Last week all the Nikon
fanboys supporters were out in full-force
critiquing the D5000, so we couldn't let another week slip by without giving Canon advocates (and haters, we don't discriminate) a similar chance with the
T1i. Hitting the market at just about the same time, this well-specced entry-level DSLR packed a few niceties than alternative units simply did not: 1080p video, a 15.1 megapixel sensor and a price tag below $1,000. That said, there are still some areas that we reckon Canon could've improved upon, and if you feel the same way, we'd love to hear about it. Are you kosher with the 20fps 1080p mode? Is the image quality up to snuff? How's that stock lens treating you? Cut loose, won'tcha?
posted Jun 13th 2009 12:41AM
Make it a Sony
http://www.theonion.com/content/video/sony_releases_new_stupid_piece_of
Yea because Sony is sooo great huh?
One day you will learn that just because everyone of your friends buys something - that does not make it good.
Ever hear of the word sheeople?
Squint hard enough, and you might just see my /sarcasm tag =p
Shut up, jason51873! My Furby is just as awesome as the day I bought it!
Jason is OFFICIALLY A MORON!
Put a Nikon logo on it since Canon blows...
So does Sony & Olympus, by the way.
I'd make it a Nikon, but only because I already have a Nikon and I'd love to use the lenses I have with this awesome camera!
amazing camera for the price
Make it smaller,lighter,cheaper,better,faster,stronger
Simply looking at the specs, I'd agree. I don't think I'd ever use the 1080p video at only 20fps, but the fact is, It's a very capable camera for the price. Certainly, there are better models out there, but they cost MUCH more. If I had the money, I would definitely consider buying.
The lens is crap... I'd wish they'd bundle in the 18-105MM lens instead of the 18-55MM.
@holycow:
Canon makes no such lens (Nikon does, though). Perhaps you're referring to the 28-105 USM? While being a terrific lens, its MSRP is $100 more and it does not include image stabilization.
Lens if perfectly fine as a starter. With these you're going to buy your own anyways. It's a gateway drug into lens buying addiction.
seriously 1080 @20fps!? Oh well at least theres still 720p@ full 30fps How about dropping the price by $100?
yeah... would it have been that hard to make it 24?
its not exactly an HD camcorder, and the actual photos produced compensate for the price
Seriously, just give me 4 more frames per second and I'm good.
I agree. I would buy this camera if it did 24pat 1080. That said they should have also added an option for 24p at 720 lines of resolution.
Lower price plus a lager sensor surface area = win.
I would add 24 fps of video recording instead of the completely useless and non-standard 20 fps. I am sure the hardware can do it, and if it can't, 720/24p or 720/30p are still more preferable than 1080/20 fps.
"its not exactly an HD camcorder"
That line is beginning to blur and Canon should know this better than anyone.
Even us 5D Mark II users don't get 24p yet. I really am not sure why Canon is making the videos record at these weird framerates.
I would like to see "macro" keys that let me change all the settings, with a push of a button. I could REALLY use 3. 1 for portraits or HDR, 1 for landscapes, and 1 for birds in flight.
I hope to upgrade my XSi in a couple of months. The XSi cameras have held their worth pretty well. I know that I like the 18-55 lens on it... and I think the t1i uses the same lens. For me, the higher ISO settings are key. As others have said, 30FPS 1080p, or even 30fps 720p.
A couple pics from my XSi:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/ryfter/3561799210/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/ryfter/3605120536/
After looking a bit more, I realized that 720p runs at 30fps... so I am good on that account. :-)
I would make the video focus a bit faster. It takes too long for the camera to focus in Video mode.
The video is very good even at 20 fps.
I would change the body from Plastic to Magnesium. Make it a bit heavier. (Yea yea, it'll be almost like the 50D but will have video mode.)
well its probably more up to the lens as to how fast it can focus. when im recording through my lens with a USM inside, it focuses almost instantly.
I have a USM lense also....
It's not always slow. BUt most of the time it's slow for my liking.....
The kit lens is very limited and cheaply built. However, I purchased it to go along with my 30d because of the video feature. The 720p video is very good.
Still its way better than the old kit lend, believe me. The image quality of the present kit lens is very very good, almost on par with L lenses. Build quality of course is plastic.
I bet you haven't tried a single L lens... LOL
I think it could use a wheel/direction pad combo just like the G10. Probably make the 1080p at 30fps as well. That being said, I love my 500D...
make its cost $100 more and i'll think about it
wait no i won't
Umm...How about building a camera that fits an adult size hand? I wish Canon would get off this tiny crappy grip kick. Basically I have to buy a 50D for $500 more just to be able to operate the thing efficiently.
Come on, Canon, build the grip bigger!
I know, its designed for the soccer-mom market. But if I want a small entry level device, I'll buy a G10. (no, not really, I would rather have the new Oly Digital PEN with micro 4/3 and exchangeable lens). Maybe Canon should build the replacement of the G10 like that!
This is true. The old Nikon F100 had a nice grip and size. Bring us something that size. I'd also be into a slightly extended viewfinder for us Americans with bigger noses.
My philosophy for cameras has always been that either it should be an ultra-compact point and shoot so it can actually fit in your pocket and go with you anywhere or it should be a properly-sized, full-featured D-SLR that makes no pointless attempts at "portability." If it's already an SLR form factor, then it's not going to squeeze into my pocket, so make it comfortable to hold and heavy enough to be steady.
Heavy is credit to photographers!
"Basically I have to buy a 50D for $500 more"
You just answered your whole rant right there.
I own the Canon XSi (which I assume is similarly sized).
I am 6' 3". I weight 310 lbs. I have huge ham hands.
My hands fit wonderfully on the camera.
No idea what your talking about.
Yea, I lost all cred with my Olympus (EVolt 500) about a year ago. All the Soccer Moms have DSLR's now. The funny as fuck thing about it tho, after they show it off to the others for a few games, and realize that they have no idea how to use the damn thing.
All the pics look like crap, so they go back to their little elph's.
My wife scored a real nice Rebel Xti from her Mother (just last week) that went back to her W series Sony Cybershot after a couple of months of bad pictures and utter feature frustration.
I dunno if this was targeted at the Mom's... maybe they just managed to fit A LOT of features in a small body
Lovin' mine, grip is the only gripe too small, kit lens is alright, but go out and buy a 50mm lens first off. You will see this camera shine. Video is great for the price and 20fps looks lovely, as long as your shooting low motion and no major pans. 720p is great. The display is really top quality, and lots of great features built in, time lapse, bracketed expo, so on.
It never ceases to amaze me how many people spout off the old "buy a 50mm" line - even when it does not apply and is very outdated.
50mm *used* to be a pretty standard focal length on 35mm film (and by extension "full frame" digital, like the 5D or 1Ds). Even then it was ever-so-slightly longer than a true mathematical normal lens for that medium, but it didn't matter because it was so popularized and was generally such a great value lens. Good 50mm lenses are still great on those size films or sensors.
However on today's crop sensor digital cameras, which are the kind 95%+ of consumers actually buy, 50mm is much too long for a true general purpose lens (it's about a short/medium telephoto, good for portraits and other moderate telephoto applications). Not to mention that a halfway decent zoom will trounce most of the current 50mm lenses for practical use (still with great results!) by amateurs. The most recent Canon kit 18-55 zoom (the one with image stabilization) is actually a surprisingly decent performer in many image quality respects.
One valid reason to suggest a 50mm is NOT to replace the kit lens, but for the absolute best value from an aperture perspective (they're the "cheapest fastest" made by the big 35mm-format companies). Canon and Nikon also both make a "nifty fifty" which is about as dirt cheap as they can possibly manage, but with sharp image quality and a wide aperture. So it almost becomes a question of "why not" at those prices (Canon's is about $90).
Still, that's a world away from replacing a general purpose (18-55) zoom.
Most of your criticisms of the 50mm are just, but they don't diminish the importance of a lens like the 50. It's impossible to underestimate the importance of a lens that can shoot as fast as a 1.8> lens - and except for a 1.8 35mm Nikkor, there aren't any alternatives. Shooting at night with a 1.8 or lower is exceptional and makes the lens invaluable it a variety of situations (not even mentioning its incredible portability). Although we lose some to the crop factor of a Canon (1.6x) and Nikon (1.5x), for how cheap they are and how sharp photos are, they can really show a cameras worth. And I'm sorry, the 18-55 is very underwhelming lens (dpreview agrees).
So, the extra sharpness from a prime and the low light abilities will no doubt make an entry level Rebel user realize the benefits of an DSLR, and I personally have no issue recommending such a lens.
It's interesting to note that many people I know (fellow teenagers still in college) who bought a DSLR are stuck with a kit lens. They almost never upgrade due to budget constraints or losing interest by the time they actually have the cash to splurge on a better/additional one.
These kit lenses aren't bad at all. But it's just not utilizing the full potential of most bodies these days.
My 2 cents.
@ MONKEY:
dpreview of the 18-55mm IS kit lens says:
"Indeed overall it's an extremely well-behaved little lens, with very few nasty surprises for the user, and a remarkably good image stabilisation unit; indeed Canon's main concern may ultimately become whether users have as much incentive to upgrade to more expensive optics as they did before."
...
"In summary, this lens is a very welcome addition to Canon's range, and gives new dSLR owners a level of optical quality in the basic kit lens which was previously lacking; the addition of IS also goes a long way to increasing its flexibility. It makes an ideal lightweight general purpose-starter lens, and as such can only be recommended."
Read that last line?
>gelbec
I wasn't saying to replace the kit lens with a 50mm, just drop an extra 100 bucks and pick one up.
>monkey
yes, yes and yes
The kit 18-55mm IS is more than usable. If that's all you got, go out and use it well. You can still make great artistic photographic work using it, though obviously pros in many applications would find it lacking.
I liked stock 50mm a lot on film - so I grabbed the 28mm f1.8, which translates to 43mm on the 1.6x crop 500D. Hardly cheap at $400. Though I already have lots of experience with primes from Photo I, I still find the really fast aparture useful at night and at controlling depth of field. It can also zone focus, a lifesaver at night.
For me the kit is valuable for its 17mm wide angle - travelling, landscapes. Though I'd love to get some better glass - the 17-55 f2.8 has everything but is big and expensive; the 17-85mm isn't that much better, the Sigmas and Tamrons don't have IS. I'm in love in the 17-40mm L, but the range seems a bit short and it doesn't have IS either.
Okay in all seriousness, despite shooting Nikon now, Sony WAS my first own-purchased DSLR. And I started with my dad's old 350D Canon.
And what this new 500D needs, is what Sony did right: They put alot of features of into an entry level cam. Built-in IS, Wireless flash spec... all very good value for money. Where Canon still reigns and I wouldn't change is its ease of use balanced with speedy access to configuration changes (compared to the Alpha line imho).
What would I change? Lower the mgpx spec.
"They put alot of features of into an entry level cam. Built-in IS, Wireless flash spec... all very good value for money."
Note that Olympus does the same. And that was one of the reasons I actually picked the brand for my first DSLR. Idea was that I can check out many features, without forking out any serious money. Buying into Canon is either very expensive or very very @#$% expensive. I can afford Canon brand, but I wasn't sure that I would use larger DSLR as much as I used smaller/more portable P&S.
The thought was that after checking out the DSLR features, I could drop cheaper brand anytime I would find its quality not satisfying.
P.S. Canon needs more better faster zooms. That's what my colleague, Canon 1000D owner, says. Analogue of Oly ZD 12-60 is highly desired: e.g. EF-S 24-120mm f/2.8-4.0 USM IS with the same/better IQ, optionally with longer/faster tele-end, and priced about $1000.
Manual controls under video mode like they just gave the 5D mark II would be good (ISO, aperture, shutter)- though i'm wondering if they're going to keep that with the 5D mark II as that's a couple of marks up in terms of build and performance.
I don't need video recording, I will get a camcorder if I want to make movies. The design of a SLR is not appropriate for filming.
I like 500D but I like it even more if it will have:
- burst of 5-6 FPS,
- rotating LCD display like PowerShot S5 IS,
- AA batteries.
A lot of professionals have been successful using the D-SLR design for filming lately. The lenses make for great video. The main problem that I'm aware of is that of the rolling shutter, but technological improvements should sort that out soon enough. I don't think the line between SLR's and camcorders needs to be so distinct anymore.
If you get the battery grip, you can use AAs.
Internal is sucks when compared to an IS equipped lens. You only have a 2 stop advantage on the internal IS, but you can get a 4 stop advantage on a IS equipped lens. Sony's decent in the slr market the lower alpha series, in my opinion they are only good is you still own monolta lens because the sensors and processors do not compare with canon or Nikon. Can't say muuch on what to change on the d500 its an entry level camera enough said.
Sony makes almost all of Nikon's sensors.
At the same time, far too few Canon lenses have IS. Most of the primes don't unless they're tele or kit, only the 17-85 (barely better than kit), 17-55 f2.8 (big and expensive, though great) and the 24-105mm L. Which leaves out some otherwise great lenses - for example, the primes, 17-40L, 24-70mm L and so on...
Maybe you should try more Sony cameras before making this statement. I have had hands on experience with the Canon 50 D mk2 and the Canon EF 24-105/4L IS USM Lens compared to the Sony A700. The A700 built in IS was quite a bit better than the Canon IS, even on one of their most expensive lens.
Also, if you read some real reviews, you would know the A700 matches easily with the Nikon D300 in terms of IQ. As Jordan says, the D300 sensor and A700 is almost identical, except A700 is a few hundred dollars cheaper.
Get your facts straight before you become a fanboy of Nikon and Canon and trash Sony.
HAHAHA Kevin just got bitch slapped by lgn
maybe this is asking the world, and i think the 5d mark 2 might be the only camera with this and then only with a firmware update, but if it could auto focus in video mode it would be awesome. the video could also stand to operate at a higher frame rate too. other than those outrageous requests its an absolutely awesome camera for the price. i personally think this is the best camera for under 1500 bucks.
What I would really love to see is some way to control the aspect ratio, shutter speed and ISO when shooting video. It goes to full auto and doesn't allow you to adjust those things at all. I saw that they recently added that feature to the 5d mark II, so I am hoping they do the same thing for the Rebel T1i.
It would also be nice if next time they make it so that the red record button quickly switches you to video record mode and back again. I hate having to turn the big dial all the way to the video record mode just to shoot a few clips, and then turn it all the way back to where it was before.
Instead...the record button quickly switches between the rather useless live view mode and regular SLR mode.
I like mine a lot. I wish that there was an audio In. I wish it would get an up date for manual exposure control in video (like the 5DII). I also wish there was a place to plug in a sync cord. other than that I am pretty darn happy.
Add some lasers to it.
i want it to have a feature where it prints out money so i can buy it.
it would have to be in your possession before you could use that feature. so you would have to buy it with your own money anyways. I was doing some thinking though, you could take out a loan if your allowed to, buy the camera print out more money than the cost of the camera maybe like 1000x more than what it costs, and then we can split the profit 60/40 for my planning. But i doubt they would add that feature...
c'mon T2i
i like the way you think..
I don't want to hear the annoying rotating motor sound when focusing while I record video.
Since DSLR's seem to be going down the video route, silent focussing lenses would be appreciated like Panasonic are introducing with the GH1. Especialy since the T1i/500D doesn't have an option to plug in an external mic to cut out noise from motors and other mechanical actuations within the camera and lenses.
Also, a dedicated big red button on the back of the camera to remotely delete or generate quips to counteract iKurt's fanboyism (whom I see hasn't commented yet about how Canon are the best because his uncle uses them and he's a professional so he should know..etc)- oh and yes i'm a Canon user... I just don't use my left hand constantly to zoom on a Canon lens.
IT's time to put in a GPS-chip
The Eye-Fi is a great substitute for now.
Built in IS so all lenses would be stabilised (including that 50/1.8 you just bought).
That's not possible currently because it would involve putting glass in the camera body itself (not desirable) and also limits the ability of manufacturers to fine-tune IS for each specific lens. I shamelessly stole this information from Wikipedia, so feel free to read more about it on there.
John, my Oly E-520 doesn't have any glass in body - IS system is moving sensor itself. That is not as good as in-lens IS, yet much, much better than nothing. And it also has nothing to do with per-lens tuning, which is generally done by firmware itself.
I'd say this is a pure propaganda you have read on Wikipedia spread by those who need to find some justification why they overpay for lenses or why they can't afford IS. Most Canon users I know fall into last category: as soon they see my Oly with in-body IS, they immediately start long monologues on why IS is not important. Pitiful people.
The only technical problem to in-body IS, is that it might make body slightly thicker. That's about it. When you mount IS lens - you disable in-body IS and vice versa.
P.S. Can't bother to dig the article on DPReview, but they once made the comparison of in-body v. in-lens ISs. In-lens IS is effective up to ~1/10 shutter speed, in-body - up to ~1/20. Yet to me personally, financial advantages outweigh the difference.
1. Larger hand grip (for big hands)
2. Better kit lens
give it a full frame sensor
Change the name.
Why can't they use 500D on all countries instead of using Rebel T1i. :D
It allready has three names: 500D; Rebel T1i and Kiss X3 in Japan. hehehe
I'd rather them all be Rebel T1i! In fact Canon should just go all out and make "cool and hip" new names for all the whole linup; Emo, Sensation, Passion, Destiny... all the good stuff :P
maybe get a metal body. I don't understand spending more than 500 on a DSLR unless its metal. secondly there lens's are crap a cheap sigma is 1,000% better lens than a stock cannon lens. who cares about video really maybe get a better sensor. 15 mega pixel is awful. The sensor will get to hot in that small body a distort the image 10 and 12 is plenty for any application. I would be willing to bet ISO of 800 on this camera tops before its to grainy to fix. The yolk on this flash looks so freaking lame take it off all together and just include a small external. maybe go into micro 4/3's. Challenge yourself instead of using film lens's and digital bodies maybe finally make a digital lens for a digital camera. I just sick of cannon and Nikon not pushing the envelop because there afraid to lose customers when they say they have lens's built for digital cameras and you have to buy all new lens's for the body. They wont ever do it.
"maybe get a metal body. I don't understand spending more than 500 on a DSLR unless its metal."
Why do not you need a metal body?
From books detailing history of photography I understand that in past that was must. The lenses were made from metal, because they were very large and heavy - the modern advanced ED glasses weren't available. Consequently such lenses required very sturdy camera body - metal body.
Modern lenses, thanks to ED glass, are awfully small and made from quite resilient fiber plastic. You do not need heavy metal body to mount them.
My understanding is that professionals go for full-metal (panic?) bodies because they might have some old big heavy lenses they want to mount on them.
"I would be willing to bet ISO of 800 on this camera tops before its to grainy to fix"
So you're saying you haven't even read one of the million reviews for it before saying how to change it?
"The sensor will get to hot in that small body a distort the image 10 and 12 is plenty for any application"
You mean hot pixels? Meh. Again, read a review. None noticed.
Besides, you can always lower the resolution if you really are that worried.
"maybe go into micro 4/3's."
You want a SMALLER sensor? What are you on?
Read a review before you go shooting off useless rants. Fucking trolls.
@Kizorblade
> Read a review before you go shooting off useless rants. Fucking trolls.
Actually that's you are trolling. Read some technical documentation on how sensors operate - so that you would actually understand what reviewers are saying - before barging into discussion.
P.S. @Kbo, I believe on 500D, ISO 1600 is quite usable too. But it depends on what you shoot. Night skies on ISO 1600/higher would always be crappy - regardless of camera.
There are some good comments and some bad ones.
The comment about the 50mm. That is a great length on a crop camera. Specifically, a 1.6 crop yields a 80mm 35mm equivalent. That is a great focal length for portraits. Plus the fact the "nifty fifty" as its so affectionately called is an excellent price/performance lens @ < 100 $ USD. With 1.8 aperature, this lens is excellent for natural light photos.
Ok, so back to the article.
I don't have this camera, I have a 450D. But going off specs, I would want this *reasonably*.
* At least 24 FPS for 1080P
* Manual aperture mode in video
* external mic plug in
* better/faster contrast detect autofocus in live view mode
* higher raw buffer
My list:
1- Increase sensor size from Canon APSC to Nikon APSC with the same MP count. That would improve IQ a bit.
2- Increased Dynamic Range
3- HDR in camera
4- Wireless Flash controller in camera
5- AF layout with rule of thirds and no Diamond form.
6- AF adjust as XXD series
7- IS in camera compatible with IS in lens
8- 5 FPS
well, just dreaming here but...lol
make it cost 500$ and I 'll buy it.
i've owned this camera since the bigging of june. one of my biggest gripes is the grip. after a while, my hand starts to cramp as the grip is a little on the small side.
also, the live view mode's autofocus feature takes longer than usual to focus on it's subject. i've found that if i change the live focus to ai focus, it flips the mirror down to get a faster more accurate focus reading, then resumes live view.
there are only 9 focal points, vs the 11 focal points that are standard in some nikon models.
and yes, would it have been that far of a stretch to give us 4 more fps in 1080p movie mode? granted, 20fps looks decent, but to the trained eye you can really see the difference. 720p 30fps mode is great though.
my pictures have come out pretty nice over all, the kit lense does leave a bit to be desired, but will do just fine for most people who purchase this camera, the "prosumer" line.
15mp images at this price is a great deal, i cant argue with that. other cameras in this price range offer about 12mp or lower. im very happy with the digic4 image processing.
the 3" lcd and vga resolution is beautiful. the display is so crisp, it makes it really easy to see if the pictures i've captured are soft or blurry. if the lcd was able to rotate, it would be much more versitile.
3.4 fps continuous burst mode is about average for entry level cameras. this is more in the middle of the road, i've like to see 4 or even 5 fps.
over all i'm very, very pleased with my purchase. i think for the money, you can't find another comparable camera like it.
let it do 24/25/30/50/60fps 1080p and 720p, also let it have autofocus like on a digital camcorder, that way people dont have to buy a camcorder and a dslr. Also add a mic input, no-one wants to use the built in crappy mic. They are purposely not adding these so that people buy canon camcorders too, but when a company comes along with a camera as good as this but with all the features of a camcorder then canon will have to follow suit, wish that day would come sooner!
You want it to do.. 60fps 1080p?
Seriously?
Are SDHC cards even fast enough nowadays to capture 60fps 1080p video?
http://www.dpreview.com/news/0801/08010601casiof1.asp
Full 1080 at 60fps (plus numerous other video modes). Uses an SD/SDHC card.
TAKE THE F'ING CAMCORDER OUT OF IT!
DSLR or pictures and HD camcorder for videos. Simple!
So basically make it an XSi with a slightly better sensor?
*for XorX
Why let it video record when we'd rather have 24fps of high quality photos at full resolution
An excellent camera in its price range. Decent kit lens, image quality is very good, 1080p is still decent at 20 fps. I would definitely like to see that bumped up to 24 fps though. Video file sizes are ridiculously large, this should be optimized. Since a certain higher-end Canon camera recently received a firmware update for enhancements to functionality including HD video, why shouldn't the Rebel T1i? Hopefully this is on Canon's to-do list.
Why isn't 25p ever mentioned in articles like this.
To be fair: I would buy it today is it did 1080@24p. But why no 720@24p of 720@25p feature. 30p is not very usefull for people in europe. Especially when the idea with the lenses is to create a more film-like feel, 24p is a miss on Canon's side.
I'm sure 1080@24p is not possible hardware wise, otherwise it would have been there. But a firmware-update for 720@24 and &20@25p would be very welcome.
I bought mine body only with the 28-135mm IS lens and couldn't be happier.
Yes, the body is small, but easily fixed with a battery grip for the most part if you NEED something more substantial in your hands.
Coming off a 20D this camera is very capable, my only gripe is not being able to shut off the flash in any mode other then the no flash mode and manual. This may be a case of RTFMing though, I've only had it a week and am still learning the controls.
I got the T1i at launch and I have very few complaints, but since that's what this is about, here they are:
The 1080p framerate basically makes it unusable unless the camera is stationary and shooting slow-moving subjects. (although 720p is more than enough for most situations)
There really needs to be an AI Servo equivalent focus for movie mode. The auto focusing is loud, long, and really ugly. Luckily this could be fixed with a firmware update down the road, but in the mean time if you're not a pro with the focus ring and your subject's distance starts changing that you loose the shot.
The lack of an mic input is a pain because the one in the body is very limiting.
The shutter button could be a little beefier, it's on the small side.
As for the kit lens, sure it's plastic, but for the price, it's pretty damn good. And lets face it, where are you going to get a $100 zoom lens besides with the kit? It's really cheap, more than decent, and if you've got the extra hundred you might as well get it to fill out your range if nothing else.
I love the new T1i...it's awesome thus far. Still working on improving the shooting style.
Here are a few examples of the work its allowing me to produce:
www.ShaunPhotography.com
Yawn...........
I would love to see more fps @ 1080p, maybe an option to switch between 24, 30 and 60 fps. Definitely missing GPS and Bluetooth. Besides that it's a fine camera.