Help with Canon 350 please..

[ollyk]

Hi folks, I am wondering if anyone can help me make my mind up good and proper!
I have had my Nikon 8700 for about 8 months now, and can safely say I know the thing inside out and can operate it blind fold but I have to finally admit it is a dog of a camera.
I am sooo glad I didn't spend the full retail price I think I would have been very dissapointed!!!
Anyway, I have finally decided that the Canon 350 is going to replace my 8700 for most shots, but one thing concerns me. Can I expect a much better dynamic range from the cannon than that of the 8700? I know common sense says yes but when I compare piccys of some review sites using similar scenes there is not a very substantial difference, although I guess it is hard to tell as different light levels will determine this to some extent!
This is one of my biggest worries to be honest, the 8700 was no better than my dinosaur Finepix 2800 zoom (2.1mp) and I don't want to be dissapointed for a second time.

I just have to say when I held the 350 in the camera shop today I was so impressed, to think i was a die hard Nikonian yesterday and wan't the D50 over the 350 what the hell was I thinking

Anyway I would appreciate if someone could help me with this!

Olly.

[nightshade]

Nikon myself, D80 would be my choice

[Gaina]

I assume this is the EOS 350D you're referring to? Personally I love mine. I took this photo with the 18-55 kit lense.

[ollyk]

Originally Posted by nightshade

Nikon myself, D80 would be my choice

Hi Nightshade. Yes I do love the Nikons it's just that can barely afford this camera at the moment let alone anything better. This might be my last chance for a while too.
It was 350D vs D50 for me but I am afraid the D50 did not offer the performance I wanted and the price difference is not justifiable! Also the build was not substantially better as I was led to believe in various write-ups!
Jessops have the 350 with kit lens and their flash for £379 so I don't think any other option comes close TBH!

@ gaina thanks that is one of the better shots I have seen with the kit lens I suspect it is not a match compared to the 8700's built in macro capability though...

http://www.btinternet.com/~olly_k/pics2/Blowfly.JPG

I will have to sell the 8700 so I feel I am losing a big chunk of what I like doing best, but if I look to the future I will probably be better off. At least with the canon 350 I will be able to catch those magic moments with my daughter that the 8700 only does out of absolute sheer luck, and even then not very satisfactorily!

Look at these two shots could someone help me interpret what I am seeing and tell me the 8700 hasn't offered a better dynamic range and overall a better picture...?

First camera
Second Comparison - sorry would not allow direct link move forward about 5 shots!

It's the dynamic range that has me a little concerned. Maybe I am expecting too much?

Olly.

[glsammy]

I don't see why you should be too concerned. You can shoot in RAW mode with the 350D without having to wait all day for the camera to be ready! That way you'll have full control over the dynamic range shown. So far as overall image quality is concerned, the 350D should leave the 8700 well behind. The reviews I've read say that the dynamic range is excellent on the 350D.

[eeyore]

yep - the 350D will definitely leave your compact standing - i cant comment on the dynamic range per se - but the shots taken with it on here are more than convincing.

by the way be aware that jessops are pretty expensive - you can get keener prices online and keener still by going to traders such as ebay's where you could do a 400D for about the same as jessops are asking for a 350D

[ollyk]

Originally Posted by glsammy

I don't see why you should be too concerned. You can shoot in RAW mode with the 350D without having to wait all day for the camera to be ready! That way you'll have full control over the dynamic range shown. So far as overall image quality is concerned, the 350D should leave the 8700 well behind. The reviews I've read say that the dynamic range is excellent on the 350D.

Hi glsammy, well I got my 350d yesterday and I really like the camera - size is what i am use to and great for chasing the little'n and other creatures around , speed is great and after getting my head round the menus these are quite usable too.

BUT....

Did anyone mention the kit lens is made by fisher price? must have been in the small print somewhere! I knew it would be poor, but I was hoping it would get me by until I could save up for a slightly better lens. However, compared to my 8700 the images are very soft. I have tried upping the apperture, loads of light, made sure shutter speeds are up and I get some barely 'acceptable' shots. Even my girlfriend remarked on the softness! It's Ironic really, 8700 = slow focus but sharp as a razor - 350D = fast focus but far too soft! I really have to ask myself at the end of the day, which is more important? I am sad that I can get far superior pictures of the birds feeding with the 8700 than the 350 at the moment and they only feed 10 feet away from where I snap!
It's just too much for my liking and to think it could be another six months or more of soft piccies is just too much to bare....

I am going out tomorrow and will have a serious shoot out between the two camera's, but I am going to be very hard on myself and if the canon doesn't produce far superior results, then it is going back!

If anyone knows any £100ish solutions allowing me to get some sharp piccies I (and more importantly the misses) might be persuaded to save this camera regardless of my test results tomorrow, but otherwise like I said above it isn't looking too good

Olly.

[ollyk]

Originally Posted by eeyore

yep - the 350D will definitely leave your compact standing - i cant comment on the dynamic range per se - but the shots taken with it on here are more than convincing.

Hey Eeyore, thanks for that as you can see I have bought the camera now but have been told I am ok taking back as long as I don't open the software / instructions. I got the camera for £379 including a free Jessops speedlight worth £100 (gets £50 on ebay) so that is £329 (assuming I see £50!) which i thought quite reasonable! I will look at ebay but will this help with my 'conundrum'?

[glsammy]

Whoops! No one mentioned the rather poor kit lens...We normally do!
I'm not so sure that's the real problem though. Canon's images are generally soft out of the camera, far more so than the likes of the 8700 would give. BUT you can sharpen them up nicely within software, that's what Canon expects us all to do! If your not up on applying sharpening, you could try changing the in-camera sharpness setting, it may get you by until you can afford some real glass.

[eeyore]

It isunfortunately widely known that the kit lens is a piece of cack, If i'd seen your thread eaelier i would have pointed this out , always buy the canons body only - but dont give up on the camera just yet - the camera itself is a very good bit of kit it is just that the kit lens lets it down

I use a sigma 18-125 which is 229 notes in jessops as my walking arround lens - suplemented by a canon 28-135IS (roughly 300 notes)

other possible solutions include the sigma 18-55 which is about 150 notes or the one buy tamron for roughly the same price.

you could get a canon 50mm f1.8 for about 80 notes but you might find the lack of zoom a bit restrictive

or alternatively you if you want to photograph birds and wildlife you might like to go for something a bit longer like the canon 90-300usm - 180 notes in jessops

also suplementary to what graham said -are you shooting raw or jpeg - raws are bound to be soft cos no in camera processing is applied , you sharpen them in the raw converter software. Jpegs can come out a bit soft but like graham mentioned you can turn the in camera sharpening up - look in the menus , if it is set on 0 try turning it up to 2 or 3