PDA

View Full Version : Cannon - 300D or 10D?



Duty
9th March 2004, 15:10
I am looking at getting a new dig camera for here at work. Is there a big difference between the EOS-10D and the Rebel / EOS-300D? Seem pretty much the same to me. There are some small differences an ISO rate and resolutions but other that is there a reason to get one over the other?

Jeff

HedsSpaz
10th March 2004, 11:04
The two biggest differences are the body construction and the frame buffer. The 10D has a 'magnesium alloy' body whereas the DRebel has a plastic body. The 10D also has a 9 frame buffer whereas the Rebel has a 4 frame buffer. There are a few other features that may or may not matter for your intended use such as mirror lockup. If you want a full list of differences check out this review at dpreview.com.
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos300d/

Personally, I went with the 10D. To be honest, I didn't really even consider the Rebel very much. The limitation on custom functions, frame buffer, and body construction where more than enough to sway me. (I also happen to think the silver body is just plain ugly ;) ).

That said, if this is something your employer is going to be purchasing for you, then you need to really evaluate exactly what you are going to be using it for and see if any of the real differences are 'make or break' features. For example, if you are doing product photography then I can nearly garauntee you that you will want mirror lockup.

If you want to really get into the nitty gritty then you need to look through the 'custom function' list of the 10D and see if there is anything critical there.

Hope that helps,
Ian

az
10th March 2004, 11:47
You could also check out other options such as Minolta's excellent Dimage A1 or A2. Only a it cheaper than either of the canons, but including a very good (!) 28-200mm lens, lots of control, lots of features, intelligent flash control, etc.

AZ

The PIT
10th March 2004, 13:12
One hell of a camera some of the best pics I've seen from a digital camera. Whens Xmas???

Duty
10th March 2004, 14:23
Originally posted by HedsSpaz
That said, if this is something your employer is going to be purchasing for you...

Unfortunately I am the employer, so the money comes from me :(.

I'm just not sure if the added features will add to what I need. I think I should have stated what we are going to be using this for. The pictures we need are for branding a company. So all pictures need to be high quality and high resolution. We do web and print work and some of the print work is really big (ie posters, signs and billboards). The pictures could be of the client (or just people), places (buildings, roads...) , landscapes (Mt Lassen and Mt. Shasta are real close) and lastly products for web and print. We do so much now that the camera needs to be versatile. We will not be doing action shots and all the pictures will be shot at the highest res possible, so stuff like ISO3200 and lots of res settings are of little use to us. The stronger body on the other hand is a really good selling point.



Originally posted by az
You could also check out other options such as Minolta's excellent Dimage A1 or A2. Only a it cheaper than either of the canons, but including a very good (!) 28-200mm lens, lots of control, lots of features, intelligent flash control, etc.

AZ

I will look at it. Do you think it will stand up well with heavy use?



Jeff

Duty
10th March 2004, 14:30
Two quick questions about the MINOLTA cameras:

1) Can you change the lenses?

2) Can you add an external flash?

They don't look like you can.

Jeff

az
10th March 2004, 15:03
You cannot change the lens, but there are (will be when the A1 hits the streets, should be here any week now) a 1.5x tele converter (so it'd be 300mm, in a MUCH smaller package than 300mm Equiv will be on the DSLRs), and a wide angle conv (forgot the ratio, I think it'll be 22mm equiv.). The built-in lens is of very high quality, you'd have to pay lots to get that good a lens for an SLR.

You can use Minolta Maxxum program flashes (5600 HS(D) and 3600 H(D)), even up to four of them with wireless automatic through the lens metering (kinda like intelligent slave flashes that meter automatically), you have a connector for studio flashes, and there are a macro ring and a macro twin flash available.

The cameras are very robust. To quote Phil Askey from dpreview: Gone is the hollow feel of the early 7 series cameras, instead the A1 feels solid, weighty (but only a tiny bit heavier than the 7Hi) and robust. The metal used to make up the body seems to be thicker and this camera feels like it could go into battle and come out looking considerably better than the photographer. This has to be one of the most comfortable digital cameras to hold, the design of the hand grip is just perfect, depth, thickness and even the makeup of the rubber used are all perfect. At the back a small 'hook' is placed just so for your thumb. Kudos Minolta.

I know someone who went on desert trips with the Dimage 7, and also mountainbiked with it. He had no complaints about the cam, and he was a Leica analog user before (though of course you can't expect real Leica quality of any digital camera).

For ruggedness, take the 10D over the 300D! Nikons are also quite rugged, and the D70 looks good (dunno if it's available already).

About the billboards: I don't think you can get enough out of any of those cameras for really sharp really big billboards. But of course BBs are viewed from a distance, which kind of negates the problem. Best is to ask someone who knows (if you don't know yourself) if 6mp will be enough for BBs.

I don't know how much you know about photography (I don't), so a bit of a warning: The photographer is much more important for a picture's quality is than the camera, much like a good brush doesn't make one a good painter (shoulda followed my own advice there, buying a 1000 Euro camera and having no eye for motives ;)).

Most important when choosing the camera, though: How do YOU like to use it, is it comfortable to hold, do you mind dragging kilograms of photo equipment with you if you're going DSLR?

(I know I'm a bit of a Minolta Fanboy, but their Dimage prosumer cams are really really good and underrated, because all people look at DSLRs at that price point and forget to make sane decisions whether they need what a DSRL gives them or if they'd be better off with an SLR-type prosumer cam.)

AZ

Greebe
10th March 2004, 18:07
(will be when the A1 hits the streets, should be here any week now)

Jeff he intended to say the A2

If you choose Canon (have owned several 35mm's) for anything get the 10D for it's alloy frame construction. If it happens to get banged or dropped (and it'll happen sooner or later) it'll pay for itself in the first Oops.

Teleconverters are the poor mans way of getting the shot and do lower Quality (also increase f stop, etc.)

The A2 is indeed a very nice camera, have seen them priced at around $900USD whereas the 10D is a tad under $1100

az
10th March 2004, 18:13
What Greebe said.

AZ

Duty
10th March 2004, 18:18
Generally speaking the BB stuff is rare so I'm not worried about that but from what I've been told 6+ megapixel is good for normal BB but larger might require 8 or 10 megapixel. And only if a single pic is used to cover the entire area.

We have the SLR side covered; we're trying to cover the digital side now.

The changeable lenses are a must. Other wise it sounds good.


Jeff

spadnos
10th March 2004, 21:28
Since the Kodak DCS Pro SLR/n has been released, the older model DCS Pro 14/n is significantly less expensive - around $3000. This is a 14 MPixel camera which uses Nikon lenses.

I know that's a LOT more money than the others, but it is also the highest resolution (35mm equivalent) digital camera you can buy.

The sensor is full frame, so you don't have to deal with lenses acting like they're 1.5x the focal length. The camera has 512M RAM, so it can take about 17 shots (in raw mode) before it has to write to the CF card. If it interests you at all, it's easy to sign up for their developer program (you could make custom PC software that goes through a range of exposures or does time lapse, for instance)

(as a side note, this camera is so good, that we are probably going to use it on an upcoming development project - it's good enough to spend the money on 60 of them !)

- Steve

Duty
11th March 2004, 00:23
Originally posted by spadnos
Since the Kodak DCS Pro SLR/n has been released, the older model DCS Pro 14/n is significantly less expensive - around $3000. This is a 14 MPixel camera which uses Nikon lenses.

I know that's a LOT more money than the others, but it is also the highest resolution (35mm equivalent) digital camera you can buy.

The sensor is full frame, so you don't have to deal with lenses acting like they're 1.5x the focal length. The camera has 512M RAM, so it can take about 17 shots (in raw mode) before it has to write to the CF card. If it interests you at all, it's easy to sign up for their developer program (you could make custom PC software that goes through a range of exposures or does time lapse, for instance)

(as a side note, this camera is so good, that we are probably going to use it on an upcoming development project - it's good enough to spend the money on 60 of them !)

- Steve

Wow that sounds cool. I wish I could. I had a meeting tonight with my partners and we pushed off the camera until the summer and instead we are going to hire a new employee. Odd trade, but what the heck. With the current budget I will most likely end up getting the 10D but, I will go look at the Kodak. This summer I might up the budget for the camera if the new person works out well.

Thanks everyone for the input. I love this place for getting information.


Jeff

az
11th March 2004, 02:02
I would advise against the Kodak. It has some issues (I think noise, sharpness - as a result of aggressive noise reduction - and colour representation).

The Fuji S2 Pro is a very good camera. Lower noise than the canons, great colour, uses a Nikon body and lenses (rugged), and isn't very expensive, especially now that the S3 Pro is coming out. It outputs 12 MP files (interpolated from a rotated 6MP sensor).

The Nikon D70 should be out by the summer - Nikon's competitor to the 10D and 300D, and it looks to be a very good camera.

In october, Minolta will release their Maxxum 7 Digital (tentative name) with some very interesting features: 10D class (6MP etc.), function dials for most major functions on top (so it will handle like an analog cam), and of course Anti-Shake, which makes ALL of your lenses optically stabilized.

AZ

az
11th March 2004, 03:36
Just out of curiosity: What do you need interchangeable lenses for, Duty?

AZ

VJ
11th March 2004, 05:04
Just an additional note on the 300D: in order not to have it compete too much with the 10D, canon limited some functions (things like linking exposremodes to focusmodes). It might be interesting so see if those limitations are a problem for you..

The Nikon D70 does seem to offer a nice package (no artificial limitations), and has a great exposure metering system (3D RGB matrix metering). For any professional related work, I'd not consider the 300D. So, in the lower range, if you need exchangeable lenses, you are left with:
Canon 10D
Nikon D70
Nikon D100 (might become obsolete, but has some connections the D70 lacks, e.g. 10-pin remote - D70 does have a wireless remote)
Sigma SD10
Fuji S2Pro / S3Pro
Olympus 4/3 system
Minolta DSLR (not sure about the model number)


Jörg

Greebe
11th March 2004, 05:46
I have yet to see most any integrated lens that achieves the quality of a seperate lens/body combo.

Kinda like comparing the wifes $60 Pentax IQzoom 38-70mm point and shoot 35mm to my Nikon setup and it's many lenses (f2.8 24-70mm, f1.2 50mm, f2.8 100-300mm, seperate motor drive, and tank like construction)

edit... I can also see that Jeff might already have a nice Canon 35mm setup so the choice of DSLR might reflect he can use lenses on both, cutting overall costs

VJ
11th March 2004, 06:47
Oops, I didn't know... Well, if he does have lenses for Canon, I'd suggest the 10D over the 300D.

(unless the limitations are no issue to him, but having used SLR before, I think they might... best to know beforehand what limitations there are, the manuals for the 300D and 10D are available on the Canon website)


Jörg

spadnos
11th March 2004, 07:38
You could always just get yourself a nice scanner. Canon has some good flatbeds that have film adapters. Also, Nikon's CoolScan series is quite good.

I think there's a Canon for around $400 that basically has higher resolution than film. (the Canoscan 9900F is $340, and is 3200x6400 dpi)

Of course, this has all the disadvantages of film (processing time, lack of immediate feedback, etc.) and digital (you have to take the time to scan and retouch, print, etc.), but what the heck. :)

- Steve

edit: typo and price

HedsSpaz
11th March 2004, 07:49
We have the SLR side covered; we're trying to cover the digital side now.

If it is safe to assume (as the others are doing), that by this statement you mean you already have a film SLR and lenses, then I would definately say go with the 10D (again, making the assumption that your current equipment is Canon). The 300D would be a reasonable choice if you didn't already have and investment in equipment and were trying to minimize the cost of the initial investment. Given that you already have lenses though, spend the little bit extra and get the 10D. You never know when you may discover that some of those features are neccesary.

As for the DCS14N, stay far far away. It has pretty widely been lambasted for having very high noise levels, and no amount of MP is going to make up for that.

/agree Greebe
There is no way you are going to get an integrated system (given current options) that will match and SLR + lenses. I won't say that there won't be integrated systems in the future that more closely approach that level, but currently, there's just no comparison.

Having said all that, since your decision has been pushed off till this summer, a word of advice. There are always rumors running around the web on when Canon will release it's next big things. At the begining of the year they announced that they were going to announce something like 17 new digital camera's this year. To date, they've announced a little over half of them. There are a great many people who expect to see the successor to the 10D sometime second half of this year. I'm not holding my breath personally, and I'd not be interested anyway, but you can take that for what it's worth.

Ian

Duty
11th March 2004, 13:26
Originally posted by az
Just out of curiosity: What do you need interchangeable lenses for, Duty?

AZ

Well, mostly because our needs change so much from job to job. I can't see spending that much money and locking myself into a single lens, even if is a really good lens for most purposes. Rarely do we get jobs with odd requirements. I guess I want the expandability.

Jeff

Duty
11th March 2004, 13:47
Originally posted by Greebe
I have yet to see most any integrated lens that achieves the quality of a seperate lens/body combo.

Kinda like comparing the wifes $60 Pentax IQzoom 38-70mm point and shoot 35mm to my Nikon setup and it's many lenses (f2.8 24-70mm, f1.2 50mm, f2.8 100-300mm, seperate motor drive, and tank like construction)

edit... I can also see that Jeff might already have a nice Canon 35mm setup so the choice of DSLR might reflect he can use lenses on both, cutting overall costs


Actually I have an older Nikon and my Partner has a Canon. I am not the photographer in the group; I just like to play with cool toys. The camera will be used mostly by an employee or the partner.

My Nikon is a Nikomat from the 60s, an FT I think. Now, you might scoff at it for its age but, it takes beautiful pictures and is rock solid. It was my grandfathers and it is in perfect shape. It also came with a few lenses, flash and other bits. Remember I am not the photographer so mine is a back up more then anything

The partner’s SLR is a modern Cannon of some sort, so we use his most of the time.

We do have a few older digital cameras (2 and 4 megapixels) as well, its just time to upgrade the main camera.

Jeff

Duty
11th March 2004, 14:00
Originally posted by HedsSpaz
If it is safe to assume (as the others are doing), that by this statement you mean you already have a film SLR and lenses, then I would definately say go with the 10D (again, making the assumption that your current equipment is Canon). The 300D would be a reasonable choice if you didn't already have and investment in equipment and were trying to minimize the cost of the initial investment. Given that you already have lenses though, spend the little bit extra and get the 10D. You never know when you may discover that some of those features are neccesary.

As for the DCS14N, stay far far away. It has pretty widely been lambasted for having very high noise levels, and no amount of MP is going to make up for that.

/agree Greebe
There is no way you are going to get an integrated system (given current options) that will match and SLR + lenses. I won't say that there won't be integrated systems in the future that more closely approach that level, but currently, there's just no comparison.

Having said all that, since your decision has been pushed off till this summer, a word of advice. There are always rumors running around the web on when Canon will release it's next big things. At the begining of the year they announced that they were going to announce something like 17 new digital camera's this year. To date, they've announced a little over half of them. There are a great many people who expect to see the successor to the 10D sometime second half of this year. I'm not holding my breath personally, and I'd not be interested anyway, but you can take that for what it's worth.

Ian

Thanks for the info. Although we do have Cannon equipment it is not a factor. It would be a bonus but I am not factoring it in to the equation. We are looking at the Cannons because of price to quality ratio and my partner is fond of Cannon. If we found a better camera for a similar price I would consider it. And now that we are not in a rush to get the camera, I am going to do more research. The more I look the more I realize a $1000 camera is actually going to cost $1500 after basic bits are purchased to go with the camera. I have never purchased a SLR so this is new to me. I've had a few SLRs but they were hand-me-downs (Pentax K1000 and the Nikomat).

To be honest if the partner had his way I think we would be looking at a 1DS - ouch...


Jeff

Duty
11th March 2004, 14:06
Originally posted by spadnos
You could always just get yourself a nice scanner. Canon has some good flatbeds that have film adapters. Also, Nikon's CoolScan series is quite good.

I think there's a Canon for around $400 that basically has higher resolution than film. (the Canoscan 9900F is $340, and is 3200x6400 dpi)

Of course, this has all the disadvantages of film (processing time, lack of immediate feedback, etc.) and digital (you have to take the time to scan and retouch, print, etc.), but what the heck. :)

- Steve

edit: typo and price

Have that covered too. But we don't want the cost of developing the film or the cost of re shooting because of problems that don't show until developing the film. Some of our pictures come from remote locations (Colorado, Hawaii, Mexico, ...) and would not be cost effective to re take the bad photos.

Jeff

az
11th March 2004, 14:10
You CANNOT ignore what lenses you have if you are going to purchase an SLR. You will spend AT LEAST as much on lenses (if you want good quality glass and a little versatility) as you will spend on the DSLR body. So the only economical option for you really is Canon. Luckily, their 10D is an excellent camera with a good price/performance ratio. And even IF Canon released a successor to it this year (which will surely not be available in summer), this wouldn't make the "old" 10D any worse. If you want/need a DSLR and you have Canon glass, and you want a little ruggedness, get the 10D, there's no other choice.

AZ

az
11th March 2004, 14:14
Oh BTW, get Sandisk Ultra II flash cards, they're very fast. NEVER, EVER get any of the older Sandisk cards (including Ultra), they're VERY slow.

AZ

spadnos
11th March 2004, 14:59
Regarding the Kodak 14/n reputation:

The initial reviews of the camera were pretty harsh - they were also reviewing preproduction and early production cameras. The issues were with theuse of the sensor, not the sensor hardware itself. I spoke with a Kodak tech, and he basically said "it's a great sensor, but it is VERY hard to use - the camera guys didn't know how to use if at first." The noise issues were fixed in a software update - I don't remember the exact timeframe, but it was at least 6 months ago.

This brings up another point - it's really easy to get updated software from Kodak (I did, and I don't even have one of their cameras) - apparently,it's not so easy with some other companies (Nikon, for example, has you send in the camera for an update.)

The Kodak is also upgradable - it's very modular inside, so they can upgrade the sensor (I believe you can get the new sensor from the Pro SLR/n as an upgrade to the Pro 14/n), you can upgrade the memory (it uses a fairly standard SO-DIMM, so the original cameras that had 256M can be upgraded to 512M, etc.

This modularity (depending on how long it lasts) might mean the difference between buying a new camera, or just upgrading the one you have next year.

(not that I'm advocating Duty buying one, I just wanted to set the record straight [or at least to my slant] :D )

- Steve

HedsSpaz
11th March 2004, 20:49
If the issues with the 14N have been remedied thats outstanding. It definately has/had potential. I'll have to look for some updated reviews on it.

I don't know about Nikon, but updating the firmware on the 10D is extremely easy. You just drop the .bin file into the canon folder on your CF card, put the card back in the camera, turn the camera on, and boom, it takes care of the rest.

As az points out, lenses are a serious investment. My most recent purchase was a Canon 100-400 L 4.5-5.6. It was approximately 200$ less than the 10D itself. My other two primary lenses are a 28-135 and a 100 macro. Both good lenses, both midrange price. (430 and 400 respectively). So, the next thing I would think about if I were you is what lenses do you currently have available to you? If you have good reasonable quality lenses, then there is no reason to switch to another system. If the lenses are consumer grade glass and if you are going to turn around and invest in higher quality lenses anyway, then by all means check out all available options. If you'd like some specific advice on your currently available lenses I'd be happy to offer some input on them.


The more I look the more I realize a $1000 camera is actually going to cost $1500 after basic bits are purchased to go with the camera.

Even 1500 is wishful thinking I'm afraid. ;) I'm up to approximately $4,000 invested since I got my 10D last Thanksgiving. Thats not including the flash and bag I already had, both of which I will be replacing eventually (the bag as soon as my local shop gets the bag I have on order back in stock). I also plan on picking up a battery grip in about a month. The 100-400 eats my two batteries like they're candy, so I'm also going to be getting 2 more spare batteries. Then, this summer I want to get a proper wide angle lens (probably a fish-eye actually) plus a new flash. Anyway, by the time I'm done, I expect to be in the 6-7k$ range for total investment.

So, depending on your needs, you may be able to get by with the body and a single lens. If I were to recommend a lineup based on your stated uses, and going on the assumption that you will generally be shooting in good light, it would be the following.
10D body, 1500$
17-40 f4L, 700$
70-200 f4L, 550$
50 f1.8, 70$

If you know you are going to have low light conditions then you can either through in a speedlight 500E or something if the flash look is acceptable, or you need to look at faster lenses (lower f-stop). Although thats also partly why I recomend tossing the 50 1.8 in there.

Anyway, thats probably WAY more info than you really wanted right now, but just in case you (or anyone else) might find it useful, there it is.

Ian

BTW, having rambled through all of that, check out the Canon Pro1 all in one. It's getting good reviews and might do everything you need.

az
12th March 2004, 04:02
The Dimage A2 is WAY ahead of the Pro1, but he didn't even want that ;)

AZ

spadnos
12th March 2004, 08:27
Interesting to note that the more "everything else" costs, the less of an effect the actual camera body has on the cost. (a $1k camera + $3k in accessories = $4k, a $3k camera with the same accessories is only $6k, a mere 50% increase - not a 200% increase :) )

@HedsSpaz - excellent info, but I'd change the 50mm lens to the f1.4 version - it's higher quality (with glass elements). The 1.8 is a consumer lens with plastic elements (hence the 0.29 pounds weight vs. 0.69 for the 1.4).

- Steve

HedsSpaz
12th March 2004, 08:55
Interesting to note that the more "everything else" costs, the less of an effect the actual camera body has on the cost.

Funny how that works isn't it. :)

The 50 1.4 is definately better, but you also pay 4x more for it. The 50 1.8 is still a good fast lens, and if it breaks, well, heck, it costs less than the filter I bought for my 100-400. ;) (actually, thats not true, although it does cost less than the filter I had intended to get had it been in stock.)

Ian