Light; easy to use; depth of field preview (although more of a gimic)

Autofocus not as good as 500 (slow and sometimes can't find focus); Requires flash to pop up in darkness to focus (500 has a seperate light, anonying when you have a flash in the hotshoe); Not very rugged

Not a bad little camera for the price, but I should have stuck with the 500N. As a beginner, all the features of 7 autofocus points (which are way too close together anyway) and 35 zone metering does not mean much since most of the time it is in the 'green square' mode. The botton line save your money, buy the 500N and get a 50mm f1.8.

Customer Service

Sent in for repairs to check spot metering in Av mode.

Similar Products Used:

EOS500N

Full of features
Light weight
Comes with 28-80mm lens, everything else in this price range had a 35-80mm.

It's plastic, but it just takes some common sense to take care of it.

I really love this camera. It has been all over the world, literally. I have compared the pictures from this camera to those from a much more expensive camera, and I can't tell the difference. For a beginner, it's a great camera.
Yes, it is plastic, but if you just think... keep it in a case, always put the strap around your neck, you should never have a problem.

Customer Service

Never used

Similar Products Used:

None

1. Most feature filled of any SLR in its class (Nikon N65, Minolta HTsi) with such luxuries as AutoExposure Lock and Depth-of-Field Preview,
2. Lightweight.
3. Excellently priced.
4. Fully compatible with EOS lens series
5. Extremely accurate metering (35 point)
6. Sharp, fast autofocus

1. Body "feels" a little fragile for such a precision mechanism, however, most bodies these days are made this way, and is more of a psychological block than an actual impediment. I've spoken to owners whose had these last for YEARS.

Before I make any statements, I think it's important to know where I'm coming from. I am not a professional photographer, so I will not bash the camera for its failure to live up to durability standards of a 2000$ product. Although I am an amateur, I looked for a camera with the intent to delve into photography, and therefore made my choice based on features beyond those needed by simple point and shooters. Unfortunately these reviews are dominated by those that fall under these extremes and consequently make it hard to form an opinion.

That said, I think the Canon Rebel 2000 was an excellent choice, but that doesn't make the N65 bad by any means. The Nikon N65, which was my other choice, is indeed a great camera. Both will take excellent shots - I chose the Rebel 2000 because its trade offs were less important to me than those I would have to make with the N65.
The N65 does indeed feel a bit better, and a *bit* sturdier. However, I really think the difference is minimal - if both were to take a heavy fall, neither would come out unscathed. The Canon Rebel has AutoExposure lock, which I realized would be an extremely useful feature to have. For those that don't know, autoexposure lock allows one to choose a point to gather a meter reading, and KEEP it while "recomposing" the picture. In situations with unusually lopsided lighting conditions, this allows for an accurate exposure of the true subject of the picture, and not an improper exposure due to a fooled meter from background or lopsided light intensities. Perhaps I am being overly descriptive, but I think that many people will enjoy this function, especially considering the many times such light contrasts and are evident in nature (a bird in front of a sunset, a person in fron of a bright window, an subject colored in extremese of the spectrum like a black dog, or bright white cat...)

Beyond that, I found the two cameras to be identical. Most of the difference and vehement denunciations seems to result from the fanaticism bred by competing product lines.

I saym, try BOTH! Put them in your hands. See which feels better. Canon won me because of AE lock, nikons "sturdier" build my push you in the other direction. I promise you'll be happy with either.

Customer Service

Never used.

Similar Products Used:

Looked at a Nikon N65, Nikon's attempt to cash in on the success of the Rebel 2000.

-Great value
-DOF preview
-Same optics system as the Elan 7
-Light weight

-Polycarbonate lens mount
-Plastic body
-Inconvinient controls (only one dial)
-No IR focus assist

It's a great camera for the money and I would recommend it to any amature photographer or as a second body to any pro. It's light but feature packed and accepts all Cannon EOS lenses which makes it an ideal travel camera. However, the polycarbonate lens mount and the plastic body makes me wonder about its durability. But then again that's what camera bags are for. All in all, it's a great camera for the money and I recommend it whole-heartedly. However, if you are looking to get serious, you'd be much better off with an Elan 7 or N80. (I traded up to the Elan 7e after 4 rolls through the Rebel 2000.)

Customer Service

-Never used

Similar Products Used:

-Canon Elan 7e

Small, Great for beginners, Light (almost too light)

cannot take quiet pictures (bad for wildlife)

This camera has been in the mountains of Tennessee and through Ireland with me. It has taken many falls and drops, and keeps right on ticking (plastic or not). Great camera for thsoe learning, but I am soon moving to the Elan 7 for more features, better build, and four frames per second. I am a hunter as well, but have decided I would rather shoot with my Canon than with my Colt

Similar Products Used:

None

Lightweight; Canon EOS; very solid for a plastic body (I've put mine through hell and it hasn't had a single problem); I take a lot of "hip" shots (not looking through the viewfinder) and the autofocus/program mode puts things in focus and has correct exposure; program shift allows a very fast and easy way to change apeture while maintaining correct exposure (I shoot in P-mode nearly all the time); oh yea, price -- that's kind of nice being as how I'm a poor college student; simple to pull out of the box and start shooting; professional features let me learn with my camera; very well balanced with the optional battery pack (highly recommended)

Plastic lens mount - I haven't had a problem with this at all, but I just bought the Sigma EX 70-200 f/2.8 which weighs a good 50 some oz. I might break the mount someday if I'm not careful. Other weaknesses are difficulty in changing between focus points (the button is not in a natural position for the fingers to reach). I shoot most of my AF shots with the AF looking at all points. It leads to a bit of searching, but there are ways to trick the AF into doing what you want.

What can I say about the camera that converted me from a non-photographer, to a multi-show photography entrepreneur. This thing is great. I bought it 9 months ago due to a growing interest in picture taking - since then I've had two independant photography shows in which I've sold a bunch of work - I've caught the eye of people interested in hiring a photographer for various functions - and I've evolved from a wandering 2nd year college student at a huge university, to someone focused on becoming a photojournalist at a smaller school more suiting for my needs. I'm not trying to pat myself on the back too much here, I'm just telling you that the little Rebel 2000 is d*** good. It's capable of taking professional level shots once you learn all of it's little tricks (which you can) and it's simply a good buy. I shot entirely through a cheep little Promaster 28-80 (which I also recommend) until I purchased my new Sigma zoom. Know what... I'm going to stop. I feel like I'm ranting. Buy the camera. If you already have a higher buck Canon - but one of these as a backup. I'm looking to upgrade to a Canon EOS-1 as soon as I can raise the funds, but I'm sure there will always be a place for my little Rebel in my bag of goodies. Thank you

Customer Service

None needed yet - Canon's are tough (even the Rebel)

Similar Products Used:

Some shots with an old Canon AE-1

very responsive AF, lightweight, compact, powerful flash, easy to use

Inbuilt flash does not sit properly.

This camera is a great deal. I use it with sigma lens and have taken very clear pictures at all ranges. The AF is very quick with wide angle lens.

Customer Service

Never used

Similar Products Used:

Nikon

Light weight.
Fast and accurate focusing.
Accurate metering.

For the price paid, none.

The pictures taken with the Rebel 2000 and my 35 2.0 EF, 24 2.8 EF and 50 1.8 EF are some of the sharpest and most well-saturated color prints I have taken during my 27 years in photography. I love that a camera as inexpensive as this can shoot in high speed sync mode with flashes such as the 420 EX. Put on the 100 2.0 EF, set the lens to 2.8, and the 420 EX to FP mode, and you'll get sharp portraits with the background nicely out of focus and with just the right amount of fill light.

I'll make this unequivocal statement: I think the Canon EX units are far better than the Nikon SB series for fill flash. The Nikons are too "hot" and always have to be adjusted to -1 stop or so to get good fill.

Another controversial statement: My Rebel 2000 has taken sharper and more pleasingly saturated Sensia II slide shots than my Nikon F5, given the same type of lens mounted on each camera.

Overall, the Canon Rebel 2000 is an outstanding value.

Customer Service

Have not needed.

Similar Products Used:

Elan 7e
EOS 1V
Lots of Nikon stuff.

Lightweight, small
Easy to use
Hard to take bad pictures

Maybe a bit too small when using a flashgun (I use Speedlite 420EX). This can be corrected by using BP200 -battery pack.

It really is very hard to take bad pictures with this camera! Just open the box, put in film and batteries and shoot! Exellent features that are usually only found in expensive cameras. Best money I have spent!

Customer Service

Nothing bad to say.

Similar Products Used:

EOS3000

Weight!!!!!!!
Great set of features.
Price.
Feel.

Not at all happy with the Canon lens selection under $800, Sigma has done much better for me.

Plastic, metal I don't give a *&^!@ this is an awesome camera because it is so light! And it doesn't sacrafice features. I like the plastic feel in my hand, kinda soft. Sure, I could have really used 4 fps film advance on several occasions. I would like a quicker focus-zone adjustment and setting up auto-bracketing could be much faster. But if you want extra features you have to get a bigger camera and spend more dough. The bottom line here is that the Rebel 300/2000 is as near a perfectly balanced machine as I have seen in quite some time.

PS Don't get the package w/ canon lens. And don't get the battery-pack unless you have big hands. It doesn't give you any more FPS, just adds more weight and bulk which defeats the whole point of this camera IMO.

Customer Service

Really great so far.

Similar Products Used:

Pentax K1000 (total opposite of Rebels)