Yep, Canon just went live with that
Rebel T1i DSLR that leaked a bit earlier, and it's looking like a hell of a response to the Nikon D90: an XSi body jacked with a sensor matching the 50Ds 15.1 megapixels, 1080p HD video recording, and a $900 price tag. Yeah, it's gonna be a hit. Other notable specs include a 3.0-inch Live View screen, a Digic IV processor, ISO 12.8k sensitivity, and the same 18-55 IS EF-S kit lens as the XSi -- in other words, all those rumors were true. Hit up the read links for more info!
[Thanks to everyone who sent this in.]
Read - Official press release
Read - Amazon listing
posted Mar 25th 2009 12:48AM
Want.
Now.
This looks great. 720p 30FPS with DoF artistry should be good for YouTube HD - and the files are easy-to-edit .MOV (not AVCHD)...
Everything looks great except the 3.4 fps is pretty slow. Very impressive for the price though! I was going to get a Nikon D90 but bought a D60 and figured I'd upgrade to the D90's successor. The D90 has some good competition here so it will interesting to see what Nikon comes up with next.
Damn.
This thing is underpriced!
Yeah, it's incredibly tempting. The only two caveats I can find is that 1080p is limited to 20fps and it has no external mic input. If you're happy 720p and the built-in mic or an external audio recorder, then I imagine you could record some pretty awesome looking movies with this sup $1k camera body.
i know! how often does THAT happen?!
i'm seriously considering this over a high-end point and shoot! will i finally be an SLR convert?
@ a ham sandwich and others
Many of you seem to be exited about the video capabilities. while this is very justified, please be aware of the lack of auto focus and the poor depth of field while shooting video. As a user of the 5d mark ii, the video can be very frustrating because of the lack of auto focus coupled with the depth of field issues while shooting video. While you can shoot stationary objects such as a bird on a bird feeder with great results, it can be a mess if the bird moves toward you about 3 feet... for example. Canon has a patent in the USPO for including auto focus into DSLR's. I would be surprised if the redesign of the 40D doesn't incorporate this.
@FNG, Canon makes it sound like this one will actually have AF during video. I could be wrong about that, though. Can anyone confirm this?
5D MKII kind of has auto focus. Just hold down the AF-On button while shooting and it'll focus. It's not very smooth though.
Besides the XSI body, nice!
I actually prefer the smaller bodies of the Rebel line to the xxD. Before I bought my XSi I was considering the 40D and I just didn't like how large it was (and I have fairly large hands). When the 50D came out I found myself wanting some of the newer features but again, I didn't want the larger body. Now, I don't have to compromise. Once this is in the wild my lightly-used XSi will be for sale on POTN.
Awesome! I can't wait to try it out.
I still have my sights set on the 5D Mark II though...
Wow... thanks for screwing us 50D owners over, Canon.
Doesn't the 50D have a better body with a stronger shutter? More akin to a semi-pro body vs. entry level body?
The body is preferable on the 50D, yes. The shutter I am unsure of (as I do not know what internal changes will be made on the new Rebel) but this new camera is equipped with the same sensor, what appears to be the same screen, and video capabilities. Essentially this is a 50D, with a couple stripped-down 5DMKII in a Rebel body...
The 50D also has a much faster continuous shooting rate.
That's just the nature of camera's it's just like the computer business. Installed obsolescence in about a year and good thing parts are interchangeable almost like the pc...
@Simon: Yeah, didn't notice that part. 3.4 vs 6.3.
@xconan: Yeah, except the 50D is only a few months old!
Always happens. The Rebel line has always been just a half step behind the x0D line, so every new rebel lately has been better than the x0D that was on the market at the time. I hope a 60D comes out or the 50D gets a video recording upgrade, I can't stand those small bodies of the Rebel line but I want video! I can actually do it with my 40D with a PC, but it's weird...
-Taylor
Well I intend on getting the 5DMKII later in the year anyways, but it still bothers me that they would pull this crap.
Don't forget the 50D being a weather sealed body as well, throw in a weather sealed lens and you can shoot all day in the rain.
@BR
You need to make a more indepth comparison.
I have the 400D and the 40D, which are supposed to use the same sensor. The cameras are very very different beasts though.
For instance, the 40D has its fastest shutter speed much faster then the 400D at 1/8000 I believe.
With the 40D you can change the ISO in increments such as 100, 125, 160, 200 etc.. With the 400D you have 100, 200, 400, 800, 1600.
With my 40D I'll shoot at 1000ISO, for ma nice compromise between noise and sensitivity, can't do it with the 400D.
The ergonomics on the 40D are MUCH better. I can change the ISO without moving my hands from the shooting position.
With the 400D, you need to move the camera away, and do it with the LCD screen. Doesn't seem like a lot of time? Try shooting a sporting event.
Autofocus with the 40D (same lenses as the 400D) is faster.
The 400D does NOT do spot metering.
The 40D has the little LCD screen on top of the camera which always shows the settings. Must use the main LCD on the 400D.
Images with the 40D (same lens) have better contrast.
Same sensor but the internals behind the sensors aren't the same. 40D is better with noise at higher ISO, even when both cameras use RAW. (Images converted after with Adobe Camera RAW)
Average RAW file with the 400D is about 10mb with the 40D it's 12mb (that's what I've noticed personally).
While the above is specific to the 40D/400D some of the general differences will always apply to the x0D and xx0D line of cameras.
The moral of the story is, a camera is about more than just the sensor. ( and of course, megapixel count)
If none of the above makes sense to you, then neither the x0D nor the xD line is for you.
I have a 40D, my brother in law has a XSI... we travelled as a family together and his battery was always dying on him, i never ran out of battery and i used my camera more than he did... i can almost take double the pictures because i have the lcd screen on the top rather than using the huge lcd on the back
There are a lot of great features on this camera that would make it appealing to the average consumer.
The problem for me is that it doesnt have a second control wheel. That huge for anyone that needs a camera to respond as well as it can take photos.
But like a said before, nice feature set.
That's why I'd rather keep my 20D than even go for something like this. For current dSLR users out there, don't fall into the hype...spend the money on glass!
This is pretty much on par with D90 specs--same quality screen, about the same AF system, ISO performance.
HOWEVER...Canon GREATLY sacrificed the burst performance (on par with a D60) for more pixels. If they cut the pixels down to 12, this body should be able to hit 4.5fps, the same as the D90...BUT because the buffer holds 9 in 15MP RAWs, this body would actually be the D90 with an extra 25-30% more images in the buffer (due to reduced size of images), so 4.5fps, 11 pictures (probably even 14 with a high-speed Sandisk Extreme III--I can get 11 in at 1/200th on the D90, followed by a tiny lag for the 12th shot).
I got my D90 for only $780, new, in December so the pricing is pretty much the same.
Yawn. Only good if you've invested in Canon lenses and will be shooting slower things like portraits or weddings. I need that extra 30% faster burst speed when I shoot sports--when I switch from my D300 to shoot wide with the D90, I want those extra shots, as I'm sacrificing lots of close shots due to the camera switch, so every bit matters.
Now if this can do 4.5fps, I'd be quite impressed--a 30% faster processor, essentially.
Actually, this camera would be pretty terrible for sports shooting--the single dial is wayyy too prohibitive for quick changes to shooting scenarios. That, and your thumb is pretty much reduced to uselessness--at least on the D60, you can use your thumb while you can shoot with your index--on this body everything is all in the index finger.
Also, the thumb could be of some use if it was near an AF/AE lock button, but I can't seem to find one. If it wasn't for the spacebar on keyboards, I think that most users of this camera would experience thumb atrophy.
What I read was.
"I'm a total Nikon fanboy. And Nikons are much better than Canons. Also, 5 > 4. However 1.3 is a 30% higher than 1. Therefore 1.3 > 1. Although it's obvious that 4.3 > 3.5, but still 548 < 984"
Did I miss something?
"Did I miss something?"
Well you certainly didn't get the point of the comparison--from a mathematical point of view, the Canon SHOULD be better for burst shooting IF they lowered the MPs (larger buffer, same processing speed).
Obviously you can't understand this logical path of the math:
15.1/12.3 = 1.227, or approx. 25% more pixels.
4.5/3.5 = 1.285, or approx 30% faster shooting (which requires processing of the pixels through reading and interpolation, followed by NR)
So, the Canon has approx. 25% more pixels, but is about 30% slower than the D90. Thus, their performance is pretty much on par. It's like comparing the Nikon running a 60M dash with the Canon running 100M--the Canon is slower (absolute time-wise) solely because it has more pixels to calculate. Given that the prices are also pretty much the same: $780 vs. $800 for the body only, the Canon is pretty much equivalent.
In addition, you'll be trading the ability to shoot 20fps 1080p for dual jog wheels, which is quite prohibitive. The major trade-off though is speed vs. pixels. This camera is just too slow to compete with the D90 to be in the class for advanced amateurs, but because the pixel count is pretty high, it's quite good for slower shooting because you have more leeway when cropping.
I was not being a fanboy at all, instead I was making a completely unbiased, mathematical comparison of the two cameras. The D90 is pretty much in the same pricing category. I actually was wowed when I read 15.1MP, 1080p, approx same ISO performance, etc. I was imagining that "Wow, that's a decent amount more pixels with pretty much the same noise, I should have thought about going Canon". However, that quickly ended when I found that 1080 = 20fps and burst = 3.5fps.
All and all, this is still a Rebel, and although it seems like quite better than the D90, it's a bit too unbalanced in terms of speed vs. pixel count. I mean, it's like releasing a camera that takes 50MP, but shoots only at 1fps (extreme exaggeration), so it only fits a tiny market; similarly, one could release a 1MP camera that shoots at 50fps, but it really wouldn't be that useful (I'd just be impressed by the shutter in this case, heh). Because Canon decided to label this as Rebel, and not a XXD series goes to show that this is supposed to be seen as the next big step up from Nikon's best in the class, the D60. Likewise, the 50D/40D are the direct competitors to the D90--especially because they whoop Nikon's ass in burst shooting.
BTW, I shoot with the D300 only because that's the one my school's newspaper gives me--it's quite a good camera, but it still lacks in burst performance (unless you get the grip), and is much more expensive than the 50D. I'm no fanboy, just saying that the camera really isn't intended to compete with the D90--Canon already has other cameras in that class (which, like this Rebel, are more expensive than Nikons but offer more features). My D90 decision was because I was riding on a few lenses, which I couldn't find Canon replacements for as cheap as I obtained my lenses for. If I was starting clean, I would have probably went with the 40D.
I'm not sure if this applies to RAW, but at least in JPG mode Canon cameras can go faster than the rated burst if you lower the resolution since the buffer doesn't fill as quickly. So you could always just force a smaller image size if higher burst speeds are key.
But it probably doesn't apply to RAW unfortunately.
Why doesn't canon drop the name REBEL.. it's so annoying sounding!
JUST CALL IT THE CANON T1i FFS!
It’s only Rebel in North America, 500D in the rest of the World.
Yeah but then instead of just saying Rebel we'd say "tee-one-eye"
Saying it really fast.... teewannai! Much easier to go into Best Buy and say "I'd like to buy a Canon Tijuana please!"
Just call it 500D.
You know, like they do in the rest of the world.
They only use the Rebel branding in North America.
@michael not really, it's called the Kiss in Japan.
yea.. 500D or T1i. Either one alone is better than having the name Rebel come before it.
I own an XTi and blacked out the dumb looking Rebel badge because It makes the camera look too amateur with the stupid red font..
I know it's just a tactic by Canon to try to get people to buy the more expensive ones with a normal name but i'm one of those smart consumers that knows what the inexpensive models are capable of.
It's all Andre Agassi's fault.
It would be great if someone had a D90 comparison sheet. I'm just about to buy a cam :)
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/compare_post.asp?method=sidebyside&cameras=canon_eos500d%2Cnikon_d90&show=all
Gah why do they have to put all these incredible specs inside that busted fisher price xsi body?.... Canon seriously doesn't know how to make their budget cameras feel like their worth $600-900. HOW CAN THE LARGEST FKING CAMERA PRODUCER IN THE WORLD KEEP GETTING THIS WRONG?!!?
$900 and I can't get a jog wheel? FFS...../palmface
Relax, it feels the way it does because of compromises made to keep the size and weight down. Some people keep them around as secondary camera bodies specifically for that reason.
They sure are doing very, very well for a company that keeps on getting it wrong.
Umm... you do realize this is very comparable to a 50D right? And very similarly priced at that... You obviously don't know the value of such equipment.
The "Rebel" series (and the xxxD series, same thing) is by far the most prolific DSLR out there. Everybody and his second cousin's dog has one. It's the one you see the most for non-pro work. It's cheap, it's got enough functions to satisfy most, and it's small. You want a bigger body, get a 5DmkII, or wait for a 60D. Canon produces different tiers for different people, so you're not really forced to buy the cheapest. If you want really cheap with everything, then design your own, make your own, since no one is going to do it for you.
$900 and you get 1080p/720p, 15mp. That's actually quite a good deal. Already has a function wheel, adding a jog wheel would just blur the line between the Rebel and the semi-pro 50D. Might as well just make a 60D (which they will). Yes, 20fps, but this is a DSLR first and foremost, and it's there to take pics. You can't really compare it to the SX1 either, the IQ isn't in the same league, for both videos and stills.
Don't like the price/feature set/design? Don't buy it, simple. Wait for something better (something better always comes along) or buy something else.
You really don't seem to understand the point in the different levels of cameras Canon produces, do you?
How is the XSi Body "Fisher Price". It works perfectly fine for me. I don't drop my cameras.
Just bought a 50D a few days ago... oh well.
just bought a 40D here.
going to cry if they release a new version.
Damn, I want this thing too... Don't they know it recession now? And I just bought a Macbook :(
I'm just gonna buy a used 4mp mark 1d
the specs may be comparable, but the D90's body is much nicer than that.
20 fps...haha, that's cute.
Stay classy Canon.
You're right, really. It's more gimmcky than anything. You'd think they'd be able to squeeze in those 4 frames somehow...
720P is fine for me either way, but still...
For real. What the hell can you do with 20fps?? I dont care what the quality is, that frame rate just makes the video feature completely worthless.
Seriously, Canon. Your PowerShot SX1 can do freakin 1080p @ 30fps. You're telling me you cant make the T1i do the same?? I dont buy it.
I think Canon has been purposely crippling their new point & shoots video features lately by not allowing zooming during recording & only letting them do mono audio so they don't step on the toes of their standalone camcorders. Now they're doing it with this model to not step on the toes of their flagship Mark II 5D. It's all about money basically.
So screw you, Canon. There are plenty of other companies who arent purposely crippling their stuff that I'll gladly give my money to so I can get a proper hybrid model without having to sell my first born. You're good but you arent THAT good.
yeah it's kinda a joke to have 20fps, definitely an artificial limitation to separate the price points.
Canon, we don't want 20fps, a lot of us don't want 30fps only, give us 1080p24
I hope this means that a T1 is coming soon...
I'm glad the two big companies are keeping each other busy. Competition is good for everyone. I'm still holding out for Scarlet myself, but stills aren't my priority.
This is the 500D for European or Asian Engadget visitors.
Sounds like it is finally time to upgrade my Rebel XT even though I said I wouldn't before I could afford a 16 megapixel. This is close enough.
1080p at 20 frames per second? What a joke! How long is it going to take for someone to make an SLR that can actually shoot video (And doesn't cost an arm and a leg).
Wait for the G1H
Sad thing is, my $280 Nikon F100 with Velvia film still kicks the Rebel's ass in terms of image quality. But oh wait, people don't care about that anymore... they just want their movie mode and the ability to throw up the (heavily compressed afterwards, mind you) results on Facebook.
Yecch....
Some people, you know, actually care more about the subject of the photo.
Come on, a good prime lens and this camera +raw will give you stellar result. Velvia is cool but you have to accept new technologies.
Yeah, let me know when digital even begins to approach the color depth of film... I'll stick with my vivid colors that I can sort out on a light table - new technologies my ass.
http://kenrockwell.com/tech/why-we-love-film.htm
Besides that, the most disappointing thing I found on digital cameras is the limited dynamic range.
Good 35mm film is both more expensive and lower quality than good digital. It has been this way for some time now.
http://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photographer/2009/02/great-expectations.html
PS: Is it still $280 after 10,000 prints?
I understand your point of view but still... come on, you want dynamic range, take 3 photos with different exposure. HDRI wtf!
@ Yem
Excuse me of ctein uses a picture he took from an old shoebox, off a crappy film stock, in order to make the comparison, as well as pulling numbers out of his ass to make his point. Why don't you actually take a look at the link I posted? The only way to get a good dynamic range in digital is with HDR which, 9 times out of 10, looks completely FAKE.
Yem - the point is I don't have to make 10,000 prints. Who the hell has room for 10,000 prints? I develop the film in my house and then make only the prints that I need. The bigger question, I think, is whether you're still saving money once you're spending $1,000 for an AMATEUR camera body every 3 years, if you're shooting with the big stuff, then that figure rises to $2,000 -$3,000 (all after selling your then obsolete body).
This sort of either/or mentality of the film/digital crowds is absurd. Each method has its own pros and cons and each is suited for different types of shooting. Most of the arguments thrown out by each side are pretty unfounded. For example, the argument that dynamic range is higher in film than digital is true only when it comes to negative film, which most professional photographers would agree is much lower quality than reversal film, which has the a dynamic range that is more or less identical to digital.
As for the arguments against HDR, it wasn't designed for digital first, it was actually used to get around the limitations of reversal film, the ideas were just digitized by the photoshop crowd.
uh, I just bought my poor old Nikon D50 a couple of filters... oh well, it's still more camera than I can effectively take advantage of.
20fps... wtf...
Oh god so sexy. I'll be purchasing one of these as soon as I can get my hands on it. So is that $900 price point body only? W/ lens seems too good to be true.
Just because it has more pixels does not mean that the Canon sensor is in the same league as the one in the Nikon D90.
My old 20d have an excellent sensor, this one cant be worst.
I'm planning to get the D90 to upgrade my D70
then I saw this w/ 1080p video? I thought might be I should wait for the next version of D90 to compete with that as I would like to have the video function, megapixel doesn't matter much to me as it's the quality of lens make the difference.
but then I saw 20fps? that's stupid.
Canon or any other manufacturer (even Nikon if they try the same thing), if you can't do 24fps or better, than please stay with 720p. It's obvious that you failed to achieve a better rate but still wanted to win on paper
They just dont wanna compete the 5D... its obvious.
It's possible that the amount of data required to push through at 24/30fps @ 1080p would be too much for entry level parts inside 500D. Otherwise the camera would likely cost a bit more (and with recession and all, not a good thing).
Pretty sure I've read somewhere that Nikon will release three more cameras this year, likely a new D60 will come first, most likely with video and more pixels.
Then why is a canon point-and-shoot capable of 1080@30?
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/specs/Canon/canon_sx1is.asp
I'm getting one anyway, cause I can't afford the 5D, but they can get stuffed for purposely limiting available technology. Wouldn't have cost a cent more to implement.
I hope some wise hacker will tweek the firmware and bring us 24fps at 1080p.
No matter how good this camera can be, the only thing you improve is the detail of the picture in certain conditions.
I like the ISO up to 3200 for the very first time in this camera series, not sure about ISO6400 and 12800. I still find ISO 3200 in my 5D to be like ISO 800 on the crop bodies.
One good thing about the video is that you do not need a couple of cameras anymore. I also find 720p more than enough for the use any consumer could give to this toy.
Thing to dislike is the sensor, I would prefer the old 10 or 12 MP with this sensor "gapless photosite" technology and a much improved Dynamic Range and cleaner high ISO with a bit more pixel sharpness. Also the auto ISO is a joke in canon cameras, if pentax can do it properly why canon can't?
Kind of got to agree on that one. I'm going to upgrade from an XSi to this once available and the relatively poor high-ISO (>= 800) performance of the XSi has me wondering how this will perform with its higher density sensor. The only thing I think this has going on that front is that it might be the same sensor as the 50D which turned out to be pretty good.
Oh, and yeah, Canon's "Auto" ISO setting is moronic. Mine refuses to select 100, even on a bright sunny day (yes, I know that the manual says it won't, but there's no real reason why Canon couldn't have made it do so) and refuses to use 400, skipping directly from 200 to 800, sometimes when it isn't needed to get a shot.
20fps? A typo?
on the amazon link look at the diagonal screen size image, it's of either the 40d or 50d. LoL, promotional pics and their inaccuracies make me laugh.
If its the same chip as the 50D then there will be the same problem that makes the 50D a piece of junk- Pixel Density. Canon screwed the pooch on this one the first time around. Also, the "Rebel" (Or whatever else its called) isnt nearly as sturdy as the Nikon D90.
HD Video on a DSLR? Its a joke, only a way to get stupid and uninformed consumers to buy one. Look into how easily the sensors heat up while being used for video. Theres a reason why the sensors are so small on camcorders.
There's already a Facebook group demanding 30FPS from 1080P!!!
I've joined. They need to hear us. WE keep Canon in business.
+ 24fps please...
I think canon would have been better to not give it 1080p at 20fps at all and only give in 720 at 30fps. They are clearly differentiating it from the 5D MkII but I agree 1080p at 20fps seems pointless (I assume they just want to be able to put 1080p on the box to annoy Nikon). Anyway, I'm sure that this will still produce great 720 footage which looks great on the web and should rival some of the great stuff being produced on the 5D2. if you haven't seen any of this footage, check out the short films on http://www.theeoscars.com/5dblog
here's the facebook group to protest, everyone join - http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=90400955680
Some clever person hack the firmware and allow 24, 25, 30fps @ 1080p please!
I'll wait for the 40d to be upgraded. The 50d wasn't it.
So, anyone want to buy a lightly used, less than 3 month old XSi?
It should be 1080p @24 minimum, and isn't 720p usually 60fps? I thought the general rule was use 720p60 for sports video and 1080p30 for everything else.....So sounds like the video comes up short on this one. They should've stuck with 10mp if it would've enabled the above rates.
Hmm, too bad. Canon seems to think that by packing more pixels in a sensor the camera sells better. To be true, I'm sure it does, however, image quality greatly suffers. I'm still sticking with nikon.
Looks nice, but if it don't take EF lenses, it can get stuffed. And the bodies of Rebels are way too small. Go for a **D or even *D: built like ruddy tanks.
I really wanted to get a dslr but wanted to get a cannon. The d90 was my first choice but looks like this one jumped to #1.
The biggest flaw for me with the Rebel line of Canon cameras is the lack of a mini-LCD screen on the top of the body. This is why with no Nikon/Canon preference last year I chose the Nikon D80 for my first DSLR. Canon's DSLRs under $1000 just don't have the ergonomics/body design like Nikon's do (D80, D90).
Canon's semi-pro cameras have the nicest bodies to use, imo. I bought an EOS 5 film over a 1n RS as I preferred the mode dial on the left and shutter control on the right, with the aperture dial on the back, first featured on the EOS 5, IIRC. These Rebel bodies seem like the worst of the lot, having to pull away from the camera to adjust settings that are on your fingertips with the semi-pro models.
The EOS 1/1D/1DS mode button on the left set-up isn't nice to use at all, from the test shots I did with the 1n RS.
Just WTF is 1080p @ 20 fps, what a bloody joke....since when did film/video hit the evolutionary ladder backwards....there is a reason film uses minimum 24fps, it is, that's right Canon, because its useless stutter..hell even 24 fps is barely fluid..this is so obviously lame marketing tactics....LAME, I am an ashamed Canon owner....
For everyone bitching about the 20fps
even though the video feature is offered on the camera
it is still a DSLR, which should be used to take PICTURES primarily
if you want to take HD video, i would suggest purchasing a dedicated HD video Camcorder
thats what they are meant for