If I were on a budget, and my only other alternative was being tied
into a dead-end Sony 828 or Minolta A1 in that price range, yes,
I'd absolutely get a 300D. And in case you haven't noticed over at
the 300D forum, there are a lot of people doing exactly that.
Neither the 828 or the A-1 is a dead end camera. Check out the
images in the STF challenge in Pbase. Both cameras give you good
pics and a lot of flexibility for someone not wanting to go the
DSLR route.
To give you a little perspective, my first autofocus SLR was a
Canon Rebel X. It was entirely plastic, looked like a toy, even
the lens mount was plastic. It didn't even have a pop-up flash.
And yet it was, and still is, a great camera. Is it a "dead end"
camera? No, because it has the entire EOS system behind it. I can
still stick it on my hefty 100-400L IS and go shooting like mad
with it. IS, USM, metering all work perfectly. Or I can stick my
24mm TS-E (tilt-shift) lens on it and do some really creative
landscape/architecture. Or I can slap any one of my other Canon
lenses on it and take pictures with it just as well as if it were
an EOS 1V. Because the Rebel X (and the 300D/Digital Rebel) are
part of a much larger system, the aren't as "dead end" as an 828 or
A1. Seven+ years later, I still use the Rebel X. I usually have
my Rebel X stuffed in a side-pocket of my camera bag with a few
rolls of film (just in case) because it remains a part of my camera
system (it only weighs about 300g). The above simply can not be
said about the 828 and the A1. The EOS system spans a huge range
of products that will continue for a good long time. What will
come of the 828 and A1 sytems in a few years?
If I were a student really keen on getting into SLR photography,
but was on a budget, this is once example of what I might consider:
Canon 300D + 18-55 kit: $1000
Canon 28-135 IS: $400
Sigma EF-500 Super DG: $180
Total: $1580
Thats ok if you are a student on a budget and you don't mind
getting locked into Canon's kit. Also your price list doesn't
include memory, filters, a tripod or a flash.
Well, better to put your money there than get locked into an 828 or
A1 kit. The 300D is a much better long-term investment because of
the strength and continued longevity of the Canon EOS system. And
as for having to buy other accessories and stuff, the same would
apply if you were to get a 10D or D100. But the point is, you can
get all the above for less than the D100 alone. In fact, you could
probably still squeeze in a 256MB CF card and still be under the
price of a D100.
That's less than the price of a D100 alone, with no lens, no
nothing. You get a great little camera, a wide angle lens out to
28mm (effective), an IS lens out to 216mm (effective), and a
full-featured flash (with wireless capabilities). I tell you, I
could take WAY more incredible pictures with that kit than I ever
could with a D100 body alone.
I agree its a great LITTLE camera. If I'm going to go the DSLR
route I would rather go for a full featured camera. If you're
interested in a DSLR that's where you would end up anyhow. That
would make the 300D as much of a "dead end" camera as the 828 or
the A1.
See above.
And if you're not a feature-whore, but just a really keen
photographer interested in taking great pictures, that's all you
may need for a while.
I like taking pics (can't call them great) and I'm a feature whore.
What to do? ;-)
Not everyone needs every feature known to man. Consider that the
300D still has more features than most medium-format film cameras
used by professionals. It has tons more capabilities than a Leica
M rangefinder. And it runs circles around the manual SLR cameras
of over a decade ago. Trust me, people did take great picture
without the myriad of features that we have today. Maybe the 300D
is a return to that simplicity.
