Lifespan of 300d

[Pleebo]

Hello all.

Im almost ready to move up from the P&S digital world to the dSLR platform but I have a few questions which bother me.

In the past, a camera was defined by the make (build quality) and the lens (image superiority). Now, with the melding of PC and camera, it seems that photography will now be subjected to the same upgrade madness of the PC world, where technology leaps faster than a person earns money.

1) What bothers me is, will my expenditure on the 300d mean that I have a camera for life, or will it be the same as a PC, where my camera is obsolete within a year?

2) Does more megapixels mean better camera, or only better camera/image quality at high end resolution. In short, if I take a picture at 1600x1200 on a 6.3mp and on a 11mp+ will the 11mp+ always be better?
I really hope SLRs dont become a "keeping up with the jones' excercise".

3) Does the 300d come with an international guarantee? If I were to purchase one in the states, would I be able to use my year warranty back home at the Canon importers?

Thanks for your comments,
Justin

 

[BengMin]

I guess we just have to admit that no electronics is built for life anymore, and the scary part is they phase out at break-neck speed as well!

I remember i read somewhere that a 6Mpix digital cam costed > $30,000 4/5 years ago! and look at what we have now....

I am very sure that we will have a even better rebel in 18 months time...

You just have to decide when is the right time for you to make the plunge.

"All you have to decide is what to do with the time that is given to you" - Gandalf

 

[Pleebo]

Maybe I should rephrase.

Money aside, do 6MP camera's (like the 300d) offer a genuine alternative to film. Will my prints look the same as a traditional SLR?

At the end of the day, we're looking to phase out film and the associated expenses, but I atleast want something thats NOT gonna print my std prints at a noticebly pixilated quality.

Is the 300d the answer to that prayer, or is it just a technological stepping stone?

I remember i read somewhere that a 6Mpix digital cam costed

$30,000 4/5 years ago! and look at what we have now....

I am very sure that we will have a even better rebel in 18 months
time...

You just have to decide when is the right time for you to make the
plunge.

"All you have to decide is what to do with the time that is given
to you" - Gandalf

 

[Simone M. Navarra]

Like all electronic equipment, your 300D is eventually going to break in the next 3 years, and since it's technology will be obsolete no lab will repair it.

Simone

Money aside, do 6MP camera's (like the 300d) offer a genuine
alternative to film. Will my prints look the same as a traditional
SLR?

At the end of the day, we're looking to phase out film and the
associated expenses, but I atleast want something thats NOT gonna
print my std prints at a noticebly pixilated quality.

Is the 300d the answer to that prayer, or is it just a
technological stepping stone?

I remember i read somewhere that a 6Mpix digital cam costed

$30,000 4/5 years ago! and look at what we have now....

I am very sure that we will have a even better rebel in 18 months
time...

You just have to decide when is the right time for you to make the
plunge.

"All you have to decide is what to do with the time that is given
to you" - Gandalf

--
http://www.photo.net/photodb/user?user_id=516817

 

[Pleebo]

I think that might be a bit of a broad statement dont you think?

Ive owned many electronic devices which have lasted ages.

CD walkmans and an HP c200 digicam which has been handled VERY roughly for more than 4 years and is still going strong.

We musnt forget that this isnt your avg tape-deck or VHS machine, most of it is solid state - no moving parts, no much chance of breaking.

my 2c worth

Simone

Money aside, do 6MP camera's (like the 300d) offer a genuine
alternative to film. Will my prints look the same as a traditional
SLR?

At the end of the day, we're looking to phase out film and the
associated expenses, but I atleast want something thats NOT gonna
print my std prints at a noticebly pixilated quality.

Is the 300d the answer to that prayer, or is it just a
technological stepping stone?

I remember i read somewhere that a 6Mpix digital cam costed

$30,000 4/5 years ago! and look at what we have now....

I am very sure that we will have a even better rebel in 18 months
time...

You just have to decide when is the right time for you to make the
plunge.

"All you have to decide is what to do with the time that is given
to you" - Gandalf

--
http://www.photo.net/photodb/user?user_id=516817

 

[KieranB]

Maybe I should rephrase.

Money aside, do 6MP camera's (like the 300d) offer a genuine
alternative to film. Will my prints look the same as a traditional
SLR?

It probably depends on the print size. Similar questions to this have been asked before so a search of the forum will turn up plenty of answers. I use a 3.2MP Canon A70 and an EOS5/A2E film SLR. I find that I get the best quality prints from the A70 if I get prints from my local photo lab who use a Fuji Frontier system, as opposed to using an inkjet printer. The biggest I've gone to date is 8"x6" and in my opinion at that size or smaller it's impossible to tell the difference compared to film. As I understand it if the the resolution of the image is 300dpi or more the quality is indistinguishable from film.
--
http://www.vistaphotos.com

 

[Richard Bolt]

How long has the "analog" version of the 300D been out for now. At least 5 years I think and its been one of their best sellers.

You can bet that this camera will do just about all you ever need from now until the day its electronic circuitry finally short circuits.

Until then, I can get great 8x10" pics from a 3MP camera and I've read of people getting fantastic printed result at 12x16" or higher with a 6MP camera.
Ask yourself how often you're going to be printing at those kind of sizes?

Not often I'd guess.

There will be better and faster cameras coming out all the time - but why wait for them, when you can be out there taking photographs which will offer you years of enjoyment.

With a camera like the 300D you may find that you will never have a reason to want to upgrade.

 

[John Frieslaar]

Pleebo

The 300D will give you prints that are the same if not better quality to that recieved from standard prints. You will be able to develop 4x5 or 6x7 or any other size to the same quality as the 35mm you are used to.

I have printed out on an Epson CX3200 printer A4 size prints (8x10 approx) that are trully great. Given that you only need 300 dpi to print the same as photo quality bigger prints are very possible such as A3 or A2. I would suggest that up to 10x15 (and bigger) are not going to be a problem with this camera.

The problem at the moment is that film is currently cheaper to develop and print than digital, this will change very soon.

As to the prayer being answered, Yes.

Regards
John

Money aside, do 6MP camera's (like the 300d) offer a genuine
alternative to film. Will my prints look the same as a traditional
SLR?

At the end of the day, we're looking to phase out film and the
associated expenses, but I atleast want something thats NOT gonna
print my std prints at a noticebly pixilated quality.

Is the 300d the answer to that prayer, or is it just a
technological stepping stone?

I remember i read somewhere that a 6Mpix digital cam costed

$30,000 4/5 years ago! and look at what we have now....

I am very sure that we will have a even better rebel in 18 months
time...

You just have to decide when is the right time for you to make the
plunge.

"All you have to decide is what to do with the time that is given
to you" - Gandalf

 

[Doug Benner]

The megapixel numbers will be going up in the future, of course, but I think we are reaching a point with the 6mp cameras that even with further mp increases the advantages will become proportionally less. The difference in quality between the 1.5mp cameras and the 3mp cameras is tremendous. The difference between the 3mp and 6mp cameras is less so. I suspect that the difference between the 6mp Rebel and its 12mp brother who is waiting to be born will be smaller still. With 6mp you can accomplish excellent 11x14 prints, even with significant cropping. How many people will ever really need more than 6mp?

 

[Rob Ashton]

Nothing is "for life" these days (especially electronics). If you have come from the 35mm camera systems you should know that these have been updated regularly, but if you have a camera that you are happy with, it should last you.

Rob
--
300d or not 300d...that is the question.

 

[Easton]

I agree with this particular reply most of all, cept i would like to add that i think that it's slightly understated still!

Megapixels will always go up, but the only benefit of megapixels really is resolution.

although megapixels can go up etc, the size of the prints and posters for us human beings in society DOSN'T go up like computers do.

Therefore, 6mp is good enough as it is. I feel the only truely obsolete design will be mini cameras that will someday have 20 odd megapixels on them.

But 6mp is probably all we'll ever seriously need.

Easton

The megapixel numbers will be going up in the future, of course,
but I think we are reaching a point with the 6mp cameras that even
with further mp increases the advantages will become proportionally
less. The difference in quality between the 1.5mp cameras and the
3mp cameras is tremendous. The difference between the 3mp and 6mp
cameras is less so. I suspect that the difference between the 6mp
Rebel and its 12mp brother who is waiting to be born will be
smaller still. With 6mp you can accomplish excellent 11x14 prints,
even with significant cropping. How many people will ever really
need more than 6mp?

 

[Michael Meissner]

I think that might be a bit of a broad statement dont you think?

Ive owned many electronic devices which have lasted ages.
CD walkmans and an HP c200 digicam which has been handled VERY
roughly for more than 4 years and is still going strong.

We musnt forget that this isnt your avg tape-deck or VHS machine,
most of it is solid state - no moving parts, no much chance of
breaking.

Ummm, that is wrong. There are two very critical moving parts in your DSLR -- the shutter release mechanism and the high speed mirror/prisim that switches between the viewfinder and the sensor. In addition, there are motors in the lenses for doing the focusing, and gryoscopes in the IS lenses. All of these are moving parts, and all do break down. Having to send a camera back in to get the shutter release repaired is a fact of life for many pros. I don't recall what the expected number of shutter releases are for the 300D, but I suspect it is in the 20,000 area (the higher end pro cameras like the 1D, 1Ds are rated for 100,000+ shutter releases).

 

[Robert Deutsch]

When you get to resolution in the 6MP range, picture quality is limited more by noise than resolution. This is where the 300D shines: if you read Phil's review and other discussion of this issue, you'll note that the 300D's CMOS sensor has six times the area of sensors used in all-in-one "prosumer" digicams, which translates to much lower video noise, and therefore greater ISO sensitivity. In general terms, this is "good enough" to compete with film. Another difference between a dSLR like the 300D and today's top-leve prosumer cameras is that whenever sensor/camera technology improves enough to consider an upgrade, you'll still be able to use all your lenses. With a prosumer camera that has an attached lens, you'll have to sell what by then will be an obsolete camera, worth very llittle.

Bob

 

[Michael Meissner]

How long has the "analog" version of the 300D been out for now. At
least 5 years I think and its been one of their best sellers.

You can bet that this camera will do just about all you ever need
from now until the day its electronic circuitry finally short
circuits.

No, see my other post about mechanical parts in DSLRs. I suspect you don't hear much about breakdowns in the film Rebel, since the majority of users are your typical weekend shooter, and go through maybe one roll a month, except when they are vacation (or unless they have a new kid -- I'm thinking of one of the early scenes in "One Hour Photo" where Sy is talking about all of the regular customers, and the new father pulls out 20 rolls).

Until then, I can get great 8x10" pics from a 3MP camera and I've
read of people getting fantastic printed result at 12x16" or higher
with a 6MP camera.
Ask yourself how often you're going to be printing at those kind of
sizes?

And I get great 8x10's from my 2MP camera (and have gotten 2 great 18x24's as well). Megapixels are just one factor that comes into making great prints.

 

[simpleton176979]

As far as PC and camera interface, I dont believe its going to stay staggnant. But you can choose to be stagnant. As far as build quality of the rebel, I think it is durable enough for a long time, at least 4 years(for me at least)

As far as the shutter goes, I might need to send it in to have it repaired because I am sure I am going to take more then 20000 pictures a year.

Its trigger happy type of thing and I am sure that it will not hurt too much to take more pictures.

Peace

--

The FAQ is viewable at http://www.marius.org/eos300dfaq.php , and if anyone wants to help contribute to it and maintain it, drop me an email and let me know.

 

[Charles C Lloyd]

I fully expect to get on the upgrade treadmill -- that's why I bought the Rebel instead of the 10D. Why spend more to get an overbuilt body when you're going to want the new electronics in a year or so.

The images from today's digitals are so good that, in short time, there will be little room left for basic image quality improvement. At that point, the camera makers will be forced to innovate to make cameras easier to use and to handle common problems like limited dynamic range and image stabilization in camera. I tihnk it'll be an interesting ride. I expect to change cameras about once per year for the next 4-5 years when things settle down a bit.

Charles.
--
The other day I went to... no wait, that was someone else.
Canon Digital Rebel (Since Sep 26, 2003)
Sony 707 (Since Oct 14, 2002)
http://homepage.mac.com/charlesclloyd

 

[Solomon]

Hi Easton,

Never say never in terms of storage space or pixels. Expect the new development to be a push for 16-bit images. The new version of Photoshop now offers 16-bit editing capabilities

which will mean a wider color gamut. So someone's 16-bit 12mp 8x10 print will have greater color depth and appearance of quality than a 8-bit, 6mp 8x10. Pixels aren't
just for resolution.
Regards,
Ed Lakin

Megapixels will always go up, but the only benefit of megapixels
really is resolution.

although megapixels can go up etc, the size of the prints and
posters for us human beings in society DOSN'T go up like computers
do.

Therefore, 6mp is good enough as it is. I feel the only truely
obsolete design will be mini cameras that will someday have 20 odd
megapixels on them.

But 6mp is probably all we'll ever seriously need.

Easton

The megapixel numbers will be going up in the future, of course,
but I think we are reaching a point with the 6mp cameras that even
with further mp increases the advantages will become proportionally
less. The difference in quality between the 1.5mp cameras and the
3mp cameras is tremendous. The difference between the 3mp and 6mp
cameras is less so. I suspect that the difference between the 6mp
Rebel and its 12mp brother who is waiting to be born will be
smaller still. With 6mp you can accomplish excellent 11x14 prints,
even with significant cropping. How many people will ever really
need more than 6mp?

 

[Brian Vallelunga]

I fully expect to get on the upgrade treadmill -- that's why I
bought the Rebel instead of the 10D. Why spend more to get an
overbuilt body when you're going to want the new electronics in a
year or so.

I fully agree with this statement. I bought the 300D, knowing that within a year, when the 300D is selling for $750, Canon will announce a $1500 replacement to the 10D that has 8 megapixesls, better environment sealing, etc. At least, I imagine this will happen, to better differentiate the models. At that time, I might very well want to upgrade.

I would look at the lens as an investment for 10+ years, and the bodies as a 2 year investment. Sell them when you want something new, and keep your lenses.

In that way, it is similar to computers. Buy a nice keyboard, mouse, and monitor and use them for years. While at the same time, upgrade your cpu, ram, and hard drive more frequently.

Brian

---------------------------------------
http://brian.vallelunga.com/

 

[toonse]

Noone will be forcing you to upgrade in 1 or 2 years. If the Rebel does what you want, then keep it for as long as you like.

As an example, IBM PCs are up to 3+ GHz Pentium 4 CPUs now, yet there are lots of people out there who still have 286/386/486 machines because they are sufficient for the home accounting and word processing that they do.

Where is back home? Cameras purchased in North America are all covered in North America. If you purchase one in North America and take it back to Europe, you may have warranty issues when trying to get Canon Europe to fix it.

Hello all.

Im almost ready to move up from the P&S digital world to the dSLR
platform but I have a few questions which bother me.

In the past, a camera was defined by the make (build quality) and
the lens (image superiority). Now, with the melding of PC and
camera, it seems that photography will now be subjected to the same
upgrade madness of the PC world, where technology leaps faster than
a person earns money.

1) What bothers me is, will my expenditure on the 300d mean that I
have a camera for life, or will it be the same as a PC, where my
camera is obsolete within a year?

2) Does more megapixels mean better camera, or only better
camera/image quality at high end resolution. In short, if I take a
picture at 1600x1200 on a 6.3mp and on a 11mp+ will the 11mp+
always be better?
I really hope SLRs dont become a "keeping up with the jones'
excercise".

3) Does the 300d come with an international guarantee? If I were to
purchase one in the states, would I be able to use my year warranty
back home at the Canon importers?

Thanks for your comments,
Justin

 

[jeffshoaf]

I've got some 5 X 7 and 4 X 6 300D images printed on a dye-sub printer that are indistinguishable from prints from 35mm film. And I have some 8 X 10's that were printed on quality paper from a pretty good inkjet printer that would require a lot of examination before determining that they aren't film enlargements.

I think the image quality is there with the 300D, but you'll need to have an output device that'll measure up as well. If you're up-sizing and making large images, you'll also need software that's capable of changing the size without noticable artifacts.

Maybe I should rephrase.

Money aside, do 6MP camera's (like the 300d) offer a genuine
alternative to film. Will my prints look the same as a traditional
SLR?

At the end of the day, we're looking to phase out film and the
associated expenses, but I atleast want something thats NOT gonna
print my std prints at a noticebly pixilated quality.

Is the 300d the answer to that prayer, or is it just a
technological stepping stone?