Canon EOS Rebel K2

dana44 · Jan 26, 2007

I was thinking about purchasing this camera, because my local Circuit City has it one sale, it comes with a basic 28-80mm lense, I am wondering, are these any good? it's a newer SLR, Are they worth it? I like fully manual, but it's just getting to damn expensive to keep mine fixed, or get them all together.

markbb · Jan 26, 2007

Camera's ok, but if it's the standard canon lens I suggest you dump it.

Alex Bishop-Thorpe · Jan 26, 2007

I have the EOS Rebel T2 (EOS 300x here), which I've heard is a similar rig. It's served me well for a year and a half. I got the 28-90mm lens with mine and a 50mm lens later, and it's been fine for my needs, but other people may be better informed in the world of optics. It's Good modern SLR with all the bells and whistles, it'll spoil you with options and things like automatic loading and the built in motor-drive. Despite it's Automatic Exposure options, in manual it offers a lot of creative control, bracketing settings and multiple exposures and such. It does feel rather fragile, but it's actually smaller than the Rangefinder I have. Convenient.
There's a long story behind this; but mine survived a while in a freezer as well, so the electronics must be decent. It's a complete brick when your batteries die though.

markbb · Jan 26, 2007

I'm assuming (big mistake!) it's the 28-80 mm F/3.5-5.6 EMZ. I can't quote the figures, but it's been poorly rated by Amateur Photographer (UK magazine).

Lee Shively · Jan 26, 2007

Canon's entry level EOS models are pretty good cameras from everything I've heard. I have an EOS Rebel 2000 that I used for several years. It wasn't abused or used very heavily during that time (it was a back-up camera) but it performed flawlessly. I gave it to my wife to use and she treated it pretty badly but it has survived and still works fine.

If the K2 design is anything like the 2000 model I have, there are only two things I didn't like about mine. It doesn't have the rear dial that other EOS models use and it has a mirror prism instead of a solid glass prism. The rear dial concept is ingenius, greatly improving function in my opinion. The mirror prism is not really a problem in most cases but the viewfinder is not as bright as it would be with a real prism.

Some have complained of the plastic lens mounts used on Rebel models but I used some heavy Canon lenses with mine without any damage. They may have changed it to metal on the K2. I don't know about the lens that comes with the camera. Most kit lenses in lower priced outfits are not noted to be outstanding but I doubt it would be unusable.

dana44 · Jan 26, 2007

So they really aren't any good?

Jim Charles · Jan 26, 2007

I'd seriously consider not getting a rebel. I have a Ti and regret buying it. I would consider going for a used A2 from Keh and a 50mm f/1.8 lens. An A2 in Ex condition would run in the $90 range and it's a much better camera. Heck, you could even go for Bargain at $50 and get a vertical grip with it.

Anupam Basu · Jan 26, 2007

This was my first camera. Well, anything that is light tight will do for a camera, but you can get more bang for your buck on many other models. If you don't need autofocus, the market is flooded with very high quality manual bodies that are virtually indestructible. As an advanced do everything p&s the rebel is okay, but I'd look elsewhere for a serious camera.

-Anupam

ripuron · Jan 26, 2007

i guess it all depends on what you expect from it. i bought a rebel 2000 as my starter camera with the kit lens. it served me fine for general use. i also bought the 50mm 1.8 lens after reading up on various "canon user reviews". love the 50mm. it's so clear and i like the range you get to play with the depth of field. as a quick, all around travel lens i would use the kit lens and use the 50mm at home. for the extra price of the kit lens, i'd get it. you could sell of later or sell it with the camera body when you decide to upgrade the body later. that's just my two cents.

Alex Bishop-Thorpe · Jan 26, 2007

I agree about the 50mm f/1.8, it's a great lens and spends a lot of time on my camera. But as has been said, if you don't need autofocus and those bells and whistles there are a lot of better cameras around, usually for a lot cheaper. I've retired my EOS for a Nikon FM2n, because I was worried about breaking it or having it pinched. Also it kept getting mistaken for a digital SLR :rolleyes:

smileyguy · Jan 26, 2007

I started with a Rebel 2000 and quite liked it. A very decent camera at a reasonable price. However, as many others on this thread have indicated there are many better cameras at a similar price point if you're willing to go used. I dumped my 2000 for an EOS3 about a year ago when one came up with the grip for $350CAD! That was the price I paid for my 2000 when it was new. A no brainer really. You can go that direction if you want the AF/AE etc. as many, many pros are dumping their really good film SLRs for dSLRs at our gain and their loss. Wooohoooo! Hooray for film.

Good luck.

dana44 · Jan 26, 2007

I actually went ahead and about a Nikkon N55.. with 28-80mm lense

mawz · Jan 26, 2007

The N55 and K2 are pretty comparable. Both have similar weakenesses and an unimpressive kit lens (The Nikon lens is sharper, but is still low-contrast and has a tendency to CA issues).

Karl K · Jan 26, 2007

The Canon 28-80 is one level above a Coke bottle. The body is OK. When and if the K2 begins to malfunction, just dump it and buy another one. Remember: the lens makes the photograph. The body just keeps the film flat.

dana44 · Jan 26, 2007

Alright, thanks

I am taking back the camera now, i tried loading film, it ate every damn role. i even went by the manual. still eat them.

reub2000 · Jan 27, 2007

dana44 said:
Alright, thanks

I am taking back the camera now, i tried loading film, it ate every damn role. i even went by the manual. still eat them.

Eats film? Just hope the camera doesn't get argyria.

dana44 · Jan 27, 2007

When I say eats film, I mean it literally does, I loaded it up with film (THE RIGHT WAY!!) and I closed the back-door, and it'd act like it was taking the film, and i'd get an error, so open the door back up, and it winded the film all the way in the roll

reub2000 · Jan 27, 2007

The low end cameras prewind the film, and then advance the film backwards into the cartridge.

Karl K · Jan 28, 2007

That's what it's supposed to do.

dana44 said:
When I say eats film, I mean it literally does, I loaded it up with film (THE RIGHT WAY!!) and I closed the back-door, and it'd act like it was taking the film, and i'd get an error, so open the door back up, and it winded the film all the way in the roll

The K2 loads film by winding the entire roll onto the take-up spool. Then, each exposed frame is wound back into the cassette. In case the back is opened by accident, no frames which were shot are ruined.

dana44 · Jan 29, 2007

Karl K said:
The K2 loads film by winding the entire roll onto the take-up spool. Then, each exposed frame is wound back into the cassette. In case the back is opened by accident, no frames which were shot are ruined.

No, This one did the opposite, i would put them film in, close the door, and it would wind for a second, click and give me an error, and then wind back, i'd open it up, and the film was all the way in the canister.

ripuron · Feb 1, 2007

sounds like a mechanical fault internally, or the film/camera spool is binding up. this would make the camera think it reached the end of the role. i could be wrong but first thing i would do is return it to the store. good luck

film_guy · Feb 1, 2007

My Elan 7N automatically fully loads whatever film I put in, and when I've finished with the roll, it'll automatically rewind everything into the film spool. I've enabled it to leave out the film leaver since I sometimes do a mid-roll rewind, but it's never done what you've said before.

Dorian Gray · Feb 2, 2007

Electronic gremlins... This is why I prefer my cameras to be of the mechanical variety. The job of a camera is conceptually very simple: hold the film in a light-tight container, open the shutter for a particular duration, move film on one frame. Repeat until end of film, then rewind. What does one gain by handing over any of the above to electronics? In my opinion, nothing whatsoever. And one stands to lose a lot, as evidenced by your N55 experience.

Get a mechanical camera. They're cheap and plentiful on the used market, vastly higher in materials and build quality, and do the camera's job so close to perfectly that it's not worth worrying about their individual flaws and drawbacks. If you still want a Nikon after your N55 problems try an FM2N.

reub2000 · Feb 2, 2007

Dana's experiance seems to be more of an exception than the rule. Newer cameras don't have decades of wear and tear. No light leaks, dirt who knows where including the ground glass screen, and other little things that don't work.

dana44 · Feb 2, 2007

So if I get good glass for the Canon EOS Rebel K2, or Nikkon F55, will it be worth a damn?

Canon EOS Rebel K2

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency