REBEL 2000

Once it was decided that I was going to Italy [link], I assessed my camera situation. I had a Konica FS-1 body that sucked AA batteries like an animal, weighed a seemingly brick-like 560 grams, and had a possible light leak. Mated to it was an excellent 50/1.4 lens given to me by my father. I wasn't really much of a serious photographer at that time, but I figured that it was time for a new camera, one that would address the failings of my current equipment: high battery consumption, excessive weight, questionable light sealing, and frustrating manual focus (to this day, I can't seem to get the hang of the much-revered split-image + microprism focusing system--maybe I'm too young to understand =P).

These things in mind, I began my research, and ultimately decided on the Canon Rebel 2000 with the much-maligned 28-80mm kit lens [link]. I had a scant 10 days to learn the camera before my European adventure began, but that proved to be quite adequate.

The most notable thing about the Rebel 2000 (aside from its small size) is its amazingly light weight. Paired with a light lens like the 50/1.8 or the 28-80, the Rebel makes a swanky travel companion. Lots of traditionalists rip on this camera because it feels "cheap" and "plasticky" and for being "unsuitable for load-bearing elements in diesel locomotives," etc., but honestly, who cares? It's not good enough to drive nails with, but it managed to survive my slapping it around with my woman-like hands. I didn't perform any concrete-impact testing (as many camera owners on the internet seem prone to do), so I can't tell you if it's suitable for the photogs who spike their cameras like footballs after making a shot.

The metering kicks the balls off of the FS-1 I had, and it certainly proved to be smarter than this novice on several occasions, pulling off decent exposures even when I clearly had no idea what I was doing. Even night exposures didn't seem to faze the damn thing; set up on a tripod on a cold-ass night on a local street, it registered 3 spot-on exposures on slide film in a situation that should have baffled it (black sky, blazing street lights, passing cars, etc.). Some people say that multi-segment/evaluative/matrix/honeycomb/whatever metering is just marketing hype, but it didn't take long for me to become a believer in said "hype," since the Rebel's 35-zone meter basically rocks.

As for the rest of the stuff: it's got depth-of-field preview, which AFAIK makes the Rebel 2000 the only entry-level camera with this feature. It takes the Canon electronic cable release. It has a continuous shooting speed of about 1.5 frames per second. And for about 30 or 40 bucks, you can get the vertical grip/battery pack, which gives you a nice vertical shutter button (that feature blew me away--I'd never heard of such a thing) and the ability to use AA batteries.

Bad things about this little camera? Beefy men may find it a bit too small, but since I'm pretty small myself, we made a good pair. The camera has 7 focus points, but changing between then is a pain in the ass (you have to push a button on the top of the camera, then spin the main control wheel), so I pretty much used the center focus point all the time. The partial metering mode can only be activated with the AE Lock button on the back of the camera, so it's not real intuitive or useful. It always rewinds the leader all the way into the film canister when you're done shooting, so you a) can't rewind the film in midroll and put it back in later and b) have a hell of a time getting black & white film onto a reel when you're first starting out doing your own development (jesus, those first couple of rolls were damn hard to load...prying the canister apart in total darkness...bah!).

All around, though, the Rebel 2000 kicks ass, and I'd recommend it as an entry-level camera to anyone who wants to get started in photography. I would've kept it, but it didn't have some features I wanted (faster motor drive, quieter operation, etc.), so I sold it after about 6 months for an Elan 7. If it sounds like I'm a Canon whore, it's because I am, but only because they made me their bitch fair and square--by making good products. I looked at the Nikon N65, but honestly, I thought it sucked. It was just as plastic as the Rebel, but weighed about twice as much (as if it had weights in it or something to appease the "lightweight is bad" school of photographers); plus, it couldn't take a cable release and didn't have depth-of-field preview. I didn't look much at Pentax and Minolta; maybe their cameras are great, but who cares--they both have such a limited lens selection (and correspondingly limited used market) that I didn't want to go down that road.