Images with an "Obsolete" Camera

[Tronhard]

My highly respected colleague, Rick made mention in another thread from someone who had paid a minimal sum for of a Rebel XT -  to the effect: "In all honesty, its time to retire that device.  6.3MP.  Your phone likely does more than it can.  Much has happened with digital imaging in the last 20+ years."

Let me say off the bat that I don't disagree with Rick at all about the age and sophistication of the camera in question.  I jokingly responded that having an almost brand-new 400D (Rebel Xti) of similar vintage that I would be at a loss to know what to do - it's just been sitting quietly in its box.

However, that got me wondering...  What if I put a decent EF lens on the thing and challenge it to take the same kinds of animal portraits that I normally do with my R5 and R6 variant units?  How would it fare?  Well, the only way to find out was to take it, and my EF 100-400L MkII lens to check it out.  Here are the results.

As always, all images hand-held, available light, spot focus centred in Servo Mode, spot metering.  Brought into PS for lens corrections, cropping to taste, exposure compensation and downsized.  Nothing to do with layers or image manipulation.

EOS 400D, EF 100-400LII@400mm, f/5.6, 1/160sec, ISO-400  EOS 400D, EF 100-400LII@400mm, f/6.3, 1/125sec, ISO-400EOS 400D, EF 100-400LII@220mm, f/6.3, 1/200sec, ISO-400  EOS 400D, EF 100-400LII@400mm, f/5.6, 1/1250sec, ISO-400

EOS 400D, EF 100-400LII@400mm, f/5.6, 1/80sec, ISO-400 
This last pair of images is of a minuscule insect inside the enclosure of an Auckland Elegant Green Gecko that I was going to photograph.  It was in dim light behind some thick grungy glass.  I realized there was absolute tiny insect on a leaf, and that took my attentions.

 EOS 400D, EF 100-400LII@400mm, f/5.6, 1/80sec, ISO-400 -- 100%crop 

So, what do YOU think?

[normadel]

6 megapixel XT is too old to take good pictures. DSLRs are obsolete. Mirrorless cameras are "better" and anyone who is hanging onto a DSLR or "old" camera is a fool.  The "more megapixels" race is a lot of garbage. 

This is all very tiring. And destructive to getting people into photography. 

The XT photos are beautiful, Trevor. So are photos I take with my 5-megapixel Canon Powershot G5. Viewed on a monitor or printed in 4x6 or 8.5x11, the pixels aren't seen at anything like how you'd view them normally.

[Tronhard]

I must admit I have never chased MP for themselves.  For me, it's generally been improvements in dynamic range (usually not a feature of more MP density), and focusing precision.  For me, the big improvements for the MILCs were the face and eye tracking, the ability to directly see exposure before one shoots and the power of the processors.
It is for those characteristics, plus a massive focus on real-time connectivity that has always been the hallmark of the 1 series, not MP capacity.    Sure, I have the 5DsR at 52MP, and R5 at 45MP, but those do not form the balance of my gear - I use the 80D (to some extent), and the R6 units far more - which, in modern terms sport a modest maximum capacity at 24MP.

All this needs to be taken into the context of what one produces (about which I am always commenting), but it is for either cropping, or printing large and detailed prints where large MP cameras come into their own.  The results for landscape and architectural work are often seen in that context.

I have done a reasonably wide range of photography - including (but not limited to) portrait, corporate, scenic, travel, industrial, but these days I would describe myself as an animal portrait photographer, who produces mainly for digital display.  As such, my need for high MP sensors is very limited.   

One of the things I really notice with folks asking for advice - by far the dominant number are those who talk about camera bodies and rarely mention lenses until prompted. Even then it is clear from their often imprecise descriptions that they underrate the significance of optics.  To me, lenses have by far the longer-term investment value.

[Tintype_18]

I'll hang on to my T7. I have priced new and used mirrorless cameras plus lenses and they are out of my price range. I could spring for an EF/RF adapter but I have other things on the list as groceries.  I'll buy one when I win the lottery. Or my wife gets a second job, whichever occurs first.

[Kngawolf]

Fantastic display of how spoiled we have become wanting more MP and better cameras when these results can still be obtained by and "obsolete" unit

[shadowsports]

Beautiful shots Trevor.  The image quality is certainly above average.  They showcases your talents of course 🤩.  Also the importance of good glass, and how one's lenses can impact their photography.

The Rebel XT and 400D (XTi) were only 4 years apart.  Canon was already on the way to its market dominance. 🧨

I'd have a hard time going back to 6.3 or 10MP,  it's as you've always stated, what do you intend to do with the output.  Many mobile devices are at 50MP now.  Canon has always been systematic in what they deliver.  Sure we all want more lenses. 📸  With new AI, I think Canon's R52 and R1 are poised to do well. 

[Tronhard]

Thanks Rick:
When I take these kinds of images, it's to see try to see (within my own limits) what these devices - lenses or cameras - are still able to do. If I can do it, others can too. The rest is down to the photographer.

Definitely agree that the R1 and R5 will do well.   I think their market is deservedly assured for the pro-sports shooters (watching the BYU videos and those from the Olympics I posted in General Discussion really put that into context).  The R5II will do well for most other professionals who need more MP values and are not a dependent on fast image upload to remote systems as a pro sporting events.   They both will doubtless be snapped up by others who like the idea of having an R1 or R5 on their shoulder.

I think I shall wait for the R6III: around 24MP is all I need, and I prefer to get closer or use a longer lens and keep that edge in DR that a sensor with larger photosites offers.  No longer making money from photography (I shoot as a volunteer now), the cost of these bodies is also an issue.

There are two areas where I would have interest, if Canon ever bothered to go there.  First would be a retro style camera, with the insides of an R6 variant, but the dials etc. one might find in a film camera.   I still  love using my Nikon Df camera for that sense of tactility and the encouragement it gives to let one slow down, savour the process of taking an image for itself, and be in the moment.

The second camera would be an equivalent to the Sony RX-10.  Canon had a rather awful PS GXIII body with a similar focal range, but there the similarity ended.   It was slow to focus, no built-in EVF (the add-on EVF was expensive, large, clunky, fragile and rendered what weather sealing there was null and void) and the controls were a bit of a mish-mash. I had one and soon sold it in favour of the the RX-10IV which, after 7 years of its release, is still the finest super zoom bridge camera in the world, and is perfect for those people who are going on a major trip but with limited funds and camera capacity constraints either because of physical limitations or travel capacity ones to get to such things as safaris and cruises.  I still have mine and after much feature wrangling to get it to behave, I actually use it a lot.   

[stevet1]

Trevor,

Those are nice pictures.

I'd say the old camera and the old cameraman are holding up well.

😀

Steve Thomas

[Tronhard]

That's a relief!

[zakslm]

Beautiful images!

They certainly demonstrate that an old tool in the hands of a craftsman can produce good results. 

I’m curious how the 6.3MP images would look compared to an 18 or 24MP image when displayed on a large flat screen TV fitting the image to the screen and viewed from 6-10 feet away?

If I had to guess, I think it would be difficult to find differences unless you look really hard.