I'm looking for what might appear wide ranging, or perhaps somewhat basic, advice on Canon Eos digital models. I've shot stock photos for many years, but recently thought to at least try a digital camera to see what it felt like to use. With that in mind, I've tried a 300D with a variety of lenses and mixed feelings. The picture quality, in general, astounded me - until I looked closely at high contrast edges where, for example, there was a dark foreground against a bright blue sky (say a building roof against the sky); there was unacceptable (*really* unacceptable) colour fringing.
I realise the 300D is the bottom of the Eos range, but even given the fringing that makes these pictures unusable, the exercise has nevertheless been valuable. It's left me with two questions though: Is this fringing to be expected on the 300D, but perhaps is not so prominent on other models? I've failed to find a good comparison on the web, looking at this factor across the range. Yes, I know this is wide open to personal choice, but what might be considered the best of the Canon range for shooting stock - but taking into account not only quality, but price. That translates as, if the top of the range camera is the only one that yields the quality (comparable to a film scan on the desktop - I use a Nikon ED4000 scan as a benchmark), then that's the end of the question. But, if the lower cost models are very close in quality, arguably cost comes into the equation. Anyone able to offer an informed opinion? Thanks Chris Howes =============================================================== GO TO http://www.prodig.org for ~ GUIDELINES ~ un/SUBSCRIBING ~ ITEMS for SALE
