Canon EOS 350D - A preliminary review
Current mood: 
optimistic
Category: Art
and Photography
The storm passed through, and this morning,
everything is bright and shiny clean.
I found I was still in a bit of a grumpy
mood from yesterday's disappointments (compounded by claustrophobia,
being housebound by the weather all day, when what I really wanted to do
was go out shooting).
My mood was not the least improved,
by a message from the camera expert, that I read as condescending. It
suggested that I need to master the basics of photography, before I go
complaining about my equipment. That is how I read it, anyway.
He suggested I practice shooting flowers,
landscapes, and portraits. I have spent the last ten years, often
shooting more than 100 shots a day, of flowers and landscapes. I have
not the slightest interest in shooting portraits (even if there were any
people populating my world). I am willing to consider the possibility
that I have been doing it "incorrectly" for the past
nine-and-a-half.
I took the whole thing as a challenge, and
so I set off with the usual plethora of dogs, up into the arroyo that I
have come to know rather intimately. My mission was to do a comparison
between the old Sony Cybershot, and this new (supposedly
"complex") Canon 350D. My friend had implied that there were a
lot of things I need to learn about; specifically "ISO, exposure,
and aperture". After a few minutes of breathing in fresh
clean air, I decided that my friend's opinion was based on ... "lack
of information".
Seems to me, there is a certain snobbery
amongst photographers, much like there is that little competitive
thing between "Ford people", and "Chevy people".
The pros in this field argue amiably about Canon vs. Nikon ... and the
fact is, they can scarcely be bothered to consider looking at anything
else, save the occasional Olympus. My friend, I realized, has no clue
that the functions of the 350D, and the Cybershot (which he refers to
as a "point-and-shooter" -- in photographerspeak, that means
"So simple, even a caveman could shoot it.") are
almost identical. Whether the Canon's performance of these functions
is better than the Sony's, is yet to be determined. It's true
that I have my favorite settings, and I use the same ones frequently.
I am willing to expand on that experience, given application for
others.
The principal difference between this camera
and the Cybershot was one that I have been aware of, since a
Canon owner first allowed me to peek through their viewer. The Canon
has clear eyes! I have often joked with friends and
colleagues, that the Cybershot has made me a much more intuitive
photographer, because I have learned to shoot without actually being
able to SEE what I am shooting at. The viewfinder is crap. I have
learned to look AROUND it, more than through it, and just through hours
and hours of practice, I have a fairly good idea of what I am going to
get in the frame. I love this about the Canon, and I can't see
ever going back to the Mr. Magoo.
So, walking up through the familiar canyon,
looking at sights I've seen --and shot --a hundred times before, the
Canon experience began to be extremely pleasant. Not only could I SEE
what I was shooting at, I discovered that I was shooting items that I
have hithertoforE passed by, as being impossible to capture with the
Sony. That's hard to explain, but it's something more than just the
viewer ... the Canon's eyes have a better depth of focus .... it seemed.
My 1G CF card got filled up before I reached
the top of the arroyo. I found that a little bit amusing, since I had
thought I might make it all the way up, and part way back, given that
much extra memory. Oh well, there had been so much more to shoot
at, this time. Before I got halfway back down, I had decided that I MUST
go back up again today ... so many new things have appeared since my
last visit, before the demise of the Cybershot. And so many more options
of angles and perspective!
Now, having downloaded and examined a few
landscapes -- that I need so much more PRACTICE shooting -- I find that
the color quality of the Canon is far and away superior to the Cybershot.
The richness of the color is remarkable!
What I am not satisfied with, however, is
the range of focus. This camera is smarter than I am, and it thinks that
faraway horizons ought to be blurry. Yes, I do need to experiment more
with the settings, but I believe it is largely due to the limited range
of focus of this lens. I love this camera. I think it is going to
make an incredible difference in the quality of my work... with the
addition of a lens that can handle the vast expanses of western
landscapes.
As for the limited macros, I am less
concerned about that. It is not my mission to be able to shoot the hairs
on a frog's back. I just want to be able to reveal certain small
details within the enormous world of the big, wide West.
As I told my friend, Diana, "It has
been a few years since I've been asked, 'Is this digital? Or real
photography?". So, it seems, a bit of that
yet lingers.
