Epic Battle

[Edgar Morin]

The epic battle between the 300D and Sony 828 has a lot of people confused.
Price: Sony is Cheaper in long terms
Quality: Sony has much pixels and its new 4th colour
Lenses: Canon has a large diversity of lenses of all kinds
Body: Sony (magnesium alloy) vs Canon (plastic) come on!

I really can't decide between this two cameras
I have talked to some nice people in the Sony Talk forum.
Now, I want to hear you.

Thanks

 

[Matt Rupert]

The epic battle between the 300D and Sony 828 has a lot of people
confused.
Price: Sony is Cheaper in long terms
Quality: Sony has much pixels and its new 4th colour
Lenses: Canon has a large diversity of lenses of all kinds
Body: Sony (magnesium alloy) vs Canon (plastic) come on!

I really can't decide between this two cameras
I have talked to some nice people in the Sony Talk forum.
Now, I want to hear you.

Thanks

So, if we are nice to you will you buy a 300D?

--

 

[Randall Lewis]

Not so epic for me...

There are many fine people who own Sony cameras, but I wouldn't. A digital camera is a camera first and I want one made by a camera company not a company that makes everything with a chip in it. Plus, there is that nasty tendency of Sony's about developing proprietary technology.

Just goes to show that different things matter to different people. Buy the camera that appeals best to you that you can afford.

(And before you dis that plastic body on the DR, read the recent threads here about how it stands up when people drop it as a few have done. I once dropped my old, mostly metal Minolta 102 and put a big old dent in it.)

 

[Edgar Morin]

So?

The epic battle between the 300D and Sony 828 has a lot of people
confused.
Price: Sony is Cheaper in long terms
Quality: Sony has much pixels and its new 4th colour
Lenses: Canon has a large diversity of lenses of all kinds
Body: Sony (magnesium alloy) vs Canon (plastic) come on!

I really can't decide between this two cameras
I have talked to some nice people in the Sony Talk forum.
Now, I want to hear you.

Thanks

 

[Donald Cooper]

Edgar,

Here's my response to some other person asking the same question. Hardly an epic battle, it's a walk over depending on what type of cam you're looking for. But essentially if you don't get the differences then the advantages of the DREB will be lost on you, and you'll probably be happier with the 828. It will be one of the two best all-in-one digicams on the market (the Minolta A1 being the other).

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1031&message=6351858

Hopefully you'll make the right decision for your needs. Good luck!

The epic battle between the 300D and Sony 828 has a lot of people
confused.
Price: Sony is Cheaper in long terms
Quality: Sony has much pixels and its new 4th colour
Lenses: Canon has a large diversity of lenses of all kinds
Body: Sony (magnesium alloy) vs Canon (plastic) come on!

I really can't decide between this two cameras
I have talked to some nice people in the Sony Talk forum.
Now, I want to hear you.

 

[Edgar Morin]

E.M.

 

[Sandman]

The epic battle between the 300D and Sony 828 has a lot of people
confused.
Price: Sony is Cheaper in long terms

Depending on your lens and accessory addiction, could be WAY cheaper.

Quality: Sony has much pixels and its new 4th colour

Since when do the number of pixels correlate with "quality?"

Lenses: Canon has a large diversity of lenses of all kinds

True

Body: Sony (magnesium alloy) vs Canon (plastic) come on!

Should not really be an issue. Your cell phone and laptop computer and automobile bumper are made of plastic too.

I really can't decide between this two cameras
I have talked to some nice people in the Sony Talk forum.
Now, I want to hear you.

What are you shooting right now? What is it not doing that you need to do with your photography? Let that determine your upgrade strategy.

Best of luck with your decision!

Cheers,

jim

--
galleries at: http://www.pbase.com/sandman3

 

[billybob_jcv]

If you are going to base your decision on the points you have listed, then I think you should buy the Sony. Personally, I would disagree with item #1 (cheaper? Do you mean because it isn't expandable?) & item #2 (there is a lot more to judging quality than the number of pixels - and until there is a side-by-side comparison of pics, talk is cheap), and unless you are a pro photographer or going on safari, item #3 is irrelevant (just ask the zillions of film Rebel owners how tough their plastic bodies are).

For me, it comes down to this: Are you going to be an interchangeable lens SLR shooter or not?

The epic battle between the 300D and Sony 828 has a lot of people
confused.
Price: Sony is Cheaper in long terms
Quality: Sony has much pixels and its new 4th colour
Lenses: Canon has a large diversity of lenses of all kinds
Body: Sony (magnesium alloy) vs Canon (plastic) come on!

I really can't decide between this two cameras
I have talked to some nice people in the Sony Talk forum.
Now, I want to hear you.

Thanks

So, if we are nice to you will you buy a 300D?

--

 

[Jack_DC]

The cameras are very different, it should be an easy choice.

One is made for convenience, point and shoot with great results. The other is for flexibility, ability to optimize the camera's settings, lenses and filters for the particular shot you want.

For point and shooter's used to digicams, if you get a D300 you will miss live preview, be disappointed with the in camera flash and not like the costly, bulky option of adding a better one on top. You also will not like having to buy another lens to zoom out, then carry and switch lenses to use it.

If you owned a SLR in the past and liked the flexibility/creativity it offered, the D300 will be a dream come true, but a costly one with the extra purchases that will follow.

For most people who have not used an SLR let alone a dSLR, I'd recommend the 828 or something similar. The 828 is a top of the line digicam, with a fast wide range single lens, with features like live preview, movie mode, night shot, that make the D300 seem like a couple of steps backwards from a digicam point of view.

 

[AltaChinook]

like you have already made up your mind. 3 out of four of your points...in your mind favour the Sony. You just want someone to validate it.

Buy the camera that suites YOU.

Cheers
Steve
--
http://www.pbase.com/hangman/galleries

 

[Edgar Morin]

Dear Jim
I do not have enough money to give me the luxe to make a mistake.

I want to capture the best possible that I want and show it and be profitable too.
I dreamed in have an own exhibition, I feel like a jailed cat!
I don't have the money yet, when I have all, I want the best for it

I want to have enough versatility, I want to make Photomacrography, artistic nudes, panoramics, all that I can!
this situation is sad

Well...
Thanks

The epic battle between the 300D and Sony 828 has a lot of people
confused.
Price: Sony is Cheaper in long terms

Depending on your lens and accessory addiction, could be WAY cheaper.

Quality: Sony has much pixels and its new 4th colour

Since when do the number of pixels correlate with "quality?"

Lenses: Canon has a large diversity of lenses of all kinds

True

Body: Sony (magnesium alloy) vs Canon (plastic) come on!

Should not really be an issue. Your cell phone and laptop computer
and automobile bumper are made of plastic too.

I really can't decide between this two cameras
I have talked to some nice people in the Sony Talk forum.
Now, I want to hear you.

What are you shooting right now? What is it not doing that you
need to do with your photography? Let that determine your upgrade
strategy.

Best of luck with your decision!

Cheers,

jim

--
galleries at: http://www.pbase.com/sandman3

 

[charles schuler]

The cameras are very different, it should be an easy choice.

One is made for convenience, point and shoot with great results.
The other is for flexibility, ability to optimize the camera's
settings, lenses and filters for the particular shot you want.

For point and shooter's used to digicams, if you get a D300 you
will miss live preview, be disappointed with the in camera flash
and not like the costly, bulky option of adding a better one on
top. You also will not like having to buy another lens to zoom out,
then carry and switch lenses to use it.

If you owned a SLR in the past and liked the flexibility/creativity
it offered, the D300 will be a dream come true, but a costly one
with the extra purchases that will follow.

For most people who have not used an SLR let alone a dSLR, I'd
recommend the 828 or something similar. The 828 is a top of the
line digicam, with a fast wide range single lens, with features
like live preview, movie mode, night shot, that make the D300 seem
like a couple of steps backwards from a digicam point of view.

I agree. A point and shoot camera is a design based on a different philosophy. Find a store where the DRebel is in stock and handle it. It's a big, heavy camera compared to a P&S. But it gives one lots of options! Only you shoud decide. For example, we have added a Canon 75-300 lens with image stabilization to our DRebel kit and my wife finds it to darned big and heavy.

 

[Dave Lewis]

The epic battle between the 300D and Sony 828 has a lot of people
confused.
Price: Sony is Cheaper in long terms
Quality: Sony has much pixels and its new 4th colour
Lenses: Canon has a large diversity of lenses of all kinds
Body: Sony (magnesium alloy) vs Canon (plastic) come on!

I really can't decide between this two cameras
I have talked to some nice people in the Sony Talk forum.
Now, I want to hear you.

Thanks

t's all in the sensor size not the pixel count. The smaller the sensor and the higher the pixel count the more liklihood of image noise, especially at higher ISO's. Plastic is a better material for cameras, in my mind. It is resilient and will not dent or deform in an accident. It is non conductive and will not cause electronic failure with mild moisture exposure. A tiny sensor and corresponding small lens will have such broad depth of field that out of focus backgrounds will not be practical. The Canon EOS digital system including the CMOS sensor and camera's mechanical and electronic components are well established as the industry standard by which everything else is compared. The Canon lens system is endless and probably the best in the industry.

In short, you are buying a professional quality and capable camera in the Rebel D, while in the Sony you are buying just another small sensor camera with a long zoom lens that will have all the compromises that such zoom lens - small sensor combinations have industry wide.

There really is no choice if ultimate image quality and versatility is your concern. If you want something slick from a slick company that performs pretty much like all other consumer cameras do with overly sharpened, and saturated images, then the Sony is the way to go.

The Rebel D is a camera to grow with, giving rise to an accumulation of lenses and flash equipment and storage cards and various other items that are common to the broadest photographic system in the industry. The Sony is just another dead end consumer camera that will be replaced with something with more impressive numbers in a year. It will give you absolutely nothing to build on.

I'm sure the Sony will give you wonderful images for as long as you own it. The Rebel D will be compatible with everything you accumulate in your future with the Canon system. It is a camera that will provide you with potentially much better images and a future with a superb system.
--
Dave Lewis

 

[Randall Lewis]

The epic battle between the 300D and Sony 828 has a lot of people
confused.
Price: Sony is Cheaper in long terms
Quality: Sony has much pixels and its new 4th colour
Lenses: Canon has a large diversity of lenses of all kinds
Body: Sony (magnesium alloy) vs Canon (plastic) come on!

I really can't decide between this two cameras
I have talked to some nice people in the Sony Talk forum.
Now, I want to hear you.

Thanks

t's all in the sensor size not the pixel count. The smaller the
sensor and the higher the pixel count the more liklihood of image
noise, especially at higher ISO's. Plastic is a better material for
cameras, in my mind. It is resilient and will not dent or deform in
an accident. It is non conductive and will not cause electronic
failure with mild moisture exposure. A tiny sensor and
corresponding small lens will have such broad depth of field that
out of focus backgrounds will not be practical. The Canon EOS
digital system including the CMOS sensor and camera's mechanical
and electronic components are well established as the industry
standard by which everything else is compared. The Canon lens
system is endless and probably the best in the industry.

In short, you are buying a professional quality and capable camera
in the Rebel D, while in the Sony you are buying just another small
sensor camera with a long zoom lens that will have all the
compromises that such zoom lens - small sensor combinations have
industry wide.

There really is no choice if ultimate image quality and versatility
is your concern. If you want something slick from a slick company
that performs pretty much like all other consumer cameras do with
overly sharpened, and saturated images, then the Sony is the way to
go.

The Rebel D is a camera to grow with, giving rise to an
accumulation of lenses and flash equipment and storage cards and
various other items that are common to the broadest photographic
system in the industry. The Sony is just another dead end consumer
camera that will be replaced with something with more impressive
numbers in a year. It will give you absolutely nothing to build on.

I'm sure the Sony will give you wonderful images for as long as
you own it. The Rebel D will be compatible with everything you
accumulate in your future with the Canon system. It is a camera
that will provide you with potentially much better images and a
future with a superb system.
--
Dave Lewis

 

[Troy114670]

I used to own a Fuji s602 which was stolen almost a year ago. I have had a similar delima, trying to decide between the Sony 717, 828, Fuji S7000, and the 300D. In my opinion in terms of image quality the 300D wins hands down. I have decided to buy the 300D (Just waiting for a 10% off sale somewhere so I can pricematch at BestBuy).

I am not experienced in the realm of SLR photography but am looking forward to many afternoons out with my fiance trying to learn the art.

Someone mentioned to me that I should think about the DSLR in this way, that it was an investment in future photographical needs. Mainly, your point about the Canon being more expensive isn't neccessarily the case. It costs more to buy the lenses you need now, but in the end you have MORE flexibility and you have something you can use 3 years from now with a different cam.

Look at everything you want to do with the camera and then decide which one fits the most of your must haves...... you will NOT find anything that is perfect, unless you're spending alot of $$$$. The only thing that is a downer for me is not having the movie modes, but then again, thats why I paid good money for my mini-dv. I am buying the 300D to learn how to take good pictures, small sacrifice.

 

[TimL184437]

I own a Sony 707 and to me the quality is as good or better than my d300. The 828 will be even sweeter. To be honest I like the 707 better because it comes with more bells and whistles. It's a simple point and shoot and no guessing that the image will be what I was shooting. Not the case with the Canon. When they start making lenses for the 1.6 then this will no longer be an issue I assume?

Since I have own the D300 I have purchased three lenses and returned two. One was a 14mm sigma (very grainy) and the other that went back was a 75-300 IS USM (very disappointed with it at 300mm). The funny thing is that the 55-200 II is a much better lenses than the 75-300 at less than half the cost.

I purchase the Rebel for two reasons in mind. The first being able to take wide angle shots inside a home. (the Sony will not do this and the lenses option sucks! Barreling is so bad plug-in software will not cure it) Second, being able to keep my investment in my lenses and take them to the next model that Canon releases.

Bottom line though is I needed wide angle inside architectural shots! If I did not I would go for the Sony hands down. It’s a better product in my opinion and I am totally disappointed with the options for lenses for Canon digital cameras!

 

[Dr. Don Sandell]

No epic battle here. 1 of the cameras is for people who want to take pictures and let the camera do all of the work and expect every picture to be acceptable. The other is for people who want to create images and don't mind working hard to get that particular image, not minding if only 1 out of four images is a keeper. My 300D is 3 weeks in my hand as of today, my Minolta Dimage 7i was sold the same day I purchased the 300D.

It all depends what you want. If you have never shot with an SLR you will probably be sadly dissapointed with a DSLR. If you have SLR experience only a DSLR most probably will be any good in your hands. I shot with SLR's before anything was automatic let alone auto focus. I thought the Minolta would let me do the creative things I wanted to do. It did not (at least for me). The only reason I went with the 300D was because it was the 1st DSLR under $1000 (with a decent WA lens no less). I'm sure in 2 years that will be the norm except for the pro cameras. Thank you Canon for bringing the DSLR to the masses.

Oh yeah, one last thing........a dropped magnesium body will dent. I dropped my 300D on concrete the second day I had it (DOH!!!!). Iit bounced off the pavement from a 4 foot drop without even a scratch. And the picture quality was NOT affected. Thank God for plastics. PLASTIC! "The Graduate" 1967.

 

[Donald Cooper]

Lassiter,

I have a few questions:

1. If you want wide angle, why not get the 828 or the A1 -- they both give you 28 mm equivalent.

2. If you need the Canon for wide angle architecture shots, why get a 75-300?

3. If you need the Canon for wide angle architecuture shots, why exchange the 75-300 for a 55-200?

4. If you're disapponted with the options in Canon lenses -- the widest available lens selection in the world -- what lens do you want, exactly?

I'm not following this at all. Are you sure this isn't a problem with a dSLR rather than with the lens selection?

Since I have own the D300 I have purchased three lenses and
returned two. One was a 14mm sigma (very grainy) and the other
that went back was a 75-300 IS USM (very disappointed with it at
300mm). The funny thing is that the 55-200 II is a much better
lenses than the 75-300 at less than half the cost.

I purchase the Rebel for two reasons in mind. The first being able
to take wide angle shots inside a home. (the Sony will not do this
and the lenses option sucks! Barreling is so bad plug-in software
will not cure it) Second, being able to keep my investment in my
lenses and take them to the next model that Canon releases.

Bottom line though is I needed wide angle inside architectural
shots! If I did not I would go for the Sony hands down. It’s a
better product in my opinion and I am totally disappointed with the
options for lenses for Canon digital cameras!

 

[jlantz]

The epic battle between the 300D and Sony 828 has a lot of people
confused.
Price: Sony is Cheaper in long terms
Quality: Sony has much pixels and its new 4th colour
Lenses: Canon has a large diversity of lenses of all kinds
Body: Sony (magnesium alloy) vs Canon (plastic) come on!

I really can't decide between this two cameras
I have talked to some nice people in the Sony Talk forum.
Now, I want to hear you.

Thanks

t's all in the sensor size not the pixel count. The smaller the
sensor and the higher the pixel count the more liklihood of image
noise, especially at higher ISO's. Plastic is a better material for
cameras, in my mind. It is resilient and will not dent or deform in
an accident. It is non conductive and will not cause electronic
failure with mild moisture exposure. A tiny sensor and
corresponding small lens will have such broad depth of field that
out of focus backgrounds will not be practical. The Canon EOS
digital system including the CMOS sensor and camera's mechanical
and electronic components are well established as the industry
standard by which everything else is compared. The Canon lens
system is endless and probably the best in the industry.

In short, you are buying a professional quality and capable camera
in the Rebel D, while in the Sony you are buying just another small
sensor camera with a long zoom lens that will have all the
compromises that such zoom lens - small sensor combinations have
industry wide.

There really is no choice if ultimate image quality and versatility
is your concern. If you want something slick from a slick company
that performs pretty much like all other consumer cameras do with
overly sharpened, and saturated images, then the Sony is the way to
go.

The Rebel D is a camera to grow with, giving rise to an
accumulation of lenses and flash equipment and storage cards and
various other items that are common to the broadest photographic
system in the industry. The Sony is just another dead end consumer
camera that will be replaced with something with more impressive
numbers in a year. It will give you absolutely nothing to build on.

I'm sure the Sony will give you wonderful images for as long as
you own it. The Rebel D will be compatible with everything you
accumulate in your future with the Canon system. It is a camera
that will provide you with potentially much better images and a
future with a superb system.
--
Dave Lewis

 

[Sandman]

Thank God for
plastics. PLASTIC! "The Graduate" 1967.

Don, I swear I was gonna say the exact same thing in my reply! Now I wish I had. LMAO!

Cheers,

jim

--
galleries at: http://www.pbase.com/sandman3