Canon EOS 300D

[jinners]

hey dudes

i'm thinkin of getting the Canon EOS 300D

has anyone have experience with this cam?any positive or negative inputs?

to buy or not to buy?

thanks!!

[roidan]

welcome to the DSLR family...

u can find out a great deal about canon 300d from here

(try to get the recently released black one...looks better IMO)

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos300d/

or the close competitor Nikon D70 here

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond70/

both are great cams.....if u have a little more budget...

perhaps u can also consider the newer canon 20d, i got it myself just a few days ago

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos20d/

my personal opinion is that u have to be very sure that you want a DSLR in the first place coz it may mean the start of another expensive hobby.

firstly u lose the live update of what is happening via the LCD screen of most digicams....ie....if u make any adjustments in settings to the ISO setting, aperture speed or aperture size, u can immediately see the picture darken or brighten in the LCD screen of digicams....but in DSLR, u will not be able to see the changes until the shot is taken.

ie: in digicams, u can see the adjustment results before the picture is taken.

in DSLR, you can only see the results after it is taken...

the DSLR relies only on the optical viewfinder for picture taking and the LCD screen to review the taken picture.

this was my major adjustment shift which i had to go through as i changed from my sony f828 to canon 20d...

other than that, i am happy with the 5fps burst shooting....ability of high ISO super low noise that DSLRs in general brings about and of coz the ability to change lens if i want to which can be seen as both a pro and con

[roidan]

as a general price guide...

the nikon d70 is just under 2k now

the nikon d100 is around 2.5k

the black canon 300d is around 1.7k

the canon 20d is around 3k

personally between the 300d and nikon d70, i may feel the d70 has a slightly better edge, the 18-70mm kit lens that it comes with is of very good quality whereas the kit lens of canon 18-55mm is not as good.

once u decided...u can go to these places to compare and get the best price

MS Colour (Ang Mo Kio)

Alan Photo (Sim Lim Sq)

Cathay Photo (Peninsula/Marina Sq)

these 3 places are quite popular amongst photographers as they seldom CHOP locals

[terryansimon]

let me warn you about DSLRs....

the older ones, and in particular the cheaper budget models like the EOS300D *these are considered budget still. seriously. hardcore ones will be like the D1 or the 1Ds from Nikon and Canon respectively. those.......13megapix monsters.* often have this problem.

and the problem is................focal length multiplication!

or at least that is what I think it is called. it's through the CCD *or CMOS for most Canon cameras* interpretation of the image, hence the expanded image size. ie to say, if you use a 50mm lens, your 50mm's minimum focusing distance will be 50 x FLM. the compensation levels differ from camera to camera. my D30 is about 1.56 if I'm not wrong.....

this should not affect the normal user, but for the more hardcore ones who decide to get macro lenses, or lenses like fisheye 14mm, then it does affect at the end of the day because the macro lens does not become a macro lens anymore due to the FLM. sama sama for fisheye. in fact for fisheye, you may not even have the fish eye effect being replicated on the shot, due to the compensation.

the flip side of it is that your telephoto lens as a result, has an extended range. so instead of 200mm, it may actually be 240-260mm, depending on FLM.

overall, a DSLR is still a good investment. I've had one since 2001, and...let's just say it has put money and water on the table for me.

also another thing to take note of. I don't know about EOS300's battery consumption rates. but mine devours battery power like no tomorrow. a wise investment will be on a couple of OEM battery packs *I think it's using battery pack and not those lit-ion 9v types you see in camera shops* (=

[terryansimon]

read the below URL to see more about Focal Length Multiplier (=

Focal Length Multiplier

[jinners]

Oooooo....

ok,alot more readings to be done

thanks dudes

[roidan]

what terry is saying is that...

when u buy a 28mm lens....u end up getting a 28 x1.6multiplier and end up

getting a 44.8mm lens if u get the 300d

the bad thing about this is that the lens may not be wide enough for your use especially in tight rooms and situations...

so get a 17 or 18mm lens that will give u the near 28mm of film equivalent

the good part is that u get a very cheap zoom equivalent..

a 125mm lens on 1.6 multiplier gives u a 200mm equivalent

i fixed a 18mm - 125mm lens on my 20d and it gives me 28.8mm - 200mm range....very good for normal range usage already

imagine if u buy a 300mm lens for wildlife photography...u end up with 480mm effect...and needless to say...a 300mm lens is much cheaper than 480mm lens generally

yes...u can get away with cheaper OEM battery packs so that u dun lose power in the middle of a shooting session...an original canon battery costs 100plus whereas OEM ones is only 20plus to 30 odd...can buy u a few more for the same price...even if OEM ones do not last as long....the quantity it makes up for is more than enough

[roidan]

in general if u wanna know why DSLR takes so nice and clean images compared to point and shoot digicams...

the big sensor size is one big reason....have a look

[roidan]

The 2/3" format isn't even the smallest image sensor around. In fact many "prosumer" all-in-one cameras such as the Sony DSC F828, Minolta A2 or Canon Powershot Pro 1 use 2/3" sensor so it is actually aready something that can be considered "large" today. True P&S cameras usually use 1/1.8" or even 1/2.7" sensors - see below for a comparison.

personally i feel the prosumer range of digicams are using the 2/3" whereas normal consumer digicams are using smaller 1/1.8" and 1/2.7" sensors

[mv3i]

which of u guys using the 300D now ?? looking for macro lense for the rebel ... any suggestion ?

[roidan]

this is probably the best if not one of the best macro lens for canon

Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 USM Macro Lens

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews...ens-Review.aspx

here u see all the happy people commenting on the lens after they use it

http://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/showpro...sort=7&thecat=2

[terryansimon]

urh if I'm not mistaken, there are no OEM lens types for specialist lenses

specialist lens type include fisheye, macro and <50mm lens. reason being because the demand is not high enough to warrant the R&D required by OEM manufacturers. sad, but true.

so no choice, must get Canon one. and it'll cost. a bomb.

[roidan]

for canon users...can look for 3rd party lens maker like sigma or tamron....they make macro lens too..just make sure u specify canon mount or nikon mount depending on the camera u are using their lens with

generally they are much cheaper than canon lens..but the optical quality is usually of suspect....

so, best is to read online reviews and testimonials before buying, dun make expensive mistakes

[aong]

Hi, just to add

Always thought the FLM actually gives you a "smaller field of view" (ie, it gives you a more telephoto/closeup picture than what your actual focal length is), it does *NOT* give you the "extra zoom". Does it?

For example,

a 50 mm lens on a 1.6 crop factor would yield a 1.6 * 50 = ~80mm field of view, but your focal length is still that of 50mm, right?

As for macro lenses, urm they can be quite ex -- esp the original ones!

3rd party don't often mean lousier quality, esp macro lenses. Apparently, Tamron and Sigma's 90mm/105mm lenses really measures up to Canon's original macro lens!

But then again, are you able to tell the difference between how good and bad these lenses are?

Usually Canon/Nikon/Leica/blah original lenses would still sell for more in 2nd hand mkt; but with the influx of pple into the hobby, this may no longer hold true (imagine one kid buy a 1000 lens and then sell it at 600... spoil market leow, right?)

Yea, going into DSLR area is quite ex now... the body is cheap.. but the lenses... they dun really drop that much prices ;(((((((

[aong]

Oh yes, jimmers, the 300d is a good enough camera for most of us...

As mentioned DSLR is very ex to upkeep if u wanna buy accessories -- chk ard ur kakis, are they using Nikon or Canon systems? So you can get something similar and then share equipment (ie, flash, lens, etc etc) when u need...

[roidan]

the multiplier "zoom" effect is definitely there...

because if you are using a 28mm lens on a film-based SLR and then use back the same 28mm lens on a DSLR like 300d, you will realise that you will not be able to capture as wide a field as the same lens did on the film-based SLR...

in looking through the DSLR viewfinder with this 28mm lens....would be the same effect as a 48.8mm (28 x 1.6) lens mounted on the film-based SLR

as for 3rd party lens....optical quality is one thing....other factors like build quality....AF speed is another...

take for example...AF speed is both determined by the lens and the camera system....the weakest link will be the one that slows you down..

if u have a great lens with very fast internal motor focusing but a slow DSLR body...you will not be able to capture fast.....

similarly if you have a very fast DSLR but a very slow lens with slow motor focusing..u will miss those precious moments too

they call it different names...but USM for canon and HSM for sigma means pretty fast internal lens motor focusing

[roidan]

The focal length doesn't really change on digital cameras but humans tend to be confused by the given focal length which simply doesn't fit to our experience based on the classic film format. Things get even more worse because of the various image sensor formats (and therefore different lens designs). Therefore most manufacturers or magazines provide the "35mm format equivalent" for the lens system in order to allow a comparison between the different formats.

Calculating this equivalent is fairly easy. The 35mm format has a diameter of 44.3mm (36x24mm) - remember good ol' Pythagoras. e.g A 2/3" sensor has a diameter of 11mm (8.8x6.6mm). Therefore the "magnification factor" is 44.3/11 ~ 4x.

A Sony F828 features such a 2/3" sensor combined with a 7.1-51mm lens. So 7.1mm*4 and 51mm*4 translates to 28.4-204mm as the 35mm equivalent.

and thus the canon 18-55mm kit lens on the 300d will give a film equivalent of 28.8mm - 88mm range

[aong]

Urm, perhaps this might help

OK, firstly, when you put a 300mm lens on a D60 you do NOT get a 480mm lens – it is still a 300mm lens. What has changed is the format of the camera – from 36x24mm film to a 22.7x15mm chip.

This is the crucial point – it’s a different format therefore the same lenses behave differently. In this case the format is smaller so the angle of view is also smaller. Therefore it behaves in similar, but not identical, fashion to a longer focal length lens.

- Nick Rains (from article in luminous-landscape.com)

Not too sure if I'd managed to grasp the concept too... anyone like to share?

[roidan]

OK, firstly, when you put a 300mm lens on a D60 you do NOT get a 480mm lens – it is still a 300mm lens. What has changed is the format of the camera – from 36x24mm film to a 22.7x15mm chip.

This is the crucial point – it’s a different format therefore the same lenses behave differently. In this case the format is smaller so the angle of view is also smaller. Therefore it behaves in similar, but not identical, fashion to a longer focal length lens.

ya....the first part means that mounting the 300mm lens on a DSLR with factor of 1.6 times does not physically change it into a 480mm lens...

what it does change is the end effect due to the film-based rated lens behaving differently when mounted on a smaller sensor....note it says...behaves in a similar but not identical fashion to a longer focal length

look at the 2 parrot pictures in the url given by aong, doesn't it simply show that using the SAME lens SAME extender, the DSLR with a magnification factor indeed DOES magnify the image and thus *mimicking* the effects of a larger zoom range?

in other words...if bros here are still confused...u just accept the lens rating by the rating that is printed on the lens...eg. 300mm

whether u mount it on a film SLR, DSLR or anywhere u like to mount it...it is still a 300mm lens. Period.

but when u use it for a DSLR with factor of eg 1.6x....u just treat it as the DSLR has a 1.6x extender FIXED DEAD on the DSLR. so whatever lens rating you mount on the DSLR will be undergoing a 1.6x extender effect.

hope this is clearer now

[terryansimon]

at the end of the day, the numbers on the lens body doesn't change miraculously.

like what roidan say, you just treat it as the lens has a x.x multiplier (fill in x yourself. mine would be 1.56) attached to the lens itself.

and also, I do not recommend getting a camera, just because your kakis have it. this is because by doing so, you may actually compromise on selection criteria. ie, comfort of the camera.

the thing when choosing SLRs/DSLRs/Medium Formats and above is

1) Comfort ---> too big a monster and it becomes troublesome, ain't it?

2) Features ---> make sure they don't have 1million features. pretty rare you'll use all of them. make sure it has the ones you really want to use

2) Cost ---> obvious one. no explaination needed

3) availability of other peripherals. which is why I dumped my old Minolta camera system to upgrade to a Canon.

4) consumption of battery power *especially true for battery pack users. Nikons with double As or something, not too troublesome*

so yah. (=

anyway. the most important thing is that you TRY the camera out by physically handling it. man handle it if possible. that's the only way to see if it fits you egronomically. (=