FS: Mint Canon Camera

[coppertop]

1. Canon Digital Rebel XT Body Only

-MINT Silver (used indoors only, very little usage)
-no marks, no scratches, no wear
-LCD screen protected
-0.2sec startup time
-8 megapixels
-clean, spotless sensor
-usable images upto ISO1600
-fast card access (both read/writes)
-definite improvement over original Rebel, 10D
-identical image quality compared to expensive 20D, 30D
-no noticeable difference in image quality with XTi

-save yourself $$$

#SOLD#

-MADE IN JAPAN!!
-all original packaging and contents included

pm for details

[OzzyOzzman]

I'm trying to figure out if it's a good deal, FS is selling the XT for $899 including a 18-55mm lens

http://www.futureshop.ca/catalog/proddetail.asp?logon=&langid=EN&sku_id=0665000FS10070885&catid=

you're selling the body for $600

and to buy the same lens would be around $230 + GST

http://www.vistek.ca/details/details.aspx?WebCode=219709&CategoryID=CameraLenses

So I guess it would be around $830 if I bought from you....

I just cheked Best Buy and the camera with the lens in on sale for $869

http://www.bestbuy.ca/catalog/proddetail.asp?logon=&langid=EN&sku_id=0926INGFS10070885&catid=20222

[lint]

The lens you're looking at isn't the kit lens. The kit lens doesn't have USM and sells for ~$100 used. $600 body only is a pretty good price. Although I'm not sure how the OP says:

-definite improvement over original Rebel, 10D
-no noticeable difference in image quality with XTi

the rebel and 10D are 6mp, the XT is 8mp, and the new XTi is 10mp. If there's a definite improvement from 6mp to 8mp then the same improvement should exist between 8mp and 10mp.

[coppertop]

Yes the kit lens is 18-55mm is about ~80 CAN even new on eBay because many people don't bother with this lens. You can check eBay.ca. It is plastic lens and not very good unless you use it at f/8 in many opinions and in the midrange.

As for the megapixel debate, here's the brief (and take it from someone whose actually used/owned 3MP to 5MP to 6MP to 8MP to 10MP and made prints and zoomed in on screen many many hours over):

3 MP is rated absolute minimum for 8x10 and you can tell it's "soft" or not enough resolution to catch fine detail on print. It really bites...

You really need a 4 MP to do 4x6s and 5 MP to do 5x7s decently in my experience (not just opinions) for prints. You will likely get away with 5MP for 8x10s, which you often see as samples at the major camera stores.

6 MP is good for 8x10s but if you plan on cropping because not every shot is going to be composed best then you want more.

8 MP has been industry touted as the point where how much more do you need and pack in the same size sensor before you get digital noise? For those non-professional who don't require massive blowups 16x20s, it is the cleanest compromise.

It's over the net with respect to DSLRs between 8 vs 10 MP. 10 MP can capture little more detail but at the expense of less "clean" pictures due to artifacts because the sensor is the same size but packs more. The 10 MP details is important for larger prints at the expense of artifacts ("digital noise").

[TurboMedic]

You may want to read again on the MP debate.
http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/mpmyth.htm

The 8mp sensor is actually smaller than most 6mp sensors. Image quality has little to do with the camera, more to do with who's taking the photos. I'm saying your camera will take great photos in the hands of a good photographer, and crap photos in the hands of a non photographer!

[coppertop]

22.7 x 15.1 mm CMOS sensor Rebel 6 MP
22.2 x 14.8 mm CMOS sensor XT 8 MP
22.2 x 14.8 mm CMOS sensor XTi 10 MP

22.7 x 15.1 mm CMOS sensor 10D 6 MP
22.5 x 15.0 mm CMOS sensor 20D 8 MP
22.5 x 15.0 mm CMOS sensor 30D 8 MP

The CMOS sensor in Canon's EOS line all are within the spec of their respective body design to fit EF, EF-S lens and maintain the 1.6 multiplication factor.

Yeah the image quality is in priority of:

1. hand/settings of the photographer
2. lens aperature, build quality for type of composition
3. CMOS Sensor
4. Color lookup tables algorithms

No. 1 sets the amount light entering the lens by shutter/aperature No. 2 the lens focuses the light for appropriate foreground, background, distance, to beam light to sensor No. 3 is the senstivitiy of each pixel photosensitive diode in providing the cleanest transfer of amount of light detected to electrical input. This electrical input matched to color lookup tables to sRGB color scheme.

Riddle me this... If the photographer is the same and takes a 6 MP and an 8MP, on a complex shot with fine details you tell me which will one will have more detail captured. Then print that at 11x14 or bigger. You tell me which will have sharper cleaner and more detail. Check the net on that guy. This is already noticeable in 8x10s before post processing.

Riddle me twice... In an 8 MP to 10 MP yet again more details are going to be captured but at the sacrifice of the 10 million pixels in the same sized sensor. It is already shown in pixel peeping reviews of more random artifacting and digital noise, or even overblown pixels along sharp edges. There are post processing fixes of course so that them 16x20s are gonna look clean.... or in cropping you want as much useful pixels in the crop as possible. 8 and 10 MP do that.

Riddle me thrice... In every quantative resolution review (not subjective) Canon's line of CMOS sensors have dominated in clean pictures all through to the highest ISOs. Only the Nikon D200 has just matched the XT, 20D, 30D and now XTi generation.

CCDs in prosumer and point-n-shoot harder to show this in clear fact due to no body remaining consistent in size and the lens fitted to the body can change spec frequently.

[coppertop]

Just like the link spells the printer must spit at least 280 dots per inch for minimum "photo" quality. for an 8 x 10 inch shot, you will need:

8 in x 280 dots per in = 2240 pixels
10 in x 280 dots per in = 2800 pixels

then 2240 x 2800 about 6 MP

You need a camera at least 6 MP to make a decent quality print at 8x10s. Trust me I tried 3,4,5,6,8,10 MP cameras. and messed with printing at various 150-360 dpi.

Even with this calculation, my original post is true. I don't bs.

[BerserkerCatSplat]

Originally posted by coppertop


Riddle me this... If the photographer is the same and takes a 6 MP and an 8MP, on a complex shot with fine details you tell me which will one will have more detail captured. Then print that at 11x14 or bigger. You tell me which will have sharper cleaner and more detail. Check the net on that guy. This is already noticeable in 8x10s before post processing.


As with the vast majority of things photographic, it depends. In this case, the limiting factor is generally the lens, no the sensor. With the kit 18-55, the picture quality, even blown up to ridiculous proportions, will be identical. That lens does not have the resolving abaility to match the sensor's ability to pinpoint detail. Only whn you start to get into good primes and higher L glass would the difference become apparent. Also, the difference between 10MP and 8 MP is very little in terms of linear delta, which is the most important factor when comparing megapixels.

Considering the noise issue, noise can be a factor when packing more pixels into smaller space, yes. However, a lot of that, especially in DSLR's with their pixel density, is related directy to the camera's image processing ability. I have seen no tests that show a noticeable amount of noise in the 400D as opposed to the 350D. For all intests and purposes, the noise for both cameras is identical.



You need a camera at least 6 MP to make a decent quality print at 8x10s. Trust me I tried 3,4,5,6,8,10 MP cameras. and messed with printing at various 150-360 dpi.
That's a fallacy and completely untrue. I've seen a 24"X36" print from a 4MP Nikon D2Hs that looked absolutely stunning.

Heck, here's a concrete example of a 24X36 print from a 4MP D2h.

http://www.grafphoto.com/articles/printdogma.html

6MP is not needed to do "decent" 8X10s, that's ridiculous.

[coppertop]

Did I not say in the typical compoitions and "TYPE" of composure what is important in priority:

1. hand/settings of the photographer
2. lens, (aperature/build quality) for type of composition
3. CMOS Sensor (or CCD if you may)
4. Color lookup tables algorithms


The kit lens is no good until f/8 where more often then not, all lens *should* be able to present the sensor with "resolving ability". At that aperature all you're taking are pretty plain 1-dimensional shots because everthing in the focal plane will be in focus. Typically for that kit lens you won't be able to take photojournalistic candids unless you perform a lot of post processing. That's one of the reasons you want L or prime lens and GLASS not plastic to improve ensure image focus or resolvability at wider open aperatures. Of course we all compromise on budget, need, type of pictures we make and there always cases where there are good lens you don't have to spend $$$$ (note 4 $ signs).


The camera's image processing among other things, is complex relating of lookup tables to best match the electrical energy received from each pixel (photo diode) on the CMOS. For noise reduction at high ISO it likely performs comparisons of pixels nearby to further confirm that the the area is a for example "pure black" so that the digital noise pixel can be reverted back to a color close to what its neighbours are.

The image processing can only work with what it receives period. That goes back to how much light is received by the camera reflected off the subject. And how well and sensitve the packed dense pixels (photo diodes) in the sensor can "see" the light.

The link of the example print is a subjective opinion based on the size of print, distance of view and type of shot. Yeah, 4 MP with post processing. IT says 500% usm T0 edge/contrast sharpening and extensive "skilled technical" enlargement methods. Of course it's going to be tack sharp from the distance you view it. If the same conditions were held true, the 6, 8, 10 MP will show more detail with less post-processing.

Man, 75-125% at T3-5 is just about right for the typical shots with people. You over due it with arhitecturals and you get overblown edges and that post-card feeling.

You find these links. There are website reviewers that are not just pixel peepers. And they have controlled settings and shots the cameras with same lens class to show at resolvability and noise.

Now that begs to say at what point will one see these findings in the real world? That is up to the composition and the photographer's needs. At least there the bar is raised now for manufature to think do we need to pack more pixels in the samed-sized sensor for that body or do work on added value benefits and improve color rendition in-camera based on the type of picture to ease the digital camera user's experience?

Here's a idea for University thesis for Engineering right there.

[coppertop]

The tiger is a close up shot (assuming with a zoom lens of course), where the granularity of the 4 MP sensor is "working" on the tiger at a focal point that the sensor can make out enough details. Try a scenic shot from a distance with a lot of fine detail, pine trees, posters with words (not fine print, just words).

I don't bs or am narrow-minded.

[TurboMedic]

Sorry, never meant to hijack your thread....just didn't want anyone to think they'd be making spectacular photos based on the MP alone....

[coppertop]

No worries. I completely agree with wrt practice practice practice on composition and knowing the "tricks" of whatever camera you own to get that great shot and not miss it!