Canon 450D and EF Professional lenses
Discussion
Looks interesting:
"With 12.2 Megapixels, 3.5fps continuous shooting, wide-area 9-point AF system and a 3.0” LCD with Live View mode, not to mention the EOS Integrated Cleaning System, the EOS 450D is compact and lightweight with an unprecedented level of image quality and versatility."
Professional EF Lens Range
Two new professional EF lenses: the EF200mm f/2L IS USM and EF800mm f/5.6L IS USM. Equipped with Canon’s latest 4-stop Image Stabilizer, both models incorporate L-series lens optics and construction to deliver class-leading performance and operability.
Products: EF200mm f/2L IS USM, EF800mm f/5.6L IS USM
Apologies if this is a repost.
R2TR
"With 12.2 Megapixels, 3.5fps continuous shooting, wide-area 9-point AF system and a 3.0” LCD with Live View mode, not to mention the EOS Integrated Cleaning System, the EOS 450D is compact and lightweight with an unprecedented level of image quality and versatility."
Professional EF Lens Range
Two new professional EF lenses: the EF200mm f/2L IS USM and EF800mm f/5.6L IS USM. Equipped with Canon’s latest 4-stop Image Stabilizer, both models incorporate L-series lens optics and construction to deliver class-leading performance and operability.
Products: EF200mm f/2L IS USM, EF800mm f/5.6L IS USM
Apologies if this is a repost.
R2TR
http://www.dpreview.com/news/0801/08012403canoneos...
One of these??? Havent even heard of the 450D... is this the replacement for the 350D and 400D, because i thought thats what the 40D was.
EDIT.. actually read the article... ignore the above. Looks quite a good spec, although alot more exspensive than the 400D, and am i reading right on the specs to what card storage it uses.... SD / SDHC card?? No CF?
One of these??? Havent even heard of the 450D... is this the replacement for the 350D and 400D, because i thought thats what the 40D was.
EDIT.. actually read the article... ignore the above. Looks quite a good spec, although alot more exspensive than the 400D, and am i reading right on the specs to what card storage it uses.... SD / SDHC card?? No CF?
Edited by Goldeeno on Thursday 24th January 09:42
te51cle said:
One little "feature" of the 450D that I was surprised by is that it uses SD rather than CF cards. All very good for those upgrading from compact cameras but rather off-putting for those of us already using Canon DSLRs.
How many will move from a 300/350/400d to a 450d?Very few.
Tho canon need to fil in a lot of holes in the product line now. A new low end entry dSLR too.
te51cle said:
One little "feature" of the 450D that I was surprised by is that it uses SD rather than CF cards. All very good for those upgrading from compact cameras but rather off-putting for those of us already using Canon DSLRs.
Why should someone be bothered by this, when SD memory prices are so cheap these days?If I wanted an entry dSLR and was looking an Canon v Nikon, the 12MP would probably swing it in favour of Canon. Also, they will market it to point & shoot users looking to go dSLR.
(I've a 40D, so no axe to grind here btw.)
RobDickinson said:
DanH said:
Very impressive spec and surprising that its 12mpx when the newly released 40d is only 10. Can we expect a 50d in a couple of months?
Probably, the 40d was out 6-8 months or so after the 400d - and has lagged behind by a bit.Wonder what they'll pack in tho.
Famous Graham said:
RobDickinson said:
Famous Graham said:
Don't ignore Sony. Their recent offerings aren't too shabby. Particularly since they can use Minolta lenses. And have IS in-body.
Uh no, I will ignore sony thanks. They are starting to show some decent results.
- ahem* Do you happen to own one?
DanH said:
Famous Graham said:
RobDickinson said:
Famous Graham said:
Don't ignore Sony. Their recent offerings aren't too shabby. Particularly since they can use Minolta lenses. And have IS in-body.
Uh no, I will ignore sony thanks. They are starting to show some decent results.
- ahem* Do you happen to own one?
Rob - ah ok, I take your point. So you ignore Nikon too, presumably (assuming I got that right, replace Nikon with Canon if not).
My point is, that the two "Big ones" are being caught up. Sony now have IS in-camera. So you don't spend more for an IS lens. Their sensor resolution was higher until this last round of Canon releases.
I don't think they can be ignored any more, they're driving development as much as anyone else.
In camera IS is usefull but isnt as good as on lens IS
Resolution I can live without, give me low noise.
I wouldnt say sony are catching up, no full frame camera for one.
Nikon certainly are catching canon tho with no real direct model for model copmpetition above the entry space its realy hard to say.
Canon still remain the benchmark for SLR lenses, speed and image quality. AFIK on the 450d they've concentraited too much on toys(and headline grabing megapixels) and not enough on IQ.
Resolution I can live without, give me low noise.
I wouldnt say sony are catching up, no full frame camera for one.
Nikon certainly are catching canon tho with no real direct model for model copmpetition above the entry space its realy hard to say.
Canon still remain the benchmark for SLR lenses, speed and image quality. AFIK on the 450d they've concentraited too much on toys(and headline grabing megapixels) and not enough on IQ.
In fact, here's his post from elsewhere - feel free to deconstruct, I'd love to have some more ammunition (he's unusually combative about this and deserves to be taken down a peg or two). I will, of course, claim any arguments as my own 
Background:
Sony released their first dSLR in late 2006, the Alpha 100. It was an entry-level camera that competed head-on with the Canon 400D and Nikon D40X.
1. Both of those cameras lacked some of the Alpha 100's key features - wireless flash, in-camera image stabilisation, and the dynamic range optimiser.
2. Whilst all three were 10MP cameras, the Alpha 100 captured more actual detail from those pixels than either of it's two competitors.
3. Unfortunately, the Sony Alpha 100 suffered worse image noise levels at ISO 800 and much-worse image noise at ISO 1600. Part of the problem was that the Alpha 100 tended to under-exposre whereas the other two cameras tended to over-expose, producing too-bright but less noisy images.
4. The Alpha 100 also had a very loud shutter/mirror noise, and had a few other quirks which never got resolved. No more than it's competition - yet - enough for Canikon fans to criticise it's design.
The Sony Alpha 100 was better than the Canon 400D and Nikon D40X in some respects, worse in other respects.
Mid-way through 2007, Sony released their second dSLR, the Alpha 700. This is a semi-pro camera that competes with other higher-level models (the Canon 40D, Nikon D300, or Olympus E-3).
Apart from the Alpha 700 being a higher-level model (with some additional features which are much better), Sony had also dramatically improved many of the core technologies in the Alpha series... They reduced the image noise at higher ISOs, made the shutter much quieter, the AF faster and more accurate, the exposure and flash metering more reliable, and importantly they improved the ergonomics of the camera.
New Stuff
Sony has now released a new entry-level dSLR to replace the Alpha 100, which is the Sony Alpha 200.
The new model is "only" an incremental evolution of the old model. It's images are less noisy at higher ISOs, it's shutter/mirror mechanism is much quiete, it's autofocus is faster and more accurate, and it's exposure and flash metering is more consistent. It also has a larger LCD, more effective image stabilisation, better ergonomics, and an accurate (%) battery life display.
The Sony Alpha 200 is equal to or better than both the Canon 400D and Nikon D40X in all respects. It still has all of the features which neither of those cameras do not have. It no longer has the flaws which it's predecessor had.
However it is just an evolutionary improvement on it's predecessor, nothing really big has changed... except...
The Big Difference = Cost
The Sony Alpha 100 was released late in 2006 with an RRP of £600, whereas the Sony Alpha 200 has an RRP of £370!!
Not only does the new camera out-spec both the Nikon D40X and Canon 400D but, with that RRP, it's RRP is about the same price as their current discounted street price. It's street price will be lower, and in a couple of months it is likely to be a LOT cheaper. (New cameras reduce in street price by about 10% of their price per month, whereas older cameras tend to stay at the same street price for much longer.)
Background:
Sony released their first dSLR in late 2006, the Alpha 100. It was an entry-level camera that competed head-on with the Canon 400D and Nikon D40X.
1. Both of those cameras lacked some of the Alpha 100's key features - wireless flash, in-camera image stabilisation, and the dynamic range optimiser.
2. Whilst all three were 10MP cameras, the Alpha 100 captured more actual detail from those pixels than either of it's two competitors.
3. Unfortunately, the Sony Alpha 100 suffered worse image noise levels at ISO 800 and much-worse image noise at ISO 1600. Part of the problem was that the Alpha 100 tended to under-exposre whereas the other two cameras tended to over-expose, producing too-bright but less noisy images.
4. The Alpha 100 also had a very loud shutter/mirror noise, and had a few other quirks which never got resolved. No more than it's competition - yet - enough for Canikon fans to criticise it's design.
The Sony Alpha 100 was better than the Canon 400D and Nikon D40X in some respects, worse in other respects.
Mid-way through 2007, Sony released their second dSLR, the Alpha 700. This is a semi-pro camera that competes with other higher-level models (the Canon 40D, Nikon D300, or Olympus E-3).
Apart from the Alpha 700 being a higher-level model (with some additional features which are much better), Sony had also dramatically improved many of the core technologies in the Alpha series... They reduced the image noise at higher ISOs, made the shutter much quieter, the AF faster and more accurate, the exposure and flash metering more reliable, and importantly they improved the ergonomics of the camera.
New Stuff
Sony has now released a new entry-level dSLR to replace the Alpha 100, which is the Sony Alpha 200.
The new model is "only" an incremental evolution of the old model. It's images are less noisy at higher ISOs, it's shutter/mirror mechanism is much quiete, it's autofocus is faster and more accurate, and it's exposure and flash metering is more consistent. It also has a larger LCD, more effective image stabilisation, better ergonomics, and an accurate (%) battery life display.
The Sony Alpha 200 is equal to or better than both the Canon 400D and Nikon D40X in all respects. It still has all of the features which neither of those cameras do not have. It no longer has the flaws which it's predecessor had.
However it is just an evolutionary improvement on it's predecessor, nothing really big has changed... except...
The Big Difference = Cost
The Sony Alpha 100 was released late in 2006 with an RRP of £600, whereas the Sony Alpha 200 has an RRP of £370!!
Not only does the new camera out-spec both the Nikon D40X and Canon 400D but, with that RRP, it's RRP is about the same price as their current discounted street price. It's street price will be lower, and in a couple of months it is likely to be a LOT cheaper. (New cameras reduce in street price by about 10% of their price per month, whereas older cameras tend to stay at the same street price for much longer.)
Edited by Famous Graham on Friday 25th January 02:44
I think it depends whats important to you personaly.
Sony bought into the market with KM technology. KM had in camera IS (which worked ok, had it on my A2) and no in lens IS.
IMO in lens IS cn be a good 1-2 stops + better, and is as good at longer focal lengths, at some point in body IS has to run out of room to compensate.
Canon also have a wider range of glass that fit moer requirements, more used, more pro, more amature.
I care about image quality 1st, lenses 1nd , features a distant 3rd.
Sony bought into the market with KM technology. KM had in camera IS (which worked ok, had it on my A2) and no in lens IS.
IMO in lens IS cn be a good 1-2 stops + better, and is as good at longer focal lengths, at some point in body IS has to run out of room to compensate.
Canon also have a wider range of glass that fit moer requirements, more used, more pro, more amature.
I care about image quality 1st, lenses 1nd , features a distant 3rd.
Gassing Station | Photography & Video | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff