Please bear with me on this an answer using small words only :D im a techno half-wit.

I think I have pretty much decided to upgarde my fujifilm S5500 for a digital SLR.

A friend has a 300D which gives good performance and shows a much higher pic quality than my S5500. Obvious areas of improvement are reaction speed and readiness to take the next pic (I take alot of motorsport style pics) and the overall image quality when viewed on computer at home. The display is also much better and gives a better overal feel for what im doing.

My S5500 with additional converter lens / 2 off 512mb cards and bag should bring in around £200. I dont want to spend the earth on an upgrade so will probably be using good old e-bay.


Ok, so to the questions.

1. As an amateur who likes to take a good number of pics would I notice a difference between a 300D and a 350D's performance? The 350D has a higher mega pixel I think but would that be noticeable when viewing pics and the occasional print?

2. Does the number of mega pixels relate to the number of pics you can get on your card? 350D higher quality and pic size = less pics per card than 300D?

3. I need a longish lens so will only be able to afford something middle of the road quality wise, will this detract badly from the overal pic quality?

4. I think £400 will get a 300d with reasonable lens and card. I think £540 wouldget a 350D with lens and card. Which would you buy and why?


Sorry for all the questions but they are worth asking IMHO :D

Gary

Go to a shop and hold them, take your friends 300D, and compare it to a 350D. In my opinion the 350 is just TOO SMALL. I think my 300D looks comical with my 24-70 sigma stuck on the front, and completely rediculus with the 70-200, the smaller body of the 350 will be completely dwarfed by any large lens, and I find it just does not fit in my hand well. (This maybe improved by a battery grip?) That would be the main deciding factor for me, as you will spend most of your time holding the camera. You can not complain about the picture quality from the 300, just look at the photo comps as most people are using the 300. See if you can notice a difference between pictures taken on a 300 and a 350?

Thanks thats a good reply and brings another factor into the equation I hadnt thought about, size and feel.

Any other comments?

Gary, on balance I think you should get a Canon 350D with the kit lenses 18-55mm and 55-200mm. This package is unbeatable value, very versatile and good for motorsport, and will give you real quality. See the current deals on this link.

http://bbs.scoobynet.co.uk/showthread.php?t=469945

Other contenders are the Canon 20D, and also Nikon D70s and D50. I don't know the Nikons in detail, other than that they are both fine cameras. In terms of results, you will not be able to distinguish between the images taken by any of these cameras. The differences are in the features and the way they handle, and of course, the price. The Canon 350D now with £100 cashback wins. However...

Top choice is undoubedly the Canon 20D as suggested by Nexaus. It is bigger, tougher and better for larger hands. It also has a 5fps drive (350D is 3fps) which could be decisive for motorsport. I dunno - unlike just about everybody else on here, I don't shoot motorsport :D In other respects, the spec is very similar to the 350D. There is also a £100 cashback deal on the 20D now, but the 20D is still quite a bit more money - not sure of the latest deals, but I would guess at maybe £300 more for the body alone. That is still a bargain mind, and I bought one a couple of weeks ago for a net £800 (price-match at Jessops - I could have got it a bit cheaper, but I like to buy locally if possible). I also have a 350D, BTW.

To your questions:

1) The difference between the 300D and 350D is mainly operational. You will be very hard pressed to tell the difference between the images each one produces. Biggest advantage of the 350D in my view is the instant start-up time. Go to the review section of www.dpreview.com and read about the 350D - they do a direct comparison with the 300D.

2) Yes - more pixels equals more data which takes up more memory, but I wouldn't worry about it. There are two types of image file - RAW and JPEG. RAW files are unprocessed and huge, and will fill up your memory card quickly. They require skilled post-processing on your PC - for experts only. But JPEGs are processed according to the basic preferences you set and compressed by the camera, and the result is images that look great straight out of the camera and you can get over 400 on a 1gig card. Select a higher compression setting and you can double this number. Image quality remains surprisingly good - fine for 6x4in prints. If you are only viewing on a PC screen, that is really very undemanding in terms of fine detail. But there is more to picture quality than pixels and D-SLRs have very good sensors that are much better than compacts in all aspects of image quality, as you have alreday discovered.

3) The 55-200mm kit lens will be plenty good enough for starters. Anything significantly better will cost at least as much as the camera. Lens snobbery is a weakness for many photographers; I suffer from it from time to time ;) Try to rise above it and judge the results for yourself.

4) 350D.

Best regards,

Richard.

Thanks for the comments hoppy ..... My mind swings back and forwards like a swingy back and forwards thing :D

It sounds as if there isnt an awful lot to chose between them. The 300D cant be had new now, or not that I can find. The 350D can and is a little more than I was hoping to spend when you add lens and cards too. It may all boil down to finding the best deal on e-bay at a particular point in time, or upping my budget slightly.

Of course you could always do me a deal on your 350D its just gready having 2 camera's :D

Gary

1. No, only downsides of the 300D is they are usually silver and take a few moments to fire up. They are a better feel than the 350D but nowhere near as nice as the metal bodied 20D.

2. Yes, see above.

3. You usually get what you pay for in lenses. Have a look on here at some of the motorsport pics. You should be able to get yourself a good enough lens without breaking the bank though. (I would personally steer clear of the 18-55 kit lens though as I hardly ever use mine).

4. Get a second hand 300D, with a battery grip - in fact I could be tempted to let you have mine to justify me buying that 20D I've been lusting after ;)

HTH

Some interesting points on both cameras.

A quick start up is a bonus I have to say especially when your waiting for cars to come along. You either have to leave it on all the time and hope the battery lasts or start up at the drop of a hat.

Other than the Currys - non in stock deal - Do you guys have any links to sites where I can get a 350D for good money?

Also the mastercard £100 how does that work?

Cheers for the help

Gary

The battery should last OK on both, it's a a Canon strong point. Pick up a couple of spare generic 3rd party batteries and you're sorted.

Unless you're buying the best available lenses and using them very carefully, you certainly won't notice any difference in picture quality between the 6MP 300D and the 8MP 350D. Your memory card will hold a few more pics at 6MP than 8, of course.

To me the most important issue for motorsport photography is the speed of the AF system. I use a Canon 1D which has AF that's fast and accurate enough to lock onto cars as they approach and maintain focus continuously until they're out of shot. My previous camera was a D30, with which I really needed to pre-focus on the spot where I thought the car was going to be, and time the exposure to coincide with when the car came into focus.

The problem with the 300D is that it tries to be clever in the AF department. It tries to determine for itself whether you want to focus on one point and leave it there ('one-shot' AF), or continuously track a moving subject ('AI Servo' AF). Although I confess that I've not actually used the 300D, the possibility that it'll get it wrong and decide to refocus at the crucial moment strikes me as a potential deal-breaker.

The 350D has user selectable focus mode and a newer AF system, which would definitely swing it for me. It also has numerous custom functions that allow you to customise how the camera works, which are unavailable (without a 3rd party hack) on the 300D. One of these is '2nd curtain sync' for the flash, which makes night shots with headlights look much better. I don't believe the 300D can do this without an expensive add-on flash like the 550EX or 580EX.

Managed to find a Currys 350D in a shop as most are sold out and non available on-line. Going to pick it up after work.

Thanks for the help.

Next step will undoubtably be lenses.

Gary

Gary, if I had any sense I would take you up on the offer to buy my 350D. But I haven't, so I'm not.

On the other hand, CharlieWhiskey might just have a snip of a 300D for you ;)

Richard.

Already spoken to Charliewhisky and he isnt ready to sell quite yet. Besides I liked the comment about the 350 having a newer hopefully better focus system, especially for use on motosport type pics.

Gary

I bet I can take better pics ;)

300D's don't like being submerged in water, get a 20D, they're much better anyway! :D

Well I have the 350D at home now, last one in the shop and not one in my local. Looks like currys are running a little short at the moment :D

Just need to buy a card now as it didnt come with even a small one, grumble grumble. As i've spent all my money, where can I get a cheap 1 meg card from?

cheers for the advice today by the way.

Gary

Try here http://www.picstop.co.uk/Compact-Flash-(CF)

I use the 2Gb Kingston Elite Pro cards :thumb:

But read this first to find out what suits the 350D http://www.robgalbraith.com/bins/multi_page.asp?cid=6007-7699