for me thus far. If I took bug pics I would be suffering, but it's a good thing I hate bugs.

Do you happen to have any photos online that you've taken with the Canon S3 IS?

 

[Ika]

Originally posted by: Kristi2k
Do you happen to have any photos online that you've taken with the Canon S3 IS?

Not of my real photography pics, but I do have a web album. Currently I only have four closeup pics and a pic of a cool spider I found.

picasaweb.google.com/submergence

I'll be adding some stuff later when I get a good collection.

 

[Feldenak]

Originally posted by: Aflac

Originally posted by: Feldenak

Originally posted by: Aflac
If you want to get into serious photography, pick the XT. This is assuming you're making an investment and have lots of money to drop on lenses, of course.

If you don't have a whole lot of money, the S3 is a good choice - but the S2 would probably be a better choice. You can get it for around $100 less, and image quality is nigh the same. The only real advantages the S3 has over the S2 are 1 more megapixel, black color, better video quality, and other random things.

You don't have to drop a ton of cash to get a couple decent lenses and a body. I think I've spent ~$1500 for my D50 kit

Perspective, perspective. I got my S3 for $400 and I have a 38-432 lens on it. For me, $400 was a lot, so people like me can't justify spending over $1k on photography.

I'm a big urban photography and landscapes fan, and the S3 has been a real gem for me thus far. If I took bug pics I would be suffering, but it's a good thing I hate bugs.

Well, yes $1500 can be alot...I look at it more as an investment in a hobby that I am learning to appreciate (and learning in general 😉 )

 

[996GT2]

Digital rebel XT definitely worth it if you are into any kind of serious photography; a friend has one and the variety of lenses for that camera really lets it do many tasks with ease. If you don't want to learn serious digital photography tho then the S3 is by no means a bad choice, although it's not really meant for the serious photographer or enthusiast.

 

[Ika]

Originally posted by: Feldenak
Well, yes $1500 can be alot...I look at it more as an investment in a hobby that I am learning to appreciate (and learning in general 😉 )

Yeah, I almost convinced myself to get into SLR photog a while back with those reasons exactly, but then I realized I'll be dead broke.

A friend of mine (Mrvile) is nuts about photography and has spent at least $3k on all his photo gear. He's a big bug photog though, and his pics are sooooo good.

In any case, I picked up an S3, which DOES have fully manual controls. If I ever want to get into SLRs again, I'll at least have some knowledge of f-stops, shutter speed, ISO, and manual focusing.

 

[Kristi2k]

I think I'll stick with the S3 IS, thank you everyone for the replies.