I put 24 rolls through my EOS 3 at Ding Darling. Got the slides back today (one week turnaround from Fuji). Some thoughts:

1. Shutter action is great...slightly better than 1N.

2. The additional focusing points really work to help nail down a shot.

3. Moose Peterson was there and suggested that I just run most of my shots on matrix to see how it works. I did and the general result is that there were more "keepers" than with my other EOS bodies.

4. Still wish Canon had put this camera in the 1N body which is, IMO, better bult.

-- Dick Ginkowski (dickg@execpc.com), January 25, 1999

Answers

Please don't shoot me for asking a "stupid question." What do you and others mean when you say that the shutter action great? Or maybe more importantly what consitutes bad shutter action? Thank for the mature answers and your patiences.

The resident beginner! BV

-- Brian Vega (vega@micron.net), January 25, 1999.

I've had a EOS 1N. I take it you've got one also or had one. What percentage of "keepers" did the EOS 3 give you in comparison to the 1N. Also were the additional "keepers" more from better exposure or focus?

-- gary Wilson (garywilson@prodigy.net), January 25, 1999.

Brian, shutter action is like "trigger action." It's great on the 1N, better on the EOS 3. Fast, precise and has a good "feel" to it.

Now, as for the other question, I have a 1N. I like it. The additional "keepers" were more the result of exposure. The metering seems very precise.

-- Dick Ginkowski (dickg@execpc.com), January 25, 1999.

Dick, Thanks for this interesting post. I haven't laid hands on an EOS3 yet, but I was under the impression that the body was pretty much the same as the 1N body (I think Philip Greeenspun was under this impression too, from his somewhat premature comparison of the EOS3 and other Canon bodies on the photo.net homepage re durability and weatherproofing). You indicate that this isn't so, which is disappointing news. Brian, I suppose to some extent "shutter action" is a subjective response (as Dick says, it's like "trigger action" to a shooter); my benchmark camera for shutter action is the Contax RTSIII, the best I've handled. I think it's a "feel" of the combination of speed, responsiveness, noise, steadiness or stability, and the general sense of solidity of the camera at the moment of exposure. (Try a few test firings of the shutter of a Contax RTSIII and you'll see better than I can put it into words.)

-- Dave Kemp (Kempda@worldnet.att.net), January 26, 1999.

Dick -- I haven't been able to get my hands on an EOS-3 yet either. I'm used to the 5 focusing points on the 1N and A2. Do the many little red squares that (apparently) light up the EOS-3 viewfinder distract? or hinder composition at all? The multi-spot metering option seems really attractive; did you try that out, and with what results? Thanks for your observations.

-- Mark Martin (mmartin @ sidley.com), January 26, 1999.

Dick, Following up on the above question, did you ever own or use a Canon T90, and if so is the spot-metering of the EOS3 similar to the T90? (The EOS3 seems to be the first Canon EOS camera to offer metering sophistication equal to what the Canon T90 had more than a decade ago.)

-- Dave Kemp (Kempda@worldnet.att.net), January 26, 1999.

I haven't used the T90 (I had an F1) and can't comment on it. The spot metering seems good and the matrix damn near flawlwss even in sdome tough situations (try sidelit egrets).

The body is similar to the 1N but more plasticky. Some controls were rearranged. Theoretically it was an improvement but it would have been nice to be consistent, IMHO.

The proliferation of focusing points doesn't impair anything. You don't have all of them going at akk times. I was very surprised that in "P" mode the camera's intuition more often than not matches mine.

-- Dick Ginkowski (dickg@execpc.com), January 27, 1999.

>>>I was very surprised that in "P" mode the camera's intuition more often than not matches mine.

why are you surprised? i'm not. the program modes in cameras were designed by photographers (that are probably better than (or at least as good as) i am) given the same set of inputs, (and with canon those inputs include, focal length, max/min aperture of the lens, some input about the quality of the lens (the P mode stops down more on cheaper lenses where sharpness wide open is suspect) and meter readings from several points around the frame. i'd assume the camera would pick close to the same settings i would. unless i'm going for a "special effect" (or unless i'm dumb and calculate wrong) the settings should be pretty much automatic and the camera knows them as well as i do.

i use P mode 99% of the time. for about 95% of the shots P mode picks what i would. for those last 5% i can switch the settings (either with the P shift knob, or the compensation knob)

i am at peace with the fact that my camera is almost as smart as me (or maybe smarter) maybe i need higher self esteem?

-- Sean Hester (seanh@ncfweb.net), January 27, 1999.

Sean,

If you know not to argue with success, you are smarter than many.

-- Bruce Rubenstein (b_rubenstein@yahoo.com), January 27, 1999.

Re T90.

I owned a T90 and now own an EOS3. The multi-spot metering functions exactly the same way (this was a major point in making the buying decision).

I've had the camera since December and run about 30 rolls through it. I haven't lost a shot as a result of anything the camera did (exposure or focus).

-- Mike Milton (ArtTech_Explorations@csi.com), March 08, 1999.