Eos 3 buying dilemma

[lawrence_dunbar]

So I went to the Photo store yesterday, planning to buy the Eos 3.

Unfortunately, I had a salesperson that made me doubt the purchase,

so I ended up backing out. I told him that I was looking into buying

an eos, but I would also like to take a look at an f100. Here are a

couple of points that he brought up. I'd appreciate any comments on

them. Most of my friends are now using medium format and I dont

really have anybody to turn to for advice.

 

He said:

 

*The f100 is a "professional camera", and the eos 3 isnt. I could

expect the f100 to last 20 years, whereas the eos 3 MIGHT last 2.

This comment kinda irked me right off the bat.

 

*The eos 3 is made out of plastic, while the f100 is made out of

metal, so the f100 will perform better under harsh conditions. I

understand that the eos is made out of polycarbon and sealed against

weather, so I kinda just ignored this comment.

 

*The f100 is superior in almost all aspects of use, from focusing,

metering to operation. He actually picked up the eos and seemed to

act like HE couldnt even figure out how to use it, and blamed the

poor user interface as the cause.

 

*The nikon system has better lenses and accessories. I've been doing

research in that area, and im completely satisfied with buying canon

glass.

 

*(see middle of below paragraph) Buying a refurbished camera is

better than buying new. You get it for a cheaper price AND all the

kinks have been worked out by someone else. This was "a lesson he

learned the hard way".

 

So i figured that this guy wanted me to buy the f100 because it was

a few hundred more expensive and he wanted a bigger commission.

But what is really wierd, even though I told him that I would take

the eos, he tried to sell me a refurbished one. I've never bought a

refurbished anything before so I was a little concerned about it.

Apparently, if I did buy it, I'd only be eligible for a 1 year

warranty, unless i purchased the extended warranty, which would cost

another 60 bucks and extend the warranty for two years (whereas the

new model wouldve recieved 3 years upfront). So if he just wanted to

sell me something, why didnt he try to sell me the eos new? he

wouldve made another 75 bucks off of me. He also told me that canon

sent them a big shipment of "demo models". He tried to explain to me

how they were "basically" new (I tried to find out whether they were

new or not), they were just not slated for sale until the last

minute. This is the order where my model came from. Was he just

trying to get rid of an overstock of refurbished models, or does

canon really do this?

 

But using both cameras in the store, side-by-side, I actually

preferred the nikon control layout, it seemed easier to use, but

maybe thats because he was highlighting the f100 and badmouthing the

eos, i dunno. I also have really big hands, so the eos kinda fit

better in them. I know there was a reason that I didnt want to buy

into a nikon system, but now I'm starting to doubt that decision.

I'm glad that I didnt buy either, I dont like when salespeople try

to make up my mind for me.

 

By the way, the photo store wasnt some two-bit operation. it's

actually a sponsor of this site, starting with "Ador" and ending

with "ama".

 

Someone please reassure me that the eos 3 is a good camera and that

buying into a canon system is a wise choice. Thanks.

[bobatkins]

System choice is a matter of personal preference. There are no absolutes. There are thousands of photographers making a living with the EOS-3 and probably just as many doing so with a Nikon F100.

 

I'd go to another camera store and see what story you get there. Since you are in NYC you could try a store starting with "B" and ending in "H"

 

I'd say the salesdroid clearly had an agenda and he wanted to sell you the F100. His comments seem to me to be nothing more than a sales pitch. For example the EOS-3 isn't made of plastic. It does have a polycarbonate shell, but that's over a metal subframe holding the important bits. It has the same degree of weather sealing as the EOS-1n does.

 

I have an EOS-3 and I think it's a great camera. Solid, reliable, accurate. No doubt many F100 owners can say the same.

[isaac sibson]

<i>*The f100 is a "professional camera", and the eos 3 isnt. I could expect the f100 to last 20 years, whereas the eos 3 MIGHT last 2. This comment kinda irked me right off the bat. </i><p>

 

And it should. Observe Chasseur D'Images' test of the F100, Dynax 9 and EOS 3's shutter durabilities. All three guaranteed for 100000 exposures. The dynax blew up at 85000, the nikon died at 115000, and the EOS gave up the ghost at 412000. This guy was somewhere off the planet...<p>

 

<i>*The eos 3 is made out of plastic, while the f100 is made out of metal, so the f100 will perform better under harsh conditions. I understand that the eos is made out of polycarbon and sealed against weather, so I kinda just ignored this comment. </i><p>

 

Good. I have a nokia 8850 mobile phone. A friend of mine has an 8310. The 8310 is made of plastic whilst my 8850 is made of metal. Does one perform better than the other in "harsh conditions"? Not that I've seen. If anything, the plastic phone is MORE durable. In cameras, it doesn't make a lot of difference. Both are solid cameras. What would break one will likely break the other.<p>

 

<i>*The f100 is superior in almost all aspects of use, from focusing,</i><p>

 

Right....[/sarcasm]<p>

 

<i>metering</i><p>

 

Not what <i>Amateur Photographer</i> magazine in the UK found...<p>

 

<i>to operation. He actually picked up the eos and seemed to act like HE couldnt even figure out how to use it, and blamed the poor user interface as the cause.</i><p>

 

Most people regard the EOS series as having an excellent user interface, with a great deal of commonality between all models. That can't be said for Nikon, with the dial and knob driven F4 being completely different to the unfathomable F70 which bears no relation to the F100. <p>

 

<i>*The nikon system has better lenses and accessories. I've been doing research in that area, and im completely satisfied with buying canon glass. </i><p>

 

Nikon produce some excellent lenses. Canon produce some excellent lenses. Some places nikon have better glass, some places canon do. Canon offer more extreme pieces of glass (three TS-E lenses, 50 F1.0, 200 F1.8, forthcoming 500 F2.8, 1200 F5.6) and also offer IS and USM in the same lenses (something nikon have yet to achieve). Both produce long lists of accessories, but the modular system of pro EOS bodies is superior in my view (since you can't remove the power pack/vertical grip from an F5, but you can from the 1V and 3).

[yakim_peled1]

It's the same old question - "which camera body should I buy ?" - and the same old answer. It's not the specific body which counts or the specific features it contains, it's "Which system is better for YOU ?". In addition to what's written in http://photonotes.org/articles/why-canon, http://www.photo.net/equipment/35mm/canon-v-nikon and http://www.photozone.de/bindex2.html (click on CANON vs NIKON ? WHAT ABOUT MINOLTA ? AND PENTAX ?) I'd say that there is one major reason to prefer Canon over Nikon. When Nikon releases a new line of lenses, some of their features are not fully compatible with older bodies e.g. you have no light-meter readout or VR does not work. And "older" can be just 3-5 years old. See http://www.nikonlinks.com/unklbil/bodylens.htm for details. This can be VERY annoying and completely un-understandable to anybody "living" in EOS "land". Here, things are much more simple. Any EOS camera is fully compatible with any EF lens, period. Don't get me wrong, I am not trying to say something silly like "Canon is better from Nikon". I only say that life can be much easier in EOS land.

 

There are some minor reasons as well. For example, Canon's USM is much more abundant than Nikon's AF-S and generally cost less. Canon's IS is much more abundant than Nikon's VR. While optical quality is about the same, an advanced technology can be a very nice and handy thing. A note, to me they are the minor ones but for others consider them as major issues. It's what's right to YOU.

 

And if you do not want to ever mount an MF lens on your AF body, Canon have a larger selection of AF lenses than Nikon. For landscape and buildings (straight ones, that is) you can't beat the 24/3.5 TS-E L. Some Nikon users bought an EOS body just to be able to use this lens. Others did so in order to get IS on their longest primes (e.g. 300/2.8 and 600/4).

 

MLU (Mirror lock up) is very handy feature for tripod shots. It is very rare in Nikon's AF bodies (I think that only the F5 has it) while is abounded in the EOS line.

 

Another unique feature of the Canon system is DEP mode (not sure if the 3 has it). DEP mode allows you to designate near-far points of focus and the camera sets depth of field between those two points. In DEP mode, you merely focus on the nearest point you want sharp, then you focus on the farthest point you want sharp, then you re-compose your picture and the camera sets aperture, shutter, and focus to achieve the depth of field you designated.

 

Combine all the above with the fact that Canon's prices are the same as or less then Nikon's and you begin to understand the EOS dominance in recent years.

 

Remember, tough, that no system is perfect. Here are a few examples.

 

1. Canon's AF is considered to be superior to any other brand. This means a lot to the professional photographer but what does it mean to the average armature ? Just another thing to consider.

 

2. Nikon's flash metering is considered to be superior to Canon's. So ? Take a look at any flash photo and try to guess which body did the photographer used. Any success ? No ? Why am I not surprised ? Because a good picture relates heavily on the photographer side. It's not what you have, it's how well you know its pros and cons. How and when to exploit the formers, how and when to override the latters and in what way. When to switch metering modes, when to bounce the flash, when to use a different focal length for a different perspective etc. I think you got the point.

 

Whatever you choose, shoot a lot and be happy.

 

Regards ,

Yakim.

 

Silly me, almost forgot. Both are fine bodies and I'm sure you will be happy with either of them. But remember, it's "Which SYSTEM do you like more ?". Answer this and your question is answered.

 

For all the points made by the salesperson I have only one word. However, it's not a very nice one so I won't say it out loud. I'll just say that it starts with "Bull" and ends with "shit".

[adam_hemphill]

Yep, it's all complete bull'.

[rog21]

I'll contribute two items:<BR><BR>

1) The EOS-3 does have DEP.<BR><BR>

2) Adorama has many sales persons, I'd choose another.<BR><BR>

I handled the 1V and 3 extensively before settling on the 3. I could not tell which was which without looking (they weigh almost the same and the controls are identical). The eye controled focus is what did it for me (Nikon has no such thing). I always hated that the autofocus cameras focused where they wanted instead of where I wanted. I'm very happy with my EOS-3 and expect it to last as long as my previous FD bodies (2 A1, 2 F1N, 2 T90), starting from 1973 I've never had a Canon body fail (though I had my Dad's A1 CLA'd for the squeak problem).<BR><BR>

I say find a sales person who really knows the EOS-3 and go through it with him/her before you decide between it and the Nikon, you will be pleasantly surprized. Also, search this forum, I don't think you'll find many reports for EOS-3 bodies giving up ever (much less after "just a couple of years."

[chris_brown4]

Hello

 

I got my first EOS 3 yesterday and absolutely love it, The eye control focusing works extremely well (never believed it myself until I used it yesterday) The Camera feels extremely well built and will hopefully last me for many years to come.

 

I think, as already mentioned, that this guy was just after a sale of the Nikon (Maybe Nikon were pushing for a certain number of bodies to be sold???), some of his comments are extremely laughable.

 

You will not regret buying into the Canon EOS system, the range of lenses and accesories is unparalleled. I started off with just an Eos 300 (Rebel 2000) and 28-80mm NON USM and have slowly built up over the last three years to owning and EOS 3, Eos 300, 28-105 USM, 50mm 1.8, 70-200mm f.2.8L, Speedlite 550ex + many other bits and peices.

 

Buy it, Love it and enjoy it :)

 

Cheers

 

Chris<div></div>

[cliff_lesergent]

The salesperson may have been pushing the Nikon because Nikon was offfering a bigger "spiff" than Canon. A spiff is a monetary reward from the manufacturer for selling their product (someone more cynical than I might call it a "kickback"). Often, the sales staff in these large stores are paid on commission, and they can earn extra money by pushing a particular brand or model depending on the spiffs available. In the case of the refurbished EOS, his commission on the extended warranty would probably be more than he would earn selling you a new camera that came with the manufacturer's warranty.

 

(as an aside, I think the refurbished Canon products are a great value, and I personally wouldn't bother with an extended warranty if it came with a one-year warranty from Canon)

 

Unfortunately for the consumer, your chances of getting a fair and unbiased opinion from these people on any particular product may be just about "nil". This sounds like a prime example.

[billballardphotography]

Sounds as if you need to find another shop.........

[lawrence_dunbar]

Thanks everyone for the comments. I think I'll take my price quote over to B&H and see how close to it I can get over there. I spent most of the day today re-reading the many eos 3 reviews and, combined with your comments, feel reassured that the canon line is for me.

 

I feel reluctant to buy a refurbished body. I like to know the complete history of a product and can usually get that info from the previous owner, or start with a blank slate with a new product. It was only a hundred dollar difference, and with the $75 rebate available from canon, it narrows the margin to only $25. I think that may be the better route for me.

 

Thanks again guys.

 

Lawrence

[colin_jones]

Can I make a suggestion?

 

Well I'm going to anyway.....

 

If you are in a big metropolis look to hire a camera with some of the lenses you are looking at. Even if it is just for a day then shoot, shoot and shoot some more.

 

It may cost a bit but if you are looking at spending a fair bit of cash it will convince you which you will feel happier with, in your hands and to use.

 

I use Canon because it fell in my lap (EOS 650) and sometimes I wish I had a better camera but it cost me nothing so I can't complain.

 

If you are spending my hard earned cash I would like to know that I am making an informed choice.

 

Good Luck in your search for a better salesman.

[henry_c]

See, I think you are talking about Adorama. I've been there buying Canon and Nikon stuffs in the past, such as F100 with motor drive, EOS1v HS, 28-70 for Nikon, and 28-70 for Canon, and a tons of other things. I've NEVER met anyone who is even remotely like the sales you have met. In fact I've never met anyone who's biased like that on any store from NYC. I've only received fair and unbiased comments to a certain degree from both BH and Adorama people.

[lee_shively]

Lawrence, while I am an EOS user and devotee, I would suggest you go to another store and handle both cameras without the salesperson input. If you've done your research and narrowed it down to the EOS system and EOS 3 vs the Nikon system and the F100, the bottom line on which to buy may be which one feels best to you when it's in your hands. This is, of course, a Canon forum and everyone here endorses Canon. But, truthfully, if you like the Nikon better that's the camera for you. YOU are the only one who matters in this transaction.

[rsriram]

Sounds like this guy gets a bigger cut from Nikon sales.

[pok_hon_wally_yu]

First of all, I have used my EOS 3 for 2 years and I still work flawlessly.....

 

Also, the plastic vs. metal talk has been totally misunderstood by a lot of people here. There are good and bad plastic. Grocery store shopping bag and the shell of EOS 3 are both made of "plastic," but the durability is certainly very different. I believe you got the picture. Actually plastic has several advantages over metal: 1) it is lighter (3 is already a heavy camera. An all-metal construction with a 70-200 f2.8L lens and a 550EX flash could have killed your neck in 2 hours); 2) It's a bad thermal conductor and you don't need to worry about holding it when shooting in the snow; and 3) it won't dent or ding when it drops. Right, most people claim that metal body feels more solid. However, it only "feels" more solid. How it actually stands depends on the engineers designing the camera, and EOS 3 certainly is very tough and durable.

 

Seems like the salesperson you are dealing with have no idea of what Canon offers. He doesn't even have any idea about the renowned Canon USM motor. The user interface is actually very clear on the camera: 3 buttons with 6 different modes of operations. Certainly you need a manual to set the custom fuctions, but you usually set them at home and let them sit there. If you need to change them in the field, Canon has provided a small CF quick reference card and labels you can put CFs you often change inside the sidedoor.

 

Concerning lens technology, Canon is certainly way ahead of Nikon for IS technology. Again, your sales seems to be completely ignorant on the Canon "system."

 

Again, I am not saying that Canon is better than Nikon. After all, it's up to you to make the choice. One point most people ignore about choosing a camera is ergonomics: a camera that fits your hands well. I suggest you to talk to a REAL salesperson and try both out to see which works better for you. If money is not the main issue in your purchase, consider the PB-E2 power grip. It truly makes the 3 shine, especially you have big hands. Also, consider the Canon 550EX flash.

[canon man]

I just went auto focus a few months ago after nearly 20 years wit hmanual focus cameras. in that amount of time I have used Nikons Minoltas, Pentax k1000 and ofsourse nearly 15 years with the AE1 AV1 an F1 here and there borrowed from freinds to use for a hunting trip. When I went auto focus I guess the choice was biased because I already used Canon, but it could very well have been Nikon. Before I switched I did a lot of research before buying my 630 to see how I would like auto focus. The reason I chose Canon...sensibility and stability. I became aware of Nikon's propensity for making incompatibiltiy issues through my Photography instructor who is a Nikon nut. i figured that if I bought something now, I would like to use it on a camera that I might buy two years from now. I can think of better things to spend money on rather than renting a lens while one is being rechipped...film to name one. I really wanted to buy an EOS 3 when I bought my Elan7 and had the money to do so, but figured this close to Christmas(whe nI bought it)I better get the Elan7 and BP300 and wait on the 3. I still want a three and hopefully can get one later this year. as for the user interface. You will have it figured out the first day, within the following week yuo'll have all the perks figured out. No doubt, you could do the same wit hthe Nikon.

[dong_wah_chin]

Hi,

 

Go with the 3 if you've already decided on the Canon system. No regrets. I don't believe that either Canon or Nikon is superior to one another. However, Canon has USM and IS at affordable prices compared to AF-S and VR.

 

*The f100 is a "professional camera", and the eos 3 isnt

What makes a camera professional anyway?? Both are equally capable.

 

*He actually picked up the eos and seemed to act like HE couldnt even figure out how to use it, and blamed the poor user interface as the cause.

He must be a "dimwit". How did he get the job in the first place?! The controls are intuitive enough unless you are totally new to photography.

 

*The eos 3 is made out of plastic, while the f100 is made out of metal, so the f100 will perform better under harsh conditions.

What kind of harsh conditions? The Antartic? The batteries would die fast on both cameras before the cameras even gets a scratch. Used the 3 in snow/mild blizzards and all it needs is some cleaning up at the end of the day.

 

Cheers

[umd]

A camerashop salesman is the last person to be relied upon; also this should be the last question to be asked in an Canon EOS forum, you'll surely get biased information. Both cameras and systems are pretty equivalent having minor advantages in different points. Go to another shop, play with both cameras and pick the one you like.

[philgeusebroek]

I have owned Canon AE1, AE1P, F1N, T90, Elan, Elan 7, Pentax K1000 and ME Super.

 

I now have an EOS 3, and it is every bit as rugged as the T90, with water resistance added. I work in the Arctic and find the polycarbonate housing to be an advantage as it doesn't get so cold. Not an F1-N, but definitely pro-quality.

 

The TS-E 24mm is a great lens for landscape, and with Canon stuff you don't have to mortgage the farm to get USM and/or IS.

 

Other great Canon lenses are the 100mm f/2.8 USM Macro, 300mm f4 IS and 70-200mm f4L. The 135mm f2L is a stellar performer as well. All of these lenses are also quite rugged.

 

I don't know about refurbs though. I have bought 3 refurbished items: an APS Canon P/S, a Kodak digital camera, and a Toshiba DVD player. All 3 have failed. The Canon APS camera wound 9 rolls of film through 3 months in Australia and Hawaii without exposing a single frame. It was working the week before I left. :(

 

Better to buy used but mint, than refurbished in my opinion.

 

Phil

[photobyalan.com]

I just received my new (actually, used) EOS 3, and it's terrific. I bought it to replace my 1N, which is getting old and doesn't have ETTL, which I find quite useful when using multiple speedlites. The EOS 3 seems just as solid to me as the 1N, I can't understand why anyone would comment that it feels "cheap".

[colin_jones]

Hey, why don't you have a larf and ask the same question on the Nikon Forum and see the difference in the answers you get.

 

War in the Gulf is nowt compared to this.

 

 

 

Only Joking {:o)

[j._d._mcgee]

The EOS 3 is a superb camera by all means. When I got mine I was overjoyed by it's feel and ruggedness. Don't EVER base your buying decisions on what some salesperson throws you spun bull. Most of his statements you posted are crap.

*"The f100 is a "professional camera", and the eos 3 isnt. I could expect the f100 to last 20 years, whereas the eos 3 MIGHT last 2. This comment kinda irked me right off the bat."* - first off this is a bunch of junk, the EOS 3 is a professional camera by all means and the F100 is no more professional than the 3. Heck the Elan 7 could be considered professional by some I mean come on. The EOS 3's polycarbonate "wunderplastik" body is, in my humble opinion, more durable than the dumb F100's so called "metal" body which is quite thin (dentable) to begin with.

 

You made the right choice the EOS 3 is just as durable if not more durable than any Nikon I have used. The EOS 3 is basically a newer version of the EOS-1n with all the same professional features and realiability in all aspects of professional shooting conditions. I love my EOS 3 and wouldn't depart from it for anything! Happy shooting.

[gene_austin]

I know exectly how you feel. I work in lower Manhattan and oftentimes visit a

store that begins with "J" and ends with "R". Not only does the main

salesperson in the pro camera section pump up Nikon and knock Canon, the

EOS-3 on display is locked in the showcase and cannot be used for hands on

demos. Its actually to the point of being insulting and condescending to

Canon users.

 

Besides the aforementioned advantage of the eye-control focusing, you also

have the ability to do wireless strobes that integrate with the camera's

metering system. Honestly, one disadvantage of the EOS-3 is the relatively

loud shutter advance which may or may not be a concern for you and that the

grip costs a small fortune. I bought a used EOS-3 off ebay a few months ago

but due to wanting digital I also scored a used D30 and grip. I originally

intended to flip the EOS-3 but I can't part with it because it is truly the finest,

most responsive camera I've ever owned. Coming from an Elan IIe I was

initially intimidated by the EOS-3 user interface but after using it a short time I

found it to be very intuitive. The Canon EOS-3/D30 and Nikon F100/D100 are

all excellent, durable, well designed tools. Just keep in mind that this is a

long term investment in a system and that once you choose one versus the

other, it will be somewhat costly to change your mind later and make a switch.

[philgeusebroek]

I don't bother with the eye control, and the EOS 3 is still the best AF system I have used.

[steevens_alconcel]

The EOS 3 was my 2nd Canon Body after the Rebel 2000, it has served me very well. I've tried Nikon bodies w/lenses. I always manage to get the slow grinding sound when it tries to focus. I would definitely go with the 3, I've had it with 2 years with no problems so far. Very durable, I've dropped it several times without any fault in operation.