Chris Devers wrote:
Megapixels shmegapixels.
Is the lens any good?
It's this one, right?
<http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/B0001G6U5C>
It looks like just annother fancy point & shoot (albeit one that takes images of unweildy size).
Maybe next time you can get a nice SLR instead... :-)
Wrong. Actually, it's this camera:
http://consumer.usa.canon.com/ir/controller?act=ModelDetailAct&fcategoryid=139&modelid=10464 http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/B0002XQJFA/
Nope. Randal's camera IS an SLR -- a digital SLR. That should have been obvious when you saw it in operation -- non-SLR cameras don't have the sound of moving mirrors when they take pictures. And if you don't like the lens it comes with (I believe he had the EF-S 18-5mm lens -- the one that Canon sells with the camera as a bundle -- which is quite good, by the way), you can put any Canon EF or EF-S (EOS system) lens on it.
Amazon lists the EOS 20D at $1600 (with lens). For comparison, the EOS-1D Mark II is $4500 (without lens). For the extra money, you get another 8 megapixels, a full-frame sensor (in other words, you can use your SLR lenses with no conversion factor of focal length, but you can't use the EF-S series lenses, which are designed to cover only the smaller image area used by the consumer digital SLRs), full (rather than limited) compatibility of accessories, and a fancier autofocus system.
I would say that both cameras are solid entries in their respective price categories. But, at a total price of $5000 or so (including lens), you have to be REALLY serious about photography to buy an EOS-1D system.
_______________________________________________ Boston-pm mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.pm.org/mailman/listinfo/boston-pm
