300D vs 10D (sorry if this will start a war :-P)

[vvizard]

I'm looking into buying my first SLR-cam, and would like you to help me out here. Which should I get? Of course money is a factor, else I wouldn't be asking. I'm planning on having this camera for some years, and the amount of money I will spend on objectives/flashes in that timeline will at least match the price of the camera itself. I really don't like expensive things that feal "cheap". That's why I consider the 10D instead of 300D. With that said, do you guys think the body of the 10D is worth 1/3 extra price, as long as I plan to use this camera for some years, and that the price of the camera itself anyway won't be "that" expensive compared to extra money I spend on objectives and other stuff?

Some opinions from other SLR-owners would be appriciated :)

[robertwgross]

If you consider yourself "serious", then go for the better one (the 10D). If you consider yourself more "for fun" then go for the cheaper one.

For your beginning six months as a photographer, you won't use the extra features that much. However, if your skills begin to develop, you will want to use the advanced features more and more. If a bunch of the advanced features are simply missing (as I see on the 300D), then you will grow tired of it early.

---Bob Gross---

[Hatem Eldoronki]

I agree with robert. I came to the 10D from the digicam world, and almost everyday I learn something new. I was considering trading or replacing the 10D for something smaller that is easier to use, but I think that at my level now - and after about 3 months with the 10D - it will be hard to give up the overall quality and features of the 10D! . I really consider the 10D undoubtedly the top digital camera, and worth every penny paid for it, with the 300D as second in rank. I also think that the resale value on the 10D might be stronger than that of the 300D, in case you wanted to trade it in in the future.
Just my 2c.

[xxlt]

vvizard...Hello :) If it were me I'd go with the 300D and spend your $$ on the L glass (lens). The camera body will come and go. But the glass will hold value and you will enjoy them for years to come.

bill from Ohio

[vvizard]

Thanks for feedback. Here's some answers to them, to make you see my position a little clearer, and maybe narrow down your advices. I'd like to consider myself as serious. Not in that I work professional with photography, but that I love to make/take pictures. But recently I've been in the "just-for-(not)-fun" department. I really blew the budget on my first camera ever. The Minolta DiMage 7i exactly one year ago. I bought it so that I would have full manual control, so I wouldn't just point-and-shoot, but learn photography and eventually get some heavier equipment. Sadly I grew tired after half a year, becouse I felt the Minolta was keeping me back. The autofocus was terrible slow in low-light, and because of the EVF instead of something optical, the viewfinder was unusable to check for proper focus. So AF was pretty much the only option. To top everything, I thought picture-quality wasn't what I expected. There was to much noise in anything above ISO-100, and quite a bit in dark areas even at 100.

With primarly these three complaints I grew kind of tired of photographing, and couldn't afford DSLR. Now I got a job, and now I can (how wonderfull =)). My first thought was the 300D, but what I'm afraid of, is that it got limitations that will keep me from fully exploiting the camera-world (much as the Minolta did). Probably not to the same degree, but I'll rather _use_ a 10D without any "L" lens (at least for some time), than _not_ using a 300D with an "L" lens.

Now you got a basic understanding of what kind of experience I do have with photographing. I'ts not long, but I got a good understanding of the shutter, aperture and how/when/if to manually control them.

So, can I be safe with the 300D for a long time (2-3years), or should I given that experience and what I hopefully will learn in the next years go straight for the 10D?

[defordphoto]

You need a 10D. If you don't buy one now, you'll be kicking yourself in 6 months. I don't think you'd be bored with the 300D, but you'll surely wish you had bought the 10D in short order.

Better to have a camera you can grow into rather than one you'll almost assuredly grow out of within 6 months.

Get the 10D and then start an L-Glass Savings Account. If you smoke, quit and put the money into that. have yard sales and sell all that crap in your garage you haven't looked at in 3 years. ;)

[vvizard]

Hehe. Darn I'm screwed :-P Yes I smoke, yes I'm a student, yes my income is from the norwegian version of K-mart :-P My only _real_ passion is computers and gadgets, so I have little value outside those things (which I obviously can't sell if I shoot digitally ;))

But yes, that L-glass is my only reason to even consider the 300D now. First said, in norway, K-mart pays a "little" bit better than the rest of the world I think, so the 10D is financed from one month of part-time work ( approx 100 hours ), and the salesum of my old Minolta. For that amount I could get the 300D with it's initial lens-kit, pluss a 70-200mm f/4 "L". With 10D on the other hand, I'll have to start saving for "L" again ;)

But if I understand the SLR-issue right, it doesn't really matter to much if I spend a little more on a proper house, cause the house itself is likely to be "just another red number amongst many" in the budget for what I'll eventually spend on extra-equipment (lenses etc). But of course, that it's really essential that the house itself is good, to get the most bang-for-the-buck out of the extra equipment..

So.. I got this somehow right now, and should go straight for 10D ?

[defordphoto]

Go for the 10D? Yes. That's my opinion. It's not THAT much difference in price, and well worth the money -- again, IMO.

I guess before you jump off the wagon there we should really ask what is your purpose for the camera? Are your shooting pictures of Grandma and the kids, or landscapes or sports/action or what?

the reason I say go directly for the 10D is that when I have 'settled' for the lower model I have always regretted it, and with your passion being 'computers and gadgets' you'd almost assuredly find that you'd be wanting the extras that the 10D offers over the 300D.

[vvizard]

No I don't shoot grandma, and hopefully I won't shoot kids for some years yet :-P I shoot landscapes yes, and I shoot dragraces now and then. For the practice I'll hopefully start shooting soccer too, since I no longer have to wait 3s for a focus lock :)

[defordphoto]

Okay well then, IMO you should get a 10D. Then get the 50mm f/1.8 and another not-so-costly lens that can get you by until you get enough for L-glass. Even at that, you won't be all that far away from the 70-200 f/4 lens you have your heart set on.

Quit smoking. That "L" money will add up VERY fast and you'll be around much longer shooting photos.

[vvizard]

Thank you all for good comments (more are welcome though). It's definetly gonna be a 10D now =) I can't wait :) But I have to though. They're not expected to the webshops I've asked until "some time" in October :/ Unfortunatly I live in Norway, so I can't choose from many, except a few norwegian and swedish ones :/

[defordphoto]

And in the meantime, you can save all the $$$ you can.

[vvizard]

I sure will =) Any good objectives to recommend me once I get a little cash again? I'm mainly looking for a zoom-objective to catch fast-moving objects, like cars, football-players etc.. Just to set it straigt, the 70-200mm f/2.8 is totally out of the question, with it's pricetag. I might buy the "70-200mm f/4 L" some time into the future, but if you got any objectives you think more of in the same or less price-range, please share :) I also don't know exactly what the 1.6x crop-factor means. Is it just that I loose things in the edges, or does this actually mean that I get a 1.6x magnification which a lot of people are saying?

[Hatem Eldoronki]

vvizard, the 10D might dissappoint you in low light shooting. I doubt that the 300D would be any better.
I'd still advise you to get the 10D. L glass or not, you will have a very stable base - unlike Windows :) to work with. "L" is for "Later" when you have enough $.

[Andy_T]

VVizard,

the 1.6 crop factor means that - as the sensor is smaller than 35 mm film - only the center part of the lens will be used to take the picture (filling the complete photo).

For this reason, the effect is the same like using a lens that has a focal length that is about 1,6 times longer (so the 1.8/50 mm on the 10D makes the same picture that a 1.8/80 mm lens on a conventional Canon SLR would make). Great for action shots (your 70-200 is actually a 112-320), bad for landscapes (to get 24 mm for true wide angles, you have to buy a rather expensive 15 mm lens)

Hope that helps :-)

Regards,
Andy

[vvizard]

mcouper wrote:

I'd still advise you to get the 10D. L glass or not, you will have a very stable base - unlike Windows :) to work with.



Windows-what? I ditched windows for Linux/OpenBSD in '99, so I'm starting to get used to stable bases now :-D

[Hatem Eldoronki]

In your signature, you sarcastically state that 'windows is stable', so I was being sarcastic too..
I myself like Windows.
So basically, it's a joke.

[vvizard]

aha, I didn't think of the signature :) Didn't even notice that I used that one for this forum :)

[CyberDyneSystems]

Hello VVizard,

Welcome :D

I see from this thread that you are quicly learning the first rule of the SLR,. and that is, that you WILL spend more on lenses than on the camera body. :)

This applies no matter what you shoot, intitial outlay, especially with a digital body,.. will contradict this. You may get the 10D for $1,500.00 and then your fist lens for as little as $200.00. But if you go that route,. you will be impressed with the camera but will want a better lens in 2 weeks. (that is how I went about things anyway,. :( ) But soon one lens won't be enough. I mean if we are happy with a single lenses zoom range,. than why did we spend that premium for an interchangable lens DSLR?

Regardless,. I too would suggest the 10D. Many of the functions I use every time I pick up the 10D are simply NOT available on the 300D.

I am very happy I did not have to make this choice myself,. as I would have gotten it wrong! If the 300D were availble whaen I got my 10D I would have gone for the 300D. And,. in the end I know I would have been wishing I had gotten the 10D.

[vvizard]

Yeah. I've made that mistake a couple of times myself (not with cameras though). And a golden rule is that I almost always regret not going with the little more expensive model, after buying a cheap one that looks "good enough" on the paper. Of course, some times, the cheap one is just fine. Depends on usage.. But I plan on shooting a lot with this camera for a long time, and I really hope the 10D will put a smile on my face when photographing a year from now, just as well as it probably will the first week :) I've seen a lot of shots from it, and it's simply amazing. I can't wait :)

Anyway, is there any websites which review camera-objectives? Specially from Canon? Something like the objective-version of dpreview.com? I've seen a lot of the 50mm f/1.4 vs 50mm f/1.8, but I wan't to see comparison between other lenses too, like some 70-200mm, and hopefully a test between canon, Tamron, Sigma..

[Guillermo Freige]

If you have a tight budget (as mine) I think the 300D is the answer. First, the 300D and 10D have the same image quality (they use the same sensor, or sort of), so the old "film" SLR rule of "spend in lenses instead of in bodies if your budget is low, because in lenses is where image quality is" applies in this case. Also the 300D supports the new EF-S lenses (not supported by the 10D), and the 18-55 seems to be very good (almost too good for a $100 lens, but probably it's because the new "short focus" design). And you can save enough money to buy the 70-200L and have a 10x zoom range :) And only the 300d for now will be able to use future EF-S lenses (if Canon decides to design new ones).
Also, the 300D AF shortcomings are easily solved. If you want to force one-shot, just focus and switch to MF to lock focus, and to force AI servo, shake your body :)
Is a little ackward, but it works. I don't know how important for you are the AE mode restrictions (evaluative by default, partial during AE lock and center-weighted in manual) but it seems a good compromise to me. And apparently the body is plastic, but very solid.
If you need to shoot wideangles, the $1000 300D + 18-55 lens is ideal, because a similar 10D configuration plus an "inexpensive" 17-40L will cost you arount $2300. You will have a more solid and flexible camera with a better lens, but also a bigger and heavier one, with a shorter zoom, and at more than twice the cost!!! (and forget about EF-S lenses).
And, after all, only the photographer matters, not the camera :)

[Andy_T]

Another thing to observe ...

... mail order houses in Germany already offer the 300D with prices 17% below Canon's suggested retail price (when it becomes available).

I'd really wait a bit to see if the price on the Digital Rebel goes down like that of prosumer Canon digicams (G1-G5). The 10D was pretty stable, so far.

That said, the price difference *might* increase.

Regards,
Andy

[larshkj]

vvizard:

I would recommend that you buy the camerabody on one of the Norwegian Internet sites. I can see that www.xd.no have the camera in stock. But you could also call Roar at www.fotovideo.no. His telnr. is 21659840. The guys at Foto & Video is very professional, and they currently have the best price on the 10D body (NOK 15.295,-). I got my 10D there, and haven't regretted it.

I have bought all my lenses (except from the 17-40) from B&H in New York. They have great prices. If you order from them, be sure to use UPS Express as carrier. I've bought the 50mm f/1.8, 70-200 f/4L and some other stuff from them the last couple of months. No problems. The package usually get to Oslo in 2-4 days.

Lars

[TomKa]

After selling all my 35mm stuff (Minolta) i opted for the 300D body, because I don't want to spend too much money for a product which is still under development. As soon as there will be a 20D or a 30D for a reasonable price I will sell my 300D body. It' more about the glass, maybe, or probably, Canon will go the way of Nikon to extend the EF-S lens palette. Switching back to Canon (long time ago I had a AE-1) I switch to the Canon system. I buy the 300D because of the chip, and I can live with the few limitations of the 300D. The only bad thing is the missing spot meter - but I have always my Gossen Spotmaster...

[Doug Rowan]

[quote]vvizard wrote:
The Minolta DiMage 7i exactly one year ago. I bought it so that I would have full manual control, so I wouldn't just point-and-shoot, but learn photography and eventually get some heavier equipment. Sadly I grew tired after half a year, becouse I felt the Minolta was keeping me back. The autofocus was terrible slow in low-light, and because of the EVF instead of something optical, the viewfinder was unusable to check for proper focus. So AF was pretty much the only option. To top everything, I thought picture-quality wasn't what I expected. There was to much noise in anything above ISO-100, and quite a bit in dark areas even at 100.
[quote]

Sorry you had so much trouble with your 7i. For an example of images taken with mine, check out my site at http://www.photo-digitaldesigns.com 99% of the images were taken with a 7i in manual mode & the others with a 2.1mp Olympus C2100.

With the D300 dropping prices like stones, I did some careful Ebaying & got a D30 (I print 8x10's) with 3 canon lenses for less than $1200.00 US. I would imagine that you could find a D60 for less than $1000 very soon plus get the lens you want for less than a 10D...just an idea.

[vvizard]

Nice pictures by the way. I didn't have such a bad time with the Minolta as you might get the impression of. It's indeed a very good camera (in my humble oppinion) in the SLR-like class. It's just that I now feel I wan't more challenges, and therefore a SLR is the logical way to go. And hopefully it will solve most of the things I wasn't to pleased about on the Minolta. Specially the AF-issue. Guess that might vary from cam to cam, and in good lightning, it was no issue at all. But in dim ligthing, I lost quite a number of shots because of the way it often "hunted" alot before it focused, and (to) regurly "missed" focus. Like that it indicated a focus-lock, but when seeing the picture on screen, it's obvious that the focus was locked at something entirely different than what it was meant (and would be logical) to be. And when the viewfiender wasn't optical, there was no easy way to check if the focus actually did match what it was supposed to. The only way I found was acceptable to check this, was to zoom into the picture after it's taken (on the LCD-screen). But that requires a lot of time, and therefore isn't suited in all scenarios. I also had a polarizing filter on it. But because of the EVF, it was very hard to use it properly. I found it to difficult to see in the EVF if the polarize-effect was doing what I wanted it to do. Hope this will get better with my 10D :) At least looking through the viewfinders of my dad's old 35mm SLR's almost make me drool :)

[puttick]

As I've posted elsewhere, there is one major difference nobody has made much of so far.

The Digital Rebel (300D here in UK) takes the new series of EF-S lenses as well as the EF (i.e.35mm format) EOS lenses. The 10D will not, and never will, take the EF-S as it doesn't have the mount.

Now don't think they are simply cheap and inferior - they are just smaller because they don't need to cover a full 36x24mm frame, only the CCD which is 2/3 that size. So they can have smaller elements in a smaller, lighter casing, and use a shorter backfocus. This requires a different mirror action (slides up and back), and a different mount. The design is in fact optimised for the digital, rather than 35mm, EOS body.

There are supposed to be a whole series of these EF-S lenses on the drawing board. None will fit on a 10D. However you can still fit the 35mm format lenses on a Rebel, such as the cheap and excellent 50/1.8 EF.

IMO this is a good reason for buying the 300D.

I also doubt the views expressed about better future resale value on the 10D. A colleague has a D30 which was very expensive when he bought it new less than 3 years ago. It is now near worthless in terms of trade-in or sale price so he gave it to his son, paid cash for his new 10D, and expects that to go the same way in 3 years when he buys a 12 (or 20?) MP Canon body. Digital camera resale values mirror computer prices, not our traditional views of quality camera (Canon, Nikon, Olympus etc) prices, and after three years they are essentially a write-off, no matter what you paid at the time of purchase.

[BruceMcL]

I want to say up front that (1) I am probably biased and (2) fairly uninformed about digital photography. I am biased because I just purchased an EOS 300D yesterday and I am fairly uninformed because it is my first digital camera after quite a few years of film shooting.

That being said, I chose the 300D for the following reasons. While it may be short a few features the picture quality appears to be virtually identical to the 10D, at least according to the reviews I have seen. Since bodies are upgraded fairly frequently, I would rather spend the money for lenses which can be used on later bodies, thus retaining their value and usefulness and making any body upgrade fairly painless. Frankly, I eventually want a full frame digital camera with a high pixel count. The top pro bodies now have them but at a very high price. I can't help thinking that full frame sensors will begin appearing on less expensive bodies within the next several years and by then I should have some nice lenses to use on them.

My other consideration is the need to invest in a nice, large format printer which will not be inexpensive. I will still be shooting 4X5 and medium format film and I will want to make large format prints as well as smaller prints from the digital camera. With that sort of investment in the future, it just seemed smart to save some money on the camera now without sacrificing a lot of features that are meaningful to me.

But the above is just my thinking. I'm sure it doesn't apply for everyone.

Bruce

[CraigBFG]

I too am in this predicament.

300D or 10D?

I'm a keen amateur who's been into photography for many years but lost touch over the last 2 or so.

Seeinhg results from the 300D has inspired me but then I see the 10D, decisions - decisions.

I'll probably stick to a 28-135 either sigma or canon

which was should I go????

[danphoto1]

Go for the 10D It's a wonderful camera. My first film camera was a Rebel i had a lot of fun with it but I still wished that the sales person ad atleasst made me aware of the differnces between it and two Canon upgrades. I really felt as though I was cheated for the longest of times.


Dan

[BobbyC]

BruceMcL wrote:
Frankly, I eventually want a full frame digital camera with a high pixel count. The top pro bodies now have them but at a very high price. I can't help thinking that full frame sensors will begin appearing on less expensive bodies within the next several years and by then I should have some nice lenses to use on them.


This is why I've been saying the EF-s lense is not a good reason to buy this camera. It is a good camera and will give you good shots, but if you ever plan on moving up, the lense will be no good. Not saying one shouldn't buy the camera at all, but not soley for this reason.

[PacAce]

Another BIG consideration between the 300D and the 10D is whether you'll be able to REALLY live without the features of the 10D if you decide to go with the 300D and not have a change of heart afterwards and decide maybe you DID want the 10D features after all and end up petitioning Canon for those features in the next firmware upgrade. :)

[Belmondo]

The introduction of the Digital Rebel is a boon to us all. It offers an extremely capable camera at a price point that is significantly lower than any other digital SLR on the market. The best part is, it's a Canon. That means more people coming into the digital EOS fold. That in turn equates to more products of better quality and at better prices.

People who buy the Rebel thinking they're getting a plastic-wrapped 10D might be disappointed at first, but most will learn to live with the differences and come to enjoy the camera. If they absolutely need the feature set of the 10D, then all they need do is wait a few months. There will be another camera coming down the pipeline that will meet or exceed their expectations. In the meantime, they're having fun.

The worst case scenario: they sell the Rebel now while it is still a hot product----they won't lose that much. Go buy the 10D, and get on with life.

[Malaxos1]

Hey, after a week of trying to log in I finally made it. Anyway I have faced this descision a few weeks ago and picked a 300D. While I love the look and feel of the 10D I just couldn't afford it. I also decided to spend mony on lenses. I will tell you while I keep hearing about the quality of the supplied 18-55mm lens, I am not a big fan of it. I went out within a week and bought a new one, there was $350 I wasn't ready to shell out. While this camera is aimed at serious ametures it will make the pro happy as well, I was one told that it's the photographer who takes photos not the camera (you do need a camera thoug). I am convinced that today's prosumer cameras are better than yesterday's pro models, thus all of the trading from the D30s and D60's to the new Rebel. There are a few short comings, while I don't need or use custom settings I do need flash compensation and spot meter. I wtook 50 or so portraits yesterday and will do another 50 or so on thursday, I felt the flash compensation lack. I really had to brighten my photos up in photoshop. I bounced my flashgun of the ceiling and all shots were dark. Thank God for PS as I salvaged all of them. Anyway this was an upgrade from my last digital camera, the E10. The E10 took great photos but lacked on two major fronts, 1) lots of noise in other than ISO80, 2) max shutter speed of 1/650. Both of these are not a prob with the Rebel. However the glass on the E10 is equaled to the L series Canon glass, boy do I miss that lens. The E10 was used on Quite a few weddings and other paid jobs and I think that I will be able to give the customer better photos with the new Rebel...Dean

[Belmondo]

Malaxos1 wrote:
I think that I will be able to give the customer better photos with the new Rebel...Dean


There's no doubt about it.

[vvizard]

Thanks again for all the feedback here. It's you guys who made me decide. I'm still saving money though, but in about three weeks, I hope to pick up a brand new 10D :) Yes, I said 10D and not 300D, and here's why:

Build-quality means a lot to me. I don't think the 10D will survive a fall from several meters, and I don't intend to drop it to find out eiter ;) It's just that when I buy expensive things, I hate it if they feel cheap. That alone would be enough for me to pay another $200-300 when we're already in this pricerange.

Second, I'll prefer to get all the functions I can get at my budget. I don't care too much if I won't use all of 10D's functions. The most important for me is that I got them, can play around with them, and decide which one I will need to carry with me the next time I buy a new camera. Shortly said: I'll pay a little extra for a lot of features in my learning-camera. It's price is anyway gonna be pretty small in the long run, when you think about all the times I will change a camera during my lifetime.

When it comes to the EF-S issue. It's not interesting for me. Sure it's great to get small lenses etc. I mean, the camera anyway only use the center of the lens (where the quality is best). The problem would arise if Canon decide to make L-glass in the EF-S series. Once you start buying L-glass or something as expensive, changing away won't be easy. And personally, though I'm still a newbie, I don't think image-sensors smaller than 35mm will stay around in digital SLR's for too many years. At least I plan my next camera to be fullframe, and then EF-S lenses would be useless too me.

The last thing is something I haven't really verified for myself, so I shall not state it's absolutly true. But I've been told the 10D is guaranteed for 100.000 exposures, while Canon haven't stated any number it will guarantee the 300D for. (correct me if I'm wrong).

The waiting-time for the camera is killing me :-P I already bought myself the 50mm f/1.4 so I have a good prime ready when it arrive =) (got a good deal on it used)