3 reasons NOT to buy the 300D

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by A bit more than, Aug 21, 2003.

  1. (1) Plastic body. Drop it and you could be in big trouble.

    (2) USB 1.1, v2 has been around for a while now.

    (3) Uses proprietary batteries rather than AA's.
     
    A bit more than, Aug 21, 2003
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. A bit more than

    Chris Brown Guest

    This is an advantage - in using the high capacity Lithium-Ion batteries that
    come from Canon's camcorder range, you can actually use power-thirsty
    image-stabilised lenses and still take a couple of hundred photos before the
    battery goes flat.

    ....and it recharges in 45 minutes.
     
    Chris Brown, Aug 21, 2003
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. A bit more than

    John M Guest

    That's the smallest "con" list I've ever seen :) so I guess you're buying
    one then?
     
    John M, Aug 21, 2003
    #3
  4. A bit more than

    FOR7b Guest

    (1) Plastic body. Drop it and you could be in big trouble.
    1) Irrelevant since plastic is more than durable enough. Proven time and time
    again. Sure plastic can crack but plastic can often absorb an impact and bounce
    back without damage. Metal deforms when impacted and can also crack. The whole
    plastic argument is silly.

    2) Not enough to deter most from buying it.

    3) Personal preference.

    Also none of your reasons have anything to do with the cameras ability to take
    great pics and shouldn't that be the main reason for buying such a camera?


     
    FOR7b, Aug 21, 2003
    #4
  5. (1) Plastic body. Drop it and you could be in big trouble.

    Probably right.
    USB is for losers anyway. Every transfer a 6.3 megapixel image via
    USB? Takes forever.
    Uses the 511. I wouldn't call that proprietary.
     
    Randall Ainsworth, Aug 21, 2003
    #5
  6. A bit more than

    Don Coon Guest

    Not sure I agree on this one. Wife has a Rebel 2000 and it's a toy compared
    to the 10D. The 10D's body is easily worth $200 or $300 extra, IMHO. (PS:
    we have both the Rebel and the 10D so we can compare them directly.)

    Agree with the rest of your post, however.
     
    Don Coon, Aug 21, 2003
    #6
  7. (2) USB 1.1, v2 has been around for a while now.
    But USB 2.0 isn't for 'losers' as it is 480mbps. That is the point the OP
    was making.

    G
     
    Gerard McGovern, Aug 21, 2003
    #7
  8. If your computer and card reader support USB2.0, USB 1.1 on 300D doesn't
    matter. And USB 2.0 is quite fast (480Mbps?).

    Bye, Dragan

    --
    Dragan Cvetkovic,

    To be or not to be is true. G. Boole No it isn't. L. E. J. Brouwer

    !!! Sender/From address is bogus. Use reply-to one !!!
     
    Dragan Cvetkovic, Aug 21, 2003
    #8
  9. A bit more than

    JohnO Guest

    What a bunch of crap!

    "A bit more than" wrote ...
    You can say the same thing about ANY electronic devise ... so don't buy
    anything you might ever drop???
    Or, better yet ... buy a card reader!
    As others have said ... this is an advantage to many
     
    JohnO, Aug 21, 2003
    #9
  10. A bit more than

    Tony Spadaro Guest

    At least two of your "reasons" are downright stupid.
    The polycarbonate bodies of the Rebel series are, in fact better than
    the metal bodies in terms of strength, resistance to wear and reliability.
    AAs take up room -- and add weight

    I won't comment about the USB stuff as I know nothing of USB v2 --- But I
    have the feeling that since the downloading of files is a rather quick
    action the version of USB will be pretty unimportant.


    You don't have to buy the new Rebel digital -- but if you want to play
    troll on the subject, I suggest you do some studying - you won't look quite
    so foolish.

    --
    http://www.chapelhillnoir.com
    home of The Camera-ist's Manifesto
    The Improved Links Pages are at
    http://www.chapelhillnoir.com/links/mlinks00.html
    New email - Contact on the Menyou page.
     
    Tony Spadaro, Aug 21, 2003
    #10
  11. A bit more than

    Paul H. Guest

    The metals used in digital cameras frames are generally magnesium and
    aluminum, both of which fracture very easily on impact. Besides, if you
    drop the camera in the field you'll likely ruin your expensive lens in any
    case, whether the camera is made from plastic or not.
    Irrelevant. Most serious digital photographers in my acquaintance use
    memory card readers and do not rely on their camera's USB port. Besides,
    USB 1.1 works, it's stable (though slower), so who cares if it's not "new."
    I would consider this a problem ONLY if the battery were exclusive to the
    particular camera, but that's not the case with the BP-511/512 used by the
    300D--several camcorder models also use this battery, guaranteeing its
    widespead availability. Besides, at least _two_ other companies, Lenmar and
    VidPro Co. manufacture compatible batteries.

    Now I use AA NiMH batteries in my cameras and I've used cameras equipped
    with lithium-ion batteries and, quite frankly, I prefer the NiMH batteries
    for a number of reasons (though I know some will disagree with me!).
    However--and it's a BIG however--if the 300D takes excellent pictures, I
    would NOT let the battery issue dissuade me from buying the camera. To
    paraphrase Shakespeare, the picture's the thing, after all.
     
    Paul H., Aug 21, 2003
    #11
  12. A bit more than

    Tony Spadaro Guest

    My wife's "toy" Rebel, bought in 1991 has taken more than 500 rolls of film
    and been on the recieving end of a few bad crashes - it still looks and
    operates as if new. I never owned a metal body that was anywhere near so
    durable.

    --
    http://www.chapelhillnoir.com
    home of The Camera-ist's Manifesto
    The Improved Links Pages are at
    http://www.chapelhillnoir.com/links/mlinks00.html
    New email - Contact on the Menyou page.
     
    Tony Spadaro, Aug 21, 2003
    #12
  13. A bit more than

    Si Guest

    No, but only 'losers' transfer from camera to 'puter. Card reader to
    computer is far more sensible.

    As for the battery issue - LOL.

    I'm a pro user and have never had a problem with the 511 running low on me,
    despite my high shooting rate.

    But then again, as a pro user, I'd never choose a 300D.

    Si.
     
    Si, Aug 21, 2003
    #13
  14. But USB 2.0 isn't for 'losers' as it is 480mbps. That is the point the OP
    I'll still take Firewire over any USB any day.
     
    Randall Ainsworth, Aug 21, 2003
    #14
  15. A bit more than

    Tony Spadaro Guest

    Tony Spadaro, Aug 21, 2003
    #15
  16. But USB 2.0 isn't for 'losers' as it is 480mbps. That is the point the
    OP
    So would I. But I wouldn't write USB 2.0 off either.

    G
     
    Gerard McGovern, Aug 21, 2003
    #16
  17. Given the wider availability of USB (total, versus far less for Firewire),
    and its ability to drop down to 1.1 speeds, I'd always want USB, but
    take the second one if I could have it too.
     
    Jason O'Rourke, Aug 21, 2003
    #17
  18. As like as not, a plastic body will bounce when a metal one will be
    dinged and bent. A Leica M-3 I owned got a whole corner bashed in in
    a short fall once, and you don't get much more metal than that!
    So what? Why would I ever connect the camera directly to the
    computer?
    That's a definite problem, of course. Seems to be endemic these
    days.
     
    David Dyer-Bennet, Aug 21, 2003
    #18
  19. A bit more than

    Dana Laffit Guest

    (1) Plastic body.

    That is enough reason not to buy it, and the only reason you gave that
    makes sense.
    I don't have it on my computer. Makes more sense to use a version
    that will work on all computers, not just the latest models. Thank
    god the software sold for my new camera still works on Win95 and Win98
    computers or it would be useless to me.
    So do MOST cameras.
     
    Dana Laffit, Aug 21, 2003
    #19
  20. A bit more than

    Dana Laffit Guest

    1) Irrelevant since plastic is more than durable enough. Proven time and time
    I don't drop my cameras, so that part of the argument is not my concern as much as
    I am not going to spend $1000 or more for a piece of plastic, for that price I
    should get something of quality.

    I could understand and might consider the plastic body if this camera were to sell
    for under $200.
     
    Dana Laffit, Aug 21, 2003
    #20
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

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

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.