Canon EOS 300D



P

Paul Saunders

Guest
I had a look and a feel of this camera in Jessops today, and I must say that it's got a really good
solid feel to it, but at the same time is surprisingly light. I didn't weight it, but it seemed to
be no heavier (or bulkier) than my G3 with the wide angle converter (the converter does add a lot
of weight).

Also, the lens has real focusing which you can see through the real SLR viewfinder. I knew this
anyway, but now I've seen it for myself and I can't wait to start doing real focusing again instead
of this stupid G3 digital focusing (that's the worst thing about digital compacts IMO).

Now I really can't wait to get one.

Paul
--
The October Project 2003
http://www.wildwales.fsnet.co.uk/october/october.html
http://www.wilderness-wales.co.uk
http://www.photosig.com/go/users/userphotos?id=118749
 
"Paul Saunders" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
| I had a look and a feel of this camera in Jessops today, and I must say that it's got a really
| good solid feel to it, but at the same time is surprisingly light. I didn't weight it, but it
| seemed to be no heavier (or bulkier) than my G3 with the wide angle converter (the converter does
| add a lot of weight).
|
| Also, the lens has real focusing which you can see through the real SLR viewfinder. I knew this
| anyway, but now I've seen it for myself and I can't wait to start doing real focusing again
| instead of this stupid G3 digital focusing (that's the worst thing about digital compacts IMO).
|
| Now I really can't wait to get one.
|
| Paul

Hi Paul,

I take it the film scanner and car can now wait? :eek:)

I half-wish that I'd just bought the EOS 10D instead of the G5. After I've bought my camera, the
lens adaptors, the teleconverters, the 50mm lens, the filters etc, it's probably not that much short
of £1250, and certainly not that much short (if any!) of the 300D! :-s But at the time, it was just
a cost thing at the time, as I couldn't afford £1250 body only, and have to fork out for a lens too.
Ahh well, there's always the EOS 20D! :eek:)

I'm going along to my local photography society next week as they've got an open day. I've never
looked through a SLR, so I'll see if I can pick one up and have a look (without them thinking I'm
about to run off with it!). Are you in any camera clubs or anything like that? Also, have you ever
had any work published?

Regards,

Stephen
 
Dave Newton <[email protected]> writes
>
>
>
>The 300 is a fine camera - but I have this anxiety about anything described as a 'cut-down version
>of....'. I know it's a heavy grade plastic over a magnesium alloy chassis but I still prefer the
>grown-up brother, the 10D. Having said that I'm not in the market for either. Up until last week
>when I had a play with the 10D and a range of lenses I had it in mind that about March next year I
>might think about switching to the Nikon D100 but, as you quite rightly say Paul, the weight of
>these cameras is a huge issue for walkers. There is no way I could consider carrying a DSLR kit on
>the tops. I think they are for lay-by shooting! I'll stick with my 5700 - for now.
>

Well I have been out walking with a D30 having a 24-70 mm lens attached and a 70-200mm lens as an
extra. The later lens weighs the proverbial ton. Fit the items into a day rucksac with extras such
as fluid and overgear. Though I do confess the 70-200 is not much good for landscapes in the main.
One could take a punt on buying a D30 used or a D60 used lot cheaper than the 300D but its knowing
the history that counts.
--
david hill
 
In article <[email protected]>, Paul Saunders <[email protected]> writes
>And from a walker's perspective, there's the all important weight issue. Yes the 10D is more solid,
>but do you really want to carry all that extra weight up a mountain?

Get you're priorities right Paul !

1) Are you a hillwalker who takes photos, in which case is it the walk that's more important, or

2) Are you a photographer who wants to sell photos, in which case the picture taking should be more
important that the walk.

I submit this as a bit of an explanation of the above.........

For some "classic" photos, you might well find yourself "stuck" in one place waiting for that
elusive bit of sunshine in order to capture the "perfect" picture. This is where the photography
takes over from the walking.

--
Bill Grey http://www.billboy.co.uk
 
In article <[email protected]>, Chris Street
<[email protected]> writes
>I've no doubt there is equipment envy in some but I've not seen it im my club. Only problem is that
>I'm about thirty years younger than the next youngest members. Fungii feature highly in our club -
>they don't run away you see....:)

Fungii are OK as long as they're the ones that are stuck on trees about six feet above the ground.
Bending to take shots of mushrooms etc can be a bit of a bind for the arthritic members :)
--
Bill Grey http://www.billboy.co.uk
 
In article <[email protected]>, Dave Newton
<[email protected]> writes
>As for camera clubs, I've been a member of ADAPS ( http://www.adaps.org.uk/ ) for 18 months now and
>it's excellent company! There is no one-upmanship whatsoever and everyone there is more than
>willing to help anyone else. Perhaps this club is a one off, I don't know.

Many years ago I formed a camera club and was knobbled for the secretary's job for my labours! We
had numerous novices - total beginners even- together with three or four "experienced"
photographers. After a settling down period in the clubs formation, we started to hold monthly
competitions. It was too obvious that things were a bit one sided and some of the novices just
didn't stand a chance. rather than lose members who might become dejected, we introduced a handicap
system. This worked very well and brought in a much better sense of competition and humour into
proceedings. Oh yes! one member did own a Hasselblad and another a Mamyia MF camera. Both were very
good photographers. I just plodded on with my Canon A1 - which I still have. FD lenses are hard to
come by nowadays.

--
Bill Grey http://www.billboy.co.uk
 
In article <[email protected]>, Paul Saunders <[email protected]> writes
>I haven't had any colour fading. Most are just as good, but some of my old slides from 86-87
>have got a bit of fungus growing on them. It will be interesting to see how the digital ICE
>copes with that.
>
>Probably best for me to scan and archive the best of my oldest shots first, before they get
>any worse.

Seeing as the original slides were properly "fixed" it should be possible to wash them again,
carefully dry them in a dust free environment and thus get rid of the fungus. The main problem will
be de-mounting them and re-mounting them !

I wouldn't like to get any fungus inside my scanner.
--
Bill Grey http://www.billboy.co.uk
 
In article <[email protected]>, ste © <[email protected]> writes
>> I suppose it's comparable to the "new" photographs that you're currently taking with your "new"
>> digital camera. Time marches on...
>
>I know what you mean, time sure does fly. I wonder what the future holds?

If the original shots are "that" good and the slides in too bad a state now, then a re-take
shouldn't be too difficult.
--
Bill Grey http://www.billboy.co.uk
 
Paul Saunders wrote

> I had a look and a feel of this camera in Jessops today, and I must say that it's got a really
> good solid feel to it, but at the same time is surprisingly light.

Finally got 'round to having a look yesterday in Dixons. Not impressed. Seems flimsy and
insubstantial to me. Also the manual focus was loose and pretty poor. It seemed to me to be a quick
shot at an entry level digital SLR. I shall probably get a 10D.

Chris
 
Carol Haynes <[email protected]> wrote
>
>"ste ©" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
>
>> What exam have you got? Also, I'm glad you're pleased with your A4
>prints!
>> I've only had one A4 print done with my Canon PowerShot G5, but I was also very pleased with
>> that, and all the other millions of 6 x 4.5's too! :eek:)
>
>Open University S267: How the Earth Works (nothing minor then).
>
I had an inkling it would be OU Its a funny old world I have signed up for that course next year.
Next session is last for the course allegedly before replacement.
>Lots of Geophysics, Geochemistry, Tectonics and Planetary Science.
>
>Back to the mantle peridotite ;-)
>
Going for s339 afterwards
--
david hill
 
In article <[email protected]>, Carol Haynes
<[email protected]> writes
>Not at all ... but if I inspire you good luck! I have got into eating fish and lots of
>fruit and veg.
>
>Can't bring myself to go on diets (and the Atkins diet makes me feel ill just to think of it) as I
>can't sustain them and put weight on again when I give up on them ... this way I have had changed
>my eating habits and am happy to continue with the new food and approach to my daily diet.

Well done Carol. I managed to lose 19 lbs by eating sensibly and keeping my calories intake down to
about 1500 calories a day. This is OK when you're sufficiently motivated but it is TOOOOOO easy to
relapse.:-(

By the way - back to topic - I'm green with envy :)

Good luck with the exams.
--
Bill Grey http://www.billboy.co.uk
 
In article <[email protected]>, Carol Haynes
<[email protected]> writes
>aul Saunders" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>> > Sorry, this is where my lack of technical knowledge shows. Digital cameras don't have shutters?
>>
>> No.
>>
>> > Then what do they have instead?
>>
>> Nothing, they don't need anything. You can see the picture on the LCD when you aren't taking a
>> photo, can't you?
>
>The EOS300D does have a shutter Paul - and as far as I can work out you can't use the LCD for
>composing shots.

Just found this on Meridian web site re Canon EOS 300D

Focal-plane shutter • 30 - 1/4000 sec (0.3 EV steps) • Flash X-Sync: 1/200 sec • Bulb

Hope this helps.
--
Bill Grey http://www.billboy.co.uk
 
On Mon, 13 Oct 2003 23:29:30 GMT, "ste ©" <[email protected]> wrote:

>
>"Paul Saunders" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>| I had a look and a feel of this camera in Jessops today, and I must say that it's got a really
>| good solid feel to it, but at the same time is surprisingly light. I didn't weight it, but it
>| seemed to be no heavier (or bulkier) than my G3 with the wide angle converter (the converter does
>| add a lot of weight).
>|
>| Also, the lens has real focusing which you can see through the real SLR viewfinder. I knew this
>| anyway, but now I've seen it for myself and I can't wait to start doing real focusing again
>| instead of this stupid G3 digital focusing (that's the worst thing about digital compacts IMO).
>|
>| Now I really can't wait to get one.
>|
>| Paul
>
>Hi Paul,
>
>I take it the film scanner and car can now wait? :eek:)
>
>I half-wish that I'd just bought the EOS 10D instead of the G5. After I've bought my camera, the
>lens adaptors, the teleconverters, the 50mm lens, the filters etc, it's probably not that much
>short of £1250, and certainly not that much short (if any!) of the 300D! :-s But at the time, it
>was just a cost thing at the time, as I couldn't afford £1250 body only, and have to fork out for a
>lens too. Ahh well, there's always the EOS 20D! :eek:)
>
>I'm going along to my local photography society next week as they've got an open day. I've never
>looked through a SLR, so I'll see if I can pick one up and have a look (without them thinking I'm
>about to run off with it!). Are you in any camera clubs or anything like that? Also, have you ever
>had any work published?

Hmmm. I'd be sorely tempted to tell you to go and play with a K1000 and a 50mm SMC lens for a few
weeks first if you've never used an SLR. Trouble is, finding a K1000 in this day and age is nigh on
impossible....

>
>Regards,
>
>Stephen
>

--
79.84% of all statistics are made up on the spot. The other 42% are made up later on. In Warwick -
looking at flat fields and that includes the castle.
 
ste © wrote:

>> Now I really can't wait to get one.

> I take it the film scanner and car can now wait? :eek:)

I don't know, I'm really tempted. The pro scanner is pretty vital for scanning my existing
photographs but I should be able to take highly sellable photographs with the 300D too. Hard choice.

Best option is to start selling lots of photos and buy them both! ;-)

> I half-wish that I'd just bought the EOS 10D

Really? I'm not sure why so many people still fancy the 10D over the 300D. Yes it's a better camera,
but by the time you buy a lens to go with it the total cost is going to be practically double, and
there's no way that it's twice as good as the 300D, I'd say perhaps only 10% better, and that's only
in terms of extra features, there's no benefit in picture quality.

And from a walker's perspective, there's the all important weight issue. Yes the 10D is more solid,
but do you really want to carry all that extra weight up a mountain? Having seen the 300d for myself
I can assure you that even though it's plastic, it's not cheap plastic, and the light weight is a
*major* benefit for walkers IMO. I probably forgot to mention also that the lens that's bundled with
it is surprisingly small too, much smaller (and lighter) than an equivalent lens that you'd have to
buy for the 10D.

> Ahh well, there's always the EOS 20D! :eek:)

Is that a joke or does it really exist?

> Are you in any camera clubs or anything like that?

No, they never appealed to me, being a bit of a loner that way (and dedicated specifically to
landscapes, which is not how camera clubs operate). I was also not impressed by the "camera club
mentality" of people I've met who were in them, but perhaps I just met the wrong people. I got the
impression that there's a lot of equipment envy in these clubs, and the guy with the Hasselblad
tends to win all the photo competitions. ;-)

> Also, have you ever had any work published?

I had some shots of Devon and Cornwall published as postcards many years ago.

Paul
--
The October Project 2003
http://www.wildwales.fsnet.co.uk/october/october.html
http://www.wilderness-wales.co.uk
http://www.photosig.com/go/users/userphotos?id=118749
 
> I half-wish that I'd just bought the EOS 10D instead of the G5. After
I've
> bought my camera, the lens adaptors, the teleconverters, the 50mm lens,
the
> filters etc, it's probably not that much short of £1250, and certainly not that much short (if
> any!) of the 300D! :-s

> I'm going along to my local photography society next week as they've got
an
> open day. I've never looked through a SLR, so I'll see if I can pick one
up
> and have a look (without them thinking I'm about to run off with it!).
Are
> you in any camera clubs or anything like that? Also, have you ever had
any
> work published?

The 300 is a fine camera - but I have this anxiety about anything described as a 'cut-down version
of....'. I know it's a heavy grade plastic over a magnesium alloy chassis but I still prefer the grown-
up brother, the 10D. Having said that I'm not in the market for either. Up until last week when I
had a play with the 10D and a range of lenses I had it in mind that about March next year I might
think about switching to the Nikon D100 but, as you quite rightly say Paul, the weight of these
cameras is a huge issue for walkers. There is no way I could consider carrying a DSLR kit on the
tops. I think they are for lay-by shooting! I'll stick with my 5700 - for now.

As for camera clubs, I've been a member of ADAPS ( http://www.adaps.org.uk/ ) for 18 months now and
it's excellent company! There is no one-upmanship whatsoever and everyone there is more than willing
to help anyone else. Perhaps this club is a one off, I don't know. There is no way the judge should
be able to know what equipment was used to take what image either. All judges in this area for all
club competitions (monthly, annual and thematic) are 'independent' drawn from the Lancashire and
Cheshire Photographic Union doing a circuit around the various clubs for judging purposes. All the
exhibitor is allowed to put on the back of the mounted image is his name, the title and the name of
the club so the judge won't know what equipment was used unless he knows the photographer. Yes, I
see the built-in flaw in the plan, that's why I used inverted commas around the word independent,
but I've seen no evidence whatsoever of any favouritism and I actually won my first competition a
couple of months ago! Great fun, and it gives you a chance to see what other photographers are doing
(I'm the only one doing landscape to any degree in ADAPS) and allows you to measure your work by
their standards.

--
Dave Newton

Lake District Walk&Photo web site
http://www.daves-lakeland-mountains.co.uk
 
Chris Gilbert wrote:

>> I had a look and a feel of this camera in Jessops today, and I must say that it's got a really
>> good solid feel to it, but at the same time is surprisingly light.
>
> Finally got 'round to having a look yesterday in Dixons. Not impressed. Seems flimsy and
> insubstantial to me.

When I said "good solid feel", I meant for a plastic camera (and compared to my G3), but obviously
it doesn't compare to a proper metal body camera.

> Also the manual focus was loose and pretty poor.

Didn't seem that way to me. Maybe the quality control is variable?

Paul
--
The October Project 2003
http://www.wildwales.fsnet.co.uk/october/october.html
http://www.wilderness-wales.co.uk
http://www.photosig.com/go/users/userphotos?id=118749
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom Back