Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

canon 300D, same as DS6041 model?

Last response: in Digital Camera
Share
Anonymous
August 24, 2005 12:55:42 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

I have a chance to get a Canon DSLR, model DS6041.

Is this the same as the Canon 300D?

If so, I've read that some "patches" are required to bring this
particular camera up to snuff. ;) 

Any advice, in fact ALL advice, is much appreciated.

I believe the 300D/DS6041 came out in Aug 2003.
Anonymous
August 24, 2005 3:02:48 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On 24 Aug 2005 08:55:42 -0700, rufus@prodigy.net wrote:

>I have a chance to get a Canon DSLR, model DS6041.
>
>Is this the same as the Canon 300D?
>
>If so, I've read that some "patches" are required to bring this
>particular camera up to snuff. ;) 
>
>Any advice, in fact ALL advice, is much appreciated.
>
>I believe the 300D/DS6041 came out in Aug 2003.

It's a 10D.

just google "Canon DS6041"
******************************************************

"I have been a witness, and these pictures are
my testimony. The events I have recorded should
not be forgotten and must not be repeated."

-James Nachtwey-
http://www.jamesnachtwey.com/
Anonymous
August 24, 2005 5:37:13 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"John A. Stovall" wrote...
>
> It's a 10D.
>
> just google "Canon DS6041"
> ******************************************************

That's an older model than the Rebel 300D, Ruthus. A better camera, just
older. Proceed with caution. You may want to consider just getting a new
Rebel 300D since the price on that model has dropped considerably since the
350D/XT came out. Or just spurg and get the 350D/XT and be happy with a very
impressive piece of work (almost as good as the 20D which is the replacement
for the 10D)

Take care,
Linda
Related resources
Anonymous
August 24, 2005 5:45:42 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

also the 10D cannot take the newer EF-S Canon lenses. The Rebel, Rebel XT
and 20D can. Most new Canon lenses will likely be EF-S.

Take care,
Linda

"Linda Nieuwenstein" <buzzball@REMOVETHIS-allstream.net> wrote in message
news:Ym1Pe.61$hW.43@tor-nn1...
>
> "John A. Stovall" wrote...
>>
>> It's a 10D.
>>
>> just google "Canon DS6041"
>> ******************************************************
>
> That's an older model than the Rebel 300D, Ruthus. A better camera, just
> older. Proceed with caution. You may want to consider just getting a new
> Rebel 300D since the price on that model has dropped considerably since
> the 350D/XT came out. Or just spurg and get the 350D/XT and be happy with
> a very impressive piece of work (almost as good as the 20D which is the
> replacement for the 10D)
>
> Take care,
> Linda
>
>
Anonymous
August 24, 2005 5:45:43 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

However, it looks like the new Canon 5D will not take EF-S
Marcel

"Linda Nieuwenstein" <buzzball@REMOVETHIS-allstream.net> wrote in message
news:Uu1Pe.62$hW.24@tor-nn1...
> also the 10D cannot take the newer EF-S Canon lenses. The Rebel, Rebel XT
> and 20D can. Most new Canon lenses will likely be EF-S.
>
> Take care,
> Linda
>
> "Linda Nieuwenstein" <buzzball@REMOVETHIS-allstream.net> wrote in message
> news:Ym1Pe.61$hW.43@tor-nn1...
> >
> > "John A. Stovall" wrote...
> >>
> >> It's a 10D.
> >>
> >> just google "Canon DS6041"
> >> ******************************************************
> >
> > That's an older model than the Rebel 300D, Ruthus. A better camera, just
> > older. Proceed with caution. You may want to consider just getting a new
> > Rebel 300D since the price on that model has dropped considerably since
> > the 350D/XT came out. Or just spurg and get the 350D/XT and be happy
with
> > a very impressive piece of work (almost as good as the 20D which is the
> > replacement for the 10D)
> >
> > Take care,
> > Linda
> >
> >
>
>
Anonymous
August 24, 2005 5:45:44 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On Wed, 24 Aug 2005 13:03:09 -0400, "Celcius" <cosmar@rogers.com>
wrote:

>However, it looks like the new Canon 5D will not take EF-S
>Marcel

Of course it won't, why should a FF sensor take a lens made for the
1.6 crop sensor? Although I own a 20D (at least until Oct.) I've
never bought any EF-S lenses because they wouldn't work on FF and I
knew that was the direction I would be going.


******************************************************

"I have been a witness, and these pictures are
my testimony. The events I have recorded should
not be forgotten and must not be repeated."

-James Nachtwey-
http://www.jamesnachtwey.com/
Anonymous
August 24, 2005 6:46:37 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

That's a whole different class of dSLR from Canon. None of the professional
level dSLRs [Mark series or 5D) include the ability to use EF-S lenses. The
EF-S lens is targetted toward the entry level/intermediate, consumer
affordable, bodies (300D, 350D/XT, 20D). Those customers are not likely
going to be buying too many lenses at 1000-12,000+ a pop like the pro
consumers would (L glass)

Take care,
Linda

"Celcius" <cosmar@rogers.com> wrote in message
news:Tq2dnQe7SvbTNZHeRVn-ug@rogers.com...
> However, it looks like the new Canon 5D will not take EF-S
> Marcel
>
> "Linda Nieuwenstein" <buzzball@REMOVETHIS-allstream.net> wrote in message
> news:Uu1Pe.62$hW.24@tor-nn1...
>> also the 10D cannot take the newer EF-S Canon lenses. The Rebel, Rebel XT
>> and 20D can. Most new Canon lenses will likely be EF-S.
>>
>> Take care,
>> Linda
>>
>> "Linda Nieuwenstein" <buzzball@REMOVETHIS-allstream.net> wrote in message
>> news:Ym1Pe.61$hW.43@tor-nn1...
>> >
>> > "John A. Stovall" wrote...
>> >>
>> >> It's a 10D.
>> >>
>> >> just google "Canon DS6041"
>> >> ******************************************************
>> >
>> > That's an older model than the Rebel 300D, Ruthus. A better camera,
>> > just
>> > older. Proceed with caution. You may want to consider just getting a
>> > new
>> > Rebel 300D since the price on that model has dropped considerably since
>> > the 350D/XT came out. Or just spurg and get the 350D/XT and be happy
> with
>> > a very impressive piece of work (almost as good as the 20D which is the
>> > replacement for the 10D)
>> >
>> > Take care,
>> > Linda
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>
>
Anonymous
August 24, 2005 10:50:57 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Linda Nieuwenstein" <buzzball@REMOVETHIS-allstream.net> wrote in message
news:Uu1Pe.62$hW.24@tor-nn1...
> also the 10D cannot take the newer EF-S Canon lenses. The Rebel, Rebel XT
> and 20D can. Most new Canon lenses will likely be EF-S.


WTF? Um, two new lenses were announced this week and they were not EF-S!

I think EF-S is not dead but I don't see why they need to make any more -
there are no holes in the lineup.
Anonymous
August 24, 2005 10:50:58 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Dave R >
>
> WTF? Um, two new lenses were announced this week and they were not EF-S!
>

No need to get emotional.

The 2 new lenses are PROFESSIONAL level lenses. EF-S are designed with entry
level/intermediate level bodies, and the budgets of those most likely to
purchase them in mind.

Try reading the thread. You'll figure out what's going on.

Take care,
Linda
Anonymous
August 24, 2005 11:26:47 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Linda Nieuwenstein" <buzzball@REMOVETHIS-allstream.net> wrote in message
news:Uu1Pe.62$hW.24@tor-nn1...
> also the 10D cannot take the newer EF-S Canon lenses. The Rebel, Rebel XT
> and 20D can. Most new Canon lenses will likely be EF-S.
>
> Take care,
> Linda
>

Except for the just announced 24-105 f4 L IS and the 70-300 f4.5-5.6 IS USM,
both of which are EF lenses, not EF-S.
EF-S lenses won't fit on the full frame cameras, like the 1Ds/mkII and the
also just announced 5D, so there will probably be some more non EF-S lenses
produced in the near future. Just not super wides like the EF-S 10-22

--
Skip Middleton
http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com
Anonymous
August 24, 2005 11:27:33 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

There's an awful lot of posts around here talking about L lenses on 350s...

--
Skip Middleton
http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com
"Linda Nieuwenstein" <buzzball@REMOVETHIS-allstream.net> wrote in message
news:%n2Pe.63$hW.62@tor-nn1...
> That's a whole different class of dSLR from Canon. None of the
> professional level dSLRs [Mark series or 5D) include the ability to use
> EF-S lenses. The EF-S lens is targetted toward the entry
> level/intermediate, consumer affordable, bodies (300D, 350D/XT, 20D).
> Those customers are not likely going to be buying too many lenses at
> 1000-12,000+ a pop like the pro consumers would (L glass)
>
> Take care,
> Linda
>
Anonymous
August 24, 2005 11:28:51 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Linda Nieuwenstein" <buzzball@REMOVETHIS-allstream.net> wrote in message
news:ZL5Pe.75$hW.59@tor-nn1...
>
> "Dave R >
>>
>> WTF? Um, two new lenses were announced this week and they were not EF-S!
>>
>
> No need to get emotional.
>
> The 2 new lenses are PROFESSIONAL level lenses. EF-S are designed with
> entry level/intermediate level bodies, and the budgets of those most
> likely to purchase them in mind.
>
> Try reading the thread. You'll figure out what's going on.
>
> Take care,
> Linda
>
The 70-300 IS USM is decidedly non professional. Really. It's a
replacement for the old 75-300 IS USM, which was Canon's first IS lens.

--
Skip Middleton
http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com
Anonymous
August 25, 2005 5:44:16 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Celcius <cosmar@rogers.com> wrote:
>However, it looks like the new Canon 5D will not take EF-S
>Marcel

They would not cover the sensor in any case.

----- Paul J. Gans
Anonymous
August 25, 2005 6:50:34 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Skip M <shadowcatcher@cox.net> wrote:
>There's an awful lot of posts around here talking about L lenses on 350s...

Sure. Marketing droids think up categories and then
we fodder end up being too stupid to follow *their*
categories.

------ Paul J. Gans

>--
>Skip Middleton
>http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com
>"Linda Nieuwenstein" <buzzball@REMOVETHIS-allstream.net> wrote in message
>news:%n2Pe.63$hW.62@tor-nn1...
>> That's a whole different class of dSLR from Canon. None of the
>> professional level dSLRs [Mark series or 5D) include the ability to use
>> EF-S lenses. The EF-S lens is targetted toward the entry
>> level/intermediate, consumer affordable, bodies (300D, 350D/XT, 20D).
>> Those customers are not likely going to be buying too many lenses at
>> 1000-12,000+ a pop like the pro consumers would (L glass)
>>
>> Take care,
>> Linda
>>
Anonymous
August 25, 2005 1:57:22 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Linda Nieuwenstein wrote:
> Most new Canon lenses will likely be EF-S.

Blahblahblah... check the new EF 24-105 f/4. :-)

--
towarzysz Vader - http://www.rzeszow.net/
Przepis na e-mail: 1 tow_vader, 1 ma³pa, 1 rzeszow, 1 kropka, 1 net
Anonymous
August 25, 2005 3:43:38 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Skip M" wrote ..
> There's an awful lot of posts around here talking about L lenses on
> 350s...
>

Then you won't have any trouble listing a lot of links to those 'awful lot
of posts'. A quick search with google groups for this group didn't support
your claim. There were a few that bought a cheap body (350/XT) who already
had L glass for their MarkII.

Take care,
Linda
Anonymous
August 25, 2005 3:46:46 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Skip M" wrote>>
> The 70-300 IS USM is decidedly non professional. Really. It's a
> replacement for the old 75-300 IS USM, which was Canon's first IS lens.
>

The NEW 70-300 (one of the NEW 2 lenses just announced by Canon that the
poster was referring to) IS a PROFESSIONAL lense made with the PROFESSIONAL
LEVEL bodies in mind, so OF COURSE it is not EF-S.

Take care,
Linda
Anonymous
August 25, 2005 3:50:46 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Skip M" wrote >
> Except for the just announced 24-105 f4 L IS and the 70-300 f4.5-5.6 IS
> USM, both of which are EF lenses, not EF-S.
>

PROFESSIONAL level lenses made for Canon's PROFESSIONAL level bodies so OF
COURSE they will not be EF-S.

> EF-S lenses won't fit on the full frame cameras, like the 1Ds/mkII and the
> also just announced 5D, so there will probably be some more non EF-S
> lenses produced in the near future. Just not super wides like the EF-S
> 10-22
>

Very good. You get it. Though several posters in this thread had already
stated the technical reasonal prior to your post.

Take care,
Linda
Anonymous
August 25, 2005 3:54:53 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"towarzysz Vader" news:D ejtln$gmg$2@atlantis.news.tpi.pl...
>
> Blahblahblah... check the new EF 24-105 f/4. :-)
>
>
I don't have to check, you do. Those lenses are PROFESSIONAL level lenses
made for Canon's PROFESSIONAL level bodies. Of course they are not EF-S. The
Op is asking about consumer level dSLRs and all of those support EF-S (not
the older 10D though) now and in the future...unless, as unlikely as it is,
Canon decides to place the professional level sensor into a consumer level
dSLR for $1000. NOT.

Take care,
Linda
Anonymous
August 25, 2005 10:17:27 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Linda Nieuwenstein" <buzzball@REMOVETHIS-allstream.net> wrote in message
news:nRkPe.80$hW.37@tor-nn1...
>
> "Skip M" wrote>>
>> The 70-300 IS USM is decidedly non professional. Really. It's a
>> replacement for the old 75-300 IS USM, which was Canon's first IS lens.
>>
>
> The NEW 70-300 (one of the NEW 2 lenses just announced by Canon that the
> poster was referring to) IS a PROFESSIONAL lense made with the
> PROFESSIONAL LEVEL bodies in mind, so OF COURSE it is not EF-S.
>
> Take care,
> Linda
>
You need to calm down, and read about that of which you write. According to
DPReview's release of Canon's press release, "the lens is expected to appeal
to serious amateur nature and sports photographers looking to achieve
outstanding results while shooting hand held." NOT a pro lens, by any
stretch of the imagination, Linda. Besides the above quote, it says further
that it uses micro USM, or the lower on the food chain USM, that usually
includes non full time manual focusing and a rotating front element. These
are features that a pro would find unacceptable.
The release also mentions being mounted on the 20D and 350D, nothing about
being meant for the 1Ds, 1D or 5D.
And did you think that emphasizing certain words would make them carry any
more weight?

--
Skip Middleton
http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com
Anonymous
August 25, 2005 10:27:11 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Linda Nieuwenstein" <buzzball@REMOVETHIS-allstream.net> wrote in message
news:7VkPe.81$hW.22@tor-nn1...
>
> "Skip M" wrote >
>> Except for the just announced 24-105 f4 L IS and the 70-300 f4.5-5.6 IS
>> USM, both of which are EF lenses, not EF-S.
>>
>
> PROFESSIONAL level lenses made for Canon's PROFESSIONAL level bodies so OF
> COURSE they will not be EF-S.
>
>> EF-S lenses won't fit on the full frame cameras, like the 1Ds/mkII and
>> the also just announced 5D, so there will probably be some more non EF-S
>> lenses produced in the near future. Just not super wides like the EF-S
>> 10-22
>>
>
> Very good. You get it. Though several posters in this thread had already
> stated the technical reasonal prior to your post.
>
> Take care,
> Linda
>
You don't get it, though. You said most new lenses will be EF-S, not most
new lenses not meant for pro use. And the 70-300 isn't meant for pro use,
anyway. And Phil's site, which you have proven so fond of quoting, backs
that up, by the way.

--
Skip Middleton
http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com
Anonymous
August 25, 2005 10:28:09 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Linda Nieuwenstein" <buzzball@REMOVETHIS-allstream.net> wrote in message
news:_YkPe.82$hW.52@tor-nn1...
>
> "towarzysz Vader" news:D ejtln$gmg$2@atlantis.news.tpi.pl...
>>
>> Blahblahblah... check the new EF 24-105 f/4. :-)
>>
>>
> I don't have to check, you do. Those lenses are PROFESSIONAL level lenses
> made for Canon's PROFESSIONAL level bodies. Of course they are not EF-S.
> The Op is asking about consumer level dSLRs and all of those support EF-S
> (not the older 10D though) now and in the future...unless, as unlikely as
> it is, Canon decides to place the professional level sensor into a
> consumer level dSLR for $1000. NOT.
>
> Take care,
> Linda
>
My, this is fun, I think I'll wait to kill file you to see how deep you dig
yourself in.

--
Skip Middleton
http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com
Anonymous
August 26, 2005 12:53:33 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Linda Nieuwenstein" <buzzball@REMOVETHIS-allstream.net> wrote in message
news:nRkPe.80$hW.37@tor-nn1...
>
> "Skip M" wrote>>
>> The 70-300 IS USM is decidedly non professional. Really. It's a
>> replacement for the old 75-300 IS USM, which was Canon's first IS lens.
>>
>
> The NEW 70-300 (one of the NEW 2 lenses just announced by Canon that the
> poster was referring to) IS a PROFESSIONAL lense made with the
> PROFESSIONAL LEVEL bodies in mind, so OF COURSE it is not EF-S.
>

Oh hogwash. The 70-300 is not even "L" quality.
Anonymous
August 26, 2005 12:53:34 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Dave R knows who wrote:
> "Linda Nieuwenstein" <buzzball@REMOVETHIS-allstream.net> wrote in message
> news:nRkPe.80$hW.37@tor-nn1...
>
>>"Skip M" wrote>>
>>
>>>The 70-300 IS USM is decidedly non professional. Really. It's a
>>>replacement for the old 75-300 IS USM, which was Canon's first IS lens.
>>>
>>
>>The NEW 70-300 (one of the NEW 2 lenses just announced by Canon that the
>>poster was referring to) IS a PROFESSIONAL lense made with the
>>PROFESSIONAL LEVEL bodies in mind, so OF COURSE it is not EF-S.
>>
> Oh hogwash. The 70-300 is not even "L" quality.
>
>
Be careful, Dave; Linda, based on her appearance here a month ago or so,
is never wrong. Never.

And she bites like a little Trapper.

--
John McWilliams
Anonymous
August 26, 2005 12:53:34 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Dave R knows who" wrote...
>
>
> Oh hogwash. The 70-300 is not even "L" quality.
Perhaps you should read more before continuing to spout foolishness...

Phil knows what you don't:
http://www.dpreview.com/news/0508/05082207canonlenses.a...

Take care,
Linda
Anonymous
August 26, 2005 12:53:35 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"John McWilliams" wrote> Be careful, Dave; Linda, based on her appearance
here a month ago or so,
> is never wrong. Never.
>
> And she bites like a little Trapper.
>
> --
> John McWilliams
>

Oh look my stalker John Williams crawled out of the hole to make an
appearance. What fun.

Take care,
Linda
Anonymous
August 26, 2005 12:53:35 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Linda Nieuwenstein" <buzzball@REMOVETHIS-allstream.net> wrote in message
news:E9sPe.86$hW.6@tor-nn1...
>
> "Dave R knows who" wrote...
>>
>>
>> Oh hogwash. The 70-300 is not even "L" quality.
> Perhaps you should read more before continuing to spout foolishness...
>
> Phil knows what you don't:
> http://www.dpreview.com/news/0508/05082207canonlenses.a...
>
> Take care,
> Linda
>
Well, gee, since I just quoted his release, above, maybe you should go back
and read it, yourself. The 70-300 is meant for serious amateurs, and it
says so, right there, in the first paragraph below the image of the lens...

--
Skip Middleton
http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com
Anonymous
August 26, 2005 1:06:37 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Linda Nieuwenstein" <buzzball@REMOVETHIS-allstream.net> wrote in message
news:ZL5Pe.75$hW.59@tor-nn1...
>
> "Dave R >
>>
>> WTF? Um, two new lenses were announced this week and they were not EF-S!
>>
>
> No need to get emotional.
>
> The 2 new lenses are PROFESSIONAL level lenses. EF-S are designed with
> entry level/intermediate level bodies, and the budgets of those most
> likely to purchase them in mind.

I'm getting emotional because you are dead wrong, IMO.

Just what other focal lengths do you want them to build?

You said "Most new lenses are likely to be EF-S". But there is virtually
nothing left to build for the EF-S.

EF-S lenses filled the wide gap where the 1.6x crop leaves people wanting
more.

When I bought my 300D kit, the first lens I bought was the 70-200 F/4 L,
followed by the EF 100-400 L.

I didn't need any more EF-S lenses because the kit lens as wife enough for
me. The only EF-S lens I could have wanted was the new 10-20mm.

Again, just what other focal lengths do you want them to build?
Anonymous
August 26, 2005 1:06:38 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Dave R knows who" wrote >
> I'm getting emotional because you are dead wrong, IMO.
>

Your unproven opinion means ziltch to me when it so greatly conflicts with
the overwhelmingly proven, and definitive opinion of Phil's:
http://www.dpreview.com/news/0508/05082207canonlenses.a...

Take care,
Linda
Anonymous
August 26, 2005 1:06:39 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Linda Nieuwenstein" <buzzball@REMOVETHIS-allstream.net> wrote in message
news:kdsPe.88$hW.30@tor-nn1...
>
> "Dave R knows who" wrote >
>> I'm getting emotional because you are dead wrong, IMO.
>>
>
> Your unproven opinion means ziltch to me when it so greatly conflicts with
> the overwhelmingly proven, and definitive opinion of Phil's:
> http://www.dpreview.com/news/0508/05082207canonlenses.a...
>
> Take care,
> Linda
>
You REALLY need to read what you quote, you are looking sillier by the
moment. That release says the 70-300 is meant to appeal to serious
amateurs.
This is the third time you've quoted it, but you apparently still haven't
read it.

--
Skip Middleton
http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com
Anonymous
August 26, 2005 1:17:03 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Skip M <shadowcatcher@cox.net> wrote:
>>
> The 70-300 IS USM is decidedly non professional. Really. It's a
> replacement for the old 75-300 IS USM, which was Canon's first IS lens.

The MTF charts on it are impressive, though. If that holds up in
real-world sharpness and contrast, I'll probably spend more time
waffling on whether I want to pick up the 70-300 or the 80-400 as a
replacement for my current 75-300.

--
Zed Pobre <zed@resonant.org> a.k.a. Zed Pobre <zed@debian.org>
PGP key and fingerprint available on finger; encrypted mail welcomed.
Anonymous
August 26, 2005 1:17:04 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Zed Pobre" <zed@resonant.org> wrote in message
news:slrndgsd9l.fha.zed@resonant.org...
> Skip M <shadowcatcher@cox.net> wrote:
>>>
>> The 70-300 IS USM is decidedly non professional. Really. It's a
>> replacement for the old 75-300 IS USM, which was Canon's first IS lens.
>
> The MTF charts on it are impressive, though. If that holds up in
> real-world sharpness and contrast, I'll probably spend more time
> waffling on whether I want to pick up the 70-300 or the 80-400 as a
> replacement for my current 75-300.
>
> --
> Zed Pobre <zed@resonant.org> a.k.a. Zed Pobre <zed@debian.org>
> PGP key and fingerprint available on finger; encrypted mail welcomed.
>
Do you mean 100-400? Canon doesn't make an 80-400, although Sigma does in
Canon mount. The difference in weight alone might make the decision
easier...the 70-300 weighs less than half what the 100-400 IS does, and if
the price is in line with the old 75-300, which sold for under $600 when it
came out, well, the line between them is pretty clear.

--
Skip Middleton
http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com
Anonymous
August 26, 2005 2:13:28 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Skip M" wrote >>
> Well, gee, since I just quoted his release, above, maybe you should go
> back and read it, yourself. The 70-300 is meant for serious amateurs, and
> it says so, right there, in the first paragraph below the image of the
> lens...
>

Yip, I see that now. Phil referred to the 70-200 at the top of article
covering both new lenses, so I read that to be the new 70-300. As soon as I
saw Professional and 'L' I went into nothing more than scan mode figuring
the price would be way too high for not-for-profit photography which I'm
into.

Take care,
Linda
Anonymous
August 26, 2005 2:15:35 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Skip M" wrote >>
> You need to calm down, and read about that of which you write.

And you need to stop repeating yourself. Hidden motives or do you just like
replying to me?

Take care,
Linda
Anonymous
August 26, 2005 2:20:39 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Zed Pobre" wrote>
> The MTF charts on it are impressive, though. If that holds up in
> real-world sharpness and contrast, I'll probably spend more time
> waffling on whether I want to pick up the 70-300 or the 80-400 as a
> replacement for my current 75-300.
>

I have the 75-300 (not IS0) and find it not great, though it was in the
budget area. I hope the new 70-300IS is consumer priced, and as good as you
indicated the specs indicate it will be. Good price and quality? hmmm 50mm
1.8 came to mind. A repeat would be nice!

Take care,
Linda
Anonymous
August 26, 2005 2:22:37 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Skip M" wrote>>
> You REALLY need to read what you quote, you are looking sillier by the
> moment. That release says the 70-300 is meant to appeal to serious
> amateurs.
>

You REALLY need to stop repeating yourself, you are looking like a person
who drives the knife in good and deep. Either that or you are just slow to
get the point.

Take care,
Linda
Anonymous
August 26, 2005 2:27:37 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Skip M" wrote >>
> You don't get it, though. You said most new lenses will be EF-S, not most
> new lenses not meant for pro use. And the 70-300 isn't meant for pro use,
> anyway. And Phil's site, which you have proven so fond of quoting, backs
> that up, by the way.
>
And you don't get that the OP was talking about consumer level dSLR. Yes I
should have added the words 'most consumer level' to my original reply for
the sake of the less intuitive, word-by-word reader of the thread.

Take care,
Linda
Anonymous
August 26, 2005 2:29:16 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Skip M" wrote > My, this is fun, I think I'll wait to kill file you to see
how deep you dig
> yourself in.
>

Stop being such a Sally. Kill file me now please instead of parading like a
peacock.

Take care,
Linda
Anonymous
August 26, 2005 3:44:17 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

In article <E9sPe.86$hW.6@tor-nn1>, buzzball@REMOVETHIS-allstream.net
says...
>
> "Dave R knows who" wrote...
> >
> >
> > Oh hogwash. The 70-300 is not even "L" quality.
> Perhaps you should read more before continuing to spout foolishness...
>
> Phil knows what you don't:
> http://www.dpreview.com/news/0508/05082207canonlenses.a...
>
> Take care,
> Linda
>
>
Phil does not say the new 70-300 is an L lens. (the 70-300 announcement
is just on the same page as the 24-105L announcement).

It may be better than the old 75-300 (which is *certainly* not up to L
standards) as the press release infers that it has some UD glass and I
don't believe the old one does. I have the old 100-300 which is similar
optically - mine is not great - has quite low contrast and definition at
the 300mm end. Most owners report the same.

Bruce G
Anonymous
August 26, 2005 3:44:18 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Bruce Graham" wrote...
> Phil does not say the new 70-300 is an L lens. (the 70-300 announcement
> is just on the same page as the 24-105L announcement).
>
> It may be better than the old 75-300 (which is *certainly* not up to L
> standards) as the press release infers that it has some UD glass and I
> don't believe the old one does. I have the old 100-300 which is similar
> optically - mine is not great - has quite low contrast and definition at
> the 300mm end. Most owners report the same.
>

Right you are, Bruce, my mistake. Where it was a combined article (covering
both new lenses) just under the first image I read his statement as 70-300
rather than 70-200 (existing, not new lens). I see now he really is talking
about the existing 70-200 not the new 70-300. I also see down the bottom of
the article he states the new 70-300 will be of interest to intermediate
level photographers using the 20D. Hmm maybe that means that lens will be
affordable since it is not professional level! Since the two lenses are not
the same class it might be better if there were two articles or at least a
statement at the top stating Canon has released 1 pro level and 1 consumer
level. As soon as I saw Professional level I went into scan mode only
thinking the price would be too high for not-for-profit photography.

I have the older 75-300 lens [not IS], and like you with your 100-300 don't
find it great optically. Even using a tripod the images are still not
impressive. After reading quite a few user mildly warm reviews/comments
about their 75-300 IS (newer than mine) lens I figured it was not worth
upgrading to. Hopefully this new 70-300 IS will indeed be priced with the
consumer in mind, and will be a large improvement over similar older
consumer lenses.

Take care,
Linda
Anonymous
August 27, 2005 1:06:31 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Linda Nieuwenstein" <buzzball@REMOVETHIS-allstream.net> wrote in message
news:bNEPe.105$hW.46@tor-nn1...
>
> "Skip M" wrote >>
>> You don't get it, though. You said most new lenses will be EF-S, not
>> most new lenses not meant for pro use. And the 70-300 isn't meant for
>> pro use, anyway. And Phil's site, which you have proven so fond of
>> quoting, backs that up, by the way.
>>
> And you don't get that the OP was talking about consumer level dSLR. Yes I
> should have added the words 'most consumer level' to my original reply for
> the sake of the less intuitive, word-by-word reader of the thread.
>
> Take care,
> Linda
>
Well, then, the 70-300 fits that request, too, doesn't it? It's a lens
aimed at the serious amateur.

--
Skip Middleton
http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com
Anonymous
August 27, 2005 1:07:05 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Linda Nieuwenstein" <buzzball@REMOVETHIS-allstream.net> wrote in message
news:HOEPe.106$hW.41@tor-nn1...
>
> "Skip M" wrote > My, this is fun, I think I'll wait to kill file you to
> see how deep you dig
>> yourself in.
>>
>
> Stop being such a Sally. Kill file me now please instead of parading like
> a peacock.
>
> Take care,
> Linda
>
Nah, having too much fun.

--
Skip Middleton
http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com
Anonymous
August 27, 2005 1:17:03 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Skip M <shadowcatcher@cox.net> wrote:
>
> Do you mean 100-400? Canon doesn't make an 80-400, although Sigma does in
> Canon mount. The difference in weight alone might make the decision
> easier...the 70-300 weighs less than half what the 100-400 IS does, and if
> the price is in line with the old 75-300, which sold for under $600 when it
> came out, well, the line between them is pretty clear.

I meant the Sigma 80-400. Between having ring zoom, an extra 20mm, a
less conspicuous body, and some field tests showing it having slightly
better sharpness than the 100-400 (which surprised me a little, since
the MTF charts don't look as good), the 100-400 isn't in the running
for me, even with the advantage of USM.

The biggest thing in the choice between the new 70-300 and the 80-400
will be weight vs reach. It used to be weight vs reach *and*
sharpness, which was a much easier decision, but now the sharpness may
be as good at 300 on the 70-300.

Also, weight may suddenly become a lot less important to me if the
FZ30 comes out meeting my expectations. I'm holding off on purchasing
until the end of the year, but I expect to be picking up the FZ30 (for
a backup camera and long hikes) and two or three new lenses in
November or December (trying to go for more sharpness and range and
less flare than my current set).

What I probably ought to do is go rent everything I'm interested in on
the same day in October sometime and just shoot a whole slew of tests.

--
Zed Pobre <zed@resonant.org> a.k.a. Zed Pobre <zed@debian.org>
PGP key and fingerprint available on finger; encrypted mail welcomed.
Anonymous
August 27, 2005 2:57:03 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Linda Nieuwenstein" <buzzball@REMOVETHIS-allstream.net> wrote in message
news:SzEPe.101$hW.95@tor-nn1...
>
> "Skip M" wrote >>
>> Well, gee, since I just quoted his release, above, maybe you should go
>> back and read it, yourself. The 70-300 is meant for serious amateurs,
>> and it says so, right there, in the first paragraph below the image of
>> the lens...
>>
>
> Yip, I see that now. Phil referred to the 70-200 at the top of article
> covering both new lenses, so I read that to be the new 70-300. As soon as
> I saw Professional and 'L' I went into nothing more than scan mode
> figuring the price would be way too high for not-for-profit photography
> which I'm into.
>
> Take care,
> Linda
>
Good, discussion over. With such tightly printed script, it's easy to
overlook something.

--
Skip Middleton
http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com
Anonymous
August 27, 2005 2:58:54 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Linda Nieuwenstein" <buzzball@REMOVETHIS-allstream.net> wrote in message
news:TBEPe.102$hW.1@tor-nn1...
>
> "Skip M" wrote >>
>> You need to calm down, and read about that of which you write.
>
> And you need to stop repeating yourself. Hidden motives or do you just
> like replying to me?
>
> Take care,
> Linda
>
Well, since you kept insisting that it said something it didn't, I figured
you needed it to be repeated so you'd latch on to it. You even argued the
point with me, and quoted the piece back. It didn't seem like you were
"listening."

--
Skip Middleton
http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com
Anonymous
August 27, 2005 5:29:30 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

In article <slrndgv18p.gbl.zed@resonant.org>, zed@resonant.org says...
> What I probably ought to do is go rent everything I'm interested in on
> the same day in October sometime and just shoot a whole slew of tests.
>
>
Nah, just enjoy those long hikes and stay fit. Better for you than
poring over pixels especially when the equipment will be different a few
months later anyway.
!