On 7 Sep 2003 at 15:25, Gary Fisher wrote: > Judging by these close-ups of the lens mounts of the 10D and 300D from > dpreview, it seems (to me) that the mounting flange (i.e. the metal > mount) is identical, but the mirror box on the 300D has a recessed > section that is missing on the 10D. It's purpose would seem to be to > allow lenses with a greater back-spacing to physically fit into the > mirror box opening - there seems no change to the rest of the mounting > system (the bayonet mount and the position of the electrical > connectors). > > Does anyone know if this is the extent of the -S addition to the EF > mount? > > My only question then is why is there an additional indexing mark (the > white dot [well, square])? > > See: > > 10D: > http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/CanonEOS300D/Images/lensmount02.jpg > > 300D: > http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/CanonEOS300D/Images/lensmount01.jpg > > Cheers > Gary
Doesn't work, 'no hot-link (deep-link) allowed'....;)) Start from here, and select #5/body&design in the pull-down menu on top: http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/CanonEOS300D Btw, the backlighted LCD seems to enter the 'low-end' range of bodies now too....or where did that feature stop in the analog range? 3000? 500? -- Bye, Willem-Jan Markerink The desire to understand is sometimes far less intelligent than the inability to understand <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [note: 'a-one' & 'en-el'!] * **** ******* *********************************************************** * For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see: * http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm ***********************************************************
