A Photography forum. PhotoBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » PhotoBanter.com forum » Digital Photography » Digital Photography
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Almost decided on Canon 350D



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old January 23rd 06, 07:34 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Almost decided on Canon 350D

Ok,

to update anyone who may be at all interested. I think I will go with the
Canon despite my past loyalty to Minolta. I'm afraid the issues with Sony
just make me feel uneasy and I don't want to start a new digital system in a
make that may have a slightly uncertain future. The Canon 350D also seems to
pip both the Minolta 5d and Nikon to the post in all magazine reviews
(except this months what camera which puts the Canon third). I've never
considered a Nikon and know nothing about them and that is probably why I'm
reluctant to consider.

After weighing up the pros and cons I can only see a few things I'm worried
about with the Canon 350D.

i) That I am paying more then the Minolta purely for the name
ii) That I am losing out on the anti shake feature (but saying that, I've
never had it before, what I don't have I won't miss!)
iii) That the colour I have seen in examples of the Canon seem a little dark
(but saying that the reviews don't mention this)

Anyway,
I'll try all three (Canon, Minolta, Nikon) at the shop and then finally
decide.
Thanks for the help. Any other comments appreciated

Chris


  #2  
Old January 23rd 06, 08:17 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Almost decided on Canon 350D


"Chris Long" wrote in message
...
Ok,

to update anyone who may be at all interested. I think I will go with the
Canon despite my past loyalty to Minolta. I'm afraid the issues with Sony
just make me feel uneasy and I don't want to start a new digital system in
a make that may have a slightly uncertain future. The Canon 350D also
seems to pip both the Minolta 5d and Nikon to the post in all magazine
reviews (except this months what camera which puts the Canon third). I've
never considered a Nikon and know nothing about them and that is probably
why I'm reluctant to consider.

After weighing up the pros and cons I can only see a few things I'm
worried about with the Canon 350D.

i) That I am paying more then the Minolta purely for the name
ii) That I am losing out on the anti shake feature (but saying that, I've
never had it before, what I don't have I won't miss!)
iii) That the colour I have seen in examples of the Canon seem a little
dark (but saying that the reviews don't mention this)


ii Anti shake feature? Canon have image stabilization in some of their
lenses (at a cost!)
iii Never noticed the colour being dark in any of my 350D shots.

Some don't like the smallness of the 350D, personally I think it is great.
Wasn't keen on it the first time I saw it / handled it but after a couple of
hours, I really appreciated the compactness of it. Much more manageable in
my opinion than walking about with something twice as big and twice as
heavy.



  #3  
Old January 23rd 06, 08:38 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Almost decided on Canon 350D


"Chris Long" wrote in message
...
Ok,

to update anyone who may be at all interested. I think I will go with the
Canon despite my past loyalty to Minolta. I'm afraid the issues with Sony
just make me feel uneasy and I don't want to start a new digital system in
a make that may have a slightly uncertain future. The Canon 350D also
seems to pip both the Minolta 5d and Nikon to the post in all magazine
reviews (except this months what camera which puts the Canon third). I've
never considered a Nikon and know nothing about them and that is probably
why I'm reluctant to consider.

After weighing up the pros and cons I can only see a few things I'm
worried about with the Canon 350D.

i) That I am paying more then the Minolta purely for the name
ii) That I am losing out on the anti shake feature (but saying that, I've
never had it before, what I don't have I won't miss!)
iii) That the colour I have seen in examples of the Canon seem a little
dark (but saying that the reviews don't mention this)

Anyway,
I'll try all three (Canon, Minolta, Nikon) at the shop and then finally
decide.
Thanks for the help. Any other comments appreciated


With Canon you are buying into their EOS system or lenses and more, which is
pretty darn good, IMO, and not going away any time soon. Can you say the
same for Minolta?. I have heard good things about Minolta lenses, too, but
no experience. The color can be anything you want: if you shoot raw, you can
create custom profile


  #4  
Old January 23rd 06, 10:07 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Almost decided on Canon 350D




i) That I am paying more then the Minolta purely for the name


With Canon if you pay more for the name, you probably pay less
for the volume. (Canon sells more camera's than Minolta).
But then if you buy a Minolta, you do not pay for their profit margins.
(Their profit margins are negative).
So I do not think paying for the name is a real argument.

ii) That I am losing out on the anti shake feature (but saying that, I've
never had it before, what I don't have I won't miss!)


Yes you loose on the anti shake feature, which is sometimes nice to have.
But then again do not overrate the anti shake feature, using a tripod or
stabilising yourself does help. And the anti shake feature does not protect
against object movement. (sports etc.).
(There are lenses which do the stabilising for you, but they are probably
outside your budget so that is no alternative).
So the anti shake feature is an argument for Minolta, you have to weight
the value of that argument for yourself.

ben


  #5  
Old January 23rd 06, 10:13 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Almost decided on Canon 350D


"Steven Campbell" wrote in message
...

"Chris Long" wrote in message
...
Ok,

to update anyone who may be at all interested. I think I will go with

the
Canon despite my past loyalty to Minolta. I'm afraid the issues with

Sony
just make me feel uneasy and I don't want to start a new digital system

in
a make that may have a slightly uncertain future. The Canon 350D also
seems to pip both the Minolta 5d and Nikon to the post in all magazine
reviews (except this months what camera which puts the Canon third).

I've
never considered a Nikon and know nothing about them and that is

probably
why I'm reluctant to consider.

After weighing up the pros and cons I can only see a few things I'm
worried about with the Canon 350D.

i) That I am paying more then the Minolta purely for the name
ii) That I am losing out on the anti shake feature (but saying that,

I've
never had it before, what I don't have I won't miss!)
iii) That the colour I have seen in examples of the Canon seem a little
dark (but saying that the reviews don't mention this)


ii Anti shake feature? Canon have image stabilization in some of their
lenses (at a cost!)
iii Never noticed the colour being dark in any of my 350D shots.

Some don't like the smallness of the 350D, personally I think it is great.
Wasn't keen on it the first time I saw it / handled it but after a couple

of
hours, I really appreciated the compactness of it. Much more manageable

in
my opinion than walking about with something twice as big and twice as
heavy.




I've had my 350d for 6 months now - very please. Goes to ISO100 where the
D50 doesn't.

Get decent lenses for it and it will reward you. Recently got the 50mm
f/1.8 on top of the kit lense. You dont need anything like anti-vibration
shake for this one as its so fast - excellent for portrait, mid range
pictures as 1.6 crop gives you about 82mm.

I also rushed and bought the 70-300mm which is only good in bright light or
on a tripod for crisp results. If I could go back I'd save up and buy the
equivalent IS or something with less zoom and wider aperture.

Size is great and features excellent for beginner/semi-pro, not far short of
the D70 IMHO.

Alex


  #6  
Old January 23rd 06, 11:19 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Almost decided on Canon 350D




After weighing up the pros and cons I can only see a few things I'm
worried about with the Canon 350D.

i) That I am paying more then the Minolta purely for the name
ii) That I am losing out on the anti shake feature (but saying that, I've
never had it before, what I don't have I won't miss!)
iii) That the colour I have seen in examples of the Canon seem a little
dark (but saying that the reviews don't mention this)


I have a 350D - it's excellent. The prices have come down and I see you can
get a body only for not much more then £500. In 2 or 3 years that will have
halved - but you need to be taking pictures now. So go out and buy one.
Colour? Not an issue, there are plenty of ways to adjust colour to suit your
taste. 8 M pixel is plenty, I can print up to A3+ with good results and A3
with excellent results. One day I shall probably get a 12 M pixel to get a
FFS - but that day is some way off.

Spend as much as you can on lenses. The kit lens is o.k., in fact it's
excellent value for money; but saving up for L lenses will make the most use
of such an excellent DSLR. The cheaper ones are the 17 - 40mm F4 and the
70 - 200 f4. They will cost about £800 between them - but you will be taking
pictures with them for years to come. Do a lot of research before spending
money on cheaper lenses.

John


  #7  
Old January 23rd 06, 11:39 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Almost decided on Canon 350D

Chris Long wrote:
Ok,

to update anyone who may be at all interested. I think I will go
with
the Canon despite my past loyalty to Minolta. I'm afraid the issues
with Sony just make me feel uneasy and I don't want to start a new
digital system in a make that may have a slightly uncertain future.
The Canon 350D also seems to pip both the Minolta 5d and Nikon to
the
post in all magazine reviews (except this months what camera which
puts the Canon third). I've never considered a Nikon and know
nothing
about them and that is probably why I'm reluctant to consider.

After weighing up the pros and cons I can only see a few things I'm
worried about with the Canon 350D.

i) That I am paying more then the Minolta purely for the name

If I should be more often
disappointed by
"Then" for 'Than" than
"Than" for "Then", then
"Then" For "Than" might
be more common
Than "Than" for "Then"

ii) That I am losing out on the anti shake feature (but saying that,
I've never had it before, what I don't have I won't miss!)

I don't htink that's true; however, it is available at a cost in
convenience and price, in the Canon line.

iii) That the colour I have seen in examples of the Canon seem a
little dark (but saying that the reviews don't mention this)

"A little dark" is a little easy to deal with.


Anyway,
I'll try all three (Canon, Minolta, Nikon) at the shop and then
finally decide.


Since you seem quite deliberate, and not preoccupied with the shots
you are missing while doing your choice-thing, consider adding a
little time to the recipe, saving a few hundred more dollars, and
going for the 20D (or equivalent). The advantages are real, lasting,
and poignant. I refer particularly to the difference in controls
between the 350D and the 20D: the latter makes every use much easier
and quicker; it gets out of your way, while the 350D presents a few
obstacles. I have one of each.

Of course if I were going into it for the first time, I'd look really
hard at the Nikon 70Ds. Nice machine, excellent lenses available,
displayed results are uniformly fine to excellent.

Thanks for the help. Any other comments appreciated

You did say _any_ comments...

--
Frank ess

  #8  
Old January 23rd 06, 11:49 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Almost decided on Canon 350D



Since you seem quite deliberate, and not preoccupied with the shots you
are missing while doing your choice-thing, consider adding a little time
to the recipe, saving a few hundred more dollars, and going for the 20D
(or equivalent). The advantages are real, lasting, and poignant. I refer
particularly to the difference in controls between the 350D and the 20D:
the latter makes every use much easier and quicker; it gets out of your
way, while the 350D presents a few obstacles. I have one of each.


The 20D has great speed, ergonomics, and flexibility. It is a
bigger/heavier camera, though. Which I prefer for serious work!


  #9  
Old January 24th 06, 12:07 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Almost decided on Canon 350D

At £250 more than the 350D, the Canon 20D is out of my price range. My aim
it to build up my lens system and get my use out of the 350D and then in 3-4
year go for a higher spec body.

Looked at the Nikon. Just can't warm to it at the moment.

Thanks for the help.

Chris


"Frank ess" wrote in message
news
Chris Long wrote:
Ok,

to update anyone who may be at all interested. I think I will go with
the Canon despite my past loyalty to Minolta. I'm afraid the issues
with Sony just make me feel uneasy and I don't want to start a new
digital system in a make that may have a slightly uncertain future.
The Canon 350D also seems to pip both the Minolta 5d and Nikon to the
post in all magazine reviews (except this months what camera which
puts the Canon third). I've never considered a Nikon and know nothing
about them and that is probably why I'm reluctant to consider.

After weighing up the pros and cons I can only see a few things I'm
worried about with the Canon 350D.

i) That I am paying more then the Minolta purely for the name

If I should be more often
disappointed by
"Then" for 'Than" than
"Than" for "Then", then
"Then" For "Than" might
be more common
Than "Than" for "Then"

ii) That I am losing out on the anti shake feature (but saying that,
I've never had it before, what I don't have I won't miss!)

I don't htink that's true; however, it is available at a cost in
convenience and price, in the Canon line.

iii) That the colour I have seen in examples of the Canon seem a
little dark (but saying that the reviews don't mention this)

"A little dark" is a little easy to deal with.


Anyway,
I'll try all three (Canon, Minolta, Nikon) at the shop and then
finally decide.


Since you seem quite deliberate, and not preoccupied with the shots you
are missing while doing your choice-thing, consider adding a little time
to the recipe, saving a few hundred more dollars, and going for the 20D
(or equivalent). The advantages are real, lasting, and poignant. I refer
particularly to the difference in controls between the 350D and the 20D:
the latter makes every use much easier and quicker; it gets out of your
way, while the 350D presents a few obstacles. I have one of each.

Of course if I were going into it for the first time, I'd look really hard
at the Nikon 70Ds. Nice machine, excellent lenses available, displayed
results are uniformly fine to excellent.

Thanks for the help. Any other comments appreciated

You did say _any_ comments...

--
Frank ess


  #10  
Old January 24th 06, 12:17 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Almost decided on Canon 350D

On Mon, 23 Jan 2006 14:39:37 -0800, Frank essayed:

i) That I am paying more then the Minolta purely for the name


If I should be more often
disappointed by
"Then" for 'Than" than
"Than" for "Then", then
"Then" For "Than" might
be more common
Than "Than" for "Then"


I hop Chris thenks you for thet. Too bad many spell checkers
don't catch more of them then mistakes than you do but at least they
labor without complaint, even if they miss many things that the old
Grammatik might have caught. And then, and then . . . (said in a
manner reminiscent of the Coasters) . . .


ii) That I am losing out on the anti shake feature (but saying that,
I've never had it before, what I don't have I won't miss!)


I don't htink that's true; however


That one a spell checker would have caught, methinks.

 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Speaking of Lenses for Canon Digital 350D Eugene Wendland Digital SLR Cameras 8 December 22nd 05 07:19 AM
More about cleaning sensors and Canon Canada (long) Celcius Digital Photography 16 December 2nd 05 03:48 PM
Canon 10D v Canon 350D News-West.Usenet.com Digital Photography 16 November 17th 05 09:10 PM
CANON - The Great Innovator (was: CANON – The Great Pretender) Steven M. Scharf Digital Photography 104 September 3rd 04 01:01 PM
CANON - The Great Innovator (was: CANON – The Great Pretender) Steven M. Scharf 35mm Photo Equipment 92 September 3rd 04 01:01 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:33 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 PhotoBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.