Canon EOS Rebel XSi Review

Background:

The last camera I bought was a Sony DSC-H7B... A camera that I love to hate... Meaning it has so much potential wrapped up in it with the 8MP, 15x Zoom, etc... But with Sony's compression (no options) image quality suffers big-time. A full review may be found here: http://arkansawyer.blogspot.com/2007/07/sony-cybershot-dsc-h7b-review.html

Finally, a few months ago, I decided it was time to do it right... But I knew I couldn't afford to take the leap yet to a Digital SLR camera. I had thought about getting a Sony, but honestly after the point-and-shoot, I wasn't too impressed. The good side was compatibility with my old Minolta SLR... itself a low end film model. But I only had the kit lens and a basic 70-200mm zoom, bought on clearance somewhere, so it's not as if I was losing much if I went with another brand.

I considered Pentax, because they've been around a long time, too, and have great quality equipment... In the end, one of my biggest frustrations has been low light shots... and I started looking for a Pentax vs. Canon review and what I found was mostly reviews of newer models of Nikon and Canon cameras... The review that intrigued me most was a comparison of four top brands in astrophotography.

Ah-ha, thought I. The Canon and Nikon were very similar in quality, and references were made to the fact that they both blew away the competition... I am no astrophotographer, but I have been known to take moon shots occasionally, and eventually maybe I'll get a really good one.

So if I narrowed it down to Canon vs. Nikon - I know more Canon users than Nikon, and my friend Jamie Walling is a firm advocate of Canon. Add to that that I could buy older Canon camera outfits (film) anywhere for a reasonable price these days... and the digitals are dropping in price every week, I sensed a real possibility there.

I started looking and happened to stumble upon an eBay auction that listed a Canon EOS Rebel 2000 35mm camera, a 28-80mm kit lens, a UV filter, a polorizing filter, a Canon branded camera bag, a Canon branded lens cleaning kit..... and I won the auction ($50 + $10 shipping).

To start there, I took some awesome shots with the 2000. Here's one of my favorites:

This was shot with the Rebel 2000, ISO400 film, Sigma 70-300mm macro-zoom.

You can read my review of this camera here:
http://catalog.ebay.com/_W0QQ_fclsZ1QQ_pidZ52119363QQ_tabZ3QQ_uaidZ780597746

I kept having fun with it - thinking, "It's great to have a REAL camera." Finally, though, the cost of film and processing, began to add up. It dawned on me that the newer Canon digital camera could be bought with a payment less than my film processing costs...

So... enter the XSi. I purchased it bundled with the 18-55mm IS EF-S lens. I added a 4GB PNY memory card. I will go into some detail later about my thoughts on each of these items.

This image was captured with the XSi at Wildwood Lake in Harrisburg, with a low-end 70-300mm Sigma telephoto zoom lens attached, on 9-02-2008.

This was taken 8-31-2008, from Negley Park in LeMoyne PA, overlooking City Island and the Harrisburg skyline. The green dome on the lower right side is the state capitol building. The fireworks are a part of the annual Kipona Artsfest that is held on Labor Day weekend at Riverside Park. The lens was the 18-55mm IS kit lens, at 4 seconds, using a tripod for extra stability.

This is a hand-held shot, taken 8-29-2008, at the Halifax High vs. Shippensburg High football game. The runner is a Ship football player... (they ended up beating Halifax 14-3 but they are also a much, much larger team - in a different division - which means that it won't count toward the state championships). The lens was the Sigma 70-300mm telephoto.

This beautiful young lady is "Min", a friend of the family. This photograph was taken at Colonel Denning State Park in Central Pennsylvania, using the 70-300mm Sigma lens. Actually, most of my best shots during that photo shoot were taken with the kit lens... But I did like this one a lot.

I haven't had a chance to use my 50mm f1.8 Canon lens very much, but the few shots I do have with it are leaving me wanting to experiment more. This is one such shot, taken along Powell's Creek on 8-16-2008.

Ahh... waterfalls... One of my favorite scenes... And something I've only taken two trips to take photographs of, or rather - SERIOUS photos of. This was taken on 8-17-2008 at Rickett's Glen State Park in north central Pennsylvania, with the kit 18-55 lens.

And this would be Lucky! I came home on 8-15-2008 to find him relaxing in my chair. He would not get up - just looked at me with that paw resting comfortable under him. I grabbed the camera of course, and shot him till he got tired of it, and finally he got up and left me to my chair.


First impressions:

Now that I've given you world history, and a sampling of photos taken over the past month, now we're to the meat... What can I say?

When I got the package, and unpacked it, I couldn't wait to get started. But of course, batteries must charge and all that. So I stuck the battery on the charger and started reading through the books, installing software, etc.

Surprisingly fast, the battery was charged. I was used to a 3-4 hour wait time on the Sony point and shoot, and about 300 shots per charge. On this one, I charged the battery in an hour or hour and a half, and still haven't run it down in a day's shooting (once filling up a 4GB memory card and then some with RAW+JPG shots). I think I can easily get 600-800 shots as long as I don't overuse the flash and even a respectable number with part time flash (I used the flash some the day I filled the 4GB card).

Confusion? Everything was pretty straightforward till I tried to use the live-view mode. I played with options trying to figure out how to get autofocus to work, and finally gave up in disgust, thinking something was wrong with the camera.

Finally, a day or so later, I got the book out and dug it up. Turns out autofocus in live-view is controlled by the * button, not the shutter button as is the case normally. My guess is it's a way to encourage people to get away from using the live-view, which eats the battery life very quickly.

I have, once or twice, used live-view successfully after figuring it out - but with an optical viewfinder (instead of the digital one on the old Sony or my prior Olympus pointandshoot), I don't find much value in the live view mode. I prefer the viewfinder, actually.

Image Quality:

This is one area where I definitely cannot complain... I have had to learn the camera's foibles... But those are mostly in terms of overcoming my point-and-shoot bad habits, not in any problems with the camera itself.

For example, I used to lock the Olympus into ISO 64, it's lowest setting. The Sony, ISO 80. This camera's lowest ISO is 100... But I've learned not to be afraid of ISO 400. Indeed, even 800 or 1600 has a remarkable clarity... I have shot a speeding roller coaster (not pictured here) and gotten very sharp images at 1600.

I did try a portrait at 1600 and there was enough noise to distract from her skin, but at 400 the noise was almost invisible.

I feel like I can easily get 20x30 shots with this camera. I've never had a camera capable of that.

And I can't wait to see a print in that size to see how it looks.


Some of the things I don't like (and these are very minor things):

1) All the auto modes do not allow capture in RAW mode. That said, I've learned over the past year or two to use Program mode a lot, and with this camera, some of the other manual settings... so really I can shoot RAW+JPG as much as I want. Sometimes I go back to the default AUTO modes just for a reality check.

For example, if I try a portrait shot, in Portrait mode, and the camera chooses to take it in auto mode at ISO 400, f4.5, and 1/250 second, then that gives me a starting point in the manual modes...

2) Live-view could be much more user friendly. No need to go into more detail - it's outlined above. That said, I am not a huge fan of live view anyways, so... *shrug* No big deal.

3) The kit lens is an EF-S instead of EF mount. That means it works great with this camera, but not with my 35mm Rebel 2000.


Things I really like about the camera:

1) Image Quality. Overall it is superb. The option to shoot in RAW mode added to the Canon processing software is a very powerful addition to the usability of this camera. The RAW mode has already saved the day a few times - it captures tons more detail than straight JPG shooting as most point-and-shoots support. At the end of the day, this is the most important feature of any camera. Period. And this one is a winner in this department. The only shots I've really been disappointed in were when I was using the 300mm zoom at close distances without using macro mode.... I had some focusing issues that I think were more the lens and photographer's fault than the camera's.

2) Live-view. It has it. Although not always useful, I do look forward to using my laptop as my LCD screen and try some portrait shots indoors with it.

3) The kit lens is image stabilized. I tried turning IS off and on and did various shots - and it definitely does a great job.

4) Lens compatibility. All Canon EF type lenses work in this camera. I did use the kit lens that came with my 35mm and got some good shots out of it.


There's more that can be said, but in the end, this is a great camera outfit. I could go on and on - but the photos speak for themselves... Feel free to let me know what you think of this review... and any questions you may have, I'll be glad to try and answer.