You are exactly right. I never complained about my Rebel G lacking any features and it still takes excellent photos. I would think that the vast majority of people that buy the 300D have never heard of FEC, for example, and really don't care.
--
Huh?
Before the 300D came out, we never knew that DSLRs could be
manufatured at $1000 and still be profitable. One simply had to
assume that $2000 or whatever was the price of production and that
we were getting the 'most camera' for that buck. Now we know that
in fact, you could manufacture a similar camera for a whole lot
less. In fact you could make a 300D with the same features of the
10D at the price of the 300D.
You're right, the 'trolls' who complain don't own 300Ds. That's
because they are excercising their choice not to pay for a camera
that has a set of features disabled not because of production costs
but for marketing differentiation so that Canon can maintain a
price premium where there is really no compelling reason to. (of
course its Canon's right to milk the customer base for what its
worth in a free market system)
Therefore, the question is not why I the customer should pay more
if I want more features. The question should be why Canon disabled
the features on that camera. The existence of the 300D is proof
that I'm not getting value for money. That value-for-money-camera
should not be far round the corner now that Nikon has made its
move. Thanks to the free market economy which kept prices high
because of Canon's monopoly will now force Canon's hand to release
a non-crippled 300D.
Although the 300D is cheap compared to other digital SLRs, it is
still as expensive as a high end film SLR with tons more features.
If I were moving from an EOS 30 or EOS 3 to a digital SLR and
paying so much money for it, and expecting to use it for many
years, I don't want to commit now only to have Canon release the
300D Mark II 1 year later (which I'd expect them to do with a cheap
firmware upgrade) as an internal roadmap of planned obselence.
Be kind.
Lee Kuo Ann
--Go take picture and learn to use the camera, then we'll see if
there'S something the 300D cannot do.
Before the 300D came out, we never knew that DSLRs could be
manufatured at $1000 and still be profitable. One simply had to
assume that $2000 or whatever was the price of production and that
we were getting the 'most camera' for that buck. Now we know that
in fact, you could manufacture a similar camera for a whole lot
less. In fact you could make a 300D with the same features of the
10D at the price of the 300D.
You're right, the 'trolls' who complain don't own 300Ds. That's
because they are excercising their choice not to pay for a camera
that has a set of features disabled not because of production costs
but for marketing differentiation so that Canon can maintain a
price premium where there is really no compelling reason to. (of
course its Canon's right to milk the customer base for what its
worth in a free market system)
Therefore, the question is not why I the customer should pay more
if I want more features. The question should be why Canon disabled
the features on that camera. The existence of the 300D is proof
that I'm not getting value for money. That value-for-money-camera
should not be far round the corner now that Nikon has made its
move. Thanks to the free market economy which kept prices high
because of Canon's monopoly will now force Canon's hand to release
a non-crippled 300D.
Although the 300D is cheap compared to other digital SLRs, it is
still as expensive as a high end film SLR with tons more features.
If I were moving from an EOS 30 or EOS 3 to a digital SLR and
paying so much money for it, and expecting to use it for many
years, I don't want to commit now only to have Canon release the
300D Mark II 1 year later (which I'd expect them to do with a cheap
firmware upgrade) as an internal roadmap of planned obselence.
Be kind.
Lee Kuo Ann
I was of course being sarcastic with the comment about someone saying something bad about a lens I own. It just sounds stupid doesn't it.
I think that there is an piece to piece variation in these cameras and its Canons quality control thats at fault. I do not have ANY problem with focus lock and recomposing [except maybe twice in 1500 images]. I am NOT saying that to blindly defend my "NEW BABY" as someone has said. I am merely pointing out a fact and am not defending Canon, infact since there seems to be so much variation they must improve QC. What does p* me off is the err99 that I get on and off. Otherwise I am really happy with the 300D. And incidently mine is made in JAPAN and not TAIWAN. Could that be a difference? The cameras soldin US are made in Taiwan.
What lens are you using when you get error 99? Have you tried recomposeing using the 50mm f1.8 at f/1.8? The recomposing issues have a lot to do with the lens and the light, contrast of the subject. I sent a letter to canon about it, but have not heard back. I will simply upgrade when a new model comes out, but i did try a lady's i work with and it kicks into servo just as mine does. If you get an error 99 without a lens on the body then you need to worry. How often do you get the error?
John from Southern California
--What lens are you using when you get error 99? Have you tried
recomposeing using the 50mm f1.8 at f/1.8? The recomposing issues
have a lot to do with the lens and the light, contrast of the
subject. I sent a letter to canon about it, but have not heard
back. I will simply upgrade when a new model comes out, but i did
try a lady's i work with and it kicks into servo just as mine does.
If you get an error 99 without a lens on the body then you need to
worry. How often do you get the error?
--
http://www.pbase.com/paulyoly/root
The Digital Rebel is to the 1D as the Film Rebel is to the Elan or the EOS-1 or -3. If people haven't done their research and understand this very simple concept, perhaps they shouldn't be spending $1000 on a camera, or maybe they should be buying a used 1D.
That's how mine started and it eventually got to where i couldn't take any pics with the error, they eventually replaced the shutter. Hopefully yours just got stuck a couple of times and is fine. Subject definately makes a difference as well as lighting, mine does it a lot with my 400mm lens at any aperture, with the 50mm f1.8 is does it bad inside my living room with very low light situation. Yours sounds like it is less sensitive, not sure if that is really possible since they didn't adjust mine when i had the shutter replaced.
