Art and Photography

Return XT and get A200?

  • Last Updated:
  • Jul 20th, 2008 11:32 pm
Tags:
None
[OP]
Deal Addict
User avatar
Jan 5, 2006
4913 posts
212 upvotes
Toronto

Return XT and get A200?

hey guys,

I am thinking about returning my Rebel XT (paid $560 at Walmart) since I saw the hot deal for the Rebel XT available for only $299 :( . Question is; do you guys consider the price of Rebel XT dropping that soon in Canada or if I can get my Rebel XT cheaper? 30 days is on monday so I would appreciate the opinions.

Also is the Sony A200 considered a step op from the Rebel XT? It comes with a better lens, has IS built in, and competes with the XTi; so would it make sense to return my XT and purchase an A200?

I like the Rebel XT; no regrets just that the price drop is kind of making me reconsider along with if the A200 is the better value.

Thanks.
15 replies
Sr. Member
User avatar
Jan 3, 2006
788 posts
1 upvote
Asad_A203 wrote:
Jul 20th, 2008 1:07 am
hey guys,

I am thinking about returning my Rebel XT (paid $560 at Walmart) since I saw the hot deal for the Rebel XT available for only $299 :( . Question is; do you guys consider the price of Rebel XT dropping that soon in Canada or if I can get my Rebel XT cheaper? 30 days is on monday so I would appreciate the opinions.

Also is the Sony A200 considered a step op from the Rebel XT? It comes with a better lens, has IS built in, and competes with the XTi; so would it make sense to return my XT and purchase an A200?

I like the Rebel XT; no regrets just that the price drop is kind of making me reconsider along with if the A200 is the better value.

Thanks.
I was playing with my friend's Canon the other day (he got it at the FS $399 Boxing Day sale.)

I must say, I didn't like it compared to mine, one huge thing was the smaller screen, it made it tough at times to tell if you were getting decent images (still happens on the Sony, but to less of an extent)

Of course if you go with the Sony you have less of an upgrade path , but I picked up all the lenses I think I'm going to need for quite some time for decently cheap. I'd say at least return since XT's go for so much cheaper when they are on sale, but that's more of an ethical thing I guess.
[OP]
Deal Addict
User avatar
Jan 5, 2006
4913 posts
212 upvotes
Toronto
TurboRegal wrote:
Jul 20th, 2008 1:46 am
I was playing with my friend's Canon the other day (he got it at the FS $399 Boxing Day sale.)

I must say, I didn't like it compared to mine, one huge thing was the smaller screen, it made it tough at times to tell if you were getting decent images (still happens on the Sony, but to less of an extent)

Of course if you go with the Sony you have less of an upgrade path , but I picked up all the lenses I think I'm going to need for quite some time for decently cheap. I'd say at least return since XT's go for so much cheaper when they are on sale, but that's more of an ethical thing I guess.
Yeah I noticed that as well; reason why most of my pictured came out blurry or I didn't catch everything (I guess bad for a newbie since I guess your suppose to examine everything in your viewfinder).

For upgrade; I don't see myself upgrading from an entry level DSLR to a full blown DSLR (too much $$ and l lack the creative talent) anytime soon but I guess it is kind of nice to have a cache of lens i can use later on.

Only thing I am concerned about the Sony is if the image quality is onpar as the Rebel and if there is more noise at higher ISOs (some reviews seem to indicate this).

I want to return the camera but I am hoping there will be another sale soon since I love this camera.
[OP]
Deal Addict
User avatar
Jan 5, 2006
4913 posts
212 upvotes
Toronto
Ah I think I might keep the camera; apparently the other store is selling refurbs for $299 and they just bumped the price to $499. I got my camera for $460 ($50 for memory card and $30 for tripod) before taxes but is new.
Deal Guru
User avatar
Dec 3, 2004
10943 posts
419 upvotes
Markham/Mississauga
Read the online reviews on how effective Sony's built in shake reduction really is and then decide yourself.

Thus far, based on sales numbers and user preferences, in-body shake reduction in SLR has not impressed many.
Member
May 27, 2007
288 posts
3 upvotes
New Westminster
CSAgent wrote:
Jul 20th, 2008 2:40 am
Read the online reviews on how effective Sony's built in shake reduction really is and then decide yourself.

Thus far, based on sales numbers and user preferences, in-body shake reduction in SLR has not impressed many.
Do you have links to such reviews saying that it is not effective?

I read in a review somewhere that the longer the focal length, the less effective it is.

I think that ideally you would have the option of both built in and lens IS. You could then use the built in IS for lenses without IS and turn it off for lenses that do have IS.
Deal Fanatic
Jul 30, 2003
5418 posts
365 upvotes
Toronto
I am not an expert but here is my take on it:

After "XT" they have released "XTi" > "XSi" > "XS"

so yes, price will be dropping soon for XT from $299 (but nothing major) - as it does for all electronics overtime.

I will siggest return it and buy it at $299. In the longer run you will be more happy with Canon. Most important aspects of taking a good picture is the photographer and the lens. Camera is not all that important (for amateurs / semi pros). Canon has the largest (and somewhat) best selection of lens and biggest after-market to buy / sell lens. Hence, you will be happier in the long run.

Now as for IS. I haven't tried Canon "L" lens IS (this is suppose to be THE BEST image stabilazations in the market). For everything else, Nikon VR, Sony, Canon regular IS ... none of that impresses me much. I would rather have a sharper lens with low f-stop (aka low aperature value).

General rule of thumb is that IS / VR will let you lower two f-stop steps. Which generally isn't significant improvment.

Disclaimer: The above thumb of rule is for regular lens, super zoom (tele) lenses may require IS (depending on what kind of photography you want to do)
For Sale:
  • DSLR Slider
Deal Fanatic
Jul 30, 2003
5418 posts
365 upvotes
Toronto
@ Natsuiro: The IS is either in lens or in body. I don't know any hardware that has it in both. Personally, I wouldn't want to get something that has it in both - it will complicate the lens / body combo and will open a new pandora's box for us amateurs to see what lens is compatible with what (assuming they will make it work technically in the first place)

Nikon actually have similar issues that simple things such as Auto-Focus doesn't work with all lenses, you have to check if auto-focus is compatible with body (although getting irrelevant if you are sticking with newer equipment only - but still something to keep in mind)

Details: http://www.bythom.com/lensacronyms.htm
For Sale:
  • DSLR Slider
Deal Addict
Oct 1, 2003
2235 posts
71 upvotes
I own a Sony a100. Have had it for over a year and have been very happy. The a200 is a light upgrade to the a100, my understanding is image quality is about the same. I'm pretty sure the Canon is a good camera as well. I was actually going to get a Canon but got the Sony because it was about half as much with a better kit lens.

I have since purchased two additional lenses, both old Minoltas and I have been really happy.

But my opinion is in the end it doesn't matter what name is branded on your camera. It's up to your eye and your creativity to get good pictures. I don't look at pictures and ask "I wonder what camera the guy used to take that?"
Deal Addict
User avatar
Dec 22, 2005
3286 posts
41 upvotes
Ottawa
jb22 wrote:
Jul 20th, 2008 3:09 pm
I don't look at pictures and ask "I wonder what camera the guy used to take that?"
i say "I wonder what camera the guy used to take that?" all the time and continue to. equipment plays a huge role in creating a stunning picture. maybe i'm a gear wh0re but that's the whole reason i got into dslr photography! i always loved taking photos, but had always used a P&S and been bound it's limited capacity.

that being said, just because you have the right equipment doesn't mean your pictures will automatically be stellar quality. technique, creativity, and composition play an integral part as well.
Member
May 27, 2007
288 posts
3 upvotes
New Westminster
PrinceMS wrote:
Jul 20th, 2008 2:26 pm
@ Natsuiro: The IS is either in lens or in body. I don't know any hardware that has it in both. Personally, I wouldn't want to get something that has it in both - it will complicate the lens / body combo and will open a new pandora's box for us amateurs to see what lens is compatible with what (assuming they will make it work technically in the first place)
I know that there isn't a current offering with both. What I meant was that it would be ideal if such a camera was created with both built in IS and the option of IS lenses.
Deal Guru
User avatar
Sep 3, 2003
12056 posts
377 upvotes
Toronto
CSAgent wrote:
Jul 20th, 2008 2:40 am
Read the online reviews on how effective Sony's built in shake reduction really is and then decide yourself.

Thus far, based on sales numbers and user preferences, in-body shake reduction in SLR has not impressed many.
Where are you getting this info?

In-body stabilization has caught up quickly compared to in-lens solutions. Both have their pros and cons, but both systems can now be considered equal in terms of performance and benefits. Olympus on the other hand is a little optimistic and claims a whole five stops... which is a little hard to prove. 3.5-4 stops on a good in-body stabilization system is very, very possible. I do it all the time. I've said this before: big telephotos that feature IS in the lens do not shift a massive element around to provide stabilization. Most of the time, a smaller element by the mount (which isn't much bigger than the sensor) is shifted.

The only in-lens and sensor-shift stabilized DSLR today is the Olympus E-510/E-520 + Panasonic L10 kit lens combo. Putting the two systems together is not very effective.

Also, the new consumer Alphas are selling like hotcakes. As far as I know, they're already bigger than Pentax and Olympus.

In regards to the OP's question... I like the A200 more, but that's me. The XT is still a very capable camera.
Deal with it.
Deal Guru
User avatar
Mar 1, 2004
12862 posts
1466 upvotes
Pickering
My first reaction is to get the one with the bigger screen and more options.
My second reaction is to look at my 20D pictures and remind myself that the screen was as small and it had less features than my 40D. The major difference between the 20D and 40D was faster autofocus and deeper buffer and liveview. So in essence the pictures are no better, just easier to take. Every camera is not perfect and has shortcomings or quirks. Experience will teach you to compensate. The owner of my 20D cannot take as sharp of a picture as I can, because I am more experienced with the camera.

As an aside, I do not care who used what product to take what picture. Go to Flickr and see people with cameras way inferior to yours that have an eye for a good opportunity and know how to use their camera, take possibly better pictures than you or I ever will.

Either way the decision is yours, but I can guarantee that if you are not satisfied with the pictures, the problem is most likely not the camera.
[OP]
Deal Addict
User avatar
Jan 5, 2006
4913 posts
212 upvotes
Toronto
AudiDude wrote:
Jul 20th, 2008 8:43 pm
My first reaction is to get the one with the bigger screen and more options.
My second reaction is to look at my 20D pictures and remind myself that the screen was as small and it had less features than my 40D. The major difference between the 20D and 40D was faster autofocus and deeper buffer and liveview. So in essence the pictures are no better, just easier to take. Every camera is not perfect and has shortcomings or quirks. Experience will teach you to compensate. The owner of my 20D cannot take as sharp of a picture as I can, because I am more experienced with the camera.

As an aside, I do not care who used what product to take what picture. Go to Flickr and see people with cameras way inferior to yours that have an eye for a good opportunity and know how to use their camera, take possibly better pictures than you or I ever will.

Either way the decision is yours, but I can guarantee that if you are not satisfied with the pictures, the problem is most likely not the camera.
I'm in no way unsatisfied with the camera; I am just wondering if the A200 is a better buy. The 350D biggest limiting factor is nothing with it; but me. I just was wondering if the A200 is worth more than the Rebel XT since I paid pretty much the same for them. It is kind of like buying a Xbox 360 and having the price drop and the Xbox 360 Elite coming out the same month at the price you paid; you are pretty satisfied but you want to get your money's worth (crappy comparision).

Well the hot deal posted was a refurbished (and are sold out); so i think I am going to stick with the XT. I just didn't want to buy a camera and have it drop $200 in less than a month.
[OP]
Deal Addict
User avatar
Jan 5, 2006
4913 posts
212 upvotes
Toronto
KorruptioN wrote:
Jul 20th, 2008 8:33 pm
Where are you getting this info?

In-body stabilization has caught up quickly compared to in-lens solutions. Both have their pros and cons, but both systems can now be considered equal in terms of performance and benefits. Olympus on the other hand is a little optimistic and claims a whole five stops... which is a little hard to prove. 3.5-4 stops on a good in-body stabilization system is very, very possible. I do it all the time. I've said this before: big telephotos that feature IS in the lens do not shift a massive element around to provide stabilization. Most of the time, a smaller element by the mount (which isn't much bigger than the sensor) is shifted.

The only in-lens and sensor-shift stabilized DSLR today is the Olympus E-510/E-520 + Panasonic L10 kit lens combo. Putting the two systems together is not very effective.

Also, the new consumer Alphas are selling like hotcakes. As far as I know, they're already bigger than Pentax and Olympus.

In regards to the OP's question... I like the A200 more, but that's me. The XT is still a very capable camera.
Thanks for the reply. Any reason you find the the A200 to be better than the XT besides the larger screen and the 2 extra MP (I heard if you don't use the full resolution you will get more noise than with an XT due to it being less MP)? 30 days is over today so I guess I will keep the XT but never hurts to hear it.

Top