I'm a little disapointed

[Daniella68313]

here goes the Canon sorliers

That I see people calling the 300D a "crippled" camera. Everyone
knew what the camera could and couldn't do prior to buying it , now
these same people are calling it crippled. If you think that and
want to say that then don't own one. Own something else. It's that
simple.

Everyone that's complaining or disappointed about the REBEL/300D
shortcommings got what they paid, an affordable DSLR camera that
can shoot excellent quality images. If you cannot accept this,
take a hit, sell your REBEL/300D on ebay, buy the 10D and complain
about it's shortcommings, then again take a hit again, sell the 10D
on ebay, buy the 1D Mark II, then complain how expensive it is that
it produces just about the same high quality images as the
REBEL/300D, then take it back to the store and return with nothing
and wait till the next generation REBEL comes out in 2005.

I, on the other hand, am going to enjoy the REBEL for the next 2-3
years and try to learn everything I can to produce fantastic
photos. So far, this is my best purchase when it comes to digital
cameras.

--
Former Kodak 280 user.
Current Olympus d-40 owner
Panasonic FZ10 owner/user/keeper
Canon Rebel newbie

--
I am not an English native speaker!
Please email me at [email protected] for questions
http://www.pbase.com/zylen
http://www.photosig.com/go/users/userphotos?id=26918

 

[Daniella68313]

The way I now see it is the camera is what it is. It stands as its
own.

it also decide on its own users are off limit...

It cannot be comapred to the Canon 10D or any other camera. It

is the Canon Rebel. If it were the sister to or crippled version of
the 10D maybe it would be called the 10E. Just as each camera that
Sony or Nikon or Olympus puts out is its own. So stands the 300D.
Hey after all , Phil Highly Recommended it.

sure..it is still a very good camera. The fact that it is crippled only mean that the firmware is limiting that camera as it is capable of much more than this.

--
I am not an English native speaker!
Please email me at [email protected] for questions
http://www.pbase.com/zylen
http://www.photosig.com/go/users/userphotos?id=26918

 

[J D Rebel]

The way I now see it is the camera is what it is. It stands as its
own.

it also decide on its own users are off limit...

Sure it may but i have yet to have a camera that does everything perfectly or exactly how I want it to. I also have now seen a HUGE difference from CCD for the past 12 years to CMOS. from what I see no matter what CCD does it can't compare. Trust me, i am no loyalist to Canon. This is my first one. I only bought sony or olympus in the past

 

[BigMike]

J D Rebel,

Would another term be more appropriate? Perhaps "limited feature
set" would be a better description. >
Cheers,

jim

That's right. Is it the popular idea that all the missing features can be turned on with a hardware hack, that caused people to start referring to the Rebel as crippled? We really don't know what all can actually be turned on and what can't, so crippled might be an incorrect term.

 

[BigMike]

If a person wants all these so-called missing features, you can get them by buying a more expensive dslr. That's the point of the Rebel. It's a trade-off. Spend less, and a few features are missing. Spend more, you get them. At least Canon put the money into the more important features, and the quality of the sensor. Thank god they didn't cut corners there, and give us a full featured camera, with a lower quality picture, like many other companies are doing at this time. No matter what you do, your going to have to trade something for something, unless you spend the bucks. Even then, you just know something will be missing that another brand has. Like I said, it never ends. Good old marketing....

 

[Scholty]

Isn't there that russian hack that takes care of some of those firmware 'crippling' things..???

Haven't bought a Rebel yet... still deciding between it and the 10D and waiting for PMA to see what's going to be new from Canon...

The way I now see it is the camera is what it is. It stands as its
own.

it also decide on its own users are off limit...

Sure it may but i have yet to have a camera that does everything
perfectly or exactly how I want it to. I also have now seen a HUGE
difference from CCD for the past 12 years to CMOS. from what I see
no matter what CCD does it can't compare. Trust me, i am no
loyalist to Canon. This is my first one. I only bought sony or
olympus in the past

 

[Travis Feisthamel]

That I see people calling the 300D a "crippled" camera. Everyone
knew what the camera could and couldn't do prior to buying it , now
these same people are calling it crippled. If you think that and
want to say that then don't own one. Own something else. It's that
simple.

The camera is everything it was claimed except I figured when I bought the DRebel w/ Speedlite 550EX I would get better results than when I shot with my Canon EOS 10s with a Quantaray QTB-9500 flash. The flash is always inconsistant to the point I do not trust it. Even in Green mode, which I never shoot in, the flash is underexposed. I am sure that 80% of people using the DRebel are in Green auto mode. Maybe a firmware upgrade with the new ETTL2 will fix this. (I am sure Canon will at least do that upgrade).

Travis
http://www.pbase.com/fototravis

 

[Jettubby]

I agree to a point. What some are saying is that it was not a trade-off. They could have enabled some features and it would not have cost them one more cent. They could have made it a better camera with no extra cost to them but they chose for "marketing" reasons only to disable several features. The cost of the Rebel is pure 100% marketing and has nothing to do with actual cost to build. They couldn't make it better or as good feature-wise as the 10D or no one would buy the 10D. The also used the color silver to mentally try and distinguish it from a "pro" camera. They want the pros to buy the $5000 bodies. Canon could have just as easily made the 300D better than the 10D, retire the 10D, and come up with a revolutionary camera for $1000 and Nikon now wouldn't be able to touch them. The made the offensive move first and Nikon has the advantage of putting in a good defense. I love my Rebel but it irks me a bit that things they could have done to make the camera better for free were purposely left out. It's all about the "almighty dollar" and the Rebel is a publicity stunt, not a revolution in technology.

 

[misha]

Isn't there that russian hack that takes care of some of those
firmware 'crippling' things..???

It doesn't do much - at least not about the main complaints (AI focus, flash underxposure, etc.)
--
Misha

 

[Michael Louis]

what other reason does the Canon Corporation exist for? Charity? I don't thing so. This issue goes back to when this Rebel D was first sold, and apparantly not too many people are familiar with the Rebel. I have a film Rebel that is a decade old (remember when Rebels were BLACK!), and it was the same then as now: AI Focus!

I hate to sound gruff, but to me it's a mooch mentality to DEMAND something for free. The 10D predates the Rebel D and existed at the same time as when the Kiss was released. Phil clearly displayed the differences, and as BigMike so clearly pointed out if Phil or Canon were off in the feature set promised then this camera could easily have been returned for any number of alternatives out now or in the future ala 10D/D70.

Of course it's 'crippled' just like every other low end product positioned in a tiered product line....Right?

I agree to a point. What some are saying is that it was not a
trade-off. They could have enabled some features and it would not
have cost them one more cent. They could have made it a better
camera with no extra cost to them but they chose for "marketing"
reasons only to disable several features. The cost of the Rebel is
pure 100% marketing and has nothing to do with actual cost to
build. They couldn't make it better or as good feature-wise as the
10D or no one would buy the 10D. The also used the color silver to
mentally try and distinguish it from a "pro" camera. They want the
pros to buy the $5000 bodies. Canon could have just as easily made
the 300D better than the 10D, retire the 10D, and come up with a
revolutionary camera for $1000 and Nikon now wouldn't be able to
touch them. The made the offensive move first and Nikon has the
advantage of putting in a good defense. I love my Rebel but it irks
me a bit that things they could have done to make the camera better
for free were purposely left out. It's all about the "almighty
dollar" and the Rebel is a publicity stunt, not a revolution in
technology.

 

[BigMike]

I agree to a point. What some are saying is that it was not a
trade-off. They could have enabled some features and it would not
have cost them one more cent.

This is a call that Canon had to make. We on the other hand, decided to buy the camera, exactly the way it is. If we did not know about any missing features, we really can't blame canon for that mistake, that's our own mistake. I am not convinced yet, that all those missing features could of been enabled, only some of them have been. Even though it might seem possible, there very well could be technical reasons why they are not enabled, that goes beyond software. I just don't know. Regardless, at this point, with technology evolving so fast, I don't think and compant stands a chance of coming out with anything that is going to make everybody happy. I do beleive, if it were not for he internet, and forums like this, we would be buying these cameras, finding out what they can do and can't do, and then we would just be having a great time using them. The problem with camera forums, like all other hardware forums, is there is always somebody unhappy wiht something, and they use the forums to try and make everybody else unhappy also. There are even people that don't even own the product that start these kind of events rolling, everyday, in every forum. While I love the internet, and these forums, if there's a darkside, that has to be it. If a person doesn't adjust their minds to all the unhappy, moaning and groaning people, then you and I can easily get caught up in it, which we are...

 

[Michael Louis]

especially those smart enough when they bought this camera to know what they were getting. It's so easy to label these intellegent consumers Canon Soldiers, but it doesn't erase the fact that you are just whining about something you should have known if you didn't.

Even so BigMike said it all: If this camera didn't perform to your standards then you could have returned it. Good Grief, calling people Canon Soldiers just because they are honest about what they were getting themselves into...shameful.

here goes the Canon sorliers

 

[Jettubby]

This has nothing to do with a "mooch" mentality. Let me explain. There are things that a camera manufacturer does to reduce costs; IE: plastic body vs. metal, cheaper CCD, etc. These things actually make it cheaper to manufacturer and therefore Nikon and Canon can sell the camera for less. Here's the difference; with the exception of the plastic body and such Nikon made the D70 the best it could be whereas Canon did not make the Rebel in that respect. They took the 10D conception and disabled features in order to promote the 10D's sales. See the difference? Nikon did not make the D70 "less" of a camera purposely compared to the D100. I think Canon could have made the 300D better than the 10D for less money and if they had done that, the D70 would not be such an issue.

Like I said I love my Rebel and it was the only DSLR that I could afford at the time. I wish they'd have made it the best it could be for their budget but that was my decision and that's ok. Personally I'm not complaining but just making an observation. And the next body I'll buy certainly won't be the older design of the 10D. I'm going for the 1D Mark II baby!

 

[Michael Louis]

it's demeaning, and only makes you look like an arrogant blowhard. Can't anyone disagree in the Kiss Digital forum without getting huffy and sarcastic.
I'll read your post later, just commenting now on your unprofessionalism...

This has nothing to do with a "mooch" mentality. Let me explain.
There are things that a camera manufacturer does to reduce costs;
IE: plastic body vs. metal, cheaper CCD, etc. These things actually
make it cheaper to manufacturer and therefore Nikon and Canon can
sell the camera for less. Here's the difference; with the exception
of the plastic body and such Nikon made the D70 the best it could
be whereas Canon did not make the Rebel in that respect. They took
the 10D conception and disabled features in order to promote the
10D's sales. See the difference? Nikon did not make the D70 "less"
of a camera purposely compared to the D100. I think Canon could
have made the 300D better than the 10D for less money and if they
had done that, the D70 would not be such an issue.

Like I said I love my Rebel and it was the only DSLR that I could
afford at the time. I wish they'd have made it the best it could be
for their budget but that was my decision and that's ok. Personally
I'm not complaining but just making an observation. And the next
body I'll buy certainly won't be the older design of the 10D. I'm
going for the 1D Mark II baby!

 

[misha]

This has nothing to do with a "mooch" mentality. Let me explain.
There are things that a camera manufacturer does to reduce costs;
IE: plastic body vs. metal, cheaper CCD, etc. These things actually
make it cheaper to manufacturer and therefore Nikon and Canon can
sell the camera for less.

I'm sure you can find plenty of examples in both hardware and software products when there is no direct relationship "cheaper to manufacture - lower price". In this case it was cheaper for Canon to use mostly the same firmware and and much of the same electronics and block some of the features, rather than develop completely new one. Would you rather have an inferior CMOS or CCD?

Here's the difference; with the exception

of the plastic body and such Nikon made the D70 the best it could
be whereas Canon did not make the Rebel in that respect. They took
the 10D conception and disabled features in order to promote the
10D's sales. See the difference? Nikon did not make the D70 "less"
of a camera purposely compared to the D100.

Do you expect that the D100 will continue much longer beyond the release of the D70? I would bet that a replacement will be announced before the D70 is on the store shelves (if the D70 isn't actually the replacement for the D100).
--
Misha

 

[Michael Louis]

This has nothing to do with a "mooch" mentality. Let me explain.
There are things that a camera manufacturer does to reduce costs;
IE: plastic body vs. metal, cheaper CCD, etc. These things actually
make it cheaper to manufacturer and therefore Nikon and Canon can
sell the camera for less. Here's the difference; with the exception
of the plastic body and such Nikon made the D70 the best it could
be whereas Canon did not make the Rebel in that respect.

Do you think there would even be a D70 if it weren't for the Kiss Digital rocking the DSLR world? I'll answer that for you: NO. Nikon is worse than Canon at giving you your money's worth; and only now with their D2H being literally obsolete in a few months are Nikon scrambling to stay viable. If you buy the D70 (I might get one) Thank Canon NOT Nikon.
They took

the 10D conception and disabled features in order to promote the
10D's sales. See the difference?

Once again Ignorance rears its ugly head. The Rebel D is NO different than the Film Rebel line. 'Crippled' features to distinguish it and it's super LOW cost from it's bigger, more featured brothers. Don't read anymore into were talking X files here just simple Product Placement.
Nikon did not make the D70 "less"

of a camera purposely compared to the D100. I think Canon could
have made the 300D better than the 10D for less money and if they
had done that, the D70 would not be such an issue.

Canon COULD have done a lot of things. I guess your mad that you are not getting more for FREE, and its embarrassing to witness here. You should have held out longer. Others drew the line in the sand knowing that there will be cheaper, better low end DSLR's down the road. Somehow your behind the curve on that simple truth present since the first Digicam came to market

Like I said I love my Rebel and it was the only DSLR that I could
afford at the time. I wish they'd have made it the best it could be
for their budget but that was my decision and that's ok. Personally
I'm not complaining but just making an observation. And the next
body I'll buy certainly won't be the older design of the 10D. I'm
going for the 1D Mark II baby!

Going for the 1D Mark II is a NO BRAINER; simply the best darn camera money can buy...IMHO. Now is there a list we have to sign giving you a little advance notice in order to borrow this from you...LOL

 

[Stan]

..you refer sell for 1/4 to 1/5 of the Rebel price in America. Some may feel that is important to consider.

Stan

 

[BadRide]

--
Keep Shooting and Have a SUPER Day!! DD
http://www.skippogue.com
Check Out:
My Gallery
My Favorite Links - Photography
Articles - Photograpy
Check It All Out

 

[misha]

..you refer sell for 1/4 to 1/5 of the Rebel price in America.
Some may feel that is important to consider.

The same is true of the Elan 7 on which the 10D is based, and just about any DSLR.

--
Misha

 

[DoctorG1]

the metering and flash metering is the SAME as the 10d , whic is considered the "uncrippled" version of the 300D , the EV metering and E-ttl flash work the same way , the only option that is missing on the 300D is the fact that you cant set CW average in all modes - you still have partial in all modes on the 300D (AEL) so essentailly , all you are missing in metering is CW average , and you actually do have it in M mode. so being crippled there is actually a little misleading....Ask any 10 D user when it's crucial to use CW averaging , I never use it and use EV mode all the time , same as the 300D.

As far as focussing is concerned , AI servo is really only useful for sports and there I will concede the point , it is rather crippling not to have it explicitly settable if you are a sports shooter . The point that must be made is that if you were a sports shooter , purchasing the 300Dor in fact the 10D is not ideal at all. The flash system works exactly the same on the uncrippled 10D as the 300D barring the fact that you can set FEC with the internal flash , but the fact of the matter is that if you are into flash photography , the internal flash is totally mickey mouse , same as the "uncrippled" 10d's (actually the added height of the 300D's flash is better) and an external flash will allow FEC , if you don't want to use FEL to accomplish the same thing.

You seem to be the guru here in terms of pics , surely a few $ more for the "uncrippled" version , IE te 10D would not have been beyond your reach as a pro photgrapher? I bought the 30D ad went to the 10d cos of the fact I wanted more control , but I knew what I was getting into with the 300D and just bit the bullet and paid my money and made my choices , I take most of my shots for my business which is to display my products. Had I been selling pics and had the artistic talent you have , I would have been even less hesitant to take the leap to better.

I find it strange that a photographer a your level with your talent cheaps out and is moaning about it.

--
Rodney Gold

The nicest thing about smacking your head against the the wall is.......The feeling you get when you stop