Re: 300D as a 'Four Thirds' killer?

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Todd Walker, Aug 20, 2003.

  1. Todd Walker

    Todd Walker Guest

    In article <DfkfgSMzX3Q$>,
    says...
    > Looks to me that the new Canon 300D, amongst other things, is designed
    > to be a 'Four Thirds' killer.
    >
    > Canon has seriously geared up dSLR production, and it looks like a large
    > slice of consumer hunger will be sated before the first Four Thirds
    > camera even reaches the shelves. It's not as if there are compatible
    > lenses sitting gadget bags waiting desperately for a Four Thirds body,
    > as it's a new mount.
    >
    > Canon by name; canon by nature!
    >


    They aren't even in the same class. The 300D is an entry level dSLR; the
    E1 is a pro level camera. The E1 is going to be around $2500 for the
    body alone; speculation is around $1200-1300 for the 300D WITH a lens.
    Apples and oranges...

    --
    ________________________________
    Todd Walker
    http://twalker.d2g.com
    Canon 10D:
    http://twalker.d2g.com/canon10d
    My Digital Photography Weblog:
    http://twalker.d2g.com/dpblog.htm
    _________________________________
    Todd Walker, Aug 20, 2003
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. In article <>,
    Todd Walker <> wrote:

    > They aren't even in the same class. The 300D is an entry level dSLR; the
    > E1 is a pro level camera.


    I fail to see what makes the E1 "pro level" other than marketing. The
    Canon 1D, 1Ds, and Nikon D2H are pro level. The E1 is not in their
    class.

    --
    David Eppstein http://www.ics.uci.edu/~eppstein/
    Univ. of California, Irvine, School of Information & Computer Science
    David Eppstein, Aug 20, 2003
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Todd Walker <> wrote:
    >They aren't even in the same class. The 300D is an entry level dSLR; the
    >E1 is a pro level camera. The E1 is going to be around $2500 for the
    >body alone; speculation is around $1200-1300 for the 300D WITH a lens.
    >Apples and oranges...


    The 4/3rds class isn't going to succeed on the backs of the *huge* pro
    market. Besides, those few thousands are more likely to stick to the full
    size units. No, it needs to be getting hundreds of thousands of units sold
    to exactly the people who are going to buy the 300D.

    --
    Jason O'Rourke www.jor.com
    Jason O'Rourke, Aug 20, 2003
    #3
  4. Todd Walker

    peter Guest

    "Mark B." <> wrote in message
    news:...
    >
    > The E1's smaller sensor, less mp, and pro-level price just says to me

    "poor
    > value". You're right, they aren't in the same class ;-)


    If Olympus put a 8MP sensor or a Foveon sensor in the 4/3 system, then I'd
    say it has a fighting chance. Or, they could drop the price to ~$1000.
    peter, Aug 29, 2003
    #4
  5. Todd Walker

    David Oddie Guest

    On Wed, 20 Aug 2003 20:17:11 -0400, "Mark B."
    <> wrote:

    >The E1's smaller sensor, less mp, and pro-level price just says to me "poor
    >value". You're right, they aren't in the same class ;-)


    5 v 6 mp? Can you tell the difference?

    The 4/3 system is supposed to evolve over time with higher mp counts
    along the line as I am sure Canons CMOS senors will increase in
    resolution eventually.

    The E1 competes with the 10D as it is built to the same (maybe higher)
    standards is a system camera and is not a stripped down cheaper
    camera as is the 300D.

    If the 300D is going to kill anything it may be the pro-sumer cameras
    such as the Minolta A1 and Sony 828 which may be priced close to a
    300D and a 18-55 lens combo.

    I don't even think the Oly E1 is on its radar.

    Dave

    --
    It may be that your sole purpose in life is simply to serve as a
    warning to others.

    Remove the uppercase N O S P A M to reply via email.
    David Oddie, Aug 29, 2003
    #5
  6. Todd Walker

    Alan F Cross Guest

    In message <>, David Oddie
    <> writes
    >On Wed, 20 Aug 2003 20:17:11 -0400, "Mark B."
    ><> wrote:
    >
    >>The E1's smaller sensor, less mp, and pro-level price just says to me "poor
    >>value". You're right, they aren't in the same class ;-)

    >
    >5 v 6 mp? Can you tell the difference?
    >
    >The 4/3 system is supposed to evolve over time with higher mp counts
    >along the line as I am sure Canons CMOS senors will increase in
    >resolution eventually.
    >
    >The E1 competes with the 10D as it is built to the same (maybe higher)
    >standards is a system camera and is not a stripped down cheaper
    >camera as is the 300D.
    >
    >If the 300D is going to kill anything it may be the pro-sumer cameras
    >such as the Minolta A1 and Sony 828 which may be priced close to a
    >300D and a 18-55 lens combo.
    >
    >I don't even think the Oly E1 is on its radar.
    >
    >Dave
    >
    >--
    >It may be that your sole purpose in life is simply to serve as a
    >warning to others.
    >
    >Remove the uppercase N O S P A M to reply via email.



    The real benefit of the 10D is the bigger sensor. The extended ISO range
    with low noise makes this camera particularly attractive - certainly
    clinches it for me.

    The noise issue will improve, but I'll wager that a bigger sensor will
    always beat a smaller one.
    --
    Alan F Cross
    Alan F Cross, Aug 29, 2003
    #6
  7. Todd Walker

    Charlie D Guest

    In article <>,
    wrote:

    > David Eppstein <> wrote in message
    > news:<>...
    > > In article <>,
    > > Todd Walker <> wrote:
    > > > They aren't even in the same class. The 300D is an entry level dSLR; the
    > > > E1 is a pro level camera.

    > >
    > > I fail to see what makes the E1 "pro level"

    >
    > 600mm f/2.8.


    Plus full manual controls.
    I wouldn't buy a 300D over my Oly 5050 since my 5050
    allows me full control over shooting parameters.
    Who cares about interchangeable lenses if the body
    is set up as a dummy's camera.

    --
    Charlie Dilks
    Newark, DE USA
    Charlie D, Aug 30, 2003
    #7
  8. Todd Walker

    Don Coon Guest

    <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > David Eppstein <> wrote in message

    news:<>...
    > > In article <>,
    > > Todd Walker <> wrote:
    > > > They aren't even in the same class. The 300D is an entry level dSLR;

    the
    > > > E1 is a pro level camera.

    > >
    > > I fail to see what makes the E1 "pro level"

    >
    > 600mm f/2.8.


    How does 600mm f/2.8 make a camera "pro level"?

    >
    > http://digitcamera.tripod.com/
    Don Coon, Aug 30, 2003
    #8
  9. Todd Walker

    Guest

    "Don Coon" <coondw_nospam@hotmail_dot_.com> wrote in message news:<on14b.304827$o%2.139041@sccrnsc02>...
    > <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    > > David Eppstein <> wrote in message

    > news:<>...
    > > > In article <>,
    > > > Todd Walker <> wrote:
    > > > > They aren't even in the same class. The 300D is an entry level dSLR;

    > the E1 is a pro level camera.
    > > >
    > > > I fail to see what makes the E1 "pro level"

    > >
    > > 600mm f/2.8.

    >
    > How does 600mm f/2.8 make a camera "pro level"?


    Before E1's 600mm f/2.8, "pro level" ($7000) tele lenses are 600mm f/4
    and 400mm f/2.8.

    http://digitcamera.tripod.com/
    , Aug 30, 2003
    #9
  10. Todd Walker

    Don Coon Guest

    <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > "Don Coon" <coondw_nospam@hotmail_dot_.com> wrote in message

    news:<on14b.304827$o%2.139041@sccrnsc02>...
    > > <> wrote in message
    > > news:...
    > > > David Eppstein <> wrote in message

    > > news:<>...
    > > > > In article <>,
    > > > > Todd Walker <> wrote:
    > > > > > They aren't even in the same class. The 300D is an entry level

    dSLR;
    > > the E1 is a pro level camera.
    > > > >
    > > > > I fail to see what makes the E1 "pro level"
    > > >
    > > > 600mm f/2.8.

    > >
    > > How does 600mm f/2.8 make a camera "pro level"?

    >
    > Before E1's 600mm f/2.8, "pro level" ($7000) tele lenses are 600mm f/4
    > and 400mm f/2.8.


    Hell, I've seen guys do 600mm on junk cameras and I've seen outstanding "pro
    level" work on 50mm or less. Neither 600mm or f/2.8 in no way make a pro,
    IMHO.
    Don Coon, Aug 30, 2003
    #10
  11. There are a few problems here - first the "600mm" lens for the Oly
    E-System is a 300mm f/2.8 lens with an estimated street price of
    $6999.95 (direct from Olympus USA), the Canon 300mm f/2.8 IS has a
    real-world price (B&H) of $3899.95, over $2000 less than the Oly lens.

    The big difference is that with the Oly's small CCD their lens has a
    field of view equal to a 600mm lens, while on a 10D or 300D the 300mm
    lens would act more like a 480mm lens; move up to a 400mm lens on the
    Canon platform for $6499.95 and you're still spending less than the
    Oly lens and have a 640mm equivalent (again with IS)




    On 30 Aug 2003 10:48:24 -0700, wrote:

    >"Don Coon" <coondw_nospam@hotmail_dot_.com> wrote in message news:<on14b.304827$o%2.139041@sccrnsc02>...
    >> <> wrote in message
    >> news:...
    >> > David Eppstein <> wrote in message

    >> news:<>...
    >> > > In article <>,
    >> > > Todd Walker <> wrote:
    >> > > > They aren't even in the same class. The 300D is an entry level dSLR;

    >> the E1 is a pro level camera.
    >> > >
    >> > > I fail to see what makes the E1 "pro level"
    >> >
    >> > 600mm f/2.8.

    >>
    >> How does 600mm f/2.8 make a camera "pro level"?

    >
    >Before E1's 600mm f/2.8, "pro level" ($7000) tele lenses are 600mm f/4
    >and 400mm f/2.8.
    >
    >http://digitcamera.tripod.com/
    Tom Obszanski, Aug 30, 2003
    #11
  12. Todd Walker

    Ken Alverson Guest

    "Charlie D" <> wrote in message
    news:-berlin.de...
    >
    > Plus full manual controls.
    > I wouldn't buy a 300D over my Oly 5050 since my 5050
    > allows me full control over shooting parameters.
    > Who cares about interchangeable lenses if the body
    > is set up as a dummy's camera.


    What shooting parameter do you want control over that the 300D doesn't give
    you and the Oly 5050 does? The 300D has apeture priority, shutter priority,
    and full manual exposure. It also gives you almost an order of magnitude less
    noise compared to the Oly 5050.

    Ken
    Ken Alverson, Aug 30, 2003
    #12
  13. Todd Walker

    Charlie D Guest

    In article <bir0u5$9r8$>,
    "Ken Alverson" <> wrote:

    > What shooting parameter do you want control over that the 300D doesn't give
    > you and the Oly 5050 does? The 300D has apeture priority, shutter priority,
    > and full manual exposure. It also gives you almost an order of magnitude less
    > noise compared to the Oly 5050.


    dpr is down at the moment, but I believe the 300D doesn't have
    spot metering in aperture priority mode.

    --
    Charlie Dilks
    Newark, DE USA
    Charlie D, Aug 30, 2003
    #13
  14. Todd Walker

    Ken Alverson Guest

    "Charlie D" <> wrote in message
    news:-berlin.de...
    > In article <bir0u5$9r8$>,
    > "Ken Alverson" <> wrote:
    >
    > > What shooting parameter do you want control over that the 300D doesn't

    give
    > > you and the Oly 5050 does? The 300D has apeture priority, shutter

    priority,
    > > and full manual exposure. It also gives you almost an order of magnitude

    less
    > > noise compared to the Oly 5050.

    >
    > dpr is down at the moment, but I believe the 300D doesn't have
    > spot metering in aperture priority mode.


    Hmm...that does appear to be the case. I think partial metering is available
    in manual mode though.

    Ken
    Ken Alverson, Aug 30, 2003
    #14
  15. Todd Walker

    Eric Edwards Guest

    On Sat, 30 Aug 2003 19:32:35 GMT, Tom Obszanski <> wrote:
    >There are a few problems here - first the "600mm" lens for the Oly
    >E-System is a 300mm f/2.8 lens with an estimated street price of
    >$6999.95 (direct from Olympus USA), the Canon 300mm f/2.8 IS has a
    >real-world price (B&H) of $3899.95, over $2000 less than the Oly lens.
    >
    >The big difference is that with the Oly's small CCD their lens has a
    >field of view equal to a 600mm lens,


    Sounds just like a 2x teleconverter. Would it not, then, be more
    accurate to call the lens 600mm F5.6?

    --
    Use the From: header. Sending mail to
    or will only result in frustration.
    Eric Edwards, Aug 30, 2003
    #15
  16. Partial metering is available in all of the "creative zone" modes,
    there is no spot metering on the 300D/Digital Rebel (same as the 10D).

    You can download the 300D manual from usa.canon.com and check page 122
    out for all of the details.


    On Sat, 30 Aug 2003 17:05:56 -0400, "Ken Alverson" <>
    wrote:

    >"Charlie D" <> wrote in message
    >news:-berlin.de...
    >> In article <bir0u5$9r8$>,
    >> "Ken Alverson" <> wrote:
    >>
    >> > What shooting parameter do you want control over that the 300D doesn't

    >give
    >> > you and the Oly 5050 does? The 300D has apeture priority, shutter

    >priority,
    >> > and full manual exposure. It also gives you almost an order of magnitude

    >less
    >> > noise compared to the Oly 5050.

    >>
    >> dpr is down at the moment, but I believe the 300D doesn't have
    >> spot metering in aperture priority mode.

    >
    >Hmm...that does appear to be the case. I think partial metering is available
    >in manual mode though.
    >
    >Ken
    >
    Tom Obszanski, Aug 31, 2003
    #16
  17. Todd Walker

    Alan F Cross Guest

    In message <>, Tom Obszanski
    <> writes
    >I don't think so, the lens is a 300mm f/2.8 lens, because of the small
    >size of the CCD the field of view is the equivalent of a 600mm lens -
    >nothing else changes, depth of field is comparable to a 300mm lens,
    >not a 600mm lens..
    >
    >On Sat, 30 Aug 2003 22:33:14 +0000 (UTC), (Eric
    >Edwards) wrote:
    >
    >>On Sat, 30 Aug 2003 19:32:35 GMT, Tom Obszanski <> wrote:
    >>>There are a few problems here - first the "600mm" lens for the Oly
    >>>E-System is a 300mm f/2.8 lens with an estimated street price of
    >>>$6999.95 (direct from Olympus USA), the Canon 300mm f/2.8 IS has a
    >>>real-world price (B&H) of $3899.95, over $2000 less than the Oly lens.
    >>>
    >>>The big difference is that with the Oly's small CCD their lens has a
    >>>field of view equal to a 600mm lens,

    >>
    >>Sounds just like a 2x teleconverter. Would it not, then, be more
    >>accurate to call the lens 600mm F5.6?

    >



    Sorry, but, although the lens is actually a 300mm, it will appear to
    have the reduced DoF of a 600mm. I've been through this in another
    thread, but essentially, DoF is based on Circle of Confusion (CoC),
    which is a notion based on how blurred (ie how far away from spot-on
    focus) an object can be and still look sharp on the print. This assumes
    (approximately) that you will view a full-frame print at the same
    distance as its diagonal dimension.

    If you're working with a sensor that is half the linear dimensions of a
    35mm frame, you will be enlarging the image twice as much to get to this
    notional print size. Therefore your CoC has to be half the diameter,
    therefore the DoF is half the depth, and like that of a 600mm lens.

    If you're working on a small crop of the image, and enlarging that to
    normal print size, your CoC and DoF get even smaller.

    But it's still a 300mm f/2.8 lens ...! You don't get something for
    nothing here.
    --
    Alan F Cross
    Alan F Cross, Aug 31, 2003
    #17
  18. Todd Walker

    Bryan Olson Guest

    wrote:

    > David Eppstein wrote:
    >>I fail to see what makes the E1 "pro level"

    >
    > 600mm f/2.8.


    The longest-focus lens Olympus has announced is actually 300mm.
    It sometimes gets mis-labeled as 600mm because it produces the
    same horizontal view angle on the 4/3 sensor that a 600mm lens
    produces on a 35mm (full) frame.


    --
    --Bryan
    firstname dot lastname at domain of the Association for Computing Machinery
    Bryan Olson, Aug 31, 2003
    #18
  19. Todd Walker

    Eric Edwards Guest

    On Sun, 31 Aug 2003 00:27:49 GMT, Tom Obszanski <> wrote:
    >I don't think so, the lens is a 300mm f/2.8 lens, because of the small
    >size of the CCD the field of view is the equivalent of a 600mm lens -
    >nothing else changes, depth of field is comparable to a 300mm lens,
    >not a 600mm lens..


    I'll leave the depth of field perspective to others. I look at it from
    a light gathering perspective.

    You've doubled the effective focal length but the aperture is the same.
    That's two stops, or F5.6

    A more graphic way to look at it: The lens appears as 600mm because the
    sensor's dimensions are 1/2 those of a 35mm frame. Half the dimensions
    translates to 1/4 the area of a 35mm frame. But that also means
    that it collects only 1/4 of the light that would fall on a full 35mm
    frame. 1/4 of the light means a loss of 2 stops, or F5.6.

    --
    Use the From: header. Sending mail to
    or will only result in frustration.
    Eric Edwards, Sep 3, 2003
    #19
  20. Todd Walker

    Nod Guest

    Not so, I think. the definition of an f stop is "The ratio of the focal
    length of a lens or lens system to the effective diameter of its aperture".
    The lens is still a 300mm, it hasn't mysteriously changed it's optics to
    become a 600mm, it's just that the sensor covers less of the field than a
    film frame. Also, it is easy to imagine that, if you trimmed off the sides
    of the film to the size of the CCD, you wouldn't get less light on the image
    area. So you wouldn't lose f stops.

    What also interests me, that I've started to think about since reading this
    post is that I think the perspective of that central area is that of a
    300mm, not the foreshortening that you would get with a 600mm. Now it starts
    to make sense, that the image through my 10D doesn't look quite the same as
    my old 35mm SLR.

    Incidentally, I wasn't aware that it was a 2X ratio with the 300D, is that
    right? not the 1.6 that you get with a 10D? I thought they were the same
    CCD.

    Cheers
    Andrew.

    > A more graphic way to look at it: The lens appears as 600mm because the
    > sensor's dimensions are 1/2 those of a 35mm frame. Half the dimensions
    > translates to 1/4 the area of a 35mm frame. But that also means
    > that it collects only 1/4 of the light that would fall on a full 35mm
    > frame. 1/4 of the light means a loss of 2 stops, or F5.6.
    >
    > --
    > Use the From: header. Sending mail to
    > or will only result in frustration.
    Nod, Sep 3, 2003
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Paul D. Sullivan

    Is the Four-Thirds project the answer for DSLR's?

    Paul D. Sullivan, Aug 19, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    13
    Views:
    643
    Mike Engles
    Aug 21, 2003
  2. Alan Browne

    Re: 300D as a 'Four Thirds' killer?

    Alan Browne, Aug 20, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    308
    Lionel
    Aug 21, 2003
  3. Bernhard Mayer

    Re: 300D as a 'Four Thirds' killer?

    Bernhard Mayer, Aug 21, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    311
    Jim Townsend
    Aug 29, 2003
  4. George Preddy

    Sigma Four Thirds 20D-Killer rumor

    George Preddy, May 19, 2005, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    490
    Views:
    4,985
    Darrell
    Jun 5, 2005
  5. Bruce
    Replies:
    31
    Views:
    1,569
    John Turco
    Sep 25, 2010
Loading...

Share This Page