 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| PhotoKB HomeDiscussion Groups Digital Photography Digital PhotoDSLR CamerasZLR CamerasPoint & Shoot CamerasFilm Photography 35 mmLarge FormatMedium formatDarkroomFilm and LabsOther EquipmentPhoto Technique Nature PhotographyPeople PhotographyTechnique GeneralGeneral Photo Topics General TopicsAustralian PhotographyUK PhotographyDirectoryPhoto Clubs |
Photo Forum / Digital Photography / DSLR Cameras / September 2005350D, D70s, lenses - Need inspiration
I just cannot decide whether to choose the Canon 350D or Nikon D70s, so I'm looking here for inspiration. I've done my homework and spent days reading reviews and user opinions. I think my next step is to go find a shop selling them both so I can see for myself what they look and feel like. Canon boast about how small and light the 350D is but that's always put me off this sort of product as it can feel and look more like a toy. Of course what I'd really like is the Canon 20D, but there's no chance I can afford that as well as lenses. For now I'm more inclined to get the Nikon but I have some questions for anyone who's experienced both cameras... 1) Is the extra noise of the Nikon due to it not having a CMOS sensor and lower pixels very noticeable or not really worth taking into consideration with the comparison? 2) How obvious is it that the Canon isn't so well made as the Nikon? 3) The Nikon's USB transfer isn't full speed - Does this really notice very much and does it bother anyone other than being just a slight annoyance? 4) I've read about the Nikon's good system for keeping focused on moving objects. That's one of the main things I want from a camera, so I'm wondering if this system is a lot better than whatever focusing system Canon uses? Ok, that's the cameras sorted out but now for the lenses. Assume for now that I go for the Nikon D70s. I can get that with the 18-70mm kit lens, which I think I'd probably do. Although I want fast focusing, that's more for a larger zoom so up to 70mm I'm not too worried. For the larger lens I'd like to get a 70-300mm. I've looked at many options but reviews don't say much about focus speed, although some people comment that focusing is slow on most the cheaper lenses. Oh one important point-I can't spend more than about 850GBP in total, so that means 220GBP for the 70-300mm lens, but I can go a little higher if need be by holding off buying it for a short time. I'm not in the market for anything too fancy though. Some lenses I'm looking at are: Nikon AF Zoom-Nikkor 70-300mm f/4-5.6D ED Sigma 70-300mm F4-5.6 APO Macro Super DG I've also thought about other options such as getting the Tamron AF 18-200mm XR DI II LD Aspherical (IF) MACRO f3.5-6.3, then a 2X teleconverter. Even that is also said to have slow focus though, and as that's what I particularly want I'm put off many of these lenses. The only lens I've seen where the focus is said to be fast is the Canon 100-300mm, but I won't get into that at the moment as I think I'm more likely going for the D70s. If anyone can give me any inspiration in what to do here, I'd be very grateful! I'm going nuts trying to work out the best and cheapest options, without sacrificing quality too much. Thanks loads, Geoff. Answers below. >I just cannot decide whether to choose the Canon 350D or Nikon D70s, so I'm >looking here for inspiration. I've done my homework and spent days reading [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > lower pixels very noticeable or not really worth taking into consideration > with the comparison? Most photographers will not see the difference, if you have to ask then you wont. > 2) How obvious is it that the Canon isn't so well made as the Nikon? The 350D is really light and plasticy, the D70s is a big solid bruiser, large hand grip. > 3) The Nikon's USB transfer isn't full speed - Does this really notice > very much and does it bother anyone other than being just a slight > annoyance? Use an external card reader. > 4) I've read about the Nikon's good system for keeping focused on moving > objects. That's one of the main things I want from a camera, so I'm > wondering if this system is a lot better than whatever focusing system > Canon uses? Probably not as critical as you might think, many photographers prefer manual focus. If it is that critical then you should probably be spending more on a camera. > Ok, that's the cameras sorted out but now for the lenses. Assume for now > that I go for the Nikon D70s. I can get that with the 18-70mm kit lens, [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > Nikon AF Zoom-Nikkor 70-300mm f/4-5.6D ED > Sigma 70-300mm F4-5.6 APO Macro Super DG Go with the Nikkor. > I've also thought about other options such as getting the Tamron AF > 18-200mm XR DI II LD Aspherical (IF) MACRO f3.5-6.3, then a 2X > teleconverter. ???? What about the Sigma 70-200mm F2.8? Even that is also said to have slow focus though, and as > that's what I particularly want I'm put off many of these lenses. The only > lens I've seen where the focus is said to be fast is the Canon 100-300mm, [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > Thanks loads, > Geoff. > 1) Is the extra noise of the Nikon due to it not having a CMOS sensor > and lower pixels very noticeable or not really worth taking into > consideration with the comparison? Not worth taking into consideration. Incidentally, CMOS is inherently noisier than CCD, not the other way around. But no, you won't notice any difference. > 2) How obvious is it that the Canon isn't so well made as the Nikon? It's pretty obvious to me. Whether it actually matters to you is another question entirely. Pick them up and see how they feel. > 3) The Nikon's USB transfer isn't full speed - Does this really notice > very much and does it bother anyone other than being just a slight > annoyance? Slight annoyance at most. I always used USB transfer rather than pulling out the card, even though it was slower, just because it was more convenient. Plug in the camera and then go do something else while it's loading. No big deal. I now have a D2x, and the USB 2 speed is welcome, especially since the files are so much bigger, but it's still just not that important. By the time I'm using USB, I'm done shooting and not in a hurry. If I'm in a hurry I'll just pull the card and do it that way. > 4) I've read about the Nikon's good system for keeping focused on moving > objects. That's one of the main things I want from a camera, so I'm > wondering if this system is a lot better than whatever focusing system > Canon uses? It actually works pretty well, but I can't compare it to the Canon. It can track a car passing by at high speed, for example. Once you learn to use the AF it is really quite good, though a lot does depend on the lens you use. A slower lens will really hurt in that department. > I can get that with the 18-70mm kit lens, which I think I'd probably do. > Although I want fast focusing, that's more for a larger zoom so up to > 70mm I'm not too worried. The 18-70 is fast with focusing. > Nikon AF Zoom-Nikkor 70-300mm f/4-5.6D ED > Sigma 70-300mm F4-5.6 APO Macro Super DG > > I've also thought about other options such as getting the Tamron AF > 18-200mm XR DI II LD Aspherical (IF) MACRO f3.5-6.3, then a 2X > teleconverter. I don't have experience with any of these lenses, but as a general rule, go with Nikon ones rather than third-party. I, too, have heard that the 70-300 type zooms don't focus terribly fast. I'd go with something with less zoom range, personally, like a 70-200.  SignatureJeremy | jeremy@exit109.com Thanks Pete and Jeremy for your time in answering my questions. With what you've said and other stuff I've read tonight, I think I'm going to go with the Nikon. I will still go see them both and have a little play, but if others find the Canon too small and plasticky then I'm sure to also. I'm surprised to read that CMOS is inherently noisier than CCD? I guess that wherever I got the opposite from wasn't right, so this helps my decision towards the Nikon. As for getting more equipment like an external card reader and better, faster zooms - I simply cannot afford it. I'm stretched to afford this type of camera at all but I miss this hobby so much, and my current Fujifilm Finepix 4900 just doesn't do the job at all (it cost me 700GBP at the time and the cheapest SLR was about 2000! Now my Finepix is only worth about 80). So I'll go with the Nikon but I'm still not sure about which lens(es) to buy. The Nikon kit lens maybe fast and fairly good but the zoom isn't enough for me. So I'm really not sure what to do other than buy the kit lens and save up. By the way I used to prefer manual focus but when shooting fast moving objects it's not so easy, and with my Finepix 4900 I've got used to not being able to tell if the view is in focus or not (the viewfinder is terrible), so I have to rely on AF, but that's very very slow. In fact with moving objects AF is useless and manual is just about useless. Thanks again guys, Geoff. > I'm surprised to read that CMOS is inherently noisier than CCD? I guess > that wherever I got the opposite from wasn't right, so this helps my > decision towards the Nikon. CMOS is inherently noisier, all else being equal -- obviously, it's not equal. The noise isn't a factor. Don't even worry about it. You won't notice it with either camera and you won't notice a difference between them. > By the way I used to prefer manual focus but when shooting fast moving > objects it's not so easy, and with my Finepix 4900 I've got used to not > being able to tell if the view is in focus or not (the viewfinder is > terrible), so I have to rely on AF, but that's very very slow. In fact > with moving objects AF is useless and manual is just about useless. The difference from any P&S to a decent SLR will be profound, in terms of focusing. With Nikon, the "AF-S" lenses tend to be the fastest, but the others are still a world apart from a P&S contrast-detection AF system. SignatureJeremy | jeremy@exit109.com > CMOS is inherently noisier, all else being equal -- obviously, it's not > equal. The noise isn't a factor. Don't even worry about it. You won't > notice it with either camera and you won't notice a difference between > them. CMOS would be noisier if they didn't put noise removal circuitry on the chip. They do, so it really does become a non-issue. Signaturehttp://www.pbase.com/bcbaird >As for getting more equipment like an external card reader and better, >faster zooms - I simply cannot afford it. Never say never - you might find something more affordable second-hand. Al Signature[This space intentionally left blank] > >As for getting more equipment like an external card reader and better, > >faster zooms - I simply cannot afford it. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Al And external CF card readers can be had for about $12. Even my firewire reader didn't cost me more than $18. Signaturehttp://www.pbase.com/bcbaird > > [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] >Even my firewire reader didn't cost me more than $18. > True, I could go second hand. The USB speed isn't a big issue anyway but it's nice to know I'll have the option of a card reader if it bothers me too much. I have wondered about 2nd hand lenses because I had one before and it was fine. I certainly wouldn't go for a 2nd hand camera but when I come to buying a second lens, I will look for something 2nd hand first. Geoff. Geoff wrote in part: > I'm surprised to read that CMOS is inherently noisier than CCD? I guess > that wherever I got the opposite from wasn't right, so this helps my > decision towards the Nikon. I'm thinking that Canon's secret recipe of 11 herbs and spices in the DIGIC processor must really be something special. Someone on rpd will of course correct me if I'm wrong. And call me nasty, foul names. Excellent, but if you want to make my .sigmata file, remember that spelling counts. SignatureIt Came From C. L. Smith's Unclaimed Mysteries. http://www.unclaimedmysteries.net T. Boozer wrote in rolltidefan.net: "That dude that took the picture, Corry Smith, is a bigtime aubie. Notice he named the pic 'BRIANDENNEHYstadium' Screw him!" > For now I'm more inclined to get the Nikon but I have some questions for > anyone who's experienced both cameras... > > 1) Is the extra noise of the Nikon due to it not having a CMOS sensor > and lower pixels very noticeable or not really worth taking into > consideration with the comparison? The "noise" from a Nikon is easily removed using a number of different programs available on the net, notably Neat Image. Unlike the Nikon where you have the option to decide just how much noise reduction you want, the Canon uses in-camera algorithms to remove the noise (at the expense of detail). > 2) How obvious is it that the Canon isn't so well made as the Nikon? Don't get me started! I would never buy a Canon consumer grade DSLR again. Some people like them, but you are right..they do look like toys. > 3) The Nikon's USB transfer isn't full speed - Does this really notice > very much and does it bother anyone other than being just a slight > annoyance? Buy a card reader. A lot easier than connecting and disconnecting the camera all the time. > 4) I've read about the Nikon's good system for keeping focused on moving > objects. That's one of the main things I want from a camera, so I'm > wondering if this system is a lot better than whatever focusing system > Canon uses? Can't comment on the 350D, but the D70 even prior to the firmware upgrade was pretty good (a *lot* better than the EOS D60 I had before it). > Ok, that's the cameras sorted out but now for the lenses. Assume for now > that I go for the Nikon D70s. I can get that with the 18-70mm kit lens, [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > off buying it for a short time. I'm not in the market for anything too > fancy though. The Nikkor 18-70mm DX lens is awesome! It is very sharp for a kit lens and extremely good value for money. > Some lenses I'm looking at are: > > Nikon AF Zoom-Nikkor 70-300mm f/4-5.6D ED > Sigma 70-300mm F4-5.6 APO Macro Super DG You'll be disappointed with those. > I've also thought about other options such as getting the Tamron AF > 18-200mm XR DI II LD Aspherical (IF) MACRO f3.5-6.3, then a 2X [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > grateful! I'm going nuts trying to work out the best and cheapest > options, without sacrificing quality too much. Get a Nikon. SignatureSave Photography | Shoot some film today! Email: drop rods and insert surfaces I reckon they should make an SLR with a fixed lens and say 128Mb of memory built in. USB 2.0 transfer. That would satisfy the needs of those who don't want to upgrade. T. Now that is the stupidest thing I have seen here in a long time. >I reckon they should make an SLR with a fixed lens and say 128Mb of > memory built in. USB 2.0 transfer. That would satisfy the needs of > those who don't want to upgrade. > > T. Unfortunately I'm on the same rollercoaster as you guys... DSLR, 24-70 f2.8, 70-200 f2.8, flash, mem cards, masses of NiMh batts, you name it. I'm going back to P&S. T. > Unfortunately I'm on the same rollercoaster as you guys... > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > T. What fun will that be? > > [quoted text clipped - 88 lines] > > Thanks for your answers mate. I'm more and more definately going for the Nikon now. The one thing remaining that leads me to wanting the Canon instead is the lower pixels, but everyone reckons I won't even notice, so I won't worry about that. Nikon it is then. I'm not sure why it's easier to take a card out and put it in a card reader by the way, compared to plugging the camera in? Not that it matters, I'll have both options if I buy a card reader. With my current camera I plug it in to the USB lead and it's recognised straight away. I can't imagine anything being faster. I guess it helps to have USB sockets on the front of the PC case. You said I'll be disappointed with those 2 lenses I mentioned, which is pretty much what I've read elsewhere too. I don't know what the best option is going to be for a larger lens without spending a lot more. A 70-200mm has been suggested (I haven't looked at available options for those yet) so maybe I'll go for that if I have to, but I'd rather have higher zoom than that if possible. I guess I can't have it all for the money I have. Could you or anyone else suggest either a 70-200mm or 70-300mm lens that's at least resonably good and has, above all else, fast focusing? Sub 300GBP. Cheers, Geoff. > I'm not sure why it's easier to take a card out and put it in a card > reader by the way, compared to plugging the camera in? Not that it > matters, I'll have both options if I buy a card reader. With my current > camera I plug it in to the USB lead and it's recognised straight away. I > can't imagine anything being faster. I guess it helps to have USB > sockets on the front of the PC case. 1) On my 300d, direct file copies take FOREVER. I know the D70 probably moves faster, but the cameras are still generally pedestrian by comparison. The card reader is FAST. 2) The card reader may stay attached, the camera can stay in the bag. Once you have more than one CF card, you will appreciate the separateness. 3) You need no special software to plug it in and have it recognized. At least for the Canon, you need to install their software first. Dave I also have to 'manage' multiple cameras with multiple types of cards from CF, SD to XD. I prefer card readers over the crap software that comes with the camera. I also find cards = film so I feel comfortable removing cards. I don't like inserting plugs and 'hoping' the camera detects. T. That's a tough call. As far as I've seen the Canon/Nikon 70-200 f2.8 and f4.0 lenses are very expensive. The f4.0 you might be able to stretch. I personally went for the Sigma 70-200 f2.8 and the 1.4x teleconverter. Be advised these are heavy lenses... 1.4kg or so and the cameras are usually only 700grams! I also believe in f2.8 down to the normal lengths so I chose the 24-70 f2.8 also Sigma. T. >That's a tough call. > [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > > I don't mind F4 - Or should I say that I accept I'll never afford 2.8 with the money I have. I'll have the 3.5 18-70mm kit lens anyway so....Well it's only half an F number less but I can live with that. I've also wondered about getting a teleconverter with a 70-200mm, but of course with an F4 I'll then be at....Well I guess it would be F6? I'm only used to 2x teleconverters which I know double the F number. Thanks for the tips, Geoff. > Thanks for your answers mate. I'm more and more definately going for the > Nikon now. The one thing remaining that leads me to wanting the Canon > instead is the lower pixels, but everyone reckons I won't even notice, > so I won't worry about that. Nikon it is then. An excellent choice. You will be happy with it, I'm certain. > I'm not sure why it's easier to take a card out and put it in a card > reader by the way, compared to plugging the camera in? Not that it > matters, I'll have both options if I buy a card reader. With my current > camera I plug it in to the USB lead and it's recognised straight away. I > can't imagine anything being faster. I guess it helps to have USB > sockets on the front of the PC case. I think it has to do with the camera doing some of the processing. It isn't recognised as a mass storage device by XP, but rather as a camera, so there might be something in that which causes it to be slow. > You said I'll be disappointed with those 2 lenses I mentioned, which is > pretty much what I've read elsewhere too. I don't know what the best [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > that's at least resonably good and has, above all else, fast focusing? > Sub 300GBP. I'm afraid nothing from any brand exists that fits the bill. I used a few of the 70-300mm zooms when I first got involved in photography, but unless you have a really good tripod (or a lens with VR or IS) you will get soft pictures for your efforts. My advice is to save up and look at something in the pro range, maybe a used 70-200mm f/2.8 ED will be a start. Just remember that with a D70s you are getting an effective 105-300mm field of view (1.5x the focal length). You won't find it for under UKP300 though. Keep a look out for lenses on eBay. SignatureSave Photography | Shoot some film today! Email: drop rods and insert surfaces > > ><snip> > >I'm afraid nothing from any brand exists that fits the bill. I used a >few of the 70-300mm zooms when I first got involved in photography, but [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > I was afraid you'd say that. :( Effective 300mm would probably be acceptable, although it's some time since I used my old 200mm with 2x teleconverter (35mm SLR) and cannot remember if I really used the last 100mm or not. I'll see how I feel about the 18-70mm when I get it anyway, and maybe I'll be able to cope with that and a 2x converter for now. I'll do some research on 2X converters another time. :) Cheers, Geoff. Hi Geoff: Great choice on the D70 instead of the 350D and here are some of the reasons why I would go with the Nikon myself as well: - The Nikon D70 has better construction - I just like the feel of the Nikon so much more. - The controls on the D70 are better (front and back instead of a single wheel on the Canon) - The 6Mp the D70 has is plenty for me - I actually think 4 to 5 Mp is the real sweet spot unless you want to blow up to more than 8x10. I have tried both plugging the camera thru the USB port and using a card reader. I have found that I would use the card reader 4 out of 5 times. May be it is just my habits. On the lenses, I would definitely get the 18-70DX kit lens. It's one of the best value lenses you can find. For the 70-200/300 range, I would save money to get the Nikon 80-200/2.8 which can be found for around 500-600GBP. I would add a 1.4x teleconverter if you need to extend your range. I prefer this combination of 80-200 + 1.4x converter to any 70-300/4.0-5.6. If the Nikkor 80-200/2.8 is too expensive for you, look for the Nikkor 70-210/4.0 - this is an older lens but very sharp, however, I can not recommend you using this 70-210 with any teleconverter. Another inexpensive lens to consider is the Tokina 80-200/2.8 ATX, this one can be found for half the price of the Nikkor 2.8. Anyway, good luck and cheers. >Hi Geoff: > [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] > > Hi Escaper and thanks for all that information. The reasons you gave for going with the D70s are exaclty what I keep reading too, so I'm confident I'm doing the right thing. :) I also feel that 5MP or so is adequate. My current camera is only 3MP and that's perfectly fine for 5X7inch prints. I'll probably want to do some larger prints once I get going with the new camera but nothing that large, so 6MP will be fine. I guess that wanting 8MP or even more is a bit psycological! I really can't justify spending 500-600GBP on a lense, even though I'd love to. I'm out of work at the moment and can only afford the camera at all because I'm selling other things. I've been reading reviews and opinions about the various Tonika and Sigma lenses and the main thing that bothers me is speed of AF, but I can't have everything. I won't be able to afford any lenses after getting the camera anyway so I won't worry too much about that now. As long as I'm certain on getting the 18-70mm kit lens (which I now am) to start with, thoughts on the next lens will have to wait a while. Thanks again, Geoff. > Hi Escaper and thanks for all that information. The reasons you gave for > going with the D70s are exaclty what I keep reading too, so I'm [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > going with the new camera but nothing that large, so 6MP will be fine. I > guess that wanting 8MP or even more is a bit psycological! Having an 8MP sensor does give you a bit more flexibility with cropping ... but not a lot. I chose the Nikon D70, as I would rather take the picture correctly than waste massive amounts of time cropping in the darkroom. Couldn't do it with film, no need to start now. SignatureThomas T. Veldhouse Key Fingerprint: 2DB9 813F F510 82C2 E1AE 34D0 D69D 1EDC D5EC AED1 Spammers please contact me at renegade@veldy.net. > Thanks for your answers mate. I'm more and more definately going for the > Nikon now. The one thing remaining that leads me to wanting the Canon [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > Cheers, > Geoff. You might to to http://non-aol.com/D70/ and check the reviews there. I've found the info worth looking through. Regards, Bob >You might to to http://non-aol.com/D70/ and check the reviews there. I've >found the info worth looking through. > >Regards, Bob > > I've had a quick look and bookmarked it. I think it'll come in very handy. Excellent, thanks Bob. Geoff. > > Thanks for your answers mate. I'm more and more definately going for the > > Nikon now. The one thing remaining that leads me to wanting the Canon [quoted text clipped - 27 lines] > > Regards, Bob Wow, great site! Thanks for the link! -A >Canon boast about how small and light the 350D is but that's >always put me off this sort of product as it can feel and look more like >a toy. So . . . .you consider large and heavy to be a feature?? >>Canon boast about how small and light the 350D is but that's >>always put me off this sort of product as it can feel and look more like [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >So . . . .you consider large and heavy to be a feature?? > I wouldn't quite put it like that. I'm saying that 'too light' and 'too small' is a bad thing. Too small can mean too fiddly, and too light can mean it feeling off-balanced when using larger lenses. > I wouldn't quite put it like that. I'm saying that 'too light' and 'too > small' is a bad thing. Too small can mean too fiddly, and too light can > mean it feeling off-balanced when using larger lenses. It can also mean it has a Fisher-Price feel to the construction, to get it that light. Having said that, I am not intentionally picking on any particular camera, but I can say that the Nikon D70 feels like a camera and not like a Fisher-Price toy. SignatureThomas T. Veldhouse Key Fingerprint: 2DB9 813F F510 82C2 E1AE 34D0 D69D 1EDC D5EC AED1 Spammers please contact me at renegade@veldy.net. Canon 350D 50/1.4 200/2.8 2x 24/2.8 0.8x > I just cannot decide whether to choose the Canon 350D or Nikon D70s, so Both will do fine for you. Consider also the Pentax *ist, Maxxum /5D (antishake) and Oly E300. Signature-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm -- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm -- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin -- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch. >> I just cannot decide whether to choose the Canon 350D or Nikon D70s, so > > Both will do fine for you. Consider also the Pentax *ist, Maxxum /5D > (antishake) and Oly E300. Thanks for your reply Alan. I've decided on the Nikon now after reading reviews and listening to what others here have said. The main thing that put me off the Nikon was it's number of Pixels, but now I know that's hardly even noticable I think the Nikon has more positive things about it than the Canon. The main thing against the Canon for me is it's small size and plasticky 'toy like' feel. I haven't held it myself yet but I trust what others have said about that, and I know I'm the sort of person to be very put off a camera simply by how it looks and feels. It's a shame because if it wasn't for that I may well have gone with the Canon. I admit I haven't looked strongly at the others you mentioned but I guess I feel more comfortable going with the most commonly used and more well-known brands that are thought of higher in the reviews, and also that have the most number of third party lenses available. Now I just need to wait until I have the money to buy the thing! I'm selling stuff to get the money and I'm more than half way there, and anticipate only having another couple of weeks at the most to wait because I have lots to sell. :) Cheers, Geoff. >The main thing against the Canon for me is it's small size and plasticky >'toy like' feel. I haven't held it myself yet but I trust what others have >said about that Do you also trust me when I say that I don't find its size awkward, nor do I consider that it feels "toy-like"? :-) Ignore what others say and handle ALL the cameras within your budget yourself before making a decision. Only you can judge what feels right in your hands, and like me you're about to make a considerable financial commitment so it makes sense to explore all your options so that you end up with the right tools for the job *you* want to do. Al Signature[This space intentionally left blank] > The main thing against the Canon for > me is it's small size and plasticky 'toy like' feel. I haven't held > it myself yet but I trust what others have said about that, and I > know I'm the sort of person to be very put off a camera simply by how > it looks and feels. It's a shame because if it wasn't for that I may > well have gone with the Canon. I chose the D70S because it was easier to operate. The controls I use most fall under my fingers with very little thought. The dual control dials are really convenient. The 350D just didn't do the same for me. It also didn't feel as solid as the D70S (Both are made of plastic). That said, you really need to handle both cameras because you may find the opposite true for you. Canon have put thought into where the controls should be placed and you may find that it feels better for you. -Mike |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2009 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.