david_brown13

THe lenses I currently have are the ones that came as part of the kit: 35-80 and 80-200mm zoom. I purchased a Canon 50mm f1.8 yesterday and will add more lenses as per your help.

I think my main reasons for upgrading were:

1. It is my birthday and I wanted to spend some pennies!

2. I assumed that as it was an entry level camera I could take better pics with a higher spec camera.

One last question! With the 35 zone metering system on the EOS 30 improve the overall % of "good" shots? (I appreciate that this is slightly naive question!)

Thank-you!

Having read your responseslens route does seem the better option.

Regards

David

I am a very enthuasiastic relative beginner and currently have an

EOS3000 I want to upgrade my camera (birthday coming up!)Should I go

for the EOS 30 or the EOS 3? I take mainly landscape shots, but also

enjoy playing around with macro shots. Would I be better off

spending the extra £££££'s on the EOS 3 now or go for the EOS 30 and

spend the extra on a decent lens.... or is there a better option?

I bought a digital camera 4 years ago and it got me into photography, I found the lack of ability to add lenses etc limiting and I went onto a film camera (EOS300) I enjoy using both, and they both have advantages and disadvantages. What I do get annoyed about is the constant bitching about film v digital that seems to go in the photography publications.

I am a mere amateur but as I see it the skill is in composing the shot and being in the right place at the right time - how you capture it I think is totally irrelevant. Without that skill you could have the best digital or best film camera and still not produce great shots. There seems to be a myth that with digital it is somehow easier to take good pics.

Personally as a newcomer to photography I find that when experimenting with different settings, exposures etc then digital gives me instant feedback and hence I have learnt more, as I have been able to experiment on the same scene without waiting for films to be developed. The EXIF file also gives me a useful record of the settings used. Having said that, some of my best pics have been taken on film! Digital is good but is still not 100% as crisp (maybe the wrong term, but hey I am a beginner!) as film. I find it is most noticeable in areas of lots of fine detail, say in pics of trees, the leaves look somehow blurred. Although I cannot comment on the 10D, (go on Canon, send me one FOC to try, Pleeeease!)

As for some of the comments about digital being cheaper - yeah right - want a set of 5x7" prints? say 36, by the time paper and ink have been taken into account, film is a lot cheaper.

Also is manipulating in Photoshop anymore cheating than messing around with a pic in the darkroom? And as anyone who has sat before photoshop knows it also takes a great deal of skill.

As far as I can see film and digital are just two arms of a great hobby, each requiring a distinct set of skills, what I don't see is why one needs to be considered better than the other. I will probably purchase a 10D so I can use all my Canon lenses, but will continue to shoot both film and digital.