Hi, I am back to photography after very long time and planning to buy a Camera. I selected two makes, Canon EOS 300 & Minolta Dynax 5. But when I checked in a shop I found Canon comes with plastic mount and minolta is with Metal mount. I am really confused about this matter.

Also I heard that the standard lens comes with these cameras are not good quality stuff.

Please can anyone advice me on this matter and a better place to buy it in UK.

Thanks Ramesh

-- K Ramesh (rameshk_k@hotmail.com), March 20, 2002

Answers

Honestly, the plastic mount isn't an issue. It's plenty durable for normal use. Maybe it would be a problem with the monster lenses (supertelephotos or the 70-200/2.8), but if you are using those, then I'd rethink your camera selection. I used the Rebel G and the Rebel 2000 (EOS 500 and 300, I think) for years at a small newspaper and I never had a problem. Also, I'm partial to Canon stuff because I like the flexibility and the feel, so I'd say go with the EOS 300 because of the system. Lots of lenses, flashes, etc. But go with what feels comfortable.

-- Tim Fisher (tfisher@beachin.net), March 20, 2002.

I have a Rebel 2000 (same as the EOS 300) and I occasionally use it with a 70-200/2.8L and a 400/5.6L. I've had no problems associated with the mount. It's not an issue.

In choosing a camera, look at the system if you plan on expanding later on. If you only want a camera for occasional snapshots or for family vacations, any entry level camera and kit lens is fine. If you expect to get more involved, the system of cameras, lenses and accessories are more important. For a "system" the Canon EOS 300 would be the choice. If you only want a "casual" camera, the Dynax 5 is not only a good choice but has better overall features than any competing entry level camera.

-- Lee (Leemarthakiri@sport.rr.com), March 20, 2002.

I agree with the other posters. You should really look at the entire camera system that you will be buying into. But if all you are interested in is choice between these two cameras, the Minolta 5 is the best buy out there in this price range. However, I'd still recommend the Canon EOS 300 if you think that you might at all be interested a future expansion of your photographic hobby.

-- Jim Strutz (j.strutz@gci.net), March 20, 2002.

If you look closely at Maxxum 5 lens mount, it is actually metal flanges mounted on plastic so it really isn't any tougher than the Rebel 2000's mount. In any regard, plastic mounts are plenty durable. Any force severe enough to break the plastic mount will most likely destroy the entire camera anyway. Same with the metal flanges on the Maxxum 5.

I have an old Rebel X which came before the Rebel G which came before the Rebel 2000. The Rebel X was my first EOS and had endured years of abuse. The Rebel X is entirely plastic, lens mount and all. It still works like a champ after years of abuse. I haven't had any problems with the plastic mount. I can mount it on my big 100-400L IS and shoot with absolutely no problems and with no concerns about the reliability of the lens mount. Lenses that large should be held in such a manner so that the lens supports the camera, not the camera entirely supporting the lens. That's why large lenses have their own tripod mounts.

Get the Canon for the quiet and fast autofocus of Canon UltraSonic Motor (USM) lenses as well as the opportunity to use any of Canon's excellent Image Stabilizer (IS) lenses. Skip the 28-90 kit lens and move up to the Canon 28-105 or 50/1.8 if you can. The 28-105 has ring-USM, Canon's standard lens motor that allows full-time manual and is even quieter than the USM on the 28-90. It is more expensive but you get better build quality, better optics and greater zoom range. The 50/1.8 looks and feels cheap but it is a very sharp performer and it is very inexpensive.

-- Peter Phan (pphan01@hotmail.com), March 21, 2002.

Thank you very much to all who responded to my Question. I was surprised by your quick responses.

I also prefer to go for Canon. Earlier I was using a Canon AE-1 Program (Manual) camera for more than 12 years.

Thanks again for your advise.

Ramesh

-- K Ramesh (rameshk_k@hotmail.com), March 21, 2002.