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
---------------------
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---------------------
Facebook
Twitter