Difference Between Canon DSLRs and EOS *0D (10,20,30)

On Nov 2, 11:55 am, "Cgiorgio" <m....TakeThisOut@nowhere.org> wrote:

>"Amateur" Cameras: High volume production, extensive use of molded plastic
> parts, built to withstand a few years of typical amateur use (weekend and
> vacation shooting), no full frame (24 x 36 mm) sensors - good choice for
> amateurs.
>
> "Pro" - Cameras: Low volume production, cost of R&D and tooling has to be
> recovered with small series, use of more durable materials to give years of
> reliable operation for professional use (like catalog photos, perhaps in
> tropical climatic conditions), many with full frame sensors.
> Worth the money if you use them as a professional.

Wow, you said it all. Thanks.
 >> Stay informed about: Difference Between Canon DSLRs and EOS *0D (10,20,30) 

On Nov 2, 11:55 am, "Cgiorgio" <m... RemoveThis @nowhere.org> wrote:

>"Amateur" Cameras: High volume production, extensive use of molded plastic
> parts, built to withstand a few years of typical amateur use (weekend and
> vacation shooting), no full frame (24 x 36 mm) sensors - good choice for
> amateurs.
>
> "Pro" - Cameras: Low volume production, cost of R&D and tooling has to be
> recovered with small series, use of more durable materials to give years of
> reliable operation for professional use (like catalog photos, perhaps in
> tropical climatic conditions), many with full frame sensors.
> Worth the money if you use them as a professional.

Wow, you said it all. Thanks.
 >> Stay informed about: Difference Between Canon DSLRs and EOS *0D (10,20,30) 

On Nov 2, 11:55 am, "Cgiorgio" <m....DeleteThis@nowhere.org> wrote:

>"Amateur" Cameras: High volume production, extensive use of molded plastic
> parts, built to withstand a few years of typical amateur use (weekend and
> vacation shooting), no full frame (24 x 36 mm) sensors - good choice for
> amateurs.
>
> "Pro" - Cameras: Low volume production, cost of R&D and tooling has to be
> recovered with small series, use of more durable materials to give years of
> reliable operation for professional use (like catalog photos, perhaps in
> tropical climatic conditions), many with full frame sensors.
> Worth the money if you use them as a professional.

Wow, you said it all. Thanks.
 >> Stay informed about: Difference Between Canon DSLRs and EOS *0D (10,20,30) 

>mutefan@yahoo.com wrote:
>
> I've been trying for the past three hours to learn something about the
> difference between the (relatively cheap) Rebel XT series and the EOS
> 10D, 20D, 30D, etc.
> Why are the lower-pixel, totally digital EOS series so extremely
> expensive and the Rebel series so (relatively) cheap?

In the film era Canon had several different bodies (with the same
"resolution" that were priced roughly double each step up the
features/performance ladder. For example the film Rebel (entry level)
was roughly $200, the Elan series $400, the EOS-3 (more serious
amateurs, some pros) was $800 and the 1V (professionals) about $1,600
just for the body.

The more expensive models feature faster autofocus, more precise AF, AF
at f/8 instead of f/5.6 min aperture, better build construction, longer
lasting shutters, faster frame rates for continuous shooting,
weatherproofing etc etc ...

To a large extent the same differences are in the digital bodies.

Bill
 >> Stay informed about: Difference Between Canon DSLRs and EOS *0D (10,20,30) 

>mutefan@yahoo.com wrote:
>
> I've been trying for the past three hours to learn something about the
> difference between the (relatively cheap) Rebel XT series and the EOS
> 10D, 20D, 30D, etc.
> Why are the lower-pixel, totally digital EOS series so extremely
> expensive and the Rebel series so (relatively) cheap?

In the film era Canon had several different bodies (with the same
"resolution" that were priced roughly double each step up the
features/performance ladder. For example the film Rebel (entry level)
was roughly $200, the Elan series $400, the EOS-3 (more serious
amateurs, some pros) was $800 and the 1V (professionals) about $1,600
just for the body.

The more expensive models feature faster autofocus, more precise AF, AF
at f/8 instead of f/5.6 min aperture, better build construction, longer
lasting shutters, faster frame rates for continuous shooting,
weatherproofing etc etc ...

To a large extent the same differences are in the digital bodies.

Bill
 >> Stay informed about: Difference Between Canon DSLRs and EOS *0D (10,20,30) 

>mutefan@yahoo.com wrote:
>
> I've been trying for the past three hours to learn something about the
> difference between the (relatively cheap) Rebel XT series and the EOS
> 10D, 20D, 30D, etc.
> Why are the lower-pixel, totally digital EOS series so extremely
> expensive and the Rebel series so (relatively) cheap?

In the film era Canon had several different bodies (with the same
"resolution" that were priced roughly double each step up the
features/performance ladder. For example the film Rebel (entry level)
was roughly $200, the Elan series $400, the EOS-3 (more serious
amateurs, some pros) was $800 and the 1V (professionals) about $1,600
just for the body.

The more expensive models feature faster autofocus, more precise AF, AF
at f/8 instead of f/5.6 min aperture, better build construction, longer
lasting shutters, faster frame rates for continuous shooting,
weatherproofing etc etc ...

To a large extent the same differences are in the digital bodies.

Bill
 >> Stay informed about: Difference Between Canon DSLRs and EOS *0D (10,20,30) 

>mutefan@yahoo.com wrote:
>
> I've been trying for the past three hours to learn something about the
> difference between the (relatively cheap) Rebel XT series and the EOS
> 10D, 20D, 30D, etc.
> Why are the lower-pixel, totally digital EOS series so extremely
> expensive and the Rebel series so (relatively) cheap?

In the film era Canon had several different bodies (with the same
"resolution" that were priced roughly double each step up the
features/performance ladder. For example the film Rebel (entry level)
was roughly $200, the Elan series $400, the EOS-3 (more serious
amateurs, some pros) was $800 and the 1V (professionals) about $1,600
just for the body.

The more expensive models feature faster autofocus, more precise AF, AF
at f/8 instead of f/5.6 min aperture, better build construction, longer
lasting shutters, faster frame rates for continuous shooting,
weatherproofing etc etc ...

To a large extent the same differences are in the digital bodies.

Bill
 >> Stay informed about: Difference Between Canon DSLRs and EOS *0D (10,20,30) 

<mutefan.RemoveThis@yahoo.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:1162485740.555578.235600@m7g2000cwm.googlegroups.com...
> I've been trying for the past three hours to learn something about the
> difference between the (relatively cheap) Rebel XT series and the EOS
> 10D, 20D, 30D, etc. I'm relatively new to high-end digital
> photography, and for some reason, Googling the question isn't
> delivering any results.
>
> Why are the lower-pixel, totally digital EOS series so extremely
> expensive and the Rebel series so (relatively) cheap? If DSLRs are by
> definition better than any digital camera, what about the EOS series
> (or any extremely high-end series by any manufacturer) makes them SO
> very expensive--and worth the money?



"Amateur" Cameras: High volume production, extensive use of molded plastic
parts, built to withstand a few years of typical amateur use (weekend and
vacation shooting), no full frame (24 x 36 mm) sensors - good choice for
amateurs.

"Pro" - Cameras: Low volume production, cost of R&D and tooling has to be
recovered with small series, use of more durable materials to give years of
reliable operation for professional use (like catalog photos, perhaps in
tropical climatic conditions), many with full frame sensors.
Worth the money if you use them as a professional.
 >> Stay informed about: Difference Between Canon DSLRs and EOS *0D (10,20,30) 

All of the cameras you mention are part of the EOS group, as are all of the
autofocus film cameras. EOS represents, "Electronic Optical System."
Outside the US, the Rebel series is marketed as EOS 300D, 350D and 400D.
The Rebels are less expensive because they are more lightly built, and lack
some features of the more expensive cameras. The 10D and 20D you mention
are out of production, and are the contemporaries of the Rebel D and Xt,
respectively, both with the same pixel count as the more expensive versions.
The 30D was introduced after the Rebel XTi, and will probably be replaced
sooner than later. Other members of the EOS family, the EOS 5D and 1Ds
mkII, have higher pixel counts than the XTi, and the 1D mkIIn has a much
higher frame rate. Both 1 series cameras have very rugged bodies and
weather sealing, which lesser bodies lack, not just the XTi. The 30D and 5D
have more metal in their construction, spot metering, larger buffers, other
advantages. The 5D and 1Ds mkII have what are known as "full frame"
sensors, i.e, sensors that are the same size as a frame of 35mm film, rather
than roughly 2/3 that size. Such sensors are much more expensive to
manufacture, currently, but give an advantage in noise and with wide angle
lenses.

--
Skip Middleton
www.shadowcatcherimagery.com
www.pbase.com/skipm
 >> Stay informed about: Difference Between Canon DSLRs and EOS *0D (10,20,30) 

All of the cameras you mention are part of the EOS group, as are all of the
autofocus film cameras. EOS represents, "Electronic Optical System."
Outside the US, the Rebel series is marketed as EOS 300D, 350D and 400D.
The Rebels are less expensive because they are more lightly built, and lack
some features of the more expensive cameras. The 10D and 20D you mention
are out of production, and are the contemporaries of the Rebel D and Xt,
respectively, both with the same pixel count as the more expensive versions.
The 30D was introduced after the Rebel XTi, and will probably be replaced
sooner than later. Other members of the EOS family, the EOS 5D and 1Ds
mkII, have higher pixel counts than the XTi, and the 1D mkIIn has a much
higher frame rate. Both 1 series cameras have very rugged bodies and
weather sealing, which lesser bodies lack, not just the XTi. The 30D and 5D
have more metal in their construction, spot metering, larger buffers, other
advantages. The 5D and 1Ds mkII have what are known as "full frame"
sensors, i.e, sensors that are the same size as a frame of 35mm film, rather
than roughly 2/3 that size. Such sensors are much more expensive to
manufacture, currently, but give an advantage in noise and with wide angle
lenses.

--
Skip Middleton
www.shadowcatcherimagery.com
www.pbase.com/skipm
 >> Stay informed about: Difference Between Canon DSLRs and EOS *0D (10,20,30) 

All of the cameras you mention are part of the EOS group, as are all of the
autofocus film cameras. EOS represents, "Electronic Optical System."
Outside the US, the Rebel series is marketed as EOS 300D, 350D and 400D.
The Rebels are less expensive because they are more lightly built, and lack
some features of the more expensive cameras. The 10D and 20D you mention
are out of production, and are the contemporaries of the Rebel D and Xt,
respectively, both with the same pixel count as the more expensive versions.
The 30D was introduced after the Rebel XTi, and will probably be replaced
sooner than later. Other members of the EOS family, the EOS 5D and 1Ds
mkII, have higher pixel counts than the XTi, and the 1D mkIIn has a much
higher frame rate. Both 1 series cameras have very rugged bodies and
weather sealing, which lesser bodies lack, not just the XTi. The 30D and 5D
have more metal in their construction, spot metering, larger buffers, other
advantages. The 5D and 1Ds mkII have what are known as "full frame"
sensors, i.e, sensors that are the same size as a frame of 35mm film, rather
than roughly 2/3 that size. Such sensors are much more expensive to
manufacture, currently, but give an advantage in noise and with wide angle
lenses.

--
Skip Middleton
www.shadowcatcherimagery.com
www.pbase.com/skipm
 >> Stay informed about: Difference Between Canon DSLRs and EOS *0D (10,20,30) 

All of the cameras you mention are part of the EOS group, as are all of the
autofocus film cameras. EOS represents, "Electronic Optical System."
Outside the US, the Rebel series is marketed as EOS 300D, 350D and 400D.
The Rebels are less expensive because they are more lightly built, and lack
some features of the more expensive cameras. The 10D and 20D you mention
are out of production, and are the contemporaries of the Rebel D and Xt,
respectively, both with the same pixel count as the more expensive versions.
The 30D was introduced after the Rebel XTi, and will probably be replaced
sooner than later. Other members of the EOS family, the EOS 5D and 1Ds
mkII, have higher pixel counts than the XTi, and the 1D mkIIn has a much
higher frame rate. Both 1 series cameras have very rugged bodies and
weather sealing, which lesser bodies lack, not just the XTi. The 30D and 5D
have more metal in their construction, spot metering, larger buffers, other
advantages. The 5D and 1Ds mkII have what are known as "full frame"
sensors, i.e, sensors that are the same size as a frame of 35mm film, rather
than roughly 2/3 that size. Such sensors are much more expensive to
manufacture, currently, but give an advantage in noise and with wide angle
lenses.

--
Skip Middleton
www.shadowcatcherimagery.com
www.pbase.com/skipm
 >> Stay informed about: Difference Between Canon DSLRs and EOS *0D (10,20,30) 

Bill Hilton wrote:
>>mutefan@yahoo.com wrote:
>>
>>I've been trying for the past three hours to learn something about the
>>difference between the (relatively cheap) Rebel XT series and the EOS
>>10D, 20D, 30D, etc.
>>Why are the lower-pixel, totally digital EOS series so extremely
>>expensive and the Rebel series so (relatively) cheap?
>
>
> In the film era Canon had several different bodies (with the same
> "resolution" that were priced roughly double each step up the
> features/performance ladder. For example the film Rebel (entry level)
> was roughly $200, the Elan series $400, the EOS-3 (more serious
> amateurs, some pros) was $800 and the 1V (professionals) about $1,600
> just for the body.
>
> The more expensive models feature faster autofocus, more precise AF, AF
> at f/8 instead of f/5.6 min aperture, better build construction, longer
> lasting shutters, faster frame rates for continuous shooting,
> weatherproofing etc etc ...
>
> To a large extent the same differences are in the digital bodies.

In other words, what you're paying more for is generally quality of
construction, and number and quality of "extras".
 >> Stay informed about: Difference Between Canon DSLRs and EOS *0D (10,20,30)