EOS 630 or EOS 10s?

<p>For those of you who have used these semi-old EOS filmies, which one do you prefer? I've had my hands on the 630 and think it's quite nice, but I think some of the simplicity is lost with the 10s. The lure is that the AF is supposedly greatly improved over the 630, I'd really love to hear first hand opinions of the difference in AF!</p>

<p>I'd go for the 10, although there's nothing "wrong" with the 630,</p>

<p>I personally wouldn't bother with either of them, given that you could pick up an EOS-3 or 1V for little more than a song these days. In both of the bodies you're considering, the metering and AF systems are crude and archaic.</p>

<p>If you want a very fine "classic modern" film body, I recommend the T90, although it's manual focus, and accepts only FD lenses.</p>

<p>Thanks JDM.</p>

<p>Mark - I'd really like to buy the EOS 3, that's kind of the end goal. We all have our different fiscal equation to 'song', right now the 630/10s are in my 'song' category. :) Plus, when I finally do go to buy an EOS 3, it's going to be mint in original box with the PB-E2 and data back, which will probably set me back around four hundred bucks.</p>

<p>A couple of batteries and CF cards will set you back four bills these days, but, as you say, it's all relative.</p>

<p>Nevertheless, many of film lovers are in heaven these days, given that we can afford bodies which we could merely dream about in days of yore.</p>

<p>I owned both cameras back in the day. The 630 (1989) is built much better and has interchangeable screens, including a micro-prism one for MF. Good thing too as 630 single axis AF is almost completely useless. Utter crap. I used mine for wide angle only (24 2.8) and set hyper-focal for landscape and street shooting. The 10S (1990) is built flimsy but was the first EOS consumer SLR with both really good AF and multi-point AF. The center point is a cross sensor with single axis sensors on both sides. I still have a lot of framed prints from the 1990s I nailed with the 10S. If you plan to use AF, I'd grab the 10S.</p>

<p>Both ate CR5 batteries like there was no tomorrow. A couple rolls of AI servo on surfers and the 10S battery was done...</p>

<p>Any particular reason you're looking at a 10s and not something in the Elan lineup? Those can be had next to nothing as well and the AF seems pretty accurate on my Elan IIe, even with the eye controlled focus points. Of course there is only 3 focus points to begin with. And battery consumption doesn't seem to be bad.</p>

<p>For a budget shooter, consider the EOS A2 or A2E(eye control focus). These can be found around $40-50 and has newer technology that the ones you mention and seems to be reasonable on battery power. I still have mine from the mid '90's and it is still working well. </p>

<p>FWIW, I've done individual reports on a number of film EOS cameras. The one on the EOS 630 (<a href="../modern-film-cameras-forum/00YFVd">http://www.photo.net/modern-film-cameras-forum/00YFVd</a> ) gives links to all the others too.</p>

<p>Having shot a all of those I reported on, I'd certainly second that the EOS 3 is an exceptional camera, but-because of that-it also sells for more.</p>

<p>The <a href="../canon-fd-camera-forum/00WkhY">T90</a> is also wonderful, but of course it uses only FD lenses, not EF EOS lenses.</p>

<p>The EOS 5 (not so much its American sibling the A2e) is also good, but many people actually prefer the 10 and 10s. The greatest simplicity of function and features <em>and</em> a more solid build is found in the earlier 600 series. Later, more and more features are piled on, from eye control to intervalometers, etc.</p>

<p>I have a 10S and an EOS 3. The 3 easily wins by a long shot though the 10S was a very capable system for me throughout the '90s.</p>

<p>I had the 10s and the EOS 3 also, and I 100% agree with Ken. The EOS 3 (except for the mirror slap reminiscent of a machine gun) is an unbelievably capable camera...the 10s was awesome for its time.</p>

<p>I wouldn't buy a 600-series EOS unless the owner was practically giving it away. Aside from the other things mentioned (archaic AF and metering), it also has several unlabeled buttons (AUGH!), and they're getting to the point in their lifespan where you can expect to service them. Since parts aren't readily available, you can expect to pay a lot for said servicing.</p>

<p>I'm also tossing my hat in for the EOS 3. The 600-series isn't new enough to be modern, and it's not old enough to be retro.</p>

<p>But the OP already ruled out the EOS 3 because of the greater cost, so the question is what would serve in the interim.</p>

<p>As for "giving it away" a typical price these days for a 630 is around US$25 to $40, max, more with a more or less valuable lens on it. A EOS 10 is not much more, sometimes selling for over $100 with a lens, but more often in the tens of dollars for a body alone. In my family we refer to these as "one to three pizza" purchases. ;)</p>

<p>EOS 3 cameras are selling right now about 10X as much, for just under $200 up to over $300. I'd think there was an argument even for getting a EOS 1v film camera if cost were no object, but again, these cost a great deal more as a rule.</p>

<p>Huh. Didn't realize the 630 was going for so little. I'd seen them for $40 before, but never $25. I partially retract my previous statement :)</p>

<p>It's not a great camera, but you're going to be hard pressed to find anything much better for $25.</p>

<p>I've had and used both of these - in fact I still have a 600 (630 in N America). I started with an EOS 650 and to some extent the way that camera handled & felt still defines, to me, how an LR ought to feel and handle; so the 600/630 always felt better, to me, than the 10. That said, I can see the arguments in favour of the better features of the 10, including the AF. Wasn't the 10 much quieter, as well? Certainly you'll never do stealth photography with the 630 - it's loud. But both, if in good condition, will enable you take very good photographs, and of course both will be fully compatible with any EF lens.</p>

<p>I see neither you nor anyone else has mentioned the very first generation of EOS cameras, the 620/650. I wouldn't recommend either of these today, even though they must be very cheap indeed. Other people have commented that the AF on the 630 is not good, but it was actually an improvement on that on the 620/650! By today's standards, the AF on the 630 is usable, as long as you know what it will do and not do, while that on the 620/630 is probably unusable as a result of user frustration. (It's bizarre to remember that when it was released in the 80s, the EOS 620/650 were praised for the speed of the AF....)</p>

<p>May as well toss in my two cents worth.I still own a couple EOS 630's (and a Elan IIe) and no doubt they are technology dated but the upside is they are built very well,cheap to purchase,and have many pro features if you need them.I agree some things are a little strange but then again it was Canon's first attempt at autofocus trying to catch up with the blockbuster Minoltas. The focus is not really that bad if you tilt them off axis a few degrees while composing (they work especially well with the EOS 28 - 105mm for some reason).The downside is all the early EOS cameras have a problem with the shutter bumper degrading and leaving a goo on the shutter blades so the camera will need a cleaning to continue functioning.It is almost a given in warmer climates and I had mine corrected years ago and both continue to work perfectly to this day.The EOS 3 is a outstanding camera but sounds like it is priced much too high for your budget.<br>

I would recommend a EOS Elan II because they do just about everything,are inexpensive,and are built a little better than some of the earlier and later consumer grade models.They do not have the shutter 'goo' problem.</p>

<p>It is true that many early EOS cameras <em>can</em> have goo on the shutter ('sponge' in many places in many cameras is liable to deteriorate with age), but (as noted-Google™ for instruction on a DIY) this can be cleaned, and of all the EOS cameras I've got, including two copies of the EOS 620, I have never personally seen this in reality. I know it occurs, but the 'danger' is, I think, exaggerated. By the way, I live in a very warm humid climate between the Ohio and Mississippi Rivers on the same lattitude as Richmond...</p>

<p>Here are the EOS film cameras I now have in order of date and the posts I have done on them:<br /> EOS 650 http://www.photo.net/canon-eos-digital-camera-forum/00Vlot<br /> EOS 620 http://www.photo.net/canon-eos-digital-camera-forum/00Vv2v<br /> EOS 630 http://www.photo.net/modern-film-cameras-forum/00YFVd<br /> EOS 1 http://www.photo.net/canon-eos-digital-camera-forum/00WvBD<br /> EOS 10S http://www.photo.net/canon-eos-digital-camera-forum/00WxgJ<br /> EOS 700 http://www.photo.net/canon-eos-digital-camera-forum/00Wn8K<br /> EOS 5 =A2e http://www.photo.net/canon-eos-digital-camera-forum/00Wrxy<br /> EOS-3 http://www.photo.net/canon-eos-digital-camera-forum/00WyuM</p>

<p>There is no doubt that the EOS 3 is one of the finest of these. However, the EOS 1 is rather less "feature bound" and is a wonderful camera too, for less money than the 3, usually. As always on eBay, getting the lowest price involves some patience and the willingness to be second highest bidder until your time comes. I have also recently noted a weakening of the prices of both the EOS 1N and the EOS 1V, many go unsold at the prices of a year ago, and the actual sales are coming closer to the 3.</p>

<p>I also have to note that while AF speed is a concern for some kinds of use (like sports), my own shooting is almost always more deliberative, and I have never had any problem even with the 650 and 620 (the oldest).</p>

<p> </p>

<p>I really appreciate the replies, I figured myself lucky if even one person had experience with these older EOS filmies! I shoot wide open quite a bit, so inaccurate AF simply won't do. I've nearly decided to just wait until I'm willing to spend the money on the EOS 3. I just loaded up my fiscal 'buffer', so I'll pick one up once the buffer has cleared. :)</p>

<p>JDM,<br>

You have class and appreciation for the old and new.Got to love anyone still shooting that loveable funky old 600 series Canons.Kudos to you and others that don't stop using something just because it is not state of the art.Like you I shoot a lot of static stuff and love my 630's.The viewfinder is so good that flipping to manual focus and using the laser matte focusing screen nails it perfectly if lighting is less than perfect.No big deal especially doing macro on a tripod.</p>

<p>That's a good point, it might be worth keeping one for MF use. I have two E-B focus screens, which are insanely tough to come by, maybe glue a Samyang 35/1.4 on there for MF fun....</p>

<p>Eos1, 'bargain' at Keh...<strong>$89</strong></p>

<p> </p>

<p>I agree with Louis that the A2 is certainly a great choice as well. I used mine mercilessly for several years before buying my 1v. I actually still have an A2. It has very good AF and a lot of other features that make using it effortless, and it's a pretty responsive camera. The 10S is nice, the A2 is nicer in my opinion.</p>

<p>I just had a similar question when looking for a film body to pair with my full-frame 6D. I bought an EX condition EOS 630 for $29 at KEH. If AF is slow, so what? I won't be using a film body for sports and don't even use my 6D for that. <br /><br />I see this today as more of a fun divergence from digital. Probably won't even see color film.</p>