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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Apr 22, 2004, 4:34 PM   #1
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 3
Default $1800 - $2K to spend

I know the 10D v 300D comparison has been thoroughly researched and documented, but I still could use some help.

My film camera is currently an Elan IIe, with a 28-80 and a 75-300 IS lens, together with a 540EZ flash. I also have a T90 and by comparison have always felt the Elan IIe was a little on the flimsy side. As a result, my initial thought was to go with the 10D. But just as I'm about to leave the office to pick one up I thought I'd better throw out my situation to see if my thinking isn't flawed.

I can either buy the 10D, with the battery grip and a card, OR go with the 300D, battery grip, card, and the 17-40 f4 L for about the same price I believe.

I work in college athletics and want to take pictures of sporting events, but I also live in the mountains and will take pictures from hikes etc.

Any thoughts would be welcome and appreciated.
sjcornish is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Apr 22, 2004, 4:51 PM   #2
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 27
Default

I have been taking 35mm pictures for over 30 years now. I bought my 300D on Monday. I went through the same thing as you, but I am STILL not going to be able to afford a longer lens.

I also bought mine for the same reason, sports, and a lot of landscapes plus a lot of historical site photos. I just can't see needing the 10D right now. From everything I've read it will be replaced in less than a year. Do you really want to spend the extra $500 now to only think that "maybe" you might want its replacement then? That lens will work just as well on the 300D, and I bet that for you as well as me, the 300D will do more than we are capable of, at least for a few months.
FSUScotsman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 22, 2004, 5:05 PM   #3
Senior Member
 
dcrawley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 392
Default

What the 10D gives you that was taken away with the 300D is the ability to select between the AF modes, metering modes, and the custom settings. The 300D uses evaluative metering by default; in P/A/S/M/A-DEP modes, you can use the AE lock button to use partial metering; center-weighted average metering is used in M mode. Also, from Canon's data, the 10D has a 90 millisecond shutterlag while the 300D adds 40 milliseconds (though that can be compentated for with experience)

In regards to your flash, one thing to think about with both of those cameras is that your EX-series Speedite will work, but it will not be able to use Canon's E-TTL technology with the newer EX-series speedlites.
dcrawley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 22, 2004, 5:19 PM   #4
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 5,803
Default

Don't forget the 10D has a deeper buffer and more frames per second.

Won't make a different on the landscape stuff, but it will for the sports.

Eric
eric s is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 22, 2004, 5:58 PM   #5
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 69
Default

The 300D has a smaller, dimmer viewfinder than the 10D. Something for some to consider.
csnudelman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 23, 2004, 9:14 AM   #6
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 27
Default

I wonder what kind of sports it will be? Over in DPReview one fellow from Oklahoma State has posted some really wonderful basketball pics from his 300D. I would think that would be the hardest sport, or maybe football to get that pin point shot.

I know in my old 35mm days it was STILL hard to get that perfect sports shot and none of my cameras had the ability to bracket!!!
FSUScotsman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 23, 2004, 10:27 AM   #7
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 3
Default

Thanks for all your input everyone! My sense is that my nature photography would be ably served by the 300D configuration and the sports photography would be best served with the bigger buffer of the 10D. Decisions, decisions!

As far as what kind of sports I'll shoot... soccer, baseball and golf predominantly. But to be honest, as someone who coaches soccer all week, (not that I'm complaining), I really enjoy getting away from it all, and so capturing waterfalls, mountains scenes, sunsets etc are very important.

I think the issue is going to come down to.....can the 17-40 L wait?
sjcornish is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 23, 2004, 2:18 PM   #8
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 5,803
Default

You certainly can get good pictures with the DRebel. But it might be eaiser with the 10D.

Just as I can get action pictures with the 10D, but it would be much easier with the 1D Mark II. 8 FPS can catch a lot of action.

Someone had a great story. They were using a 3fps camera at a pro hockey game.

The player flipped over (skates over heels, as it were.) He had one picture where the guy was almost horizontal, facing down. The next shot he was sitting on his butt. He camera just couldn't take the pictures fast enough.

Could he have gotten lucky and got the "head straight down, feet up" shot with 3fps or less? Sure... but the odds are against it.

Eric
eric s is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 23, 2004, 3:23 PM   #9
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 227
Default

If you're hitting the wall budget wise I'd go with the 300D if you can live with the compromises. I can and I'm very happy with the purchase.

The 18-55EF-S lens is really good (not as great as the 17-40L is but the price difference is pretty huge).

For waterfalls look at my webpages, all these were taken with my rebel. I've taken some with the EF-S and they are just as goo, I've been deliquent with updating the site.

I don't mind not having the second command dial when I'm doing nature stuff, I tend to bracket shots anyways as the exposures can be tricky. A side benefit is that I have to slow down so I'm spending more time composing shots.

Depending on what you're using the athletic shots for you could cheat and shoot lower quality jpegs. You'll speed up the buffer clearing with smaller individual files. While it's nice to shoot everything at the best settings, if you're using the output on the web you don't need a 4 meg file.

Personally my view is that you'll have more success putting the difference in the price between the two cameras into a good flash and good optics.

I'd rather have good lights, good optics and a good body - than a great body but only a few mediocre lenses and only an onboard flash.
ursa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 24, 2004, 1:26 AM   #10
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 577
Default

No flash exposure compensation on the 300D. Only on the 10D.

Barthold
barthold 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 11:08 PM.