I dont know if this question is leagal, but i will ask anyway 30-12-01

I have just seen that the canon eos 300 is on sale, and i would very much like to have a good camera to a fair prize. I am 14 years old, and hooked on the idea of taking fotografies (sorry if not spelled corectly) so i would like to hear from some pros, why i should by the camera (what goog feauteres it has etc.) and would you rather buy the nikon f 65 ( and if so, then why)?

I'm from Denmark, and I'm sorry if some words are spelled wrong...

Sorry if this is not a question that you will answer... but I really hope so.

Anyway, you will hear from me again when/if i get the camera ( it seems as a good forum.

Thanks Martin Denmark

-- Martin Feht Therkildsen (mourden@hotmail.com), December 29, 2001

Answers

Hey Martin. Forget about the spelling. I've been speaking English all my life and I still can't write it. Thank God for spell checkers. Now if I could just remember to use it.

The EOS 300 and the Nikon F65 are both good cameras. You'd probably be happy with either one, and both have a very complete system of lenses and flash units available, both from the original manufacturer and from third party vendors like Metz, Sigma, Sunpak, Tokina, Tamron, etc. The usual advice is to go to a camera store and handle them both and see which one feels better to you. Which one seems easier to operate, etc. Then buy the Canon anyway. Oops, sorry, strike that last comment.

Keep in mind that you are not just buying a camera body but you are buying into a camera system. You may never buy another piece of it but you may find yourself buying a lot more of it than you think right now. So you do need to consider what technology and features each system makes available to the average user, not just the high priced stuff for the pros.

Some of the major advantages of Canon's system are: 1) UltraSonic Motors (USM) for focusing. They are faster and quieter and make Full Time Manual (FTM) focusing available. Nikon has the same thing, but only for its most expensive lenses. 2) Image Stabilization is offered in some lenses to counteract camera vibration from hand holding, allowing slower shutter speeds without a tripod. Again Nikon has this available but in only one quite expensive lens. 3) Flash technology is about even as far as metering accuracy (Nikon probably taking a slight lead here), but Canon's high tech system (E- TTL) operates in more situations and is more feature laden. (It offers; better high speed sync with auto exposure, Flash Exposure Lock (FEC), wireless multi-flash with E-TTL, etc.) Nikon's very good 3D flash system only works if the flash head is pointed straight ahead. Otherwise it's straight TTL.

All this and more point to a design philosophy difference between Nikon and Canon. Simply put, Canon puts more high technology available in low and mid priced cameras, lenses and flashes. Nikon reserves their high tech stuff for their high-end equipment. If you are going to invest big money into a camera system, you should consider Nikon, but if your funds are more limited, you will get more for the same money from the Canon system.

One of the best reasons to buy a Nikon camera is to use some of the older non-autofocusing lenses from Nikon's past. This can save some money and allow you to get good, affordable lenses to use in manual focusing mode. The problem with the F65 (as well as the F80) is that the camera won't meter with the old style Nikon lenses. So that one good reason is gone unless you buy a much more expensive Nikon camera body.

Well, I've given you some things to think about anyway. If you post this question in a Nikon forum you will get a different perspective. Just remember, I’m right, they’re wrong. :~))

-- Jim Strutz (j.strutz@gci.net), December 30, 2001.

Martin,

In addition to the excellent advice that Jim provided there is 1 additional thing to consider in the Canon vs Nikon (or Nikon vs Canon) decision.

While virtually all Nikon lenses are physically compatible with all Nikon bodies a number of them will loose some functionality depending on which body they are mounted on - while all Canon EF lenses are fully compatible with all Canon EOS bodies.

As as example, the Nikon 80-400 VR lens looses it 'VR' functionality on all except the newest Nikon bodies. The Canon IS series of lenses retain the 'IS' function on all EOS bodies.

This is not intended as 'Nikon bashing' but just to point out a difference between the 2 systems that needs to be considered before making a commitment.

Dick

-- Dick Tope (RTope@yahoo.com), December 30, 2001.

I think you'd do very well to start with an EOS 300. I started off with an EOS 1000FN (Rebel IIS), which is a distant predecessor to the EOS 300. People bemoan the plastic contruction, but I dropped mine a couple of times (I got the camera when I was 10....maybe not always as careful with it as I should have been...), but rather than breaking, it just bounced.

I didn't really have the choice between Nikon and Canon, because my parents shoot Canon, and since, at the time, I could not afford big lenses, it made sense to be able to use theirs. However, it's not a decision I feel was wrong, because I now have an IS lens, and all my lenses are Ring-USM, which is something I would not go without, and I certainly can not afford Nikon's equivalent (AF-S) (Except perhaps I might have been able to get an AF-S 300 F4, rather than my 300 F4L IS, but I'd still loose IS).

I'd say go for it, and if you can get it at a good sale price, even better.

-- Isaac Sibson (isibson@hotmail.com), December 30, 2001.

Hi Martin

Go for Canon EOS 300. It is a good camera for starting. I have the same. Dont worry about the plastic body, nothing happens unless untill you play foot ball with it. It has a number of good features. But one thing. Do not go and buy that advertised kit with Canon 28- 80mm lens. That is the mistake every one do for the first time. Even I did it. I had this lens first. This is a low priced and low quality lens that Canon manufacture. Recently I tradeoff this lens and got Canon EOS 50mm/1.8 and Canon 28-105mm lenses. Both of these lenses are good. It gives good sharpness and the 28-105 is with USM for autofocusing which is faster than any regular motors. I suggest you to spend little more and get Canon EOS300 body with these lenses. If you cannot afford to get both of these lenses then go get one. Preference is left to you. If you go for 50mm then you loose other focal lengths, but it is good to have it in the beginning as it helps you to learn composing and other basic things. 28-105 is not that sharp as 50mm but you get the advantage of 28-105 focal lengths. 50mm costs you 80 US $ and 28-105 costs you 250 US $.

Good Luck! Go get EOS 300/50mm-1.8 or 28-105mm. Dont get 28-80mm or 28-90mm lenses at any cost. This suggestion comes from an experienced person. You can take my word.

George

-- George Mathew (george_mathew2k@yahoo.com), December 31, 2001.