Canon EOS30/33 or Nikon F80?


Status
Not open for further replies.

tomshen

Senior Member
Feb 20, 2002
3,644
0
36
Singapore
#4
Select your system instead of only your camera, though it's hard to see it clear b4 you have a body. You cannot be wrong with either one. Ask a Canon user, he will tell you the other story.
 

007

New Member
Apr 11, 2002
692
0
0
u n k n o w n
Visit site
#5
Originally posted by ckiang
I'd say F80, but do try out both and see which you prefer.


Regards
CK
heehee, no $$ no talk, I wish but I can't:cry: unless you sponsor hor?:bsmilie:
 

Kho King

Senior Member
Jan 20, 2002
2,513
0
0
41
shashinki.com
#6
Originally posted by 007

heehee, no $$ no talk, I wish but I can't:cry: unless you sponsor hor?:bsmilie:
He means trying out both at shop, then decide which one you prefer.
 

007

New Member
Apr 11, 2002
692
0
0
u n k n o w n
Visit site
#9
Originally posted by ckiang


Yeah. That's right. :) Who would want to buy 2 different systems unless one of them is a Leica or something? ;p

Regards
CK
Got it! Sorry, misinterpreted the meanings......:embrass:
 

007

New Member
Apr 11, 2002
692
0
0
u n k n o w n
Visit site
#10
Originally posted by andre
Minolta Dynax 5... price of F65, but with F80 feature...

got more money go for Dynax 7...

hehehe :)

-Andre
I read somewhere:

Olympus = Good body
Nikon makes good lenses
Canon is somewhere in between.
but personally I like the way canon does business. Nikon is just too stubborn(means no interraction with their customers....and many things only Canon first introduce for quite long, then nikon will use that technology in their cameras.....) other than that it is quite difficult to decide.....Nikon or Canon?:dent:
 

Kho King

Senior Member
Jan 20, 2002
2,513
0
0
41
shashinki.com
#11
Originally posted by 007


I read somewhere:

Olympus = Good body
Nikon makes good lenses
Canon is somewhere in between.
but personally I like the way canon does business. Nikon is just too stubborn(means no interraction with their customers....and many things only Canon first introduce for quite long, then nikon will use that technology in their cameras.....) other than that it is quite difficult to decide.....Nikon or Canon?:dent:
Ask yourself more, what lens you want. Then easier to decide.
 

rueyloon

New Member
Jan 17, 2002
1,679
0
0
www.rueyloon.com
#12
Originally posted by 007


I read somewhere:

Olympus = Good body
Nikon makes good lenses
Canon is somewhere in between.

brother.. you'll have the "unread" them :p

Canon definately comes up with things faster and have more "fun" stuff which can make photography .... FUN, with
nikon you'll have to wait ages for new stuff to come out. Hence depending on what type of a person you are lorr :p
 

Jed

Senior Member
Jan 19, 2002
3,911
0
0
UK
Visit site
#13
Ruey Loon's post made me think of something a bit differently from the way I normally do. You guys know how I'm always going on about Singaporean photographers being, in general, somewhat too obsessed with equipment? And how in general the people here take better pictures with far, far less equipment? Well, after reading RL's post, I sort of realise that maybe with some people the joy of photography is in using the equipment, and therefore I suppose bells and whistles are a great joy.

For me anyway, my images are all that matter to me, hence equipment envy, comparing brands with passion, comparing brands with ignorance/half truths, all seem a bit stupid.
 

scanner

Senior Member
Jan 24, 2002
1,608
0
0
Visit site
#14
Originally posted by Jed
Ruey Loon's post made me think of something a bit differently from the way I normally do. You guys know how I'm always going on about Singaporean photographers being, in general, somewhat too obsessed with equipment? And how in general the people here take better pictures with far, far less equipment? Well, after reading RL's post, I sort of realise that maybe with some people the joy of photography is in using the equipment, and therefore I suppose bells and whistles are a great joy.

For me anyway, my images are all that matter to me, hence equipment envy, comparing brands with passion, comparing brands with ignorance/half truths, all seem a bit stupid.
Yo! Good say! :thumbsup:
Anyway, me too, partly fall under this group
- the joy of photography is in using the equipment.
Hahahaha... :D
 

007

New Member
Apr 11, 2002
692
0
0
u n k n o w n
Visit site
#15
Originally posted by Jed
Ruey Loon's post made me think of something a bit differently from the way I normally do. You guys know how I'm always going on about Singaporean photographers being, in general, somewhat too obsessed with equipment? And how in general the people here take better pictures with far, far less equipment? Well, after reading RL's post, I sort of realise that maybe with some people the joy of photography is in using the equipment, and therefore I suppose bells and whistles are a great joy.

For me anyway, my images are all that matter to me, hence equipment envy, comparing brands with passion, comparing brands with ignorance/half truths, all seem a bit stupid.
Or waste the $$$? :cool:
 

Mar 20, 2002
27
0
0
Singapore
Visit site
#16
Originally posted by Jed
Ruey Loon's post made me think of something a bit differently from the way I normally do. You guys know how I'm always going on about Singaporean photographers being, in general, somewhat too obsessed with equipment? And how in general the people here take better pictures with far, far less equipment? Well, after reading RL's post, I sort of realise that maybe with some people the joy of photography is in using the equipment, and therefore I suppose bells and whistles are a great joy.

For me anyway, my images are all that matter to me, hence equipment envy, comparing brands with passion, comparing brands with ignorance/half truths, all seem a bit stupid.
You say that images are all that matter to you, and that all this equipment envy seems a little stupid, yet you can argue so passionately about how useful USM/SSM is to a photographer, and to the extent that you even made a few long posts. And now you can still say that all this equipment discussions seem a little stupid to you. Makes me wonder if whatever you're saying is credible......

http://forums.clubsnap.org/showthread.php?s=&threadid=3459&perpage=20&pagenumber=2
 

007

New Member
Apr 11, 2002
692
0
0
u n k n o w n
Visit site
#17
Originally posted by crazyhorse


You say that images are all that matter to you, and that all this equipment envy seems a little stupid, yet you can argue so passionately about how useful USM/SSM is to a photographer, and to the extent that you even made a few long posts. And now you can still say that all this equipment discussions seem a little stupid to you. Makes me wonder if whatever you're saying is credible......

http://forums.clubsnap.org/showthread.php?s=&threadid=3459&perpage=20&pagenumber=2
I second that!;)
 

007

New Member
Apr 11, 2002
692
0
0
u n k n o w n
Visit site
#18
Originally posted by Jed
Ruey Loon's post made me think of something a bit differently from the way I normally do. You guys know how I'm always going on about Singaporean photographers being, in general, somewhat too obsessed with equipment? And how in general the people here take better pictures with far, far less equipment? Well, after reading RL's post, I sort of realise that maybe with some people the joy of photography is in using the equipment, and therefore I suppose bells and whistles are a great joy.

For me anyway, my images are all that matter to me, hence equipment envy, comparing brands with passion, comparing brands with ignorance/half truths, all seem a bit stupid.
don't tell me brand is not a matter hor!
If you got one F80, can you use canon's lenses? of course not!From your advice, I think you just asked me simply get a camera (any brand) and enjoy the equipment, not the brand! Yeap! then I go and get one Pentax, how? (I know the famous, it ain't the camera, it is the user that does matter, ) But without a good equipment, how are we going to have equal conditions to get a nice shot? wahaha....... :bsmilie:luckily i am not totally a newbie, if not, kenna misleaded also blur blur!:dent:
 

Ian

Senior Member
Feb 20, 2002
2,548
0
0
56
Perth Australia
#19
Originally posted by crazyhorse


You say that images are all that matter to you, and that all this equipment envy seems a little stupid, yet you can argue so passionately about how useful USM/SSM is to a photographer, and to the extent that you even made a few long posts. And now you can still say that all this equipment discussions seem a little stupid to you. Makes me wonder if whatever you're saying is credible......

Erm, I'd suggest you read what Jed actually says in his posts .. his point is that most phtographers DO NOT REQUIRE USM and in that he's quite corrrect.

Jed is also in case you don't know it a professional sports photographer whose work regularly makes the front pages of the UK National Press, so he's far better qualified to speak on this matter than most people on this forum or indeed most forums online.

I for one shot for 23 years in a variety of professional areas such as motorsport, travel, wildlife without the need for USM, AF or any other bells and whistles and indeed if you knew what you're talking about you'd realise that the majority of professional wildlife work is done with lenses over 600mm in focal length, which precludes USM in most cases.

Equipment envy discussions and endless wars (except for fun :devil: ) are essentially a waste of time as Jed will agree. What is FAR more important is how people use their equipment and frankly many amateurs buy gear that they will never use to it's potential so they can pose and posture with their toys.
 

Jed

Senior Member
Jan 19, 2002
3,911
0
0
UK
Visit site
#20
Originally posted by crazyhorse
You say that images are all that matter to you, and that all this equipment envy seems a little stupid, yet you can argue so passionately about how useful USM/SSM is to a photographer, and to the extent that you even made a few long posts. And now you can still say that all this equipment discussions seem a little stupid to you. Makes me wonder if whatever you're saying is credible......
Okay, let me clarify. No, actually I have nothing to clarify. No where in my post did I say equipment discussion was a waste of time. I said equipment envy was a waste of time.

There's nothing wrong with level headed equipment discussion, certainly not. Discussing the merits of a certain tool and whether it contributes to taking a better picture is fine. But how many equipment discussions do you know that remain level headed?

And then there's equipment envy, which is quite a different thing, and what I was warning against, not equipment discussion.

If you read my comments in the link that you've posted, you'll see that I was trying to say that you don't need USM to take good pictures. I was trying to get rid of the equipment lust that I'm talking about here, nothing two faced at all.

Frankly, I've had it with painstakingly trying to educate people and then having my credibility called into question. Next time, read my posts properly first, and also, go ahead and think that you need USM to take a good picture.

I think it's absolutely brilliant that we get lurkers like this who do nothing and then jump in like sharks when they find a perceived inconsistency. Do you do anything other than try to tear people to pieces?
 

Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom