Sign-in / Sign-up
Your question

Canon Digital 350D. Basin Trials V Armchair Theoreticians...

Tags:
  • SLR
  • Photo
  • Canon
  • Cameras
Last response: in Digital Cameras
Anonymous
September 19, 2005 10:31:46 PM

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

I think this needs rer-posting. I'm just back from a highly profitable
photo stint in France.

-------------------------------------------------
I started photography in the 70s earning a crust here and there doing
this and that for a variety of customers but also a fair bit for
myself. I do not regard myself a professional. I'm new to the digital
world and only after being badgered into trying it by a couple of
co-workers. The Canon 350D, with that notorious kit lens, was chosen
because I did not want to commit myself to investing too much in a
branch of photography which I might decide was not for me. But I also
wanted a bit of kit which would perform to a high and reliable
standard and would still have a place in my bag if I decided to go
down that road with more expensive "professional cameras".

The only problem I had was the size. I had difficulty in gripping it
and using the controls, solved by the addition of a Battery Grip!
I gave it a good run out the week I got it. I tried out all of the
combinations which I would normally use on a job.I ended up with
blisters on my fingers but also some fine 'photos.

I took the camera out with me on a 5 day "pot boiler" doing factory
and landscapes. The lens performed just as I expected. Very well.
All of the shots were usable. As for "noise", according to the two who
pushed me down this road, even at 400 negligible to non existent at
100. I was quite impressed. This is a very good entry level camera.
There is a place for this one. I can take dozens of exposures and
check practically there and then. This was money well spent. Of
course, this is only the opinion of someone who earns an extra crust
using a camera. Unfortunately, I'm not an armchair theoretician who
has the time to sit back and consider this that and the next thing. I
don't care if the kit is not a perfect reflection of some platonic
artifact in heaven. If a bit of kit cuts the mustard its in if not
its out.

I suspect that most critics of this model and the kit lens have either
none or little practical experience of either. What they may be giving
out is a rehash of magazine articles and bar chat stripped of nearly
all positive comment. We have this in the UK. There is a guy on TV a
bit of celebrity,( in other words well known), who reviews motor
vehicles. He rips it out of all makes except Ford. But he is thought
to be a bit of a tube. The vast majority of folk don't listens to him
those who do take the piss. I suspect it is much the same in this
group.

Of course the above is only my personal opinion. Use it at your own
risk!

Angus.

---------------------
Remember Glencoe.
Visit:
http://members.aol.com/Skyelander/glencoe.html
---------------------

More about : canon digital 350d basin trials armchair theoreticians

Anonymous
September 19, 2005 10:48:44 PM

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

I couldn't agree more.

While most people engage in silly debates over tiny differences between
on make/model over the other most people engaged in actual photography
are supplying clients with what they need and making their living.

The majority of photography ends up downsampled in lowish quality
publications so it really doesn't make that much difference. When the
clients stop using you because your images are soft then it's time to
start looking at different lenses...until then...keep raking in the
profits and let the walter mitty's engage in the ceaseless hair
splitting debates.
Anonymous
September 20, 2005 11:24:05 AM

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

imodan@tpg.com.au wrote:
> I couldn't agree more.
>
> While most people engage in silly debates over tiny differences between
> on make/model over the other most people engaged in actual photography
> are supplying clients with what they need and making their living.
>
> The majority of photography ends up downsampled in lowish quality
> publications so it really doesn't make that much difference. When the
> clients stop using you because your images are soft then it's time to
> start looking at different lenses...until then...keep raking in the
> profits and let the walter mitty's engage in the ceaseless hair
> splitting debates.

I have the Canon Digital Rebel, the model before the 350D.

I shot some photos on a holiday to Scotland with the camera and the kit
lens.

I entered a couple of photos in the Davis County Fair (Utah). Took a
First Place Ribbon, and a Second Place Ribbon in the Pro-Am division.

I entered the same photos in Utah State Fair. More photos at this
level.
More competition. I didn't do as well, only an honorable mention for
one photo.

The kit lens is good for an all around lens. Are there better lenses?
Yes.

I have some other lenses from when I had a 35mm Canon EOS. I have also
purchased some other lenses for this camera.

It just depends on what you are going to do with the camera.

If I just want a lens to pack around with the camera all day, I think I
might want the kit lens, as it is light and has a good range.

If I want something for portraits, I might want something with a bit
longer focal length.

If I want something for sports - I have a 70-300mm telephoto.

If I want something for special effects - I have an 8mm Peleng fisheye
lens.

You just need to match the lens to what you are going to shoot.

roland