Size comparison - 300D vs. 350D vs. 20D [Warning: Large Files]

[Wazza]

The other day I decided to line up all the cameras lying around and take a few shots. These were shot with a 300D, in M mode, 1/60th with flash. Didn't have patience to do none harsh lighting, with a tripod and longer shutter speeds.












Well, the 350D, although maybe only 15% smaller than the others, feels much smaller. Maybe a touch too small for my hands. I've shot most with the 20D, and much prefer the larger solid feel to it, with the grippy texture as well.

[Dooglla]

Where is the 1D? just kidding.

[Wazza]

That will have to wait a year or two, when I have some money.

Obviously, I'm not silly enough to buy such similar cameras.. That EOS5000 is so close in performance to my 20D.

[ron chappel]

Hey nice comparo
The 350D actually deos look too small there!(i still want one though)

[picture-this]

Way to small for my liking.

[PhotosGuy]

Way to small for my liking.

All of them together is way to expensive for mine!

[CousinMadness]

Greetings,

Camera manufacturers for some reason have acquired a propensity to produce smaller and smaller models. It's as if the whole raison d'etre for making the thing is to see how much electronics they can cram into an ever smaller space. Maybe they are showing off to the design team at Nikon.

Personally, and as several here have alluded to... I think a lot of models are too small. I hear everyone from here to dpreview raving about the new Canon wondertoy 350. I still cannot comprehend why the brains at Canon would make the handgrip even smaller. I mean... at over $1000 with taxes you at least want to be able to hold onto it.

.. and god forbid you do drop it... what engineer had a cerebrial misfire and thought up the idea of encasing your $1000 electronic ever shrinking gadget - in plastic?

Something is wrong with this picture folks (pun intended)... Gone are the days it would seem, that your camera could survive a roll down a set of concrete fire exit stairs... and live to tell you about it.

Camera manufacturers would be doing us all a great favour if they were to get their design crews out of the minature cellphone way of thinking. When does small become unusable? Soon all we will need to take pictures is a piece of velcro and voice commands.

I say give me something I can feel.... and wrap it in metal please.



CM

[condyk]

I love small gadgets, but the main problem I had was at the bottom of the 350D grip. Holding it made the bones around the base of my little finger ache quite quickly as they didn't grip anything and I also felt like the bones in the middle of my hand got a bit sore too quickly as the fingers gripping the camera had to grip more and the load not spread. I did try it with a quite heavy lens, as that's what I'd wanna be using it with. Without generalising at all, Japanese hands are probably smaller then mine on average. Maybe they need some big fat guys in their research labs

[cmM]

remember those threads about how there aren't many women into photography... Canon decided to make a dSLR for women... and that was the birth of the 350D concept

[condyk]

Originally Posted by cmM

remember those threads about how there aren't many women into photography... Canon decided to make a dSLR for women... and that was the birth of the 350D concept

Of course ... how cool is that

[roanjohn]

That 20D looks yummy!!!

Thanks for taking the time to do this.

Ro1

[VesselinG]

When I got my hands on the 350D, I really expected something really smaller. And lighter. The surprise was good... I really like it. Though I never got my hands on a 20D, but still could compare the feelings that the 300D and 350D make. The 350D is pretty comfortable, at least for me. (even though i have "big hands".) I really dont think that, when you have 350D in your hands it will be THAT small. At least it wasnt for me.

[jimsolt]

I would suggest that Canon recognized that many people (not ALL people) would be receptive to a new camera that is slightly smaller and lighter than it's predecessor but very much heavier in capabilities. The initial sales figures would seem to prove them right about this.
The OVERALL difference in size is 1.6 inches. As the originator of this post points out, even this slight difference "feels" too small for him. Not to worry, Canon has not forgotten you, they still make the cameras you used for comparison, and I see no indication they intend to miniaturize them.
On the other hand, if I were to buy the 20D it would be for the capabilities, not the size, but if I picked one up and it "felt" too big, I'd probably opt for another camera more to my size likings.
I guess I just like compact things. I'd rather have a Ferrari than a Linclon Navigator. It's a lot smaller, but . . . .
Jim

[etaf]

i found the 350D too small for comfort - but then i'm used to the eos5

[Wazza]

As for expensive gear..
Only that 20D with 17-40 is mine.
The 300D pictured is my friend Daniel's (known as Rendezvous here),
The 350D is one of my uncle/aunties new cameras, which they have no idea how to use. And are disappointed that it can't do perfectly clear shots in the dark outside, 20 metres away with flash.. I didn't mean to make Canon sound that great.
And the camera taking the shots, and the EOS 5000, belong to another Uncle who has just gone back to the UK.