new canon product

greenspun.com : LUSENET : Canon EOS FAQ forum : One Thread

could anyone give some infos about and commet on EOS 3000N and D3 SLRs? thanks

-- legnum (legnum212@email.com), August 28, 2001

Answers

Try this, at least for the D3:

http://eosseries.ifrance.com/eosseries/lenscanon/news_en.htm

-- peter bg (pbg333@hotmail.com), August 29, 2001.


Legnum,

The D3 is rumored to be the low cost replacement to the digital EOS D30. Frankly, I can't imagine they'd replace the camera. If they could make the same camera for less, they'd just reduce the price. I imagine that a lower cost digital EOS SLR will have fewer features or lower build quality. Canon is also rumored to be soon releasing a pro model digital EOS SLR that has at least 6 MegaPixels (at a rumored twice the cost of the D30). I could easily see Canon having a three tiered digital SLR lineup - entry, advanced amateur & pro.

The EOS 3000N appears to be an even more simplified entry level 35mm SLR camera. It's features put it below the EOS 300/Rebel 2000. The 3000N has 3 focus points instead of the 300's 7 (the 3000 also appears to have 7 AF points, and appears very similar to the EOS 300), no depth of field preview, worse low light AF focusing ability (3000N 2 EV & 3000 1.5 EV vs EOS 300 1 EV). Metering: 3000 6 zone evaluative or 9.5% Central partial metering (apparently different from Center-weighted averaging), 3000N 6 zone eval metering, 9.5% Partial & Center-weighted averaging (the EOS 300 has 35 zone eval). I didn't take the time to look for other differences, but I don't think the 3000 & 3000N have automatic exposure bracketing.

The above 35mm camera information courtesy of Canon Australia: http://www.canon.com.au/products/cameras/slr_cameras.html

-- Hung James Wasson (HJWasson@aol.com), August 30, 2001.


Quick addendum: The Canon Australia website clearly states that the EOS 3000N is the replacement to the 3000 (I should have realized sooner, my appologies)! It does seem odd that the N seems to backwards in some areas (such as 3 point AF instead of 7).

-- Hung James Wasson (HJWasson@aol.com), August 30, 2001.

Umm wouldn't that make th 3000N basically a Rebel G?

-- Jake E. (photodude@nowhere.net), September 02, 2001.

"Umm wouldn't that make th 3000N basically a Rebel G?" - No. It's not that good.

-- Jim Strutz (j.strutz@gci.net), September 05, 2001.


I agree. Unless the 3000 or 3000N is drastically less expensive, I'd suggest going with the 300.

-- Hung James Wasson (HJWasson@aol.com), September 06, 2001.

Moderation questions? read the FAQ