Which camera would you recommend?

[0x21]

Originally Posted by AsheAshe

Its not a good camera either. Having to use another button in order to alter aperture rather than a dedicated control? horrible high iso noise? slow buffer? shitty plasticy build quality? it was my first DSLR but I was pretty glad to see the back of it when I replaced it with a 20D

as for prices, that was going by ebay which is a fairly accurate price guide. That, and youd probably not want a DSLR thats probably had close to its shutter-life in actuations. pissing money away really

Yes its pretty poor compared to the 20,30,5,1D's (all of which cost far more) but its still a sound camera and far better than anything else of the time - I haven't used any bridge cameras since the Fuji 7000 and its got nothing on the 300D, I don't know how it'd compare to the newer bridge cameras, but I can't see them being better all round than the 300D

The shutter life will be determined by how its been kept; most people don't shoot at the rate we do, so there will be a lot of 300D's out there which haven't been that well used (even if they must be...3 years old now?).

Slow buffer - its fast enough for most things (not including weddings and high speed sports stuff), and mine managed to do me fine when I worked for the press.

Shitty plasticy build quality - its not that bad, my press one put up with a lot of abuse with only minor superficial scratching, so its not as bulletproof is the alloy ones but its still far from fragile.


Can you think of a better option for that budget?

[AsheAshe]

Just because yours put up with abuse, doesnt mean its not a shitty plasticy build. yes it is that bad. i dont know of any other DSLR that feels so toy-like.

S6500 for £155.48 You lose the lens changeability of a true SLR, but with a budget like £200 its not like theyre going to be buying a 400L F2.8 any time soon. 100 - 3200 ISO, large 2.5" LCD, records video at 60FPS, live preview as its not a mirror based system, shoots in RAW format, in camera image stabilisation and the lens covers a range of 38-300mm. Compare that to a possibly 3 year 300D, or possibly 60K actuations (theres no way to tell as you can reset the counter) body only for £200 with no lens (or a kit 18-55).

Where does it fall down vs the 300D except in 0.3FPS slower shooting speed and lenses which, once again, are out of budget?

Im sure as someone that does an incredible amount of photography i would take the 300D because of the glass i can put in it and the way i would use it, but for the average person or new person to photography id have hard time suggesting a used 1-3 year old camera warrantyless and with outdated features over a complete camera kit including lens and better features for £50 less

[2plus2isfive]

Are you not just saying all this in hindsight though? I don't know about the 300D, but looking back on my Pentax *ist DS, yeah, it's a piece of shit compared to my 30D. At the time it was fantastic though, and was a perfect entry into DSLRs. I'm sure many people feel the same about the 300D (although to be fair i've never used one so yeah, they could just be absolutely terrible).

[AsheAshe]

Originally Posted by 2plus2isfive

Are you not just saying all this in hindsight though? I don't know about the 300D, but looking back on my Pentax *ist DS, yeah, it's a piece of shit compared to my 30D. At the time it was fantastic though, and was a perfect entry into DSLRs. I'm sure many people feel the same about the 300D (although to be fair i've never used one so yeah, they could just be absolutely terrible).

the 300D is not a terrible camera, but it does not stand up to that fuji spec wise especially when you consider youve got lenses to buy on top. he/she said they are completely new to photography so buying an ageing out of warranty DSLR with no idea of how many actuations its been through isnt so hot an idea as buying a P&S that outspecs it, still allows raw shooting, also does video and will come with full warranty and be brand new in box

[RaverKeefus]

I would personally save up £350-400 and get a Canon 400D off Ebay :-) You would never regret it

[Potatojunkie]

You'd regret getting it off eBay when you can pick one up new for that price …

[0x21]

Originally Posted by AsheAshe

Just because yours put up with abuse, doesnt mean its not a shitty plasticy build. yes it is that bad. i dont know of any other DSLR that feels so toy-like.

It may be a plastic build, but that doesnt make it shitty, ok so you can't throw it off walls or anything, but you wouldn't want to do that anyway, for entry level stuff its fine.

Where does it fall down vs the 300D except in 0.3FPS slower shooting speed and lenses which, once again, are out of budget?

Who says they need to go and buy lenses straight away? if they want to do something new, with the SLR they have the option of picking up bits and pieces here and there, and upgrading as they go along, whilst maintaining a system which will allow them to upgrade to a better body later and keep all the kit, upgrading a crossover camera would mean ditching the whole thing and buying a new one, and the older one isn't going to retain value as well as the SLR.

S6500 for £155.48 You lose the lens changeability of a true SLR, but with a budget like £200 its not like theyre going to be buying a 400L F2.8 any time soon. 100 - 3200 ISO, large 2.5" LCD, records video at 60FPS, live preview as its not a mirror based system, shoots in RAW format, in camera image stabilisation and the lens covers a range of 38-300mm. Compare that to a possibly 3 year 300D, or possibly 60K actuations (theres no way to tell as you can reset the counter) body only for £200 with no lens (or a kit 18-55).

How fast does it turn on? how fast is the zoom/autofocus? does it have manual focus? how does it work?

I've no idea what crossover cameras are like these days, the last one I looked at was the S602, which seemed amazing until compared to the 300D, which was leagues ahead of it, I'm sure it was also better than the S5000 that I've had a brief play of, but I've no idea how the later ones compare so can't really comment. Unless the systems changed lately the Fuji won't be as flexible as the Canon (since you had to access everything through menus?)

However, horses for courses, the 300/350/10/20D are still value for DSLRs, even if they are getting on a bit.

However II, we're not actually getting anywhere now.

[djtoast]

Originally Posted by 0x21

I've no idea what crossover cameras are like these days, the last one I looked at was the S602, which seemed amazing until compared to the 300D, which was leagues ahead of it,

One of my pals is a fantastic photographer but only recently got his first digital camera (he mostly uses a Nikon F4)... he looked at a few SLRs but eventually got one of the Sony pro-sumer cameras. I thought someone at his level would find it frustrating based on my experiences with my S602 which takes fantastic pictures but takes forever to switch on, doesn't have a great high ISO facility, etc etc.

But in the intervening years the gap seems to have closed: the sony has a phenomenal lens (12x optical zoom, good apertures throughout), the metering and focus systems are excellent... i couldn't fault it in any way, and when I saw his pictures - mama mia they're good.

there may well be some overlap in quality, features etc between SLR and non-SLR digital cameras, despite how we're used to thinking. i suppose as long as those nuts Leica rangefinder cameras that cost thousands of pounds (despite having no motors, no displays, practically no flash ability...) still exist we have to accept that SLRs don't fit every situation.