Canon Digital SLRs

Your friend may have made an error. The best digicam site I know (www.dpreview.com) does not list it, even in its directory of discontinued models. OTOH, Canon do make a product with a "3000" designation - it is a scanner.
I would ask him to confirm the details.
Regards.

Thanks Ken. I did check with him after my first search only came up with 300 D. He's certain that it is 3000 D. I thought they might have different names in different markets.

The excellent Canon Eos 300D is known in some markets as the "Digital Rebel" or "Eos Rebel". If you are in the market for a digicam of this quality, you should consider it, but watch out for warranty issues on imported gear.

Good point about the warranty issues Ken. I don't know if things are standardised across the European Union or not. My friend will be ringing me back again later this evening for an update on my research, I'll mention that to him.

I think he's going to go for a Nikon D70, but he saw this "Canon 3000D" which he hadn't heard of before, and wondered if he should be considering it as an alternative.

Kevin,

Tell your friend that the D70 has a virtually unusable viewfinder (same goes for the entry-lvel Canon). Dim, tunnel-like and impossible to focus with. The Pentax alternative at this prce point is a much wiser one if your friend is genuinely interested in photography and not biased by "brand" appeal. Note that he should also stay away from ANY zoom lens these companies sell with such cameras as part of a kit: they are truly rubbish. Get the body only and then pick up a couple of primes that best suit one's style.

Wolfe

Thanks wolfe, I'll pass it on.

He may have condsidered these things of course. He's usually pretty thorough in his research and I know he's had what I thought were fairly serious cameras back when he was using film (OM4, I think).

Kevin - If your colleague was an Olympus user get him to look at Olympus current DSLR range - he might be very surprised at what is on offer.

He may be able to re use some of his OM lenses on the Olympus DSLRs.

Kevin,

It's one thing to consider something like the D70, quite another to look through it and see how awful it is ;-)

Derek,

I feel that Olympus has made a big mistake in going for the 3/4 (TV) format. It simply does not work as well compositionally as 2/3.

Wolfe

quote:

It simply does not work as well compositionally as 2/3.

A bit sweeping - it might be your opinion or experience - a YMMV might have been appropriate

however Ansel Adams did quite a good job with 10by8 format,

I remember articles many years ago lamenting the 35mm format as being bad for composition and not being compatible with the classic paper sizes of whole plate, half plate etc.

35mm format does not conform to the ISO paper sizes or the US paper sizes - so all 35mm pictures that are to be printed have to be compromised in the printing to either get the image to fill the paper or have the paper trimmed down.

To see how users of the Olympus DSLR cameras have overcome your perceived format problem - check out

fourthirds web site

Canon made an EOS3000 - i.e. three zeros - but it was a low budget film camera, not digital. It was pretty poor, the sort of fare pushed by clowns in Dixons and the like.

Never handled a 300D so don't know if they're any good, but I like my 10D, which is comparable to the D70 - dunno if the 300D is quite as good as either.

John

Another big thubms up for the 10D here. the 300D is essentially the same with less robust construction and fewer features. From all accounts one of the best VFM DSLRs about - although 10D prices are falling, making them somewhat tempting too.

FWIW

Cheers

Harry

quote:

Originally posted by Derek Wright:
To see how users of the Olympus DSLR cameras have overcome your perceived format problem - check out fourthirds web site

Derek,

I'm sorry but I don't see how those pictures make any sort of case. We are so swamped with photos these days that anything 3/4 immediately screams digital point-and-shoot. Yes, that's not fair, but it is the reality: human perception is all about association. Almost all the photographers I know share my view (though perhaps as a slightly different ratio of reasons).

As for printing to the edge of paper (in other words, without a border), that again is the realm of the point-and-shoot novice.

Wolfe

Prejudices always bite the prejudiced

you sound like the anti 35mm bigot in the late 50s

quote:

Originally posted by Derek Wright:
Prejudices always bite the prejudiced

you sound like the anti 35mm bigot in the late 50s

Derek,

I think that is more than a bit harsh. The perception of images is dictated by culture and we can not escape culture. There is also the issue of habit and expertise with something. I have no problem with Olympus or prejudice against the company, but I am not interested in re-thinking 35mm composition or becoming a 3/4 crusader. They have chosen this diversion from the standard and I think they have made a mistake.

I don't understand why you are getting so wound up because of my aesthetic preference and perfectly reasonable explanation of it.

Note: Nikon, Canon, Leica, Contax and Pentax have all gone with 2/3 for their digital SLR, so it's not as if I am being stubborn against some sort of trend that will change SLR photography (which your nasty comment implies).

Wolfe