for those of you with the Digital Rebel

[Gary Sheynkman]

Is it worth dumping a grand into.

I have an itch for technology and since my PC isnt good enough for video I want to give photo a try. A family friend just got it but Im yet to check it out.

The new sony( http://www.sonystyle.com/is-bin/INTERSHOP.enfinity/eCS/Store/en/-/USD/SY_DisplayProductInformation-Start;sid=EkYq_r4UEOsq6f4Jzo4g9fEFjXfIe5ia5M0=?ProductSKU=DSCF828&Dept=dcc&CategoryName=dcc_DIDigitalCameras_CybershotProDigitalCameras ) is a beast. Same price...2 more mps... and more features than the 717 (which dad has)....it looks cool. Im trying to justify it over the minuses: its HUGE and costly prints (see printing forum)

[Godsongz]

the mechanically coupled 7X zoom lens covers an extensive range of shooting conditions—without the need for additional lenses.

hmmm, personally I think theres always a need for additional lenses. (of course, I don't own any yet, but I will) One of the major factors for going with the Rebel was the easy ability to change lenses. 8mp is very impressive, but 6.3 will do me just fine for the time being. If it lives up to some of the articles I've read about it, Sony's four color filter CCD is something to drool over though.

I love my Rebel and it will probably serve me as my primary camera for at least the next couple of years.

[Lee Yuan Sheng]

I don't have a EOS 300D, but ask yourself what you want to get with photography. I think it is an important thing to think about before you just jump into a hobby which can be potentially expensive. If it's just for the hardware I'm afraid to say you will run out of steam photographically very soon, and will end up spending tons of equipment with little to show. Think about what you want to do first before spending money lavishly.

[Godsongz]

The Rebel is only my 4th SLR in 22 years (got the bug when I was 16) and my first digital. What I want out of photography has certainly changed numerous times over the years, but nonetheless it is, has been, and foreseeably will be a lifelong hobby. I have gone through periods of doing extensive nature photography, then portraiture, then some astronomical for a while, lately some architectural studies, but mostly just memory preservation now, and a whole lot of fun.

[aroma]

yslee makes some very good points. If you are wanting to "try" digial photography, why even spend a grand? You can get some very nice camers for a lot less money that will give you a good taste and see if this is a hobby you want to stick to. But to answer your question about the why the Rebel over the Sony? Optics. On the Sony your stuck with that one lens. You can't change the optics on it. So if down the road you want better glass or need a faster lens, your stuck. I haven't dug into and compared the individual specs of both cameras, but that would be the biggie.

- Aaron

[marlof]

Although these camera's do not exactly exclude each other (they're too different), it seems that many people are wondering similar things. Me too, I've been in the same boat.

In the end I opted for the Sony DSC-F828, although it most certainly has it flaws (chromatic aberration and high noise at high ISO ranges anyone?). There's most definitely an advantage in the bigger sized sensor in a DSLR. But I've found by holding both the Digital Rebel and the Sony, that I liked the Sony more. I guess years of using digital still cams (not SLR) have spoiled me in wanting a live preview, a flip screen/body for waist level shots, and that kind of stuff. Next to that, the lens on the Sony isn't half bad (having 2.0 to 2.8 through the zoom range of 28-200 mm helps, even if you need 64 ISO to get the best shots). And I liked the idea of a fixed lens design, since the less dust can creep into my camera when I'm on the road in Africa, the better it is to me. And it means lugging one object, not several lenses and a body. Not to mention a good 640x480 30 fps movie mode. Let alone it's remarkable color rendition and detail...

Of course, I had to weigh this to the advantages of having a better image quality at higher ISO ranges with a DSLR and the broad range of lenses to choose from. But exactly the last was what made me decide. I really like the Sony lens, it's pretty fast, and has excellent manual zoom control (oooh.... no more digital fly by wire zooming!). And the price of the complete package was the price of one good Canon lens that would have sufficient enough sealing to withstand my typical holidays.

Does this mean I'll never get a DSLR? No way. I'd love to have one of those. But it will probably one with good seals (like the current pro range), and with a very good wide to supertele range of lenses. It will set me back several times what a Digital Rebel with kit lens would cost me. So I better get into photography really seriously before I'd spend that amount of money....

So for me, with my typical usage, the Digital Rebel just was not the right choice. But one of my friends has one, and I've used it a bit, and I must say just like my Sony, it's a joy to use in itself. He's into portraits in natural light a lot, so the Canon suits his needs way better. If it's the one for you, is up to you to decide. The best thing would be to try them both, and see what suits you best.

[Suhit Gupta]

See, I look at it in just the other way. I wait to see if I really want a particular product, for example a Digital SLR. And once I decide that it is something I need/desire, then I will look for the best device possible (within reason of course, I am but a starving student). This is why I bought the Canon EOS 10D (ok, so maybe I am not starving that much). It was the best professional digital SLR out there at the time, and was fairly cost effective at $1500. Now the Digital Rebel is over $500 cheaper and is basically the same device, but it also has a ton of features turned off in software. Take a look at http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos300d/ for an extensive review and a good comparison between the two cameras. So given the two cameras now, if you have the money, you may even want to consider the 10D.

But like aroma and Marlof point out, if you haven't played with this stuff before, perhaps a cheaper option would be better so you get a better idea of the tech and you can make a more informed decision when you are ready to buy a top of the line product.

Suhit

[Russell]

I don't actually own one, but I have looked into owning one. My biggest set back is that it has a plastic case. I want something that is going to last more than a few years (even if the technology will be archaic by that time).

[Lee Yuan Sheng]

Russel, I wouldn't be too concerned about the plastic, at least you get a metal mount, hehe. In any case it'd also greatly depend on how long you can resist the temptation of "upgrading" (among here, it seems the 300D didn't last very long in the owner's hands before being sold to make way for a 10D).