EOS 3 - How will it improve your photography?

greenspun.com : LUSENET : Camera Equipment : One Thread

Others have asked if the new Nikon F100 will improve your photography. I am wondering if the new EOS 3 will improve your photography, and, if so, how?

-- STanley McManus (stanshooter@mailexcite.com), November 24, 1998

Answers

No more than a Canon AE-1 would improve your photography. Time and again you hear pro's like "Moose Peterson" praising an F-5 and stating that he gets shots with it that he could have never took without it. Do you think he would have said the same if Nikon wasn't compensating him for doing so?! If they paid him enough he'd say the same about the FE10! I'm not knocking the Moose, but consumer's need to consider the motives of advertisers. It might be easier for me to get certain photo's with an EOS 3 than with an AE-1, but I wouldn't say that it's impossible to get similar results with either. Will the EOS 3 compose and crop my photo? Will it put me in the right place at the right time? I'm sure if the Moose or John Shaw took a Pentax K1000 out for a day they would come back with nothing short of what they're producing now.

-- Ron Stecher (stecherr@vafb5a.vafb.af.mil), November 24, 1998.

I have to agree with Ron. I bought an F5, and the RGB metering may have helped out on a number of photos, the faster AF probably has come in handy on some action shots, but I bought primarily to use for 8-10 years and for it's durability. None of the 'new toys' will really help one's photography. But I do wish that Moose Petersen and others would really divulge when they are compensated by the Canons and Nikons of the world so we & others could take their comments about the equipment at something other than face value. I've been around photo gear long enough to know what I'm looking for, and for what I like & don't like. Others may really be swayed because BigNamePhotographer is using X brand & wouldn't be caught dead without it. Those less experienced may not realized $ just changed hands ( and not for the equipment!).

-- Mark Mitchell (mmitchell@inetnow.net), November 24, 1998.

Imagine this situation: Ramp Fashion Show In short, there are some situations where the technology of the newer cameras will help you take better photos, and by no means does this imply that you are using technology as a crutch either. Autofocus and advanced metering have their place.

-- Tommy Zablan (lensman49@hotmail.com), November 24, 1998.

I'm going to leave this thread here as long as it remains civil. As we should all know, no camera can make you a better photographer. This is not the same as saying no camera can improve your photography though, so keep the replies civil, as they have been so far.

What the EOS 3 will do for you depends on what you use now, and what sort of photography you do. If you primarily do landscapes, it won't do much, if anything, for you that any 35mm SLR won't do. On the other hand, if you currently do a lot of sports, or take pictures of birds in flight, or whatever involving focus tracking, it will make things a lot easier than manual focus. Less so if you already use a modern autofocus camera. Things like multi spot metering are nice, but in the end you still have to pick on aperture and one shutter speed, so there is only so much a meter can do for you.

In other words, it depends. The answer is simple. Is there something your style requires that your current equipment can't do, or perhaps more importantly, that you can't do with it? If so, does the EOS 3, or for that matter, any other camera do it? If the answer is yes to both questions, then it may help a little, but no camera is going to work miricles.

-- Brad (reloader@webtv.net), November 24, 1998.


The EOS-3 has a couple of features not on my EOS-1. First, it has a mirror lockup. That's great, especially for macro work, and landscape work. It has a TTL flash system that can manage fill up to 1/8000th. That's awesome for portrait work, or outdoor fill work. The remote flash capability is nice. The vertical grip that duplicates all the controls in the vertical position (ala the EOS-5) makes it better than the EOS-1n too. This is definitely a very nice upgrade. I think I will eventually end up with one or the replacement to the EOS-1n (though that'll probably be a lot heavier). It has a 97% viewfinder, not as nice as a 100% viewfinder, but the slidemount hides that much anyway.

The street price is supposed to be around $1000 for a new EOS-3. That makes it a very affordable camera.

-- Piaw Na (piaw@mpath.com), November 24, 1998.



Does the EOS 3 really do *TTL* flash up to 1/8000? There are a number of cameras that will to high speed sync by pulsing the flash, but none are TTL to my knowledge.

The X sync for the EOS 3 is 1/200 where it will certainly do TTL.

-- Paul Wilson (pwilson@ultranet.com), November 24, 1998.


I DO think that better equipment improves your photography. IB4ve been a pro sound engineer for some 25 years and found out that top results, in most cases, can only be achieved with top quality gear. All these myths about John Shaw being able to shoot with a Russian Leica and a Korean lens and DELIVER is rubish! Go for the best (though usually grossly overpriced) and be stimulated and inspired; THEN youB4ll know that if the results are no good IT IS you and your technique. It does not matter if it is Canon, Nikon or whatever; who can afford building bad quality for top dollar? Over a certain price level EVERYTHING is good, let the ergonomics and appearance decide. EOS3 SHALL improve your photography!

-- Andrzej Poniatowski (audiomix@algonet.se), November 25, 1998.

Andrzej, If what inspires you is a new peice of equipment then it seems as though you would have to purchase a new lens or body every six months in order to take good photos. If you think that giving a seasoned photographer like Shaw a no frills camera a crock, then consider Edward Weston. He took his photo masterpieces with a beat up 8x10 system held together with duct tape. I think Tommy made a good point about how updates can ease certain sitautions, thus "getting the shot." For years the Nikon 75-150 series E zoom was a favorite amoung fashion photographers, 10 -20 years previous I'm sure that a zoom was unheard of for lack of quality. Many great photos were taken before the introduction of autofocus, but different things inspire us all.

-- Ron Stecher (stecherr@vafb5a.vafb.af.mil), November 25, 1998.

Ron, I know that top quality equipment does not automatically create a top photographer; I know that some people can achieve wonders with a Konica Pop - but only SOME. I totally disagree with the common attitude - I am a beginner and looking for a simple camera to learn. Many will be put off by what they achieve and turn to something else - they think it is their fault that the photographs are out of focus and under/overexposed, etc.. Give these people the right stuff from the start! The original question was if EOS3 would improve his photography - the answer MUST be YES (depending on his past experience and the quality of equipment he had been using). With the modern gear of today and some brains you can, at least, come up with good looking images and be a hero among your friends and family.

-- Andrzej Poniatowski (audiomix@algonet.se), November 26, 1998.

Think of the photos that have inspired you. Think of the images that made you think, "I wish I had taken that!". Think of when when they were taken, who they were taken by, and what they were taken with. For me it is Henri Cartier-Bresson. Manual focus rangefinder (OK a Leica - so what?), did the equipment make those images what they were? Ok, the fact the camera was small and relatively fast to operate would have helped, but that's sheer handling, nothing to do with camera functions or features. Also ask yourself if the 'features' witl actually get in the way of taking a wonderful classic photo 'cos you don't want to have spent all that money and not use all that's on offer.

-- Adam Poll (adamrita@iinet.net.au), November 26, 1998.


EOS 3 - How will it improve your photography

Simple answer - it won't. This asumes you are already shooting with a current or last generation AF SLR body. If you're currently using a disposable camera, maybe you'll see some difference.

Given $1000 to spend, my guess is that buying and shooting 100 rolls of extra film will give you a far better payoff in terms of "keeper" images than buying a new camera body. Even better would be taking a $500 trip and 50 extra rolls of film.

If you're using an Elan/ElanII/A2/EOS-1(n) or similar and you're not getting good images now, an EOS-3 won't do anything for you except make your wallet lighter.

I think it looks like a great camera, and would make an excellent choice if you're just coming into the EOS family, but the "upgrade" advantages for most people (myself included) are based more in the mind than reality.

-- Bob Atkins (bobatkins@hotmail.com), November 27, 1998.


If, as above post suggests, it won't improve the photography of someone already using an Elan 2, then someone about to buy into the EOS system might just as well get an Elan 2. There would be point in spending money on a more expensive camera.

-- Michael Fuhrmann (fuhrmann@interlog.com), November 27, 1998.

Correct (I assume you really meant NO point).

I've seen a bunch of people with F5s, F4s, EOS-1s etc., shooting hand held nature with comsumer lenses. My guess is they wasted their money (but it's their money to waste).

They probably wonder why I have an ElanII stuck on the end of a 600/4L - not even an ElanIIe. Hmm. Maybe that's why my images suck. I clearly need an EOS-1n (with an EOS-3 for backup of course).

-- Bob Atkins (bobatkins@hotmail.com), November 27, 1998.


But not everyone buys an expensive body and puts crap lenses on it to shoot nature handheld. Used intelligently, the Eos 3 presumably will offer some real advantages over other EOS models.

-- Michael Fuhrmann (fuhrmann@interlog.com), November 27, 1998.

Sure it does. And the 1n offers more (different advantages) and the 1n RS offers even more (and still more different advantages). And the EOS-4 will offer as yet unknown advantages.

However anyone who thinks that continually buying and "upgrading" is going to do much for their photogaphy is probably doomed to perpetual disappointment.

There's an old Zen saying which runs along the lines of "If you can't achieve enlightenment here and now, what makes you think you will achieve it somewhere else?". The problem with most photographs lies far more in the photographer than in the equipment.

The main reason camera companies introduce so many new models is to generate revenue, not to supply photographers with equipment they really need. But we all know that, right?

-- Bob Atkins (bobatkins@hotmail.com), November 28, 1998.



I won't be looking for a new camera for at least a decade, or more, I hope. My 8008s is six years old, and a F4s is a little over a year old. I don't think either of the new cameras would improve my photography. They might make it easier as far as state of the art autofocus, but I don't use any AF in landscape or closeups, so I guess I'll just keep what I've got, and suffer through not having a new and improved camera. I just wonder what they (camera companies) are going to think we want next? And where do they get their input from? I've never seen a questionnaire about what "I" want on a camera body!!

-- Jim Bridges (jcbejb@worldnet.att.net), November 29, 1998.

Moderation questions? read the FAQ