300D Not a professional camera? I beg to differ!

[gartnl]

http://www.cps.canon-europe.com/articles/article.jsp?article.articleId=60003

No, there is no debate or missunderstandings! ...go take pictures

--
http://tkis.com/wild-mike/
http://wnyboaters.com/

It's not that I'm so smart, it's just that I stay with problems
longer -- Albert Einstein

--
nice cam .. but what's that stupid colour doing there?

--
nice cam .. but what's that stupid colour doing there?

 

[Paul Edwards]

sigh....what does it matter?

Does it being an amateur camera mean that i should now be too ashamed to sell my work?

What is exactly the point in this argument anyhow. Are you trying to make it worthy or unworthy?

Are we supposed to cast away our 300D's stop selling prints and go and get a more expensive model that has the word "pro" attached to it.

Will any of us be able to function without the pro label and a black body?

eeeeeeeeeeeeeek.

really guys what is the point of this rediculas argument?

are we somehow supposed to be better photographers because we own a pro camera. if some of us cant afford to do that and instead invest in glass for our choices are we supposed to give up the foolish notions of a career in photography. personally i thought it was a sensible choice.

What exactly is anyone getting at. and if all you say is "well i wanted to prove the 300d is an amateur camera" then you have way to much time on your hands.

Right well im off to a mates to take some amateur pictures. Just one question, will my L lenses suddenly not be able to fit onto my amateur body? I sure hope my ability to compose a shot is still intact looking through that amateur viewfinder.

sheesh. i really wonder sometimes.

Regards
Paul

http://www.cps.canon-europe.com/articles/article.jsp?article.articleId=60003

No, there is no debate or missunderstandings! ...go take pictures

--
http://tkis.com/wild-mike/
http://wnyboaters.com/

It's not that I'm so smart, it's just that I stay with problems
longer -- Albert Einstein

--
nice cam .. but what's that stupid colour doing there?

--
nice cam .. but what's that stupid colour doing there?

 

[Wild-Mike]

Does it being an amateur camera mean that i should now be too
ashamed to sell my work?

Yes, I stopped selling mine immediately after reading that article

What is exactly the point in this argument anyhow. Are you trying
to make it worthy or unworthy?

How about just reality?

Are we supposed to cast away our 300D's stop selling prints and go
and get a more expensive model that has the word "pro" attached to
it.

Naw, just stop selling your prints

Will any of us be able to function without the pro label and a
black body?

Doubtful, but I will try my hardest

eeeeeeeeeeeeeek.

really guys what is the point of this rediculas argument?

I'm not arguing, just having fun as usual.

are we somehow supposed to be better photographers because we own a
pro camera. if some of us cant afford to do that and instead invest
in glass for our choices are we supposed to give up the foolish
notions of a career in photography. personally i thought it was a
sensible choice.

Is this a trick question?

What exactly is anyone getting at. and if all you say is "well i
wanted to prove the 300d is an amateur camera" then you have way to
much time on your hands.

Not sure, what are you getting at?

Right well im off to a mates to take some amateur pictures. Just
one question, will my L lenses suddenly not be able to fit onto my
amateur body? I sure hope my ability to compose a shot is still
intact looking through that amateur viewfinder.

You will need to contact Canon on that one

BTW, I have sold thousands of $ worth of photos with the Powershot S45 since the begining of August. Does that mean I should give the money back to the people and organizations that I sold photos to?

--
http://tkis.com/wild-mike/
http://wnyboaters.com/

It's not that I'm so smart, it's just that I stay with problems longer -- Albert Einstein

 

[s k u l p t118025]

I look at it like this. The 300D is cut down. It doesn't have all the features of more expensive cameras. It is made to be entry level. But.....

This camera has the potential to shoot what ever it wants, and do it just as well as a 10D, D60, and D30. In fact, it has better image quality over the D60 and D30 which I was drooling at a few years back. That's enough for me.

I kind of laugh when people knock a camera because of it's features that are disabled in the "stupid zones", and that it's not made out of platinum. As long as there is workarounds, I'm fine. It's image qaulity that I care about. And I'm not some fart that goes around dropping my camera. Apparently there are a lot of non 300D users that are. I guess I'm not a pro if I haven't dropped my camera and needed the stronger casing. ; )

So basically in a nut shell, this camera can produce anything the 10D can produce, which is good enough for me. I know it's cut down feature wise, but I'm also no idiot that can't figure out how to maximize a camera.

Brian

Looking at the many reviews around the internet of my new 300D, I
see the camera described as an ‘entry level SLR model’. Many
photographers that have written in these very forums have tried to
argue that the 300D is a ‘none professional camera’.

My post is to disagree with this mind-set and touch on a few points
which you may like to hear.

Let me start by telling you about my 2 main film cameras in the
hope that it may demonstrate to you that I favour quality heavily.
Camera one is my Hassleblad 900cm and camera two is my Contax RTS.
If you know your cameras then you will know how legendary these
cameras are. So now for my digital work I comfortably use my 300D.
Compare your 300D to the top most available cameras of as little as
say 10 years ago. Can you honestly say a camera at that time had a
3rd of the features that your 300D has now? I doubt it. In fact,
if someone had owned a one off 300D 10 years, ago it would have
been worth a fortune and the world envy of the photographic
community. Problem is with us humans is that we live in a relative
world and gladly accept it without batting an eyelid. Imagine when
you had your Sinclair Spectrum computer, or your BBC Acorn, someone
came along and offered you a computer with the kind of power that
is the standard today . . . Laughable really isn’t it! We just
don’t know when we are well off.

I can’t really think off anything significant that I cannot do with
my 300D. There is no shot type impossible that I can’t plan for. It
takes pin sharp pictures that definitely stand shoulder to shoulder
with the kind of quality I am used to with my film cameras
previously mentioned. More importantly, I am using it as part of my
job to shoot publicity photographs for working singer / vocalists
that rely on high quality portfolio shots. This camera has totally
revitalised my interest in hobby photography as well as enhanced my
professional work. It’s earning me money and my clients are happy.

If you own a 300D and most of us in this forum does. You have spent
on average £880 for it and that’s a lot of money to me. You also
own something that contains cutting edge technology only once
dreamed about as little as a few years ago. This camera is ‘not’ a
point and shoot camera, and you do need considerable knowledge of
photographic science to fully appreciate its abilities.

Take a look around at some of the 300D user’s gallery’s. Some of
the shots I have seen are nothing short of stunning. The sort of
shots that have been planned out and worked for. Not shots obtained
by point and shoot, in the dreaded green square mode.

Feel good about your Dreb, you have a wonderful piece of apparatus.
And I was one of those who had a faulty 1st camera and had it
replaced.

Long live the 300D. A truly professional camera!

--
The Hunger Site: http://www.thehungersite.com
-------------------------------------
http://adigitaldreamer.com
-------------------------------------
Portfolio at: http://www.skulpt.com

 

[Niku Toivola]

for exemple with the central focusing point..If I focus on the dark
area, I get overexposure...I focus on the light area, I get
underexposure. can't get evaluative meetering with the central
focusing.

Huh? Evaluative metering is exactly what you get, regardless of which focus point you have selected. The only way to get anything else than evaluative in P, Av or Tv is AE lock, which gets you partial metering. M does center-weighted instead of evaluative.

The fact that the evaluative metering is biased around the active focus point does not mean that it's not evaluative. It just means it assumes the active focus point is on your primary subject, and it kinda makes sense to bias the metering in that area, doesn't it? It still considers the rest of the frame as well, based on a bunch of factors, for example the orientation sensor (perhaps that bright patch towards the top of the frame is the sky?). For the metering to be the same regardless of where you focused, it would have to basically average the light in the whole frame, and that wouldn't make too much sense...

But yeah, I agree it would be nice to have the freedom to choose spot, center-weighted or evaluative at will.

As for the pro vs. non-pro debate, I don't really see why a professional photographer would need loads and loads of features in a camera (depends on the photographer of course, everyone has different needs). The way I see it, a pro camera only needs to do a small number of things, but do them well. In that respect, the 300D would certainly qualify if it didn't impose certain stupid limitations on us in the name of ease-of-use...

Niku

 

[olaf63it]

I have only tried the camera, taking some shots at the shop, postprocessing on pc and printing with minilab.

The metering system seemed to me very umprecise, sure vay less than some prosumer or p/s cameras. Normally d and film slr do best metering.

Also focusing was a deal. Happily it's a digital hardware and it's possible to take another shot (maybe). But let's put the same problems on a film body and we find a disaster camera.

There are too many things to care of, forgiving the main duty to make photos. Then the lack of controls make the skill more difficult.

Regards

 

[Blue60407]

Looking at the many reviews around the internet of my new 300D, I
see the camera described as an ‘entry level SLR model’. Many
photographers that have written in these very forums have tried to
argue that the 300D is a ‘none professional camera’.

My post is to disagree with this mind-set and touch on a few points
which you may like to hear.

Let me start by telling you about my 2 main film cameras in the
hope that it may demonstrate to you that I favour quality heavily.
Camera one is my Hassleblad 900cm and camera two is my Contax RTS.
If you know your cameras then you will know how legendary these
cameras are. So now for my digital work I comfortably use my 300D.
Compare your 300D to the top most available cameras of as little as
say 10 years ago. Can you honestly say a camera at that time had a
3rd of the features that your 300D has now? I doubt it. In fact,
if someone had owned a one off 300D 10 years, ago it would have
been worth a fortune and the world envy of the photographic
community. Problem is with us humans is that we live in a relative
world and gladly accept it without batting an eyelid. Imagine when
you had your Sinclair Spectrum computer, or your BBC Acorn, someone
came along and offered you a computer with the kind of power that
is the standard today . . . Laughable really isn’t it! We just
don’t know when we are well off.

I can’t really think off anything significant that I cannot do with
my 300D. There is no shot type impossible that I can’t plan for. It
takes pin sharp pictures that definitely stand shoulder to shoulder
with the kind of quality I am used to with my film cameras
previously mentioned. More importantly, I am using it as part of my
job to shoot publicity photographs for working singer / vocalists
that rely on high quality portfolio shots. This camera has totally
revitalised my interest in hobby photography as well as enhanced my
professional work. It’s earning me money and my clients are happy.

If you own a 300D and most of us in this forum does. You have spent
on average £880 for it and that’s a lot of money to me. You also
own something that contains cutting edge technology only once
dreamed about as little as a few years ago. This camera is ‘not’ a
point and shoot camera, and you do need considerable knowledge of
photographic science to fully appreciate its abilities.

Take a look around at some of the 300D user’s gallery’s. Some of
the shots I have seen are nothing short of stunning. The sort of
shots that have been planned out and worked for. Not shots obtained
by point and shoot, in the dreaded green square mode.

Feel good about your Dreb, you have a wonderful piece of apparatus.
And I was one of those who had a faulty 1st camera and had it
replaced.

Long live the 300D. A truly professional camera!

--
Blue
http://www.pbase.com/image/7450272

 

[lec_eos]

Looking at the many reviews around the internet of my new 300D, I
see the camera described as an ‘entry level SLR model’. Many
photographers that have written in these very forums have tried to
argue that the 300D is a ‘none professional camera’.

My post is to disagree with this mind-set and touch on a few points
which you may like to hear.

Let me start by telling you about my 2 main film cameras in the
hope that it may demonstrate to you that I favour quality heavily.
Camera one is my Hassleblad 900cm and camera two is my Contax RTS.
If you know your cameras then you will know how legendary these
cameras are. So now for my digital work I comfortably use my 300D.
Compare your 300D to the top most available cameras of as little as
say 10 years ago. Can you honestly say a camera at that time had a
3rd of the features that your 300D has now? I doubt it. In fact,
if someone had owned a one off 300D 10 years, ago it would have
been worth a fortune and the world envy of the photographic
community. Problem is with us humans is that we live in a relative
world and gladly accept it without batting an eyelid. Imagine when
you had your Sinclair Spectrum computer, or your BBC Acorn, someone
came along and offered you a computer with the kind of power that
is the standard today . . . Laughable really isn’t it! We just
don’t know when we are well off.

I can’t really think off anything significant that I cannot do with
my 300D. There is no shot type impossible that I can’t plan for. It
takes pin sharp pictures that definitely stand shoulder to shoulder
with the kind of quality I am used to with my film cameras
previously mentioned. More importantly, I am using it as part of my
job to shoot publicity photographs for working singer / vocalists
that rely on high quality portfolio shots. This camera has totally
revitalised my interest in hobby photography as well as enhanced my
professional work. It’s earning me money and my clients are happy.

If you own a 300D and most of us in this forum does. You have spent
on average £880 for it and that’s a lot of money to me. You also
own something that contains cutting edge technology only once
dreamed about as little as a few years ago. This camera is ‘not’ a
point and shoot camera, and you do need considerable knowledge of
photographic science to fully appreciate its abilities.

Take a look around at some of the 300D user’s gallery’s. Some of
the shots I have seen are nothing short of stunning. The sort of
shots that have been planned out and worked for. Not shots obtained
by point and shoot, in the dreaded green square mode.

Feel good about your Dreb, you have a wonderful piece of apparatus.
And I was one of those who had a faulty 1st camera and had it
replaced.

Long live the 300D. A truly professional camera!

Lets stop the words and go to the action:

Can anyone post samples of pictures taken with a "PRO" camera that the 300D could not take?

By the same token, if someone has Pictures that can defeat the ones posted please do so.

Lets demonstrate with results where the 300D stands...

 

[Wild-Mike]

A few minutes of trying the camera won't cut it. Even having SLR and P&S experience, it took a few weeks to really understand and be able to use the camera easily and effectively.

Once you spend the time with the camera you can repost your thoughts, otherwise your post is useless.

I have only tried the camera, taking some shots at the shop,
postprocessing on pc and printing with minilab.
The metering system seemed to me very umprecise, sure vay less than
some prosumer or p/s cameras. Normally d and film slr do best
metering.
Also focusing was a deal. Happily it's a digital hardware and it's
possible to take another shot (maybe). But let's put the same
problems on a film body and we find a disaster camera.
There are too many things to care of, forgiving the main duty to
make photos. Then the lack of controls make the skill more
difficult.

Regards

--
http://tkis.com/wild-mike/
http://wnyboaters.com/

It's not that I'm so smart, it's just that I stay with problems longer -- Albert Einstein

 

[Wild-Mike]

You're just making a joke, right?

Basically, a pro wouldn't be a pro unless he had a camera labled "pro". What is all this discussion about?

I used to be an auto mechanic years ago and used tools for my trade. I could use a tool that was developed for backyard amateurs or professional mechanics. And no matter what tool I was using it became a tool for a professional when I was using it.

I would say the labeling of cameras is the problem. There is way too much emphasis on the tool instead of the user of the tool.

--
http://tkis.com/wild-mike/
http://wnyboaters.com/

It's not that I'm so smart, it's just that I stay with problems longer -- Albert Einstein

 

[chrissul]

Heck, i've been using a film slr for only about 4 yrs and picked up the DR and used it exactly the same w/out any problem and not that much of a curve..took about a couple of hours to figure out just due to the layout of the camera. I do admit that i never use the stupidity zones or whatever they are called..i mainly shoot in M and Av as those are the two i worry about most..Flash has never been a priority for me and the digital aspect is amazing..if i don't like it, delete and reshoot or plan to fix in photoshop if i can't reshoot...normally not that big of a deal, really. Focus is comparable to the film slr's i'm familiar with, i'm adjusting to the lack of sharpness that seems to be inherant to dslrs..i don't want ot set the incamera sharpness to anything other than 0, so i can retouch later in photoshop w/out a problem..Nikon's dslrs have the same "softness" so i don't really worry about it. print, resize or sharpen, and you will notice sharpness will increase a great deal.

and yeah, as long as there are workarounds, i'm good to go. i've always said i only really need a light meter, focus control, aperture and time control and i'm good to go. heck, i don't even need an incamera light meter, i still love my batteryless holga with the plastic lenses..

have fun, take more pics, and that's about it..

A few minutes of trying the camera won't cut it. Even having SLR
and P&S experience, it took a few weeks to really understand and be
able to use the camera easily and effectively.

Once you spend the time with the camera you can repost your
thoughts, otherwise your post is useless.

 

[olaf63it]

I'm honoured you paid attention to my post. It was provocatory but we italian like to exagerate sometimes.

I've tried the camera for a whole afternoon with my friend who hown the photo shop and is in business from 20 years.

If i weren't interested in buying the camera and if my friend wasn't asked so much about it we could have tried one of the 50 digicams there.
And my thoughts are also my friend thoughts.

But it seems that in this forum every problem is relied on professionality or ability of people, so i make to you a direct question:

On your experience is this camera more difficult to handle, about metering, than other slr bodies? Do you think all (basic) photographic workarounds suggested allow a reliable all-round utilization of this camera?

All that said i still think have to decide between the 10D and the 300D, as the quality of photos was good but i'm interested in a reliable (in terms of results) product, as many here.

Regards

Once you spend the time with the camera you can repost your
thoughts, otherwise your post is useless.

I have only tried the camera, taking some shots at the shop,
postprocessing on pc and printing with minilab.
The metering system seemed to me very umprecise, sure vay less than
some prosumer or p/s cameras. Normally d and film slr do best
metering.
Also focusing was a deal. Happily it's a digital hardware and it's
possible to take another shot (maybe). But let's put the same
problems on a film body and we find a disaster camera.
There are too many things to care of, forgiving the main duty to
make photos. Then the lack of controls make the skill more
difficult.

Regards

--
http://tkis.com/wild-mike/
http://wnyboaters.com/

It's not that I'm so smart, it's just that I stay with problems
longer -- Albert Einstein

 

[Daniella68313]

nah...it is heavily weighted in the center when you use the central focusing point.

Huh? Evaluative metering is exactly what you get, regardless of
which focus point you have selected. The only way to get anything
else than evaluative in P, Av or Tv is AE lock, which gets you
partial metering. M does center-weighted instead of evaluative.

duh...that's why I say the 300d is NOT a pro camera..it is way too crippled.

not control!

The fact that the evaluative metering is biased around the active
focus point does not mean that it's not evaluative.

well yes it does mean it...it is more than active..it is predominant.

It just means

it assumes the active focus point is on your primary subject, and
it kinda makes sense to bias the metering in that area, doesn't it?

no, what would make sense is to have a focusing point that is independant of the meetering mode..so that you can choose the appropriate meetering mode for the subject.

That's the way all "PRO" cameras works and that's also the way my cheapo point and shoot work.

It still considers the rest of the frame as well, based on a bunch
of factors, for example the orientation sensor (perhaps that bright
patch towards the top of the frame is the sky?).

yeah..right. focused on the white areas:

http://www.pbase.com/image/23374969

this clearly show that the camera exposed for the white..period..not taking into consideration any of the surrounding.

For the metering

to be the same regardless of where you focused, it would have to
basically average the light in the whole frame, and that wouldn't
make too much sense...

well yes it woudl make a lot of sense ! that'S called evaluative mode and it is selectable on "PRO" camera...as well as with my 2 cheapo point and shoot.

But yeah, I agree it would be nice to have the freedom to choose
spot, center-weighted or evaluative at will.

not nice...just basicaly essential for about 10% of the situations. As it is now..I find the 300D to be a good tool for about 90% of the situations..some situations it just CANNOT handle at all, unless you do some fancy tric.

As for the pro vs. non-pro debate, I don't really see why a
professional photographer would need loads and loads of features in
a camera (depends on the photographer of course, everyone has
different needs).

professionals need control...there are none with the 300d. Can't decide on the meetering mode..can't decide on the focusing mode.

The way I see it, a pro camera only needs to do a

small number of things, but do them well. In that respect, the 300D
would certainly qualify if it didn't impose certain stupid
limitations on us in the name of ease-of-use...

Niku

--
I am not an English native speaker!
http://www.pbase.com/zylen
http://www.photosig.com/go/users/userphotos?id=26918

 

[olaf63it]

and yeah, as long as there are workarounds, i'm good to go. i've
always said i only really need a light meter, focus control,
aperture and time control and i'm good to go. heck, i don't even
need an incamera light meter, i still love my batteryless holga
with the plastic lenses..

have fun, take more pics, and that's about it..

A few minutes of trying the camera won't cut it. Even having SLR
and P&S experience, it took a few weeks to really understand and be
able to use the camera easily and effectively.

Once you spend the time with the camera you can repost your
thoughts, otherwise your post is useless.

Chrissul, Thanks a lot, you undrstood the point and replied while i was sloowly typing my questions.

regards

 

[Rodolfo]

This does cover it: even the 10D is not. The only pro I know that owns a 10D has it as a backup. US magazine articles and reviews commonly make allusions to pros using even point-and-shoots. British magazines referred to the 10D as an amateur offering.

My Rebel is a nice camera that lets me do a lot of things I couldn't do with a fixed lens CoolPix, and it's the hottest product of the year. But I'm also frustrated by not being able to do some essential things I can do with my other amateur cameras, the CP and an Elan 7.

Looking at the many reviews around the internet of my new 300D, I
see the camera described as an ‘entry level SLR model’. Many
photographers that have written in these very forums have tried to
argue that the 300D is a ‘none professional camera’.

My post is to disagree with this mind-set and touch on a few points
which you may like to hear.

Let me start by telling you about my 2 main film cameras in the
hope that it may demonstrate to you that I favour quality heavily.
Camera one is my Hassleblad 900cm and camera two is my Contax RTS.
If you know your cameras then you will know how legendary these
cameras are. So now for my digital work I comfortably use my 300D.
Compare your 300D to the top most available cameras of as little as
say 10 years ago. Can you honestly say a camera at that time had a
3rd of the features that your 300D has now? I doubt it. In fact,
if someone had owned a one off 300D 10 years, ago it would have
been worth a fortune and the world envy of the photographic
community. Problem is with us humans is that we live in a relative
world and gladly accept it without batting an eyelid. Imagine when
you had your Sinclair Spectrum computer, or your BBC Acorn, someone
came along and offered you a computer with the kind of power that
is the standard today . . . Laughable really isn’t it! We just
don’t know when we are well off.

I can’t really think off anything significant that I cannot do with
my 300D. There is no shot type impossible that I can’t plan for. It
takes pin sharp pictures that definitely stand shoulder to shoulder
with the kind of quality I am used to with my film cameras
previously mentioned. More importantly, I am using it as part of my
job to shoot publicity photographs for working singer / vocalists
that rely on high quality portfolio shots. This camera has totally
revitalised my interest in hobby photography as well as enhanced my
professional work. It’s earning me money and my clients are happy.

If you own a 300D and most of us in this forum does. You have spent
on average £880 for it and that’s a lot of money to me. You also
own something that contains cutting edge technology only once
dreamed about as little as a few years ago. This camera is ‘not’ a
point and shoot camera, and you do need considerable knowledge of
photographic science to fully appreciate its abilities.

Take a look around at some of the 300D user’s gallery’s. Some of
the shots I have seen are nothing short of stunning. The sort of
shots that have been planned out and worked for. Not shots obtained
by point and shoot, in the dreaded green square mode.

Feel good about your Dreb, you have a wonderful piece of apparatus.
And I was one of those who had a faulty 1st camera and had it
replaced.

Long live the 300D. A truly professional camera!

--
Blue
http://www.pbase.com/image/7450272

 

[Joe Ng]

Hi,

I've read the same reviews and it does get a bit irritating knowing you have an entry level prosumer camera. Especially since it cost a pretty penny.

I opted for the body with a EF 24-85mm USM lens, and this made my camera a bit more 'professional'. People who buy the 10D won't be using the cheap lens in the box the 300D comes with.

Anyway, the proof is in the pudding! For years I've lugged around my EOS5 with extra lenses and a big flash on my vacations, and took great pictures, no complaints at all. One day I sold all that equipment and bought a small Contax T2 with a Carl Zeiss lens and the pictures were great - really sharp and almost perfect. Sure it had some limitations and much less control built in but we loved the pictures we got from it.

I expect my Canon 300D will be the same for us... and just in case I still have the Contax T2!

Looking at the many reviews around the internet of my new 300D, I
see the camera described as an ‘entry level SLR model’. Many
photographers that have written in these very forums have tried to
argue that the 300D is a ‘none professional camera’.

My post is to disagree with this mind-set and touch on a few points
which you may like to hear.

Let me start by telling you about my 2 main film cameras in the
hope that it may demonstrate to you that I favour quality heavily.
Camera one is my Hassleblad 900cm and camera two is my Contax RTS.
If you know your cameras then you will know how legendary these
cameras are. So now for my digital work I comfortably use my 300D.
Compare your 300D to the top most available cameras of as little as
say 10 years ago. Can you honestly say a camera at that time had a
3rd of the features that your 300D has now? I doubt it. In fact,
if someone had owned a one off 300D 10 years, ago it would have
been worth a fortune and the world envy of the photographic
community. Problem is with us humans is that we live in a relative
world and gladly accept it without batting an eyelid. Imagine when
you had your Sinclair Spectrum computer, or your BBC Acorn, someone
came along and offered you a computer with the kind of power that
is the standard today . . . Laughable really isn’t it! We just
don’t know when we are well off.

I can’t really think off anything significant that I cannot do with
my 300D. There is no shot type impossible that I can’t plan for. It
takes pin sharp pictures that definitely stand shoulder to shoulder
with the kind of quality I am used to with my film cameras
previously mentioned. More importantly, I am using it as part of my
job to shoot publicity photographs for working singer / vocalists
that rely on high quality portfolio shots. This camera has totally
revitalised my interest in hobby photography as well as enhanced my
professional work. It’s earning me money and my clients are happy.

If you own a 300D and most of us in this forum does. You have spent
on average £880 for it and that’s a lot of money to me. You also
own something that contains cutting edge technology only once
dreamed about as little as a few years ago. This camera is ‘not’ a
point and shoot camera, and you do need considerable knowledge of
photographic science to fully appreciate its abilities.

Take a look around at some of the 300D user’s gallery’s. Some of
the shots I have seen are nothing short of stunning. The sort of
shots that have been planned out and worked for. Not shots obtained
by point and shoot, in the dreaded green square mode.

Feel good about your Dreb, you have a wonderful piece of apparatus.
And I was one of those who had a faulty 1st camera and had it
replaced.

Long live the 300D. A truly professional camera!

 

[ryusen]

The 10D doesn't have the seal either. Actually, I think the only
digital SLRs with a full environmental seal would be the 1D and the
1DS - both professional cameras.

• but i thought the 10d was NOT marketed as a pro camera either?

--

ryusenkai.org for some pictures. Early shots taken with Canon G-1, later stuff with 300D

 

[ryusen]

I'm sorry, i can't tell you where i read it (i've been reading so many different sources trying to learn lately it's all a blur.) Anyway, i read somewhere that the pro cameras like the 1s and the 1ds are environmentally sealed to help keep out dust and rain. the L lenses also have matching seals.

please correct me if i'm wrong on this.

they both have the same frame and they both have the same metal
lens mount no? the only pastic thing is the outter shell. but the
body is as solid as the 10D.

what is that seal?

--

ryusenkai.org for some pictures. Early shots taken with Canon G-1, later stuff with 300D

 

[Jeff Laitila57576]

There is no such thing as a professional camera, only a professional photographer.

It does not matter what camera you use, but If you get paid to do photography, then you are a professional.

Everyone needs to get off their soap boxes, and go out and take some photos once in a while.

--
Jeff Laitila http://www.sushicam.com

 

[Daniella68313]

Canon define the 300d as a consumer DSLR. Canon defines the 10D as a prosumer DSLR.

Looking at the many reviews around the internet of my new 300D, I
see the camera described as an ‘entry level SLR model’. Many
photographers that have written in these very forums have tried to
argue that the 300D is a ‘none professional camera’.

My post is to disagree with this mind-set and touch on a few points
which you may like to hear.

Let me start by telling you about my 2 main film cameras in the
hope that it may demonstrate to you that I favour quality heavily.
Camera one is my Hassleblad 900cm and camera two is my Contax RTS.
If you know your cameras then you will know how legendary these
cameras are. So now for my digital work I comfortably use my 300D.
Compare your 300D to the top most available cameras of as little as
say 10 years ago. Can you honestly say a camera at that time had a
3rd of the features that your 300D has now? I doubt it. In fact,
if someone had owned a one off 300D 10 years, ago it would have
been worth a fortune and the world envy of the photographic
community. Problem is with us humans is that we live in a relative
world and gladly accept it without batting an eyelid. Imagine when
you had your Sinclair Spectrum computer, or your BBC Acorn, someone
came along and offered you a computer with the kind of power that
is the standard today . . . Laughable really isn’t it! We just
don’t know when we are well off.

I can’t really think off anything significant that I cannot do with
my 300D. There is no shot type impossible that I can’t plan for. It
takes pin sharp pictures that definitely stand shoulder to shoulder
with the kind of quality I am used to with my film cameras
previously mentioned. More importantly, I am using it as part of my
job to shoot publicity photographs for working singer / vocalists
that rely on high quality portfolio shots. This camera has totally
revitalised my interest in hobby photography as well as enhanced my
professional work. It’s earning me money and my clients are happy.

If you own a 300D and most of us in this forum does. You have spent
on average £880 for it and that’s a lot of money to me. You also
own something that contains cutting edge technology only once
dreamed about as little as a few years ago. This camera is ‘not’ a
point and shoot camera, and you do need considerable knowledge of
photographic science to fully appreciate its abilities.

Take a look around at some of the 300D user’s gallery’s. Some of
the shots I have seen are nothing short of stunning. The sort of
shots that have been planned out and worked for. Not shots obtained
by point and shoot, in the dreaded green square mode.

Feel good about your Dreb, you have a wonderful piece of apparatus.
And I was one of those who had a faulty 1st camera and had it
replaced.

Long live the 300D. A truly professional camera!

--
Blue
http://www.pbase.com/image/7450272

--
I am not an English native speaker!
http://www.pbase.com/zylen
http://www.photosig.com/go/users/userphotos?id=26918