Digital version of EOS 3....

Sponsored Links

9 Jan 2005 - 5:40 AM

• Options

Join ePHOTOzine for free and remove these adverts.

Little Jo (e2 Member)

10

9 Jan 2005 - 6:41 AM

• Options
  • Report Error / Abuse

0

I doubt that Canon will release a digital body between the 1D MkII and the 20D. The 20D has some more advanced features than those found on mid-range film bodies. Mid-range film bodies didn't have a PC socket and they used the mini-jack based remote, whereas the 20D has a pc socket and uses the same remotes as the pro versions. The 20D is a superb camera, I doubt that there's really a need for another intermediate model. The build quality is excellent (as good as the EOS 3, I do own both) and the handling in terms of autofocus is excellent. It has been marketed as a semi-pro camera. I did a brief comparison of the AF systems and the 20D was every bit as fast if not faster than the EOS 3.

If you want things like the 45 point AF, you need the pro models.

Jo

mikeyc71

8

9 Jan 2005 - 9:36 AM

• Options
  • Report Error / Abuse

0

Well thats no good for me because the EOS 3 is technically more superior to the EOS 20D. I require a DSLR without the automatic program modes as they signify a 'consumer' or 'beginners' camera and having them in the camera means you end up paying for features you do not want. That is one of the other reasons for offloading my EOS 30 and getting the EOS 3. The biggest and important thing is weatherproofing and certainly the EOS20 is not weatherproof. Unless Canon release a digital version of the EOS 3 then a whole horde of disgruntled Canon EOS user's may end up switching over to either Minolta or Nikon. So if the EOS 1D range is equivalent to the EOS 1 range and the 10D/20D similar to the EOS 30/30V then why not release a new version in the middle, namely the 3D?? This does not make any sense. I do not like the 10D or the 20D as the build quality is nowhere near as good as my EOS 3 and they have the crap program modes and built-in-flash I do not even want!
Jo, one important thing I have no intention of blowing 4 grand on a pro camera, but I would blow 1,500-2,000 on an EOS 3 digital. Canon should realise their DSLR's are grossly exhorbitant in price and should release an EOS 3D with a FAIR price for us mere amateurs! Oops I forgot to mention that the 20D has only 7 focus points and therefore is built on the EOS 30V and not the EOS 3.

mdpontin

8

9 Jan 2005 - 9:44 AM

• Options
  • Report Error / Abuse

0

Minolta currently has just one dSLR in it's range: the Dynax 7D. So far as I'm aware, it doesn't have any more weather-proofing that the Canon EOS 20D.

I'm not sure I understand your point about program modes - surely you didn't upgrade only to get rid of them? Although the automatic subject-based program modes are aimed at those with less experience, their inclusion in a camera's specification shouldn't be assumed to take anything away from the rest of the specification. Sure, you can see it as paying for something you don't need (thought it's an open question how much it would add to the cost), but on the other hand, almost any camera will have features that you don't particularly want. Usually this is something you have to accept in order to get the features that you do want. Sorry if I've misunderstood.

Edit: It's easy to fall into the way of comparing technical specifications to arrive at a decision on which camera is better. I think most of us are prone to do this at times. However, it isn't necessarily a clear indicator. One camera may have more focus points, more megapixels, more this, more that than another, but that doesn't guarantee that it handles better, focusses more reliably, delivers higher quality results. Again, I'm not saying this is what you are doing, just making a general observation.

Doug

mikeyc71

8

9 Jan 2005 - 9:45 AM

• Options
  • Report Error / Abuse

0

I think even at 2,700 that is too much for an amateur to splash out. I am just a hobbyist photographer and have no wish to spend that much on quite an out-dated DSLR now.

mikeyc71

8

9 Jan 2005 - 9:50 AM

• Options
  • Report Error / Abuse

0

Hi Doug, my point about the automatic program modes is they are seen to be included for the less experienced yes, but surely for a DSLR priced over 1,000 is a lot of money for a less-experienced person to pay. I am quite a but experienced myself, but I would not pay that much as it is not worth the money unless I won lottery of course

I am not sure, but I think the Nikon D100 is a pro version is it not? Can someone enlighten me.

I wasn't aware the Canon 1D pro spec cameras have program modes, like portrait, landscape, night mode, etc. No pro is gonna use them. If they did not exist in their film bodies why are they in the digital models?

chris.maddock

11

9 Jan 2005 - 9:55 AM

• Options
  • Report Error / Abuse

0

All of which goes to prove that you can't please all of the people all of the time

mikeyc71

8

9 Jan 2005 - 9:59 AM

• Options
  • Report Error / Abuse

0

Subject modes should be built into consumer cameras and priced at a level suitable for the general user, i.e. like the 300D. As for the 10D/20D not sure which market this range is aimed at as they are not really pro spec as they are not weatherproof.

The top-end EOS 1D range is too bulky, too expensive and is designed for action, wildlife and journalists. The introduction of the 3D based on its film version with features lifted from the 20D and the pro-spec 1D's would be suitable for a lot of us and give Nikon a run for its money.