My equipment

I´m using CANON. Why? There are several reasons for that.
My first SLR was a CANON 850. It was really a point & shoot camera but You could change the lens, the big advantage with SLR. I managed to break the 35-70 mm lens supplied with the camera. The camera fell on the floor three times from my shoulder, I could press it back in two times against a wall and it worked well, AMAZING quality by the way, but the third time it really broke down. After that I bought a Sigma 28-105 lens. After a while my skills and interest in photography developed so I just had to buy me a camera in which I had more control over the picture and a camera that was reliable. My old CANON proved the reliability more than once so my natural choice was a CANON. My EOS850 never failed me and it took several hundreds of great pictures.

My second SLR was a CANON EOS100. It was light, silent and it was filled with usefull functions. On top of that it had a couple of usless program modes which I never used. At the time I bought it it was already quite old technology. I was following the news and saw that "todays" SLR´s had so much more. It was really just enough for my pfotography, for a while but I had reasons to upgrade. My EOS100 broke down two times. I don´t know if it was the quality of the camera, my abuse or pure unluck but the command dial and the quick control dial fell off. The service was expensive and I heard that it was a common problem with the command dial breaking on EOS100 & EOS5.

I was long thinking of upgrading to EOS5 but I was worried about  the stupid command dial. The EOS50 was never an option. I didn´t like the colors (silver! who came up with that color on a camera?!) and I didn´t like the dials. They looked much more sturdy then the command dial on EOS5 & EOS100 but I´d rather press a button than turn a big dial. Just my personal preference. What choices did I have then? Well, the EOS1N or the EOS3.

EOS1N was quite old, heavy and "too proffesional" for me,  I thought :-). I compared it with EOS3 that was VERY proffesional and heavy as well BUT it was loaded with some new high tech stuff. It was just what I ever dreamed of so I decided to buy it. I have not regreted that since.

Why didn´t I buy a NIKON? NIKON was stone age in comparison to the new EOS SLR and if they had the same functions, well, You´d had to add a zero at the end of the price tag. It seems that the NIKON logo itself costs a hundred dollars. NIKON does make some great cameras, I know, I just can´t justify their function/price ration. My friend´s F90X with a SB26 still makes better flash pictures then my EOS3 with a EX550 but he misses half of the functions I have and often use. NIKON F100? Very nice camera...have You looked at the cost of a good NIKKOR lens? If the famous NIKON 3D-matrix light metering is supposed to work You need a IF-ED lens. Then comes the USM, standard in CANON, very expensive in NIKKOR...so much about NIKON. Oh, one more thing, why does always CANON invent things, NIKON "people" say it´s crap and then after a while NIKON comes up with a bad copy of the same thing and says it´s excelent new technology? In my opinion You definitely get more camera for the buck´s with CANON!

<< BACK