Upgrading to a DSLR question.

Justin Thyme wrote:
"Robert" wrote in message
...
I am upgrading from an Oly C4040. and I am trying to decide between
the Evolt, EOS 300D, EOS 350D, and the EOS 20D. Mainly between the
Evolt and the
EOS 350D. I know the Oly has the CCD and the Canon has the CMOS.
Back When I
bought the C4040 I read that the CCD was the way to go. I am not
sure now. Any advice and comments between the EOS 350D and the
Evolt
would be greatly
appreciated.
The 20D is not in the same category as the 300D or 350D or the
E-300.
Obviously comparing just these models the 20D is the much better
camera. But it is also more expensive, and if that is an issue then
the equation becomes a little blurred. The standard Canon kit lenses
are truly awful,

Hyperbole alert: the 18-55 is not that bad.
http://www.fototime.com/inv/191CD1A6774DAD3

so for the same money as a 20D with it's
http://www.apostrophe.fsnet.co.uk/

kit lens,
you could get a 300D or 350D with a half decent lens (From what I've
seen, even the much maligned sigma lenses perform better than
Canon's
cheap lenses). Using a 20D (or even the 300 or 350) with the kit
lens is like using standard petrol and tyres with a Ferrari.
I find the E-300 a bit of a quandary - it's

_ibid._

kit lens is many orders of
magnitude better than Canon kit lenses, it's

_ditto_
(it's a dirty job, but someone has to do it)

build quality leaves the
similar priced Canon's feeling like bits of plastic junk, but it is
let down by a very noisy sensor and I found some of it's

....

functions
such as "hold the button down" exposure lock, and the lack of mirror
lock up to be quite annoying. If you mainly shoot in daylight, and
want to use it as an advanced P&S it is

missed your chance!

a great little camera - if
you want to use it in low light situations or in tricky shooting
situations it is a bit limited. The sensor cleaning function is
fantastic however, and could tip the scales well away from any other
models in this league. Why limit yourself to the models you listed?
If you like the Olympus
cameras and are looking at something in the same league as the 20D,
the E-1 ships with an extremely good kit lens, and picture quality
and camera features are miles ahead of the E-300 (despite the lower
number of pixels). I'd prefer 5 million excellent pixels over 8
million average pixels any day. The E1's build quality is 2nd to
none, it is very rugged, can handle a bit of rain or snow, and won't
need to be sent for sensor cleaning every couple of months. If you
are looking at something in a similar price range to the
E300/300D/350D, I think it's hard to go past the Pentax *istDS.
Build
quality and feel is miles ahead of the Canons - again makes the
Canons feel like plastic pieces of junk.

If you used scientific language in place of tabloid language, I
believe you would be more credible.

Pentax lenses are excellent,
or alternatively (here in Australia at least)

Now I get it - you're just oriented upside-down, universally speaking.

it is often bundled
with Sigma lenses which are not great but significantly better than
the cheap Canon offerings. The camera is compatible with the
zillions
of K-mount lenses around, plus you can use the old screw-mount
lenses
with adapters. This gives you access to a huge variety of lenses,
new
& used, at all price/quality levels including some of the finest
lenses that have ever been made. Another alternative is the highly
rated Nikon D70 - it is an excellent
camera, and the 18-70 DX lens is excellent. It is a bit higher
priced
than the E300/300D/350D/istDS, but quite a bit lower than the 20D.
Personally I think they are a little on the large and heavy side,
but
they do feel solid.


Relax. You have good knowledge and valuable opinions. Let them sell
themselves. Histrionics are Preddy territory.

Yes it's.


Resp'y,

--
Frank ess