Canon EOS Rebel SL1 18.0 MP CMOS Digital Camera with 3-inch Touchscreen and Full HD Movie Mode (Bod

This is a very compact DSLR similar in ability and layout to a Rebel T2i/T3i for stills. Enhanced autofocus has made it Canon's best DSLR for point-and-shoot style movies. Paired with small primes, it makes for an exceedingly capable travel camera. Larger kits can make the T5i preferable.

==== Rebel T5i:

18 MP

5 fps

9-point AF w/ 9 cross points

Hybrid AF w/ 9% frame coverage

1080p/30, 720p/60

Articulating touchscreen

Stereo mics

13m flash range

20 oz

==== Rebel SL1:

+ 14 oz, 30% smaller by volume

+ Hybrid AF w/ 80% frame coverage

-4 fps

-fixed touchscreen

-9 point AF w/ 1 cross point

-9.4m flash range

-mono mic

DIFFERENCES:

* Size.

This is the smallest DSLR from any make. It's a whole size tier below the T5i and level with a number of mirrorless bodies. Whether that's a worthwhile ergonomic compromise depends on the use case. With a small lens like a 40/2.8, the combined package reduces to prosumer point-and-shoot dimensions. Anything more ample (even the kit 18-55) and the bulk of the lens rapidly offsets the SL1's space efficiency.

In-hand, the SL1 is a fingertip camera. The palm of my large right hand doesn't rest easily against the body without finger contortions, so support comes mostly from the left under the lens. It feels (and looks) lilliputian if you're used to larger DSLRs, but that's the only real adjustment; the button layout has no surprises relative to the T2/3/4/5i.

* Single cross-point AF.

First, context: Canon uses autofocus to differentiate between DSLRs. More expensive cameras tend to have 'better' autofocus. Precisely what that means, and whether it matters, depends on your requirements. With the addition of movie capability, we've got three parameters to consider: stills with static subjects, stills with movement, and movies with movement. A complicating factor is that performance depends greatly on whether you're shooting through the viewfinder or from the rear LCD ("Live View"). Unlike point-and-shoot and mirrorless bodies, Canon DSLRs (and all others save Sony's) have two entirely separate autofocus systems.

When I talk about 'phase-detect' AF and 'cross-points', these are characteristics of the viewfinder AF system. The SL1's phase-detect AF array has 9 points. Only the center point is a cross-point. Cross-points (shaped like a +) detect contrast in any orientation. The 8 outer points (shaped like lines) only see contrast that's near perpendicular to them. The practical implication is that the T4i/T5i will be somewhat faster and more consistent with off-center compositions with wide-aperture lenses (e.g., 50/1.8) and motion-tracking.

Both systems outperform the contrast-detect focus in any current mirrorless body with motion. You focus through an optical viewfinder that'll never wash out, show noise in dim lighting, lag the action, or smear colors. In exchange, you lose the clever information overlays of electronic viewfinders (EVF) and the face tracking that's become a part of many contrast-detect systems.

Here's the phase-detect breakdown for this body:

VF, stills, static: fast and accurate in frame-center

VF, stills, movement: moderately fast and accurate in frame-center

VF, movies, any subject: not possible

This is the same AF array as in the T2i/T3i. If you were happy with those bodies, you'll be equally so with this one.

* Hybrid AF II.

In the T3i and prior, Live View focusing from the rear LCD was achieved by contrast-detect. This method is vastly slower than phase-detect and, in Canon's DSLR implementation, isn't capable of tracking motion in movies. It's reasonably quick and quite accurate with stills. It isn't possible to use the main phase-detect array without interrupting Live View because a mirror gets in the way.

The T4i/T5i added a second phase-detect system integrated into the imaging sensor itself that boosted acquisition speed and improved motion tracking to mediocre/adequate levels, but only for the center 9% of the frame. The SL1 expands this system to 80% frame coverage (or so Canon says; if you measure the pixel dimensions of the AF area, it's almost exactly 60%). The result is significantly more confidence with continuous autofocus in movies. With off-center subjects, it hunts (bringing the scene in and out of focus) much less than the T4i/T5i.

Here's the contrast-detect breakdown:

LV, stills, static: reasonably fast and accurate over the whole frame

LV, stills, movement: very slow, accurate when it can keep up

LV, movies, static: reasonably fast, occasional hunting

LV, movies, movement: very slow, accurate when it can keep up

Motion tracking is still short of exceptional. STM lenses (which use a stepper motor instead of standard USM or a noisy micro-motor) work more quickly and precisely than non-STM lenses. They'll track slow, undemanding subjects and faces. For more challenging movement, either prefocus, manually focus, or jump to the next performance tier comprised of Sony's 'translucent mirror' DSLRs and many mirrorless bodies (e.g., Panasonic G/GH). The SL1 has no focusing aids (e.g., focus peaking) for Live View except full-screen zoom. Focusing accurately by hand on a moving target is very challenging.

OTHERWISE:

Everything else is to lesser consequence. A slightly weaker flash, a slightly slower framerate, a smaller battery, one less microphone channel. Even the loss of LCD articulation isn't much of a bother unless you're continually shooting from vantage points away from the viewfinder.

A major advantage of the SL1 is that, like the T4i/T5i, it has a new touchscreen that that significantly lowers the EOS learning curve. It's capacitive and almost as responsive as a modern smartphone. Adjusting functions (e.g., exposure, white balance, focus points; everything) is as simple as tapping what you want. The camera won't be at the ready when you're manipulating the LCD, but thanks in part to an integrated 'feature guide' that explains most options, you probably won't need to pull out the manual on first acquaintance.

Phone gestures (e.g., pinch zoom, swiping) are now part of the picture review system, which makes checking focus vastly quicker and more flexible than on any other non-touch EOS body. Focus itself is touch-enabled in Live View mode, so you can tap to focus on static subjects anywhere in the frame without ever having to manipulate the 9-point AF system.

STILLS QUALITY:

This sensor is functionally identical to those in the T2i/T3i/T4i/T5i/60D/7D save for the pixels devoted to phase-detect. Noise and dynamic range are the same in raw. Expect acceptable results up to ISO 3200. Nikon's D5100 is slightly better, Sony's A65 slightly worse. It's about two solid stops better than a typical point-and-shoot.

Unless you're in a JPEG-only shooting mode (e.g., multi-shot NR, HDR), raw gets the most out of this camera. Post-production creates the bulk of the appeal of many photographs (e.g., Instagram) and JPEG often lacks the requisite flexibility. Raw shooting also lets you defer decisions (e.g., white balance, sharpening, noise reduction, color, lens corrections, tone curves, and even exposure) that distract from catching whatever moment you're after.

LENSES:

The 18-55/3.5-5.6 STM is a stellar optic. Focus is as fast as the camera allows, near-silent, and inaudible in movies, as is the IS system. If you upgrade, it'll be for speed, a different range, or perhaps more contrast, not because it isn't sharp enough. The 18-135/3.5-5.6 STM is equally impressive, though about an inch longer and twice the weight.

Light and small primes are well-suited to this body. The 40/2.8 STM, 50/1.8, 28/1.8, and 28/2.8 are all more compact than the kit lens. Larger lenses work as with any other EOS body, though some will be slightly more awkward when you're trying to adjust the zoom ring and support the rig from under the lens at the same time.

ACCESSORIES:

For video, buy SD cards 32 GB or larger. My pair of 16 GB cards have been inadequate for even a one-day event. For stills, two or three 8 GB cards is plenty.

Interface responsiveness isn't much affected by card speed. Faster cards have three advantages: they can shoot longer bursts at 4 FPS, clear the picture buffer more quickly, and record video at the highest quality without risking a speed warning. Buffer depth is 28 JPEGs and 7 raw files with a standard SD card. Buffer cycling times are much lower with UHS-1 ('Ultra High Speed'). In one-shot mode, this difference is invisible; very fast cards would only make sense if you were time-limited on card-to-computer transfers with a USB 3.0, SATA, or Firewire card reader.

If you buy protection filters for your lenses, try Hoya's "DMC PRO1 Clear Protector Digital" line. They have very high light transmission and cause no visible flare. Digital sensors filter UV natively, there's no reason to pay more for that feature. I've written reviews on the relevant Hoya product pages with more details and why you might (or might not) want a filter.

IN SUM:

Whether this DSLR is your huckleberry depends on your priorities. This is new territory for Canon. This camera is sized to compete with mirrorless, but the EOS lens line doesn't have as many compact options to pair with it, so you may still end toting around a separate bulky camera case.

Like just about every DSLR save Sony's, it's better for stills than movies, and that's the best reason to buy it. This iteration of Canon's phase-detect AF system has fairly high success with running kids, surfers, and other action you'd encounter at home or traveling. You also gain a broader array of narrow-purpose lenses (e.g., macro, tilt-shift, supertelephoto, superfast), potentially greater subject isolation, faster and better physical controls, and (for stills) an excellent optical viewfinder.

The counterpoint is that mirrorless bodies are less clunky than the strange amalgam of 'Live View' and traditional mirror shooting that defines this camera and other DSLRs. They have unerringly accurate focus with static subjects and often vastly superior motion tracking in the movie modes. Many of them, particularly on the system level, are even smaller than this SL1, though some makes fare better than others. You might be tempted by the EOS-M, Canon's first attempt at an interchangeable-lens mirrorless body. Don't be. Image quality matches this camera, but focus speed lags by quite a lot.

If your priorities favor DSLRs, hands-off autofocus in movies, and small size, the SL1 is the best choice in Canon's arsenal. If you expect to upgrade to larger lenses or equip bulky accessories like an external flash that'll negate the size advantage, a Rebel T4i or T5i will be preferable for most uses.

Please leave a comment if you intend to downvote so I can correct the inaccuracy.

I am impressed with my new Canon SL1 with the 18-55 kit lens. As a long time dedicated amateur photographer with a shelf full of other equipment, including fancier and much more expensive equipment, this could be the one I take with me and use most of the time. Here's why:

* Incredibly small and incredibly light. The biggest single reason for mirrorless cameras (Sony NEX, Fujifilm X) is now negated! I am sitting here looking at the SL1 next to my Fujifilm XE-1 with a comparable 18-55 zoom lens. The SL1 is lighter and smaller than the Fuji mirrorless camera with its electronic viewfinder. The SL1 optical viewfinder, while more compressed than a more expensive DSLR, to my eyes is still far superior to any electronic viewfinder. Canon appears to have achieved the small size by repackaging the sensor and shutter; impressive engineering and I feel sure that Nikon and Sony will have to follow suit. Let's hope we will now see a new generation of tiny DSLRs.

*Image quality: Excellent. Superb. The market reality is that the electronics of sensors have advanced so rapidly in the last few years that your newest entry level camera is guaranteed to perform better than the one you bought two years ago, no matter how much you paid for it. And new half frame sensors may be comparable to full frame sensors from a couple of years back. Also, the entry level DSLR market is the most competitive. Nikon (D3200) and Canon (SL1 or T4) are forced to give you more for your money then with high end full frame cameras. The SL1 is a bargain. Yes, you can get a marginal improvement in images and controls by going up market, but you will pay 3X as much in dollars, and in weight, and in volume. The cost of technology is usually on a log scale; 90% of state of the art costs X and 95% costs 3X and 99% costs 9X. It makes no sense to ride this curve unless you do very specialized or commercial photography. For most of us, the most important single thing is to have the camera with you when the photo opp comes up.

*Image comparison. The images coming out of this Canon SL1 are lovely, contrasty and with excellent colors. I compared directly with my full frame Nikon D600 and Fujifilm XE-1 indoors on a still-life, ISO 1600 in room light and ISO 200 with flash. Results; unless you are a fanatical pixel peeper, they are all in the same ballpark. Perhaps the SL1 had slightly more shadow noise at 1600 but was better on greens, etc. Note that the full frame D600 body costs 4X the SL1 and weighs more than twice as much! And anyway, does it really matter if some other sensor is s-l-i-g-h-t-l-y better? No it does not. I confess to being a 'recovering' pixel peeper and realizing recently that using the best available equipment is just not the determining factor in capturing photos that you will take pride in your whole life. The SL1 gives you 90% of the quality you will get from any camera anywhere at 1/4 the cost of a high end DSLR. The main difference is that the viewfinder is cramped and the settings are in menus rather than dedicated buttons. Big deal.

*Kit lens is: Just fine. By profession I am interested in the details of lens design and I admire beautiful finely crafted Zeiss lenses just as much as you do. But as a photographer I can tell you that for real capturing of once-in-a-lifetime handheld photo opportunities, what matters more for sharpness and image quality are a) image stabilization and b) zoom so you can scale the desired image to fill your sensor. Are high quality prime lenses "better?" In practical terms, usually not. For most photography, they will not produce a more detailed image unless your camera is on a tripod and the scene just happens to be matched to the focal length. For general opportunistic photography, squeezing out the last iota of lens quality is close to irrelevant. This is especially so these days when the camera JPG engine corrects many lens defects such as distortion and chromatic aberration automatically. Modern lenses no longer have to be perfect in the glass; they are half software. This is also why spending hours diddling around with RAW images in Photoshop no longer makes much sense the JPG engine has been programmed to optimize the specific lens and it will take much time and skill to equal this on your own. Today, JPEG is how cameras should be judged. Image stabilization in particular has a lot more to do with sharpness for handheld photos then ultimate lens quality. Having a zoom has a lot bigger impact on quality then the niceties of a prime lens because you don't need to crop down.

There is one factor however which does favor mirrorless over SLR; the size of lenses, which is limited by the laws of physics and the long flange-to-sensor distance that comes with a mirror. For the Canon SL1 or any SLR, zoom lenses will usually be bigger than the body. So I also bought the 40mm f2.8 Canon pancake lens which is compact for walk-around. In addition, Canon makes higher quality zooms such as the 18-85, but you will have to accept a weight of 575-645 g compared to 205 g for the kit lens. Canon also makes 24 mm and 28mm lenses with image stabilization that weigh only 260-281 g and would offer a good match for the SL1. And of course you may already have a collection of Canon lenses to begin with.

*But isn't the SL1 plasticky? Yes, it is plasticky. But it's also very light. And it doesn't cost so much. And it's so handy you're going to take it with you when you travel as opposed to leaving your big full frame Nikon at home or locking your Leica lenses in your safe. And if it gets stolen or dropped, not such a tragedy. Yes, there is a tactile pleasure to high precision Leicas from the 1950's, but at one time that mechanical precision was functionally necessary. Cameras do not need to be made like that any more to capture high quality photos.

*Interface and ease of use. Canon did a fine job on the menus and so forth. They are the world's largest mfg. of DSLR's and have it all worked out. No big problems, and the touch screen is a plus. In any case, although this is considered an 'entry level' DSLR, the full manual nevertheless runs to 388 pages, so plenty of options. Details; I find the flash pops up when I don't want it to, but there is an auto setting which suppresses flash right in the mode dial.

*Flaws? There is one real deficiency. When I switch to Live View (this means lock up the mirror and use the LCD to frame photos, like a point-and-shoot), the autofocus becomes slow and hunts for a lock. The mirrored autofocus runs on a dedicated phase detection principle but in Live View the sensor focusses using some combination of contrast detection (slow in poor light) with special phase pixels. In any case, it's slow; use Live View mainly in good light with a contrasty scene. Other minor annoyances: the on/off switch is not in the most natural place. Also the optical viewfinder picture is rather cramped and does not capture 100% of the full sensor field; more like 79%, so you will have to learn to compensate by overfilling the viewfinder frame a bit.

*Movies. Have yet to try it.

*Bottom line: This is a great little state of the art camera and lens which takes lovely photos without much fuss in an affordable tiny package. It benefits from the latest up to the minute sensor technology and the photos are quite comparable to high end mirrorless cameras and even in the same ballpark according to my test as full frame costing much more and weighing much more. Speaking for myself, a highly portable half-frame camera with an optical viewfinder is just the right combination. The whole justification for half frame mirrorless designs is now just about null and void. Canon has produced an advance similar to that of the Olympus OM series in the 1970's. Small is beautiful.

I love SL1 already and it may leave my other cameras sitting on the shelf from now on, or even send some to eBay. Bravo, Canon; you will sell a lot of these!

Note added in response to comments below:

Thanks to everyone who commented. But perhaps I did not make my viewpoint clear enough. Yes I know a skilled PhotoShop artist who spends an hour or two fiddling with an image may produce a better result than the in-camera JPEG. My point is that post RAW processing is no longer optional since lenses are now designed assuming their distortions, vignetting and chromatic aberrations will be corrected in software. Since that is the case, we have a right to expect an efficient in-camera JPEG and the camera must be evaluated that way, not just for a few hobbyists who have the time and skills to start from RAW. Second, I know it's possible to get slightly better, slightly lower noise images at high ISO from a full frame D600. But I have compared and the difference is simply not great enough to make it worth lugging the big heavy D600. In other words I am willing to compromise a bit on these performance factors in return for small / light / portable and with me more of the time. So please allow me my personal preferences and I will allow you yours.

Another note: Consumer Reports just reviewed the SL1 and rated it near the top overall.

Buy Canon EOS Rebel SL1 18.0 MP CMOS Digital Camera with 3-inch Touchscreen and Full HD Movie Mode (Bod Now

I've had several smaller cameras like the Canon G11. All had one fault that troubled me. They could not shoot quickly when a grand child photo op materialized. Setting up for a particular shooting situation was far too time consuming, but more importantly, there was too much delay once the shutter was depressed. When shooting flash with red-eye protection turned on the delay is worse yet. The SL1 is slowed a bit with red-eye on but not much and for all other shooting is as fast as other Canon DSLRs. Shots using available light are near instantaneous under normal lighting as is typical of Canon DSLRS and as is essential for shooting pets and grand kids. When shooting available light in low-light conditions the SL1 can take a second to focus but is still DSLR-quick, much quicker than lesser camera types.

Another issue I have with smaller cameras is a secure and comfortable grip. While the SL1 is dimunitive by SLR standards, it still fills the hands comfortably and doesn't feel like it's going to slip through your fingers as a Digital Elph or an S100 or S110 does. My right hand fingers do bottom against the front of the body (I'm tall with longish fingers) but not problematically so. The thumb rest on the back of the body is excellent; as good or better than any DSLR I've had before. The grip is great in spite of the small body and allows secure one-handed shooting. And, of course, the light weight means many shots before fatigue sets in.

As with any small camera with a large sensor, physics prevents an equally compact lens though the 18-55 kit lens is surprisingly compact and light. With the standard two-handed grip with the left hand underneath and the right hand up the right side, the zoom and focus rings are as easily accessed as on any larger dslr and lens and sure beat the rubbery electric zoom controls on more compact cameras.

While the body is small, seemingly half the size of a 5D or 50D or 60D or 7D, the controls are pretty much as accessible as those on these larger cameras and far better than on an more compact camera. I wasn't excited about the touch screen, being adicted to the Canon Q screen, but it's a winner. I use it more on every outing. I thought smudges from use of the touch screen would be a problem but that has not been the case even with a protective film applied. The LCD is very bright. I've only had to set it to full brightness for use in ver y bright sunlight.

If you are a Canon shooter now, you will be up to speed on this camera in an hour or two without ever cracking the manual (mine is still sealed). If you are new to DSLRs, the SL1 is probably as good a place to start as any.

I won't get into a lot of the technical details since they are well covered by others. It seems to do at least as well as any APS-C camera I've had. Suffice it to say, feature-wise, the SL1 has just about everything you can get in the Rebel line except the weight and size and the flip-out LCD. For me it's the perfect second camera for backup, to carry on long hikes, for use at the grand kids birthday parties and soccer matches, and for casual walk-around duty. I'll rarely be without it. My full frame DSLR will now be reserved for serious landscape and portrait shooting.

UPDATE ...........

It's been about two months now and I'm over 800 shots on the SL1. I like it better every time I pick it up in part because it lifts up so easily! I've now shot a five day vacation (one that did not justify taking the 5DIII) and a granddaughter's birthday party as well as a few family outings and some construction going on across the street. And lots of experimenting in the back yard. Here are my key findings:

The dedicated ISO button is a blessing. Because one runs into noise issues more often in a smaller sensor (compared to a full frame sensor in this case) keeping an eye on ISO is a good idea. Mostly I put ISO on auto and set it for a maximum of 3200 and shoot Av and the camera does a good job of balancing ISO and shooting speed, dropping below about 1/60 only when ISO would otherwise go above 3200. When a special situation arises such as when I have something to brace against the ISO button makes it very easy to force the ISO down for that shot.

The Av +/button is also handy. It lets you easily adjust Aperture and/or compensation in the Quick menu, surely the two most frequently accessed adjustments.

At ISO 3200 noise is hardly a problem for jpeg shooters. RAW shooters used to a 5DII or 5DIII and using the SL1 as a "backup" or for less demanding outings may be shocked at the noise. Even though it looms large compared to the full frame cameras, I don't think it's any worse than canon's other 18 MP bodies (60D, 7D, other Rebels). But, higher ISO images from the 5DII and 5DIII that did not require noise correction will typically require some color and luminance noise correction if taken with the SL1 (or any 18 MP Canon APS-C body). There are APS-C cameras with lower noise but I think none that offer the benefits of the SL1 (especially at the new lower price!).

The silent shooting mode is great. It's quieter than the quiet mode in my 5DIII!. It also slows the 4 frames per second burst mode down to an often more suitable 2-3 fps. As with my 5DIII, I set the SL1 on silent mode early on and it's been on that setting since (I may go back to the 4 fps mode when the grand kids are old enough for sports).

If I have an issue with the SL1, it's the zoom range of the kit lens. I love the compactness of this lens and the always excellent Canon image stabilization. However, at 18-55mm, it's plenty wide for casual use, but is a bit short on the tele end (88mm full frame equivalent). At my grand daughter's birthday party I shot well over 20 images at the maximum 55mm setting. Almost every one needed to be cropped. While this is a bit of a nuisance, the 18MP of the SL1 is sufficient to allow a lot of cropping so long as you are not printing beyond about 8x10. Also, unless you are an expert (I'm not), there is risk of zooming in too far and getting a less than ideal framing that you are stuck with. When cropping down from a too large image, you always get a perfect framing of the subject(s) (and you can crop to 4x6 or 8x10). Living with a maximum 88mm tele reach is thus not a bad thing. The logical upgrade would be to an 18-135mm zoom (29-216mm) though such lenses are considerably larger and weigh about 16 oz, almost three times the six oz of the kit lens. The SL1 would not be nearly so handy with such a lens.

I'm continuing to transition to the touch screen. I think I'll miss it when I next take the 5DIII out.

Read Best Reviews of Canon EOS Rebel SL1 18.0 MP CMOS Digital Camera with 3-inch Touchscreen and Full HD Movie Mode (Bod Here

Pre-ordered SL1 to replace old Rebel xSi in April 2013 before a trip to Europe. Huge technological step forward. Got 18-135mm STM for greater range than kit lens; still very compact. Brought 50mm 1.8 but never took 18-135 off camera fast enough. Took 2000+ shots plus some video; few bad shots. Low light performance astonishing; even ISO 6400 in near-darkness very usable with little noise (I shot entirely in JPEG). Smartphone users will find touch screen intuitive and easier than menu surfing; long-time Canon users will find customary buttons familiar. Well-balanced even with longer lens; body comfortable in large hands. Light weight ideal to wear around neck all day. Instant availability of video; can shoot stills within. Unlike T5i, SL1 screen fixed, not swivel, fine with me. Other features lacking versus T5i: stereo microphone (SL1 is monaural) and some multi functionality of cross keys IMO, small price to pay for lighter weight. For ready shooting on the fly, I used mostly in no-flash full-auto mode; for greater precision, used AV for focus-point and DoF control. (Can't opt for center-point focusing in full auto.) BTW, 64G Class 10 SD card was overkill for my trip, used only 15G. Very happy with this camera and 18-135mm lens.

Want Canon EOS Rebel SL1 18.0 MP CMOS Digital Camera with 3-inch Touchscreen and Full HD Movie Mode (Bod Discount?

Outstanding Camera, blew away my expectations! All of my pictures look like they were taken from a professional studio. I would absolutely recommend this product!