EOS 3 - How will it improve your photography?

Others have asked if the new Nikon F100 will improve your photography. I am wondering if the new EOS 3 will improve your photography, and, if so, how?

No more than a Canon AE-1 would improve your photography. Time and

again you hear pro's like "Moose Peterson" praising an F-5 and stating

that he gets shots with it that he could have never took without it.

Do you think he would have said the same if Nikon wasn't compensating

him for doing so?! If they paid him enough he'd say the same about the

FE10! I'm not knocking the Moose, but consumer's need to consider the

motives of advertisers. It might be easier for me to get certain

photo's with an EOS 3 than with an AE-1, but I wouldn't say that it's

impossible to get similar results with either. Will the EOS 3 compose

and crop my photo? Will it put me in the right place at the right

time? I'm sure if the Moose or John Shaw took a Pentax K1000 out for

a day they would come back with nothing short of what they're

producing now.

I have to agree with Ron. I bought an F5, and the RGB metering may

have helped out on a number of photos, the faster AF probably has

come in handy on some action shots, but I bought primarily to use for

8-10 years and for it's durability. None of the 'new toys' will

really help one's photography. But I do wish that Moose Petersen and

others would really divulge when they are compensated by the Canons

and Nikons of the world so we & others could take their comments

about the equipment at something other than face value. I've been

around photo gear long enough to know what I'm looking for, and for

what I like & don't like. Others may really be swayed because

BigNamePhotographer is using X brand & wouldn't be caught dead

without it. Those less experienced may not realized $ just changed

hands ( and not for the equipment!).

Imagine this situation: Ramp Fashion Show

<UL>

<LI>The models are walking down the ramp in fast, sure steps - <B>Fast

autofocus</B>

<LI>You generally want to get them during their walk down and when

they strike a pose on the end of their walk (which doesn't always end

in the same place - <B>can't get away with focusing on a certain point

and waiting for them to pass and then shooting</B>

<LI>During their walk down the ramp, the lighting changes since there

are some spots illuminated by spotlights and others not as well as

over-all changes in the lighting - <B>Can't take a meter reading

handheld and keeping it through the show, Nikon matrix metering

certainly helps particularly because...</B>

<LI> They sometimes walk in pairs down the ramp meaning you would be

focusing on off-center subjects - <B>In vertical orientation, it would

be nice to focusing points on the left and right for this (like an F5

does), also center weighted AE will definitely be off so a metering

system that takes focusing distance into consideration would be a help

</UL>

In short, there are some situations where the technology of the newer

cameras will help you take better photos, and by no means does this

imply that you are using technology as a crutch either. Autofocus and

advanced metering have their place.

I'm going to leave this thread here as long as it remains civil. As we should all know, no camera can make you a better photographer. This is not the same as saying no camera can improve your photography though, so keep the replies civil, as they have been so far.

 

<p>

 

What the EOS 3 will do for you depends on what you use now, and what sort of photography you do. If you primarily do landscapes, it won't do much, if anything, for you that any 35mm SLR won't do. On the other hand, if you currently do a lot of sports, or take pictures of birds in flight, or whatever involving focus tracking, it will make things a lot easier than manual focus. Less so if you already use a modern autofocus camera. Things like multi spot metering are nice, but in the end you still have to pick on aperture and one shutter speed, so there is only so much a meter can do for you.

 

<p>

 

In other words, it depends. The answer is simple. Is there something your style requires that your current equipment can't do, or perhaps more importantly, that you can't do with it? If so, does the EOS 3, or for that matter, any other camera do it? If the answer is yes to both questions, then it may help a little, but no camera is going to work miricles.

</B> The EOS-3 has a couple of features not on my EOS-1. First, it has

a mirror lockup. That's great, especially for macro work, and

landscape work. It has a TTL flash system that can manage fill up to

1/8000th. That's awesome for portrait work, or outdoor fill work. The

remote flash capability is nice. The vertical grip that duplicates all

the controls in the vertical position (ala the EOS-5) makes it better

than the EOS-1n too. This is definitely a very nice upgrade. I think I

will eventually end up with one or the replacement to the EOS-1n

(though that'll probably be a lot heavier). It has a 97% viewfinder,

not as nice as a 100% viewfinder, but the slidemount hides that much

anyway.

<p>

The street price is supposed to be around $1000 for a new EOS-3. That

makes it a very affordable camera.

Does the EOS 3 really do *TTL* flash up to 1/8000? There are a number

of cameras that will to high speed sync by pulsing the flash, but none

are TTL to my knowledge.

 

<p>

 

The X sync for the EOS 3 is 1/200 where it will certainly do TTL.

I DO think that better equipment improves your photography. IB4ve been

a pro sound engineer for some 25 years and found out that top

results, in most cases, can only be achieved with top quality gear.

All these myths about John Shaw being able to shoot with a Russian

Leica and a Korean lens and DELIVER is rubish!

Go for the best (though usually grossly overpriced) and be stimulated

and inspired; THEN youB4ll know that if the results are no good IT IS

you and your technique. It does not matter if it is Canon, Nikon or

whatever; who can afford building bad quality for top dollar? Over a

certain price level EVERYTHING is good, let the ergonomics and

appearance decide.

EOS3 SHALL improve your photography!

Andrzej, If what inspires you is a new peice of equipment then it

seems as though you would have to purchase a new lens or body every

six months in order to take good photos. If you think that giving a

seasoned photographer like Shaw a no frills camera a crock, then

consider Edward Weston. He took his photo masterpieces with a beat up

8x10 system held together with duct tape. I think Tommy made a good

point about how updates can ease certain sitautions, thus "getting the

shot." For years the Nikon 75-150 series E zoom was a favorite amoung

fashion photographers, 10 -20 years previous I'm sure that a zoom was

unheard of for lack of quality. Many great photos were taken before

the introduction of autofocus, but different things inspire us all.

Ron,

I know that top quality equipment does not automatically create a top

photographer; I know that some people can achieve wonders with a

Konica Pop - but only SOME. I totally disagree with the common

attitude - I am a beginner and looking for a simple camera to learn.

Many will be put off by what they achieve and turn to something else

- they think it is their fault that the photographs are out of focus

and under/overexposed, etc.. Give these people the right stuff from

the start!

The original question was if EOS3 would improve his photography - the

answer MUST be YES (depending on his past experience and the quality

of equipment he had been using). With the modern gear of today and

some brains you can, at least, come up with good looking images and

be a hero among your friends and family.

Think of the photos that have inspired you. Think of the images that made you think, "I wish I had taken that!". Think of when when they were taken, who they were taken by, and what they were taken with. For me it is Henri Cartier-Bresson. Manual focus rangefinder (OK a Leica - so what?), did the equipment make those images what they were? Ok, the fact the camera was small and relatively fast to operate would have helped, but that's sheer handling, nothing to do with camera functions or features.

Also ask yourself if the 'features' witl actually get in the way of taking a wonderful classic photo 'cos you don't want to have spent all that money and not use all that's on offer.

<em>EOS 3 - How will it improve your photography</em>

 

<p>

 

Simple answer - it won't. This asumes you are already shooting with

a current or last generation AF SLR body. If you're currently

using a disposable camera, maybe you'll see some difference.

 

<p>

 

Given $1000 to spend, my guess is that buying and shooting 100 rolls

of extra film will give you a far better payoff in terms of "keeper"

images than buying a new camera body. Even better would be taking

a $500 trip and 50 extra rolls of film.

 

<p>

 

If you're using an Elan/ElanII/A2/EOS-1(n) or similar and you're

not getting good images now, an EOS-3 won't do anything for you

except make your wallet lighter.

 

<p>

 

I think it looks like a great camera, and would make an excellent

choice if you're just coming into the EOS family, but the "upgrade"

advantages for most people (myself included) are based more in the

mind than reality.

If, as above post suggests, it won't improve the photography of

someone already using an Elan 2, then someone about to buy into the

EOS system might just as well get an Elan 2. There would be point in

spending money on a more expensive camera.

Correct (I assume you really meant NO point).

 

<p>

 

I've seen a bunch of people with F5s, F4s, EOS-1s etc., shooting

hand held nature with comsumer lenses. My guess is they wasted their

money (but it's their money to waste).

 

<p>

 

They probably wonder why I have an ElanII stuck on the end of

a 600/4L - not even an ElanIIe. Hmm. Maybe <em>that's</em> why

my images suck. I clearly need an EOS-1n (with an EOS-3 for backup

of course).

But not everyone buys an expensive body and puts crap lenses on it to

shoot nature handheld. Used intelligently, the Eos 3 presumably will

offer some real advantages over other EOS models.

Sure it does. And the 1n offers more (different advantages) and

the 1n RS offers even more (and still more different advantages).

And the EOS-4 will offer as yet unknown advantages.

 

<p>

 

However anyone who thinks that continually buying and "upgrading"

is going to do much for their photogaphy is probably doomed to

perpetual disappointment.

 

<p>

 

There's an old Zen saying which runs along the lines of "If you

can't achieve enlightenment here and now, what makes you think you

will achieve it somewhere else?". The problem with most photographs

lies far more in the photographer than in the equipment.

 

<p>

 

The main reason camera companies introduce so many new models is

to generate revenue, not to supply photographers with equipment

they really need. But we all know that, right?

I won't be looking for a new camera for at least a decade, or more, I

hope. My 8008s is six years old, and a F4s is a little over a year

old. I don't think either of the new cameras would improve my

photography. They might make it easier as far as state of the art

autofocus, but I don't use any AF in landscape or closeups, so I

guess I'll just keep what I've got, and suffer through not having a

new and improved camera. I just wonder what they (camera companies)

are going to think we want next? And where do they get their input

from? I've never seen a questionnaire about what "I" want on a camera

body!!