Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Canon EOS dSLR

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Oct 13, 2003, 4:06 PM   #11
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 112
Default

Well, this much is true. You can't believe EVERYTHING you read. The real test is when you can actually use a 300D AND a D100 and compare the results for your self.
As for the lenses, From what I've been seeing, Canon's lenses aren't much less expensive than Nikons. More expensive in some cases. How many times has Canon changed their mount?? At least 2 or 3, I believe. And Nikon?? Once, maybe twice.

Anyway, I'm not here to get into a pissing contest. I have both a Nikon film and a D100 and a Canon EOS rebel film, which my 12 year old son is currently using to learn on. I can't complain about any one of them. However, I prefer the Nikon. All I'm saying is that when you compare a 300D to a D100, it's like comparing a Chevy to a Mercedes.
Chrisr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 13, 2003, 4:06 PM   #12
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 610
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by LCohen
Don't get me wrong, I use to have the D-100 with a combination of some AF-S lenses, I gave it up and let it go since I acquired the 10D and few other Canon EF-L lenses, and with the Rebel I now have for the fun part of it

did you first have a D100? Then you got the D10? and now the digital rebel?
yes...I use the Rebel as the back up...at least for the cost it's a worthwide investment. cheers
tuanokc@hotmail.com is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 13, 2003, 4:11 PM   #13
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 610
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chrisr
Well, this much is true. You can't believe EVERYTHING you read. The real test is when you can actually use a 300D AND a D100 and compare the results for your self.
As for the lenses, From what I've been seeing, Canon's lenses aren't much less expensive than Nikons. More expensive in some cases. How many times has Canon changed their mount?? At least 2 or 3, I believe. And Nikon?? Once, maybe twice.

Anyway, I'm not here to get into a pissing contest. I have both a Nikon film and a D100 and a Canon EOS rebel film, which my 12 year old son is currently using to learn on. I can't complain about any one of them. However, I prefer the Nikon. All I'm saying is that when you compare a 300D to a D100, it's like comparing a Chevy to a Mercedes.
I think you get the wrong impression...no comparison of the 300D to the D100, the real comparison is between the 10D and the D100, the point is for most of the basic users, they can save a lot of money to start with the 300D and still get almost the same benefits of the 10D. For the material that made up the 300D camera, there is no comparison, but then the cost is already justified for that...
tuanokc@hotmail.com is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 13, 2003, 5:22 PM   #14
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 28
Default

this is with out a doubt the most twisted misbelieving thread ever.
you have bought a 300D Rebel (at least i spelled it right) and now want everyone to believe it kicks the pants off of the 10D............... :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
MichaelL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 13, 2003, 5:39 PM   #15
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 251
Default

4 In general, you're correct, but in the case of spot metering, you don't just put this feature in the camera to bear the name spot meter. You're the Nikon user, you probably know, a lot of the amateurs, professional photographers, they don't trust and use the built-in spot meter but rely on a separate handheld spot meter such as the workhorse Pentax digital spot meter, or the Minolta spot meter F or the Sekonic. This is a very delicate special tool, using is the wrong way or misunderstood the application could result in a disaster; true spot meter may not be built in the SLR because of the cost. But that's just my personal though...when it comes to spot meter, to me it has to be the real thing

ah. So spot metering isn't of any use in the camera? Ridiculous.
A separate spot meter should be bought according to you, but in other cases money is important? Strange

You say that "they don't trust..."... well people don't trust plastic flimsy gadgets either, but you want to claim that the 300D beats the heck out of the D100...

ah well... we wont come any further in this case i think
LCohen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 13, 2003, 9:07 PM   #16
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 5,803
Default

I am only going to contribute what I believe is true.

Canon has only 3 generations/versions of USM, not the 5 that were claimed by tuanokc.

I believe (I'm not positive) that Nikon just got to their 3rd. I believe the new 70-200 VR AF-S is a new generation. I've seen that stated, but by less reliable sources than the claim about Canon's USM

Not all USM or AF-S are created equal. It's a matter of space (in the lens), cost, market segment the lens is aimed at, and stealing sales from their other products. It is fair to compare two equal lenses (price and market segment) from the different brands. The 100-400L from Canon beats the pants off of the 80-400VR. The AF-S in that lens is pathetic. It's not that AF-S is inherently bad, they designed that lens that way (for reasons unknown to me.) Both are still first generation IS/VR (donít know which is better, though.)

I would also say that I donít know enough to agree/disagree with tuanokcís claim about Canons being cheaper than Nikon, or having more USM across the board. But what I do know for a fact is that Canonís long lenses (400mm and up) are all cheaper than Nikons and by a noticeable amount on every lens. And all the Canon lenses have IS, none of the Nikon have VR.

--------------------

I would also like to say that I basically agree with tuanokc's list of "Professional" cameras. The D100 is not a pro camera, and Nikon doesnít sell it that way. Neither is the 300D or the 10D. I don't know enough about the S2 Pro to say either way.

As to the argument about the spot meter. I believe that you are both basically right. Some people are used to hand held ones, know how to use them correctly (I certainly don't) and get great results from what they tell them. Having been in a company that designed electronic hardware, I am very sure that cost is the reason a camera doesn't have a great spot meter built in. Yes, the D100 has a spot meter (3-degrees of coverage) and the Canon does not (9 degrees or so, but at least they don't call it a spot meter) and to some that matters a lot; especially if you use a form of the Zone system. I do wish it had a spot meter on certain occasions, but mostly I wouldnít use it. But to say it doesnít matter is wrong. It does.

But having a 300D as a backup makes sense. I know some pros who keep a D100 has a backup to their D1x. Itís a business, and they canít afford 2 D1xís deprecating while one isnít in use. So the D100 does the job as a ďgood enoughĒ insurance policy. People do the same with the 10D.

Eric
eric s is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

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

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 4:03 PM.