URGENT: HELP WANTED - 300D vs 10D?!?!?!?!

[FotoPhreak]

Hi all,

Have only just found this forum, and must say am very impressed and will be returning frequently from now on.

In the meantime however, I have somewhat of an urgent problem.

I am about to make a trip late next week, and the only cameras I currently can get access to are a digital 2/3(?)Mp point & shoot, and a very old SLR.

I have been looking at getting into the DSLR market for awhile now, and am almost there.

My situation is as follows:

As have stated, am going away (with a group) and would be nice to have some quality physical memories.

Despite being a keen photographer, reasonably creative/skilled in the composition aspects, I have had very little actual use/practice on any sort of SLR (whether it be Digital or film).

So here are the real questions ...

1. Should I buy the 300D or the 10D?
2. Should I buy any camera now, or wait a little longer?

I will now go through my reasoning of the above questions.

I have not just whacked this post on as an uneducated person, as I have done plenty of research/reading.

1. Now I know all the different specs between the two, smaller bufer, different body, smaller viewfinder, lack of control, etc., and essentially there is very little separating the two.

However, what has got me stumped is whether I need the extra features. On paper the 10D's buffer and body are probably the biggest draw cards for me, as the camera is to be used in many different environments (from portrait work to outdoor/sports photography).

Though the body weight is both a neg & a pos, as carrying it around could be a bit of a hassle when using transport other than that of modern conveniences.

2. I guess the biggest question for me is the timing.

Also from my research, I know that the 10D is coming up to being almost a year old now, whereas the 300D is still less than 6mths.

Additionally, there has been mention on the net that the successor to the 10D is possibly going to be a 30D, and if going by trends should be launched at PMA mid 2004.

So question 2 can really be divided down into the following ...

(i.) should I buy now at all, or wait until the next model?
(ii.) if buy now
(a.) which one to buy
-> as the 10D could quite easily lose alot of its value, much like the 60D did when the 10D was released, when the '30D' comes out?
-> at the same time, the 300D is going down in price pretty much every month.

What I am predicting to happen is that I will buy either one of these cameras now, and then almost certainly sell the body for an upgrade come the next release.

I guess the question then really comes down to, which camera do you predict holding its value more/depreciating less in the time frames given.

Any help on the above would be absolutely fantastic, and you can take away the satisfaction of knowing that you have helped out an informed but somewhat confused future 'FotoPhreak'.

Thanks all!

[Daytripper]

Personal Oservations:

1) Whatever you buy will be cheaper next year

2) You stand to lose less with the 300D because it is cheaper to start with.

3) In three years time they will be equally obsolete.

I can't make up your mind for you, but my advice would be to buy a 300D now and spend the next 12 months taking lots of photos and enjoying it.

Cheers,
Pete

[CyberDyneSystems]

This is how my own logic would go about solving this dilemna.

The questions you must ask yourself are this then... (given your concern over newer technology)

Do you

1. ...wait to buy something else? or do you want a camera now?

IF you want a Camera now then we continue,...

2. If you buy something now,. will you be in a position to,. or want to upgrafde in the near future? Or will this be "the" camera you buy for some time.

If you have every intention of buying now and then upgrading as soon as the new 10D arrives,. then YES buy the 300D.

However if you will be sticking with your purchase for the long haul.. then spend the extra $500.00 on the 10D.

[FotoPhreak]

Daytripper wrote:
Personal Oservations:

1) Whatever you buy will be cheaper next year

Yes I am a little to aware of this!

2) You stand to lose less with the 300D because it is cheaper to start with.

Another good point, but have you any predictions as to which one will lose more.

I.e. they may both lose an equal amount in terms of %, e.g. both half.

Do you think this is likely to be the case, of will the 10D lose more because of its successor?

3) [b]In three years time they will be equally obsolete.

Again am too aware of how true this is, thus 3 yrs is not within the time frame mentioned ... the only questions at the moment are within the next 6 months.

[b]I can't make up your mind for you, but my advice would be to buy a 300D now and spend the next 12 months taking lots of photos and enjoying it.

Will definately enjoy either camera I buy, but already know am not likely to hold on for 12 months - only 6.

[b][Cheers,
Pete

Thanks for your reply, but I was hoping either someone with either a little more crudentials on this site, or someone who has had quite a bit of use of both of the cameras to provide a solution.

[FotoPhreak]

CyberDyneSystems wrote:
This is how my own logic would go about solving this dilemna.

The questions you must ask yourself are this then... (given your concern over newer technology)

Do you

1. ...wait to buy something else? or do you want a camera now?

IF you want a Camera now then we continue,...

2. If you buy something now,. will you be in a position to,. or want to upgrafde in the near future? Or will this be "the" camera you buy for some time.

If you have every intention of buying now and then upgrading as soon as the new 10D arrives,. then YES buy the 300D.

However if you will be sticking with your purchase for the long haul.. then spend the extra $500.00 on the 10D.

Thanks CDS,

You have almost made up my mind for me.

For any additional replies, the answers to CDS' questions are as follows ...

Yes I do want a camera now, but only knowing that it isnt going to do some crazy drop in price within 6 months -> knowing that I will 'want' the new camera and have to burden the loss.

As said, more than likely I will upgrade, as I think the new one should have some significant improvements.

Thankyou very much for your reply CDS, as said it was very helpful.

Any other experienced CDFP users please feel free to add some additional comments.

[KarlJones]

Well, it’s a pretty tough call to make. Based on what you’ve said, and with availability and all else being considered, I think over any given period of time, most people would prefer the feeling of growing into one product rather than outgrowing another. That said, between the two, I go 10D. Regardless of the next version.

I believe the 10D would still retain a higher value and interest among used buyers since the D-Rebel is heavily touted for it’s low initial cost. Following the trend of other entry-level offerings that typically don’t do very well in the used market, I don’t see used D-Rebels producing an attractive return. Whatever you decide, good luck… and have a good trip!

[ilya]

One more question - do you want a new L-lens? Would guess the answer is yes...thus get 300D

[CoolToolGuy]

If I were in your position, I would go for the 300D now. Some reasons/strategies:
-Sooner or later you have to make the leap. Unless you are waiting for some particular feature or resolution, you might as well go now. 6 megapixels is very good resolution, and the available printers (if you want prints) are excellent and inexpensive.
-The sensor in the 300D is basically the same as the 10D, so the image quality is very similar.
-You mention having little experience with an SLR. As you get started, you may be spending a lot of time learning how to use all of the features of the camera. Depending on how active you are, that could be a couple of weeks or several months. Its possible that by the time you learn all about the features of DSLR's in general, and the 300D in particular, the successor to the 10D will be out. If you find that there are features on the 10D that you want enough to get it, you would have the option of stepping up beyond the 10D. If you're happy with the 300D, so much the better (and cheaper).
-Some of the features that are 'unavailable' on the 300D are becoming available via creative software developers (flash exposure compensation is one). There again, it will take you some time to become familiar with the features that you paid for, by then you may be able to get some 10D features for free or cheap.
-As for depreciation, I'm no expert, but if they both depreciate to zero, you have lost less with the 300D. If you are looking at the intro time of the 10D successor, the 300D will probably still be a current camera, and the 10D will be the superceded one. Unless Canon shoots themselves in the foot and brings out a real clunker, the 10D will almost certainly drop more in value at that particular time than the 300D, so you may get a higher resale than if you had the 10D.
Good luck with whatever you decide.
Have Fun

[FotoPhreak]

Thanks for your input CTG.

OK folks, we now have one thinking outright that the 300D will drop due to the 'market' it is aimed at.

And another saying the 10D will drop due to the next model more than likely being its successor rather than the 300D's successor.

Any one else care to agree/disagree with the above, or add any more reasons for going one over the other?

[imago57]

Dear FotoPhreak, I am confused. Are you in the market for a new camera, or are you buying stock in the wall street market? all this talk about loosing value is totally ridiculous. Buy the camera that best suits your skills and abilities, and your desire to shoot. You know what the issues that are bothering you about the 300D are, and probably those issues will somewhat tamper with your ability to take good photographs. Worring about the possible loss in the market of your new camera is a sorry excuse for not investing the necessary money to pursue your passion. You will find that when the time will come that you will need to upgrade your camera (wheather you choose to buy the 10D or the 300D) you will not care about the market value of the camera you intend to dispose of, but of the cost of your new toy. Those people who bought a D30 3 years ago have today 3 years of experience shooting with digital media, and with workflow etc. If they had been waiting for the D60 to come out, and then for the 10D to come out, they will still be there, waiting for the perfect deal to come out.

I guess I got a little carried away, but what I ment to say is that your camera is first and foremost the tool you use to follow your passion, don't relegate it to a mere investment object.

Regards:

Max

[dtrayers]

I was prepared to buy the 10D, but when the 300D became available I purchased that and used the price difference to get a better lens. To put it another way, for the price of a 10D and a decent lens, I have a 300D and TWO decent lenses. The lenses will be with me for a long time, but the body will be upgraded someday.

The 300D has the same sensor as the 10D, so with the same lenses they'll take the same picture. Sure, the 10D has some more features, some I would like to have, but not worth the price difference.

Another point:

You said you have little experience with SLR's, film or digital. To get a good image from any SLR takes a little more than point and shoot. Also, you didn't say if you had experience with managing digital images, but if not, I'll caution you that be it the 10D, or 300D or even a Nikon D100 (gasp!), it takes a little work on the computer to get a decent image.

My point is that if you are comfortable working with digital editing, then go for it. But if not, you may want to consider a camera more like the Canon A80 or G5. You can get excellent images with less work.

Good luck and have a nice trip.

[robertwgross]

I give up. I read all of the text. What is urgent?

---Bob Gross---

[FotoPhreak]

robertwgross wrote:
I give up. I read all of the text. What is urgent?

---Bob Gross---

The urgency was that I needed to make a decision soon, as if I choose to get a camera, which I have now done so, by the time I order it I really need to get it before I go away.

Is that what you were asking?

[FotoPhreak]

Dave,

Your help was very beneficial!

Thanks for your time.

[mwinog2777]

Urgent! Buy the 10D, now, never wait. There will always be something new and cheaper. Using that logic we'd all still be using Brownie cameras. The forum may be breaking up soon, and you might be banished if you buy the 300D. Also, don't underestimate the added features on the 10D. As you grow as a person and a photographer you will need these.

[FotoPhreak]

Forum breaking up - were you being hypothetical?

[mwinog2777]

FotoPhreak wrote:
Forum breaking up - were you being hypothetical?

No, read the threads: "My Saddest Day, Ever", and "SUGGESTIONS FOR FAQ"

[KarlJones]

imago57 wrote:I guess I got a little carried away, but what I ment to say is that your camera is first and foremost the tool you use to follow your passion, don't relegate it to a mere investment object.
Respectfully Max, the cost/value and investment appears to be a concern to FotoPhreak, who said:

“I guess the question then really comes down to, which camera do you predict holding its value more/depreciating less in the time frames given.”

Yours were good points, but at the same time everyone’s criteria weighs in accord with different priorities.

[Daytripper]

FotoPhreak wrote: Thanks for your reply, but I was hoping either someone with either a little more crudentials on this site, or someone who has had quite a bit of use of both of the cameras to provide a solution.

Well I'll be buggered. An eletist noobie.

You are quite welcome, No, really.

[RichardtheSane]

Will definately enjoy either camera I buy, but already know am not likely to hold on for 12 months - only 6.
That is a sound reason to go for the cheaper option, nad you get a lens with ti :)

[imago57]

Karl, I never intended to question anyones economic restrictions, or sound unsensitive. But buying a camera almost only based on its reselling value it seems to me to ignore some much more important issues, e.g.: quality of the product, and its ability to stimulate the artist to pursue further reaches. There is nothing worst than finding yourself in the position of saying "if I had got the other camera I could take this shot now!". I was under the impression that FotoPhreak was already concerned with issues like buffer, and since he was talking about taking pictures of sports events...

Regards:

Max

[DonCoon]

From the way I sense you're leaning, I'd suggest you buy the 300D and put the difference into a good "L" lens, say the 70-200 f4L ($560 +/-). The 70-200 make sense because of its fit with the 18-55.

When you sell the 300D (with the kit lens), the 70-200 will still be a stellar performer on the replacement -- regardless of what it is.

In the meantime you'll also learn the difference between cheap glass (kit) and quality glass.

Just my 2 cents.

[CyberDyneSystems]

All these posts manage to turn into some interesting and stimulating debates! And some say they are tired of the same old questions! :D :D :D

Fotofreak,

FYI price drops. Historically,. none of Canon's DSLR's have gone down in price due to the introduction of a new model. Canon's retail model is one of individual cameras at differing levels.. and they do not compete with thmeselves.

The D30 was only available for about a year when the D60 replaced it. Replaced it Many hoped that the D60 (including myslef) would drive down the price of the D30. It did not. The D30's simply disappeared.

Likewise with the 10D... this was a better Camera for substantially less money than the D60... did this undercut the cost of a D60? No,. there were none to be had.

The 300D has been out for some time now and it will not effect the cost of the 10D,. they are in different classes. (just as the 10D does not effect the cost of the 1Ds)

In fact the only Canon DSLR that has budged in price is the recent drop from some vendors for the 1D.

The 1D is currently Canon's OLDEST available DSLR.. it predates even the now discontinued D60. It's price came down not because of anything Canon has released,. but because Nikon has released a more capable camera (they finally caught up in this case) in the D2H at roughly a thousand less than the Canon 1D was selling for.

The Next Canon DSLR will be either of two things.
Most feel it will be a model between the 10D and the 1D series like the Film body EOS 3... whether such a release will be priced to replace the 10D,. or be in between at about $2,500.00 remains to be seen.

Personally I would not be surprised if the next Canon DSLR is an updated 1D.. which will faze out the existing 1D alltogether.


Okay,.. what was my point??? :D

Do not fret the fear that any of these camera's will drop in price. Canon just doesn't like to do it that way. I could see it happening only to the D-Rebel as it is being marketed as a consumer hobbiest camera and sometimes these do go down... but so far the DSLRs don't.

[RbnDave]

I had to make a similar decision a few months ago. I was leaving on a trip in a week and wanted a new camera. After doing extensive research, I decided on the 10d and then proceeded to research where I could get the lowest price. I found the lowest price and bought the camera. I thought I had a great new camera to take on vacation, but I was wrong.

The problem for newbies like me when shopping for SLR camera is not picking the body. The problem is choosing the lens. When i bought my 10d I totally neglected researching lenses and ended up getting talked into buying a bad lens. I was in a rush preparing for vacation and decided to trust the camera store guy when he told that the Sigma 24-70 (non EX) was a great lens for the 10d. I didn't find out the lens was junk untill I got home from vacation and saw my 10d was producing lower quality photos than my old Powershot S30 digicam.

The moral of the story is "don't by an SLR camera untill you know what lenses you are going to need." You are going to need to buy a set of lenses not just one. For the type of shooting I do (outdoor nature photography), I need three lenses, a wide angle (17mm), a mid range zoom (24-70mm), and a short telephoto (70-200mm). It took me several months of research to come up with a quality and affordable set of lenses. The Sigma I bought originally with my camera now never gets used. I would have been better off had I waited to buy my 10d till after my trip. I ended up lugging the 10d and sigma combo all over the southwest. I could have gotten better results with my tiny powershot and the money I wasted on the Sigma lens could have paid for a 77mm polarizer and a 1.4 teleconverter.

Dave

[robertwgross]

As a general rule, you should not instantly believe any advice that a camera salesperson tells you verbally. Most of them are just shooting for a sales commission, so anything that they say to get you to purchase is a necessary evil. Besides, they can always claim that you misunderstood what they actually said. Plus, they will always try to sell you what it is that they have in stock, as opposed to what they might have to order.

Now, there are a few exceptions to the general rule. Once you have visited a few really good camera shops, you will learn which few can really be trusted. If it is a pro shop and they think you will be purchasing pro gear from them for a long time, then they tend to get a little more careful about their advice.

---Bob Gross---

[kabell]

FotoPhreak wrote:
So here are the real questions ...

1. Should I buy the 300D or the 10D?
2. Should I buy any camera now, or wait a little longer?


OK, here are my 10 cents....

A month ago i bought a 10D and had some of the same speculations as you.

I bought the 10D, because when a successor to the 10D comes out, the 10D will still be a better camera than the 300D, so you should be able to sell the camera used to a least the same price as the 300D.

So the question really is, are you willing to pay the extra money for getting the camera now and have it for maybe 6-12 months?

I'd say: go for the 10D and see the extra money as a ticket to half a year of enjoyment.

[karusel]

Take 300D, the extra features of the 10D are not making the difference between a superb and a good photo.

The cost part: initial cost is low, depreciation is pretty heavy, it's not a very desirable used item, unless somewhat ridiculously cheap, not much to loose though.

Let's do the math together, shall we? A period of 6 months, and suppose ye olde Rebel looses 50% of initial price:
-300D -> $900 --------- -50% ------ lost $450
-10D -> $1,500 ----------30%---------lost $450

so to loose the same, 10D would have to lose 30% at most. I is really not very likely that either will lose more... unless something really really dramatic happens, like, a full size CMOS priced just above $1,500. Then Rebel would probably leave his teef in the dusty ground. 10D would get a pretty tough hit, but as a semi-pro item, wouldn't lose much of value.

My non-expert opinion, heh.

[iwatkins]

Buy the 10D, it isn't silver......



Cheers

Ian

[BearSummer]

Hi Folks,

My 2p worth

Buy the 10D, you then have more room to grow into the functionality and wont find that you are hitting the "my camera cant do that" wall so fast. Once you have outgrown your cameras abilities buy whatever the next camera is if you can afford it. At the end of the day you buy a camera for what it does, if it still does everything you want it to in 5 years time then its not redundant its just well used.

As has been suggested here buy the best glass you can afford after doing lots of research.

Best regards and happy photography whatever you buy

BearSummer

[Tom W]

I'm kind of slow here - I haven't taken the plunge yet. Instead, I bought a used Elan II last spring and have had a great time learning with it. I'm going digital on the SLR side next spring, after I've saved up a bit of cash (I'm not fond of using credit if I don't have to), but I continue to enjoy the film(gasp) camera right now.

The good part of my approach is that I've enjoyed the benefits of Canon's EOS system, I've had time to learn a bit with the almost-new SLR, and I have a couple of compatible lenses (though I will probably be easing my way into "L" glass at some point).

Anyway, I would offer another idea to consider - buy a good used film Camera such as the Elan II or IIe and a decent "L" lens such as the 24-70 2.8. I realize that digital has several advantages, but you'll still get enjoyment and very fine pictures out of that camera, and you will be compatible with the digital SLR when you choose to buy one.

[Daytripper]

PhotoFreak,

Whatever you decide, do make sure that you post an update of your valuations here in six months time (when you upgrade) - it will be of invaluable assistance to other like-minded folk who are struggling with the same dilemma...

[FotoPhreak]

Hi all,

Just thought I'd touch base again to say have been reading all the replies, and, honestly, have to say very surprised with the support/input the topic has gathered.

Whether it be from the

[vvizard]

Hi there PhotoPhreak. I won't try to tell you I'm a photo-guru, cause I'm not. But, and this is probably relevant.. Less than one month ago, I was in the same situation that you where.

I'm pretty young (just turned 20), going to school, working part-time at the norwegian version of "K-mart". Yep, that means I don't have the econemy to buy whatever I want :/ Less than one month ago, I was in the same 10D vs 300D situation as you are. And right now, I'm in the same "what lens" situation as you are/soon will be. I don't waste cash, cause I don't have enough of them. I therefore _REALLY_ hard try to search the web for in-depth reviews and oppinions. _LOTS_ of them. When reading reviews, you might wan't to make up your own "grade" about the equipment you're about to buy. The way they give points in skijumping have worked quite nice for me this far in photography (and for years in computer-equipment). People saying "This brand is _THE_ best, and _THAT_ brand is the SUCK!" can usually be discarded. You'll see it a lot in the Canon-L vs Third-party makers debates. Sometimes I seriously doubt those reviewers have actually tried the equipment the badmouth.. So where where I'm going? :-P Yes, If some (among many) user-oppinions are EXTREMLY good, discard it. Also so if it's extremly bad. Then you're left with the majority of the reviews. The ones who haven't been lucky/unlucky in receiving a bad or execptionally good copy of the product.

My camera-story turned out this way: Just to say, I've only photographed for a year. Started out digitally with the Minolta DiMage 7i beeing my first Camera ever! (yeah, never shot analogue). When I wanted to upgrade to a DSLR, I finally took the 10D over the 300D. Mostly because of the robust body. As said, I don't have a great income, and I've had it for less than a month, but seriously, even after this short time, the extra money spent is already forgotten. I'm into the business of getting my lens-arsenal now, and seriously the price-difference between the 10D and 300D won't matter jack sh*t in the big picture anyway ;) I was afraid I would regret taking the 300D after a short time. And now, after having the 10D for a month, I already think I would. If you can afford it, really, take it! ;) I'm still paying mastercard-bills for it, but I never regret it ;)

For lenses.. Let's see. Get the hell out of this forum, before you're convinced to get the "L" out of your economic life ;) No seriously. L's are probably _GREAT_! I only own the 50mm f/1.4, which is a truly sharp and great lens, but doesn't suit my style at all. It's not _nearly_ wide enough when I wan't wide (for the majority of my shots), and not narrow enough when I wan't tele (the rest of the time ;)). So now I'm looking into lenses in the 15-40 and the 70-200 category. As said, I hate to waste money. And by buying cheap crap, I'm actually wasting more money than I will by buying quality. But I'm not paying 90% extra cash, to get the 5% extra performance. I'll buy in what people probably will call the "prosumer". Therefore, the 17-40mm f/4L (~ $700 I think) is what I probably get in the wide-department. In the telephoto, I'm either taking the 70-200mm f/4L (~ $550), or the sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 ($700), or the Sigma 100-300mm f/4 (~ $800). I'm really having a hard time deciding between the last three in the telephoto-department. Most L-guys here will kill me now I think, but I'll take one of the Sigma's. Ok, they're a little more expensive, but what the hell, they're as good optically, and got more bonus's like longer focal-length or bigger aparture. Therefore better lenses ...

(aaaaaaauch don't hit me. You L-aholics could have spoken up when I made threads for recommendation, but you didn't. Take that as the fact that you don't disagree in this statement (and most people I've read about who have used both don't either))

So there you are.. My two cents. Get the 10D, then _really_ spend time reading reviews for lenses =) A few of the pics I've taken with mine can be found here:

http://www.foto.no/cgi-bin/bruker/minside.cgi?brukerid=15668

My profile-photo is just a snapshot of myself in the mirror, taken with the 10D. It would probably have been (photographically better with the 300D, cause then people would not start to wonder: Oh what a great camera-shot. Is that a 10D? Too bad that head snuck into the scene :(

If it where taken with the 300D, people would probably just think: Oh, that's how he looks, ok. Too bad about that cam in the picture though :/

And that was my 0.02 of jokes ;) This was one L-ish long post, but hope it helps at least a little.

[CyberDyneSystems]

RE: Glass,. in my response in your lens post I thought I had touched on the "brand name" question,.. but perhaps I was typing too much :D

All three manufacturers you mention have models that are well worht looking into, even when compared to Canon "L"

I am partial to the quality and savings compared to "L" that Sigma's EX line offers.

But for some zoom ranges,. such as the 28-70mm f/2.8, I know that both Tokina's and Tamron's are a bit better than the Sigma of this range.

Sigma's 70-200mm f/2.8, 100-300mm f/4, and 120-300mm f/2.8 on the other hand are in the case of the latter two the absolute best zoom lenses availble in this range.

Period.

And the 70-200mm f/2.8 can hold it's own neck and neck with the Canon version for half the cost.

So no,. you should not really rule out the "other" brands. They are making some great lenses too.

[Lightning]

mwinog2777

I am new to this Forum and reading your post just gets me hot under the collar. You are one pretentious son of a ##### .

Not everyone can or needs to spend the most for a camera. So what if the now public is closer to getting good pictures. If I spent $10,000 on a camera can I flame you? Does it make me better than you?

So what if someone asks a stupid question. They have to start somewhere. It is people like you that think they are better than everyone else because they do not have or want the same as you!

More is not always better. I do own a 300D and I am very satisfied with the pictures it takes. I have had man digital cameras since the first Kodak DC40 and have several 35mm SLR cameras.

I am sorry for stealing you post but this is something I had to get off my shoulders.

Maybe you start your own forum for pretentious owners of Canon 10D Digital Camers

[Belmondo]

Lightning wrote:
mwinog2777

I am new to this Forum and reading your post just gets me hot under the collar. You are one pretentious son of a ##### .

Hey Lightning.....lighten up!

There is a lot of satire in these threads, especially where there’s a discussion of the relative merits of the 10D and the Rebel. Read back through a few of them and you’ll see that most of these threads are liberally laced with a lot of tongue-in-cheek comment (approaching outright sarcasm). Don’t be offended when you encounter it.

There is no question that Rebel owners will eventually become the dominant group in this forum ……. everyone recognizes that. The numbers of Digital Rebels being sold are pretty amazing. And if you’ve been reading the various threads over recent days, you’ll see that there have been discussions based on serious proposals about splitting this forum into two or more groups based on either hardware or experience levels. The prevailing sentiment (although admittedly not unanimous) among the forum members is to keep it all together.

Nearly everyone concedes that the Rebel is a fine camera….a fact that’s hard to dispute. Based on a Ben Franklin analysis (side by side), it acquits itself very favorably when comparing the Rebels features against a 10D which has a street price that’s 2/3 higher. There is a fear, however, that a massive influx of new members to the forum with no previous SLR experience could possibly degrade the quality of exchange that the older members have enjoyed to this point. I personally don’t have any such concerns. New DSLR owners will come and they will go. Some will learn, and in time, contribute. Others will simply disappear. The measure of their worth will not be based on how much they spent on their gear. It will be what they do with it that establishes their value to the forum.

Finally, your comments to mwinog2777 are inappropriate in this venue. Getting ‘hot under the collar’ and venting in such a manner serves no purpose other than to invite an equally vitriolic response. There have been only a few of those since I’ve been tracking this board, and for most of us, they’re unwelcome and rarely solve anything.

Good luck with your camera.

Tom

[mwinog2777]

Lightning wrote:
mwinog2777

I am new to this Forum and reading your post just gets me hot under the collar. You are one pretentious son of a ##### .

Not everyone can or needs to spend the most for a camera. So what if the now public is closer to getting good pictures. If I spent $10,000 on a camera can I flame you? Does it make me better than you?

So what if someone asks a stupid question. They have to start somewhere. It is people like you that think they are better than everyone else because they do not have or want the same as you!

More is not always better. I do own a 300D and I am very satisfied with the pictures it takes. I have had man digital cameras since the first Kodak DC40 and have several 35mm SLR cameras.

I am sorry for stealing you post but this is something I had to get off my shoulders.

Maybe you start your own forum for pretentious owners of Canon 10D Digital Camers


Please read thread: "My Saddest Day, Ever"

It addresses your concerns. In a post about 70-80 down, I acknowledge that the color of a man's camera is no more important than the color of his eyes.

I truly do not wish to offend anyone. 28 years ago I, too, was a begining photographer, and was lousy. 28 years later I'm 28 years older and still lousy.

There are those that will maintain that the only thing that's kept me going all this time is my sense of superiority (verging on superciliousness), as far equipment is concerned. First it was film equipment, and then it was digital. NOTE, I've been on this forum longer than anybody except Pekka. I joined right after he started it. I was early in getting into digital, and was always a step ahead of my friends.

We all need something to give meaning to our lives. Some people have religion, some have politics, others have causes. Some people even have families. I have only my Canon 10D, my 2 lenses (Canon 1.8-50mm & Tamron 28-200 3.5-5.6) and my i950 printer.

Once again, I truly wish to offend no one.

[mwinog2777]

belmondo wrote:
Lightning wrote:
mwinog2777

I am new to this Forum and reading your post just gets me hot under the collar. You are one pretentious son of a ##### .

Hey Lightning.....lighten up!

There is a lot of satire in these threads, especially where there’s a discussion of the relative merits of the 10D and the Rebel. Read back through a few of them and you’ll see that most of these threads are liberally laced with a lot of tongue-in-cheek comment (approaching outright sarcasm). Don’t be offended when you encounter it.

There is no question that Rebel owners will eventually become the dominant group in this forum ……. everyone recognizes that. The numbers of Digital Rebels being sold are pretty amazing. And if you’ve been reading the various threads over recent days, you’ll see that there have been discussions based on serious proposals about splitting this forum into two or more groups based on either hardware or experience levels. The prevailing sentiment (although admittedly not unanimous) among the forum members is to keep it all together.

Nearly everyone concedes that the Rebel is a fine camera….a fact that’s hard to dispute. Based on a Ben Franklin analysis (side by side), it acquits itself very favorably when comparing the Rebels features against a 10D which has a street price that’s 2/3 higher. There is a fear, however, that a massive influx of new members to the forum with no previous SLR experience could possibly degrade the quality of exchange that the older members have enjoyed to this point. I personally don’t have any such concerns. New DSLR owners will come and they will go. Some will learn, and in time, contribute. Others will simply disappear. The measure of their worth will not be based on how much they spent on their gear. It will be what they do with it that establishes their value to the forum.

Finally, your comments to mwinog2777 are inappropriate in this venue. Getting ‘hot under the collar’ and venting in such a manner serves no purpose other than to invite an equally vitriolic response. There have been only a few of those since I’ve been tracking this board, and for most of us, they’re unwelcome and rarely solve anything.

Good luck with your camera.

Tom



Thank you so much for the kind comments above. I'm very appreciative of the emotional support you have given me. Much better said than I could possibly do. I agree, no room for vitriol. Everybody's welcome on this forum.

[Belmondo]

mwinog2777 wrote:Once again, I truly wish to offend no one.

Nice reply. It shouldn't have been necessary, though. Obviously some people don't read the entire thread before flying off the handle. I suppose I should keep that in mind myself when posting some of my more inane comments.

Tom

[Lightning]

That is all I wanted.. Just give the little guy a break. We are not all experts.

I am sorry I flew off the handle but it just got me a little P'd off. Not everyone needs the best of the best.

And for spltting up Novice and Expert.. I think the Expert should help the Novice. That is how the Novice can be an Expert. Then pass it on and on..

[RichardtheSane]

Lightning wrote:
And for spltting up Novice and Expert.. I think the Expert should help the Novice. That is how the Novice can be an Expert. Then pass it on and on..
I agree with your sentiments there.
This forum is great, and there are some posters here with a fantastic (often dry and sometimes sarcastic) sense of humour - Kind of keeps it a bit light hearted really :D :D

[daaaveman]

Hello all. Total newbie here. My first post. Let me say that I am excited about about being a member of this forum. From what I have read thus far, it is an intelligent, intellectual, and interesting place to discuss photography. Being a newbie, I have gained more good advice in a couple of hours of browsing than my many hours of reading reviews and manufacturer propoganda. I am very grateful for those of you with enough experience to enlighten the total amateurs. I was just getting into SLR photography a few years ago when my gear was stolen from my car. I've been a digital point and shoot guy since then. It's dull and the pictures are less than impressive. I am very excited about entering "your world".

I am planning a purchase of my first digital SLR in the next two weeks and had narrowed it down to the 300D or 10D. This discussion is greatly helping me in that decision making process.

My vote is don't break up the forum, just enjoy the humor caused by the silly questions of those of us that are beginning to learn. I believe that if we are serious enough to participate in this forum, we will be serious enough to work hard to broaden our knowledge and someday contribute value. Just remember, we all had to start somewhere.

[Belmondo]

daaaveman wrote: Just remember, we all had to start somewhere.

You just did! Welcome.

Tom

[vvizard]

I'm just jumping in after reading the headline. Didn't bother to read all posts. Maybe I even have answered this thread earlier too, don't remember.. Anyway guess you have gotten a _LOT_ of pro's con's for the different models. Pro's for the 10D, and Cons for the 300D ;) (joking guys, don't flame me).

Since you're asking, I'll take it that you can afford the 10D. If so, go for it. I did, I don't regret. If you can't afford it.. Get a mastercard, I did, I don't regret ;) I'm still owing way to much money on my cam, but anyway I'm paying it back in small doses, each time with a smile on my face as long as I look at the cam when pressing "submit" on my banks internet-service =)

[FotoPhreak]

daaaveman wrote:
Hello all. Total newbie here. My first post. Let me say that I am excited about about being a member of this forum. From what I have read thus far, it is an intelligent, intellectual, and interesting place to discuss photography. Being a newbie, I have gained more good advice in a couple of hours of browsing than my many hours of reading reviews and manufacturer propoganda. I am very grateful for those of you with enough experience to enlighten the total amateurs. I was just getting into SLR photography a few years ago when my gear was stolen from my car. I've been a digital point and shoot guy since then. It's dull and the pictures are less than impressive. I am very excited about entering "your world".

I am planning a purchase of my first digital SLR in the next two weeks and had narrowed it down to the 300D or 10D. This discussion is greatly helping me in that decision making process.

My vote is don't break up the forum, just enjoy the humor caused by the silly questions of those of us that are beginning to learn. I believe that if we are serious enough to participate in this forum, we will be serious enough to work hard to broaden our knowledge and someday contribute value. Just remember, we all had to start somewhere.


Daaaveman let me know if and when you make your decision, and what you decide?

If not there yet, let me know where you stand and why?

Thanks for your post.

Cheers.

[Canuck]

Hi
I raealise I'm not a pro, but heck, I recon I'm getting close to a point where I could make some return on the investment I have so far:
Canon EOS 10D w/Big Ed
2x batteries
Canon 16-35mm F2.8 L
Sigma 120-300mm F2.8 EX
(gotta order a Canon 28-70mm F2.8 L)
2x 512 CF cards
Lots of other bits and bobs like filters and a shutter release and stuff like that.

The last thing I'm trying to do is brag about my stash, but make it known what I have to take pics with. I can't overemphaisie the need to put quality glass on the camera, especially the 10D. I was shooting with a 28-80 and 70-300mm cheap as chips lenses and it showed!
I was really frustrated!!! Then I had some extra cash floating like about $2k and said, that the heck and got the Sigma 120-300mm F2.8 EX lens, and didn't look back. It finally came here to England and took it to Wales and that was where it was used for the first time. If you want to see what the camera is really capable, you owe it to yourself to get pro glass like either Canon L glass, or Sigma EX glass. I have heard good stuff about a Tokina lens, but can't speak for it myself. Now I go to use it and talk about a revolution, when I saw the pics I couldn't believe my eyes! CDS has some pics of birds on this forum that will blow your mind and I have 2 that I took and were posted, topic # 17977. I hate to say this, but I am seriously anal about the pics I take. I fail to see the point of taking crap pics! I have someone I know that has an Olympus D380 and it's 2MP and 2x or 3x digital zoom. Cost, about $175. Geez, the Sigma lens alone was $1900! That puts it into perspective I hope. That camera takes what I call crap pics, especially when you start using the digital zoom. Also it isn't designed to be more than a digital point and shoot, although it easy to slip in your pocket. Can't to that with a 10D! What am I getting at?
You get what you pay for in how you set up the 10D. When I get back to the US, I'm going to enquire about a job on the side wherever I am, on my terms to go freelance/per diem to start. It will depend on where my real job takes me next. I am only hoping to stay away from the Southern US. Reason: I loathe hot weather with a passion, after spending 3+ years in Tucson, Arizona I found out how much I enjoy the snow and cold weather. It is worth noting I am from the Northeastern US, and very used to well below zero weather. Good time to find out how the 10D operates in below zero weather when it gets that cold.

Cheers from England,
Canuck

[vvizard]

If you wan't to know how the 10D works in low temperatures, hang on :) I got mine a month ago, and I live in Norway! This is probably like the best friggin place to find out if, and how much cold weather this baby can survive =) Guess I'll take it to the ski-resort one day it's really cold to shoot some snowboard-pics. If it should happen to survive, that will give me some nice clue about how much battery-performance is decreased in such temperatures.. If it doesn't survive on the other hand, I guess I'll finally find out if this over-prized insurance is worth it's money ;)

[vvizard]

But just to give a hint about my expectations.. I think it'll survive -20C without problems at all. Heck I live in this cold country, and I have yet to see any electronic device dying because of the temperature. And I'm the kind of guy who drags a cellphone and PDA virtually everywhere, even though it's -20 or -30 degrees.

So what do they have in common with the 10D? Not much, except that all of them have a "working-temperature" of ~ +5C or more.

[FotoPhreak]

vvizard wrote:
If you wan't to know how the 10D works in low temperatures, hang on :) I got mine a month ago, and I live in Norway! This is probably like the best friggin place to find out if, and how much cold weather this baby can survive =) Guess I'll take it to the ski-resort one day it's really cold to shoot some snowboard-pics. If it should happen to survive, that will give me some nice clue about how much battery-performance is decreased in such temperatures.. If it doesn't survive on the other hand, I guess I'll finally find out if this over-prized insurance is worth it's money ;)

## vivizard ##

You mentioned insurance, what sort of insurance do you take out on your camera?

How much does it cost (what currency)?

## Everyone else ##

Does anyone else insure their camera?

If so, have you made any claims?

Do you think its worth it?

Is there a limit as to what camera you would insure, i.e. obviously the 1D would make more sense insuring than the 300D - but would you still insure the 300D?

[Andy_T]

PhotoPhread,

one word of advice from another newbie (worthier Forum members obviously are not around):

On the top of this page you'll find the 'Search' feature.

It's really a cool feature - you might not suspect from its name, but it helps you to find posts, in which someone already used specific terms.

As an example, you might enter 'insurance' and get a list of all the posts where anyone mentioned which kind of insurance he or she bought on their cameras, what their experiences were and whatnot.

Of course, you'll never get a very important user with zillions of posts that way if you only ask new or original things. That's the downside of the feature, of course...

Best wishes,
Andy

[daaaveman]

Phreak, have you read the direct comparison between the 300D and 10D at

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos300d/page6.asp#afmeter

It's worth a read.

What do the rest of you think about dpreview???

[hmhm]

If the price of a 300d or 10d is high enough for you that you require soul-searching, then (IMHO) you should either be getting a film SLR and a cheap consumer zoom lens, or if you're feeling saucy, then a 300d with the kit lens. You'll need 2 lenses on the 10d to cover the same range, and the wider one isn't cheap.

And in order to be self-contradicting, don't listen to any of the advice you hear on message boards like this. If you went to a Ferrari message board and asked what kind of car you should buy to drive to work, you just might end up spending more than you really should have.

Don't overlook the "incidentals", the batteries and flash cards, etc. Many a newbie digital photographer has decided to buy a new PC to run Photoshop faster. How are you going to archive your digital images? Will you also need a CDRW and media? New internal or external hard drive? Factor those expenses in too, and compare to dropping off your film at the drugstore. Despite what we want to tell ourselves, no amateur ever saved money by going digital.

In terms of the urgency of your request, consider that the best camera for your trip "next week" is whatever one you already know how to use. You're not going to be very adept at using your 300d this quickly, and you shouldn't screw up your trip by spending it with your head down, puzzling over a little buttony contraption.
-harry

[daaaveman]

My situation is that my wife gave me a $700 budget to buy a new digital point and shoot. That was just before the 300D came out. I would love to spend $2,500 or more on a 10D with accessories but that would buy a lot of groceries. I'll have to grow into that.

I am planning to start with a 300D and a Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 EX. That gets me in the game and I can start learning for around $1,300 with a UV filter and a basic case. I have the wife talked into that.

I can then buy a zoom lens in a few months. Probably a Sigma Sigma 100-300mm F/4.0 EX IF HSM. Or should I look at this new 50-500 Sigma?

After that, I'll look at a wider-angle EX.

OK, I'm a total newbie so does this sound like a sound plan or should I suck it up and keep pointing and shooting while I talk the wife into the extra $600 (300d w/o lens compared to 10d w/o lens)?
Will I sorely miss the added functionality of the 10d or are the manual AF mode settings and the other differences minor?

My main concern about the 300D is the fact that it's plastic - that I don't like.......

[Andy_T]

Daaveman,

no problem, you can edit the post and delete it.

Have you taken a look at the Tamron XR 28-75 f/2.8?

There's a thread by FA Doorhof very favourably comparing it to the Sigma and the Tokina.

This lens on the 300D is the setup I'm currently eyeing ... haven't convinced my wife yet, so there's still something left to do...

I don't really know whether to get the kit lens in addition or not... on one hand, it's not the grandest lens in Canon's offering. On the other hand, there's no conceivable alternative to get a real wide angle lens for so little money.

Regards,
Andy

[vvizard]

FotoPhreak wrote:

## vivizard ##

You mentioned insurance, what sort of insurance do you take out on your camera?

How much does it cost (what currency)?

## Everyone else ##

Does anyone else insure their camera?

If so, have you made any claims?

Do you think its worth it?

Is there a limit as to what camera you would insure, i.e. obviously the 1D would make more sense insuring than the 300D - but would you still insure the 300D?

I haven't actually insured the Camera yet. I will though take the same insurance as I did with my last camera. (Minolta DiMage 7i). Of course I will insurance for a higher amount of money, and pay more I guess :-P I just make the insurance through one of norway's biggest insurance-companies. I can tell you a little about how the Minolta-insurance was done, what I paid, and what it would cover:

I found the price for all my equipment, if I where to buy it from the nearest photo-store (not online). I told the insurance-company that this was the amount my equipment was worth. According to last year, (converted from Norwegian kroners to USD) that was $2400. Included the camera and the 1GB IBM microdrive. None was cheap at the time of purchase (specially not here in norway). They then saw the equipment, along with the receipts that prooved me as the rightfull owner, and accepted. I then payd ~ $50/year to insurance my equipment for $2400. That would cover theft, accidents and mostly anything, as long as the loss wasn't caused by me beeing utterly stupid. Utterly stupid would be to leave the camera exposed in the passenger-seat of a parked car. Even if the doors where locked. Do that, someone smashes the window, steal the cam.. No payment.. Put a jacket over it, it would get covered. If I where to accidently slip and fall, land on the cam and crush it, that would be covered..

I haven't made any claims on camera-equipment, but I'm definetly think the relative small insurance-sum is worth every penny. Specially here in norway with all the snow and ice. You don't have to be very drunk to slip and fall over here =) And paying $50/year for the 10D, I will do without hesitation =) Will probably pay $100+ with some lenses.. But I still think it's _VERY_ worth it =)

I even put insurance on "small" things like cellphones and PDA's. I've done a cellphone-claim once.. Worked as charm. They even replaced the (then) almost brand new Ericsson T68m, into the newser Sony-Ericsson T68i. I wasn't to pleased about that since i Liked the original T68 better, but it just shows the point.. So of you where to insurance the 1D now, and it'll be replaced by a new one while under insurance, and you break it, you'll probably get the new one, if Canon stops producing the 1D when it's replaced by a newer versionn. At least that's probably what would happen with my norwegian insurance-company.