I have been wrestling with the decision between the D100 and the 300D lately. Because the debate does not require me to factor lenses in (I don't have any yet) I am curious what others thoughts are.

If you were deciding which way would you go and why?

If you already own one of these cameras why did you choose it and why (And, not because you already had one camps lenses as I fully understand that) Would you change if you could?

I find it to be a scary decision as it will commit me to one camp when the decision is made once I start to buy the lenses.

Also, housing are not a consideration between the two as I will be staying with Aquatica and they manufacture both housings.

Thanks for any insight as to why you chose, or would choose.

I would say that the two cameras' internals and functionality are roughly the same.

The big differentiator for me is the Nikon line of lenses. They have the 12-24DX wideangle zoom and Canon does not yet have an equivalent. Nikon has also just started selling a 10.5mm fisheye so we can finally shoot fisheye underwater again. For underwater use, the Canon or Sigma 15mm fisheye lenses will give good wideangle results, but they aren't much good for topside shooting.

Nikon also has an excellent line of macro lenses which are well supported by housing manufacturers (including Aquatica of course). I have shot both and I like Nikon's "starter" macro lens - the 60mm - much better than the Canon 50mm because the 60 will do > 1:1 if you get close.

That's all I can think of right now.

Cheers
James

Thanks James.

Those were some of my thoughts also.

If I were buying again today, I'd still probably buy Canon, as they seem to currently have the lead in terms of sensor technology, but that's really just personal opinion.

I've got to say that I think it could go either way, especially if you're only concerned with shooting UW and limiting your lens choices to Nikon or Canon. If Aquatica supports both, it's down to lens choice. You've removed the biggest problem I see with Canon, which is a lack of options for housing their cameras.

In defense of the 300D, the new Sigma 12-24 supposedly makes up for the gap that Nikon created with their 12-24. It may not be as good a lens in terms of performance, but it's at least an option.

If you're interested in long lenses down the road, Canon's lineup of super telephoto's is supposed to be the best available (300 / 400 / 500 / 600 IS), but those are lenses that cost multiple times what you'll spend on the body. There are also a few specialty lenses that you can only get with Canon like their MP-E lens, or the 3 TS lenses. But again, these are very specific lenses and have nothing to do with your choice for UW.

The flip side of the lens issue is that Canon doesn't have an equivalent to the 70-180 micro, which is a very cool lens by all rights. The closest thing in the Canon lineup is either the 70-200 f/4 which doesn't focus very close, or the 180mm macro which is pretty expensive and probably hard to house.

You'll definitely find more people on this board shooting with Nikon mounts than Canon, and as a result will probably get more mileage from their experience.

Another point is that I (personally) have a problem buying technology / cameras that are due for a replacement. The D100 has been out a while now, far longer than the 300d, and is about ready to be updated in theory.

Just to make it more confusing, why not an S2 Pro or a 10D? I think the Nikon is the last body in the class that I'd buy if I was doing it again. Having TTL would be great, so the S2 makes sense. And I don't think I'd choose the 300d over the 10D, unless the cost is a significant issue.

Ok, I'm done rambling. Sorry if this made it worse...

Tom

Thom Hogan predicts the D100 will remain in the line for 2004, perhaps with a modest update. I don't believe obsolescence is an issue for any of the current 6MP APS SLR's.

There is no direct match for the 70-180 micro or 10.5 fisheye on the Canon side. The Canon 180 is matched by the Nikon 200 while the Tamron and Sigma 180's are available for both. The new Sigma 12-24 is bigger, slower and less flexible than Nikon's DX lens and may not offer the image quality (a little early to tell). Canon's 50mm does not offer the close focus capability of Nikon's 60mm. All in all, Nikon's underwater lens choices are more complete, though the most popular lenses are available for both.

When looking for an underwater camera you need to consider your housings, lens, and ports. Considering those issues the D100 may not be the last choice of the three and some actually prefer it's handling above water to the other two cameras. The good news is that housing manufacturers are supporting the 300D. That means that Canon will receive broader support in the future once manufacturers can house their entire lens line.

I have no idea what direction I would go today. Canon has a slightly better sensor than Nikon. Nikon has a better assortment of lenses that would be used underwater. Canon has a better assortment of top side lenses. Fuji has a better sensor than Nikon and does TTL, but has a few shortcomings I don't like.

I have no clue what I would do today, but if you are selling your A5000 with camera, let me know.

Sorry but the A5000 is staying in the fold as a back-up. I can eliminate the concern of being set-up for wide-angle and missing the macro scenario that way. Or, just afraid to have a problem and then having to dive camera-less for the rest of a trip.

But, I'll keep you in mind should my wife tell me otherwise.

I am considering the camera choice mainly with U/W in mind but obviously will also shoot top-side as side thought.

I eliminated the 10D due to no Aquatica housing and the S2 due to adding even more dollars to the equation for the body.

The general pricing difference I have seen is $500CDN between the D100 and the 300D with the lens.

I definately like what I have heard of the 12-24dx so it is swaying me that way plus the 60mm. But, with the whole outlay of cash for body/lenses and then housing them you can see it adds up quickly.

The S2 has dropped to less than $300 of the D100.

Cheers
James

Just to be clear, that's MY preference. I just don't like the D100 based on the infintessimal amount that I've played with it in a camera store. I'm biased towards Canon though, as I had an Elan 7e before my D60.

As for thinking about the whole setup, Todd mentioned that housing / ports isn't an issue, he's settled on the Aquatica lineup, so it's really down to lenses. I'd have to agree at this point that Nikon has a better lineup of lenses for UW use, most notably the native 12-24, the 10.5 fisheye, and the 70-180. I think you could argue back and forth on the 50 vs 60mm based on preference as well, but yes, in general there is better support for Nikon equipment than Canon from the housing manufacturers.

I really do hope that the 300d brings more support from manufacturers for Canon, if only in terms of ports / gears. Only time will tell...

The more I think about the decision, the more I would lean towards the S2. In the grand scheme of a camera / lens / housing purchase, the $300 is probably less than 10% difference overall.

Another thought would be to wait a couple months and see what happens. As Craig pointed out, nothing out now is deficient, but after PMA in February things might get more interesting.

Oops, I should have mentioned I will be waiting to see what PMA shows. If anything it may bring better pricing. CDN lens prices seem to have lagged in adjustement to the change in the USD and that should sort itself out in January with new pricing lists, I am assuming.

Everyone seems to be confimring my lens thoughts, which Craig had previously done in some of our conversations on the subject.

Can I then ask, what are the added benefits that you see in the S2 for the added dollars. I am assuming it refers back partly to your thread about the handling preferences you experience while in-store?(and James or any other S2 users, or heck anyone)

Of course Aquatica does a S2 housing so it certainly is relevant.

Thanks

Had nothing to do with handling at all actually. I'd pay the extra money for the S2 over the D100 for the ability to shoot TTL when I wanted to do so. The S2 is also supposed to exhibit the least noise of all the comparable dSLRs as well, if I remember correctly, not that noise is a huge problem in any of them compared to a P&S.

James, why did you buy the S2 over the D100 when you had a chance to switch when your housing flooded?

Ah, yes that thread on the noise comparisons. I briefly reviewed it but was wondering, in terms of visable to the naked eye, is there a true difference as noted in the comparison.

Maybe I need to find that thread and re-read the results also as at the time I was not serious in my considerations.

Hi Guys,

Sarah and I now own both the S2 and the D100.

I like the S2 better because it is spot on with its TTL exposures for macro shooting. It is a joy to use for macro w/ the 105 or the 70-180. Not having to touch your flashes is a big convenience, especially when the conditions get bad.

I also like that the S2 takes AA batteries.

Output from the S2 is an "interpolated" 12 megapixels - which is really about 1/2 way between 6 and 12 (9mp) and Phil's resolution tests show this. 16bit Tiffs from the S2 are ~69 megs. The low noise is also nice, especially for WA shooting in low light.

Since Todd is getting an Aquatica housing, the housing, ports, and lenses will be literally the same. For others, you have to look at the whole system:

I would say the S2 for wideangle w/ the 12-24 and the Aquatica housing, as the dome balances out the weight very well. For macro, the best overall "system"is probably the Nexus D100 with a housed SB80 or dual DS50's (or Inons if you can afford them).

Cheers
James

Well, dualing Z220s's are on the way already. That decision I had no problem making. Whether I keep my 90dx's or one of them is yet to be determined.

OK, the TTL advantage I knew but again, in the noise comparison is it a truly visable difference. I certainly can see the graph in the thread james had posted a while back and see a difference but, in actual visable differences what does that mean?

Also, in Herb's recent comparison, I found it somewhat confusing as the D100 was shot in iso 200 and seemed to overexpose slightly. What I did gather is the clear difference in noise between the ps and dslr's listed. Did this test demonstrate a clear winner? To Herb it must have as he choose the 300D.

I guess what I am sayying is numbers are all fine and dandy but, brass tax will I see the difference or are we splitting fine hairs?

Again, thanks for all your insights it is appreciated.

The reasons for my choice are lower noise and better exposure range.

The first was the exercise with the histograms I posted earlier. The second: the D100 only goes down to ISO 200 and the S2 has maximum flash sync of 1/125. The Canons can shoot at ISO 100 and 1/200 flash sync. That ~ 1 stop can make a big difference on shots into the sun.

I'm betting the housing, ports and lenses will become available over time.

Wow, thanks for this thread! Lots of great info.

I am in the research mode also and have come to the same conclusions in regards to comparing the systems. The interesting pricing point is that with the 10D & D100 being out for a while their prices have "matured", but the 300D isn't being discounted much. The Christmas buying frenzy and the upcoming show you've mentioned, has lead me away from doing anything for a while.

I'd have to say that from what I've seen the housings for the D100 are more expensive than for the 300D, although they vary. We don't yet know the pricing of Aquatica's offering. It does seem like they are going to be smaller and overall lighter (out of the water) with the 300D. As I travel, I am concerned with keeping things compact and as light as possible. And cost is a significant factor for me. Which may mean an Ike housing. But I am looking for overall value.

I really like the Inon 220 strobes and am wondering how they're going to work with the 300D, in terms of the laser pointer/focusing light, etc. I assume you can get Nikon bulkheads and S&S/Nikon cords to work them.

Thanks guys for the insights, keep 'em coming.

Jack

OK, first

Local pricing on a D100 is $2000cdn vs $2800cdn for the S2. Do you still think that is worth the price difference? (yes I could buy elsewhere if you can show me where you saw your price difference but I also like to try to support local. Sort of the same concern people were expressing when S&S mentioned closing) Nice to have a local contact and service etc.

Second, if Herb is correct then are the Nikon lenses that much better to compensate for the noise difference that Herb based his decision on?

Glad I could help Jack. I figured there must be more than a couple interested in this discussion thus why I started it.

Of course Herb is correct.

Noise is added by the image sensor, and cannot be corrected with a lens. For the moment, Nikon does have lenses that are better suited for underwater. The 70 - 180 macro that Craig mentioned, and the 10.5mm fisheye. The sigma 12-24 is F4.5 at the wide end vs the F4 for the Nikon. The sigma lens is spec to have a closer minimum focus distance, again a small difference. We'll have to see images from that lens to see.

I plan to go with the Sigma lenses: 15mm fisheye, 105 macro, 50 macro. That should keep me busy for awhile. Something else will aways come along.

Even though I cited noise as the first reason, I think the exposure range difference is just as important.

You can get an S2 in UK for around 2,000 Canuk Dollars.
You got along ok without ttl on the 5000 so why worry now with a D100?
You can house SB80DX's for Dttl, which would be perfect for macro. Cheaper than an equiv. UW strobe too.
There are good and bad points on all of the manufacturers kit mentioned, depends how serious you take or make em, and how much you might consider worthwhile spending on a hobby.

My apologies my good man. We all are correct just sometimes others think they are too.LOL As for sensors I think Craig might think he is right also but he can talk for himself.

As for the noise, I understand it is the sensor but, if the lense reduces the quality of the image also then would it not have a similiar effect in terms of overall image quality. Therefore making it a equal factor in the decision? I guess that would have to be quantified in terms of equal but, it would be a contributing factor.

Is the question: Will a better lens with a higher noise sensor be superior to a poorer quality lens and lower noise sensor?

It's all kind of moot. All the lenses mentioned (I can't personally vouch for any Sigmas) are of sufficiently high quality that any variation will likely not be noticable, especially in a "cropped" sensor.

All cameras are sufficiently noise free that you will not notice any noise or variations in noise among cameras at the lower ISOs (200 or less).

One disadvantage to the D100 is the lowest ISO at 200. Not for noise, but for flash sync.

Hmmm

I thought I had seen someone mention that the iso 200 was a bit of a misnomer in that it really was like a iso 100 but it actually even gave you an extra stop to play with. Something about forgetting that they were not dealing with film anymore.

I make no claims that is accurate but, I was sure I had seen that mentioned.

I agree with scorpio_fish.

The downside of the D100's ISO 200 comes when shooting wide angle with strobes in bright ambient light. I've done that, though, successfully by adding a gel which improves the blue water color and slows the effective ISO to 125 or so.

D100 owners would have liked to have an ISO 100 with lower noise but it didn't happen. All these cameras are low noise, though, and if you are going to pick a camera for noise performance it would be the S2 rather than the 10D. Unfortunately, the S2 offers only 1/125 strobe sync speed for those same wide angle shots.

But, (assuming you meant 300D not 10D) the price difference is then huge and we are saying the Canon has a better sensor than the D100 with the 100 iso available but...lenses may not be as appropriate.

Herb mentioned the Sigma lenses...does anyone have any thoughts on the quality of the Sigmas as compared to the brand name lenses?

Some of the Sigma lenses are very highly thought of and produce great results. The only issue is that some of them (can't recall which) have had compatibility issues with some of the newer Canon's. I've used the Sigma 14mm, which is nice, but I returned it in favor of a Canon 17-40L, which was the same cost, but a zoom. I've now only got Canon name brand lenses, for better or worse.

Its an interesting process you're going through, and an interesting discussion that you've inspired.

I have to be honest and say that I am a Nikon fan (especially the glass), so would lean towards either the D100 or S2Pro.

I went through the decision process between these two, and opted for the D100 largely because of the battery system. However, the TTL of the S2Pro was really attractive.

I like my D100 very much, and haven't really missed having ISO100, yet. It handles well, and I find the buffer and write speed to be excellent, even with NEF.

But I have to be honest and say that I've never tried the Canon's, so can't give any more insight than that.

Good luck, and thanks for the interesting discussion

The Sigma and Tamron lenses may be harder to house depending on availability of rings. For wide angle you can generally get by with AF so rings aren't such a big deal, but zooms and macro lenses will need them. The Tamron 28-75 is a good lens and the Sigma 15mm FE and 180mm macro are too. I suspect there are lots of good Tamron and Sigma lenses. Japanese manufacturers have access to one another's technology after all and they manufacture lenses for one another.

If you want the best sensor, buy the S2, but I don't accept that the Canon has a better sensor than the D100. CMOS is used by Canon because it is cheaper and easier to make. What matters is the results, and while you can debate whether the Canon is better overall than the D100, they are close enough that you should consider other factors. I think that is true for all three. I personally value the small size and versatile lens choices I get with my setup and don't believe I'm giving up image quality to other rigs.

First, 300d or D100/S2. Second, if D100/S2 then D100 or S2.

Does the Nikon glass lineup justify choosing D100/S2?

Does the D100/S2 have features you will need that will be misssing on the 300d?

Is it worth the $600-$800 U.S. price difference?

As for the D100 or S2 debate, we've beat that horse before a time or two.

If I had it to do over and didn't have Nikon glass, I would opt for the D100 or S2. There are features missing from the 300D that I need, but that's me.

As for the D100 or S2, I'm still not sure. I've got a battery pack grip for the D100 with L bracket. I've got other accessories that may or may not work with the S2. I rely on the histogram for exposure evaluation. Using an LCD sceen is wholly unreliable. The S2 histogram implementaion is poor. TTL with the Fuji is a big plus. The in-camera interpolation is a small plus. Having ISO 100 is a small plus.

By the way, the Aquatica 300d housing is based on the A90 housing. If you go back to my review of the AD100 housing, you will see them side by side. The A90 housing is much smaller.

By the way, about flash sync speed. The problem with the D100 is when you have a highly lit background and you want to use fill flash for foreground shaded area, it requires you to stop down, sometimes way too far. The Fuji has a slight advantage in that the ISO can go down a full stop, whereas the flash sync is only a half a stop worse, so the S2 has a half stop advantage even though it sync limit is 1/125 vs. the 1/180 of the D100.

I think you should get the Canon. That way you can be the early adopter. Someone has to go first. That way you can figure out the hard way what the various extensions are needed for all the Canon lenses. Other readers of the board will then thank you.

This is true. I had to use f/19 and f/22 for my shots even with a gel and 1/180s shutter. Offsetting this is the fact that faster shutter will help freeze the sun's rays.

I do agree and love the D100. Herb will be pioneering the 300D for us in any case.

So on the plus side for the D100

Better glass
Already in use for about a year
Added features over the 300D
Limited learning curve

On the plus side for the 300D

Less noise
Iso 100
With appropriate lenses about $1000cdn less
lighter camera and smaller housing

As far as appropriate rings etc I am assuming that Aquatica would be thinking about those things in making the housing for this camera.

Hmmm, is the glass worth the $1000CDN or $700USD and, is the noise difference noticable and will iso 100 be something I miss having.

With regards to iso 100, am I not gaining dof on f stops by being forced into iso 200 on the D100 by having/being able to stop down without having to consider the previous grain issue in film? (Or, am I out to lunch on this thought?)

To be, or not to be a guinea pig, that is one of the questions.

Great insight so far, thanks.

Pioneers get shot full of arrows

He said pointedly...

I wouldn't say better glass but rather better selection of glass (for underwater).

I'd also be surpised if the housed 300D system is a lot smaller than the Nexus D100.

The Canon offers similar noise performance to the D100 when set to ISO 200, so having ISO 100 can only be a plus. Yes, you could gain DOF by gaining the stop in speed, but that's only if you don't have enough light. ISO 100 is plenty fast enough for your Z220 strobes and you'll probably be using them at -1 or -2 for macro even at ISO 100.

Aquatica says they will be supporting the bundled lens for the 300D and would quickly support the 50mm and 100mm. The fisheye is likely to work without effort so you should have the basic lens choices for the 300D right at the start. I expect other manufacturers have similar plans.

Yes, that is what i meant to say with regards to the lenses.My bad thanks for correcting that.

So less expensive and iso100 but why do I think I should have a Nikon? Better advertising budget?

Also, the housing size is still a factor as remember I was sticking with the Aquatica line which, as mentioned is side by side with the AD100 in Scorpios review.

Getting back to his comments, what are the missing features in the 300D that the D100 has that you felt were important?

Here's one issue we may be able to resolve

According to http://wetpixel.com/archives/00000151.shtml the Aquatica A300 is

9 x 6 1/2 x 5 1/4 inches and weighs only 6 1/2 pounds
(229mm x 165mm x 133mm)

According to http://www.aquatica.ca/catalog/housing/d100housing.html the Aquatica D100 is

# Size: 8 1/2 x 7 3/4 x 5 1/2 in
21,6 x 19,7 x 11,1 cm
# Weight: 7 lbs. 3,9 kg.

According to http://www.nexusamerica.com/products/Nexus...sings.html#D100 the Nexus D100 is

320mm x 171mm x 125mm (W/H/D). Weight is 4.5 lbs.

It looks like the Aquatica A300 is smaller than the Nexus. Just depends on what you mean by "lot". The width difference seem surprisingly large. Don't know if they're measuring from the same points.

Craig, since you have one of these, please have a look.

There's been endless talk on dpreview about the lack of focus mode control.

The Canon's have AI focus which tracks moving subjects. There's no switch to turn this on or off. The camera may decide to kick this in after you half press the shutter to "lock" focus. This has the potential to screw up your shot if you focus lock. and reframe the shot, because the focus may change when you reframe. I've tried it with my camera and have not had this problem. I can get the AI focus to kick in by moving the camera back-and-forth fairly rapidly, not something I'd do in reframing a photo, but usual focus lock and reframe seem to alway work. People have work out a work around for this problem that may not be supported by underwater housings. If you press the DOF preview button, the focus stay locked, but I haven't seen a housing that supports that button.

The Nexus measurements include the handles. Without the handles it is only 229mm wide, not 320mm, so they appear to be the same size. The difference in weight concerns me. The D100 is not 2 pounds heavier than the 300D and the Nexus is not positive underwater.

If you were tracking a moving subject, or panning do you think the focus would then give you grief?

I don't move much when locking and recomposing so I agree that it should not be a problem but on a subject like a shark or dolphin. Do you think it may even help?

I don't think big critters like a shark will be too hard. The DOF is large for a WA lens. One of the critters that I had the most troble with on the last trip was the blue ribbon eel that was bobbing around. So... I did a test tonight. Couldn't find a blue ribbon eel around the house, I settled for hanging a dive light on a foot long string and took a few shots.

Here're the results: both shot taken with Sigma 50mm macro lens, F/5.6, popup flash

No movement on the subject. I focus locked on the tip of the light and recentered

... continued from last post.

As you can see the still photo came out as it should. The AI focus tracking did not kick in.

Next set the light swinging: For small movements, less than an inch swing, the AI focus did not engage and I was able to get the same shot by timing the swing. When the swing got to about 2 inches the AI focus kicked in: I can feel and hear the lens moving. I was still able to get the shot by partly moving the camera and partly timing after a couple of trys. It may be harder with a subject that's moving randomly instead of a swinging light that I can time and move with. I'm not sure the AI focus will help or get in the way in that case.

Thanks Herb that does help answer the question. I also think with a larger subject that is moving such as a shark that the focus should not be an issue with your system.

Can I ask why you did not choose the similiar Canon lenses? Was it strictly a cost factor?

When and how often do people think that a lack of iso100 will become a annoying issue? Currently on the cp5000 I almost always am using iso100, so will I miss it too much?

I may be wrong, but doesn't the 300d lack spot metering? Also, doesn't it have but one command dial?

hmmm

So getting back to the S2 discussion it basically allows the use of the better lense selection of Nikon, it has iso 100 with lower noise than the rest and ttl.

Housing weight would equal the D100.

So, it accomplishes what the 300D does and adds the lens selection.

But, when will I find the 1/125 sync to be an issue and is it worth the extra $1300cdn over the Rebel or the extra $800cdn over the D100?

ps. I really appreciate everyone that has taken time to provide their insights, it has been useful and I am sure educational to a number of people myself included.I had thought of most of the issues but some of these others I had not considered.

I believe 1/125 will only be an issue when you shoot wide (with strobe of course) in bright ambient light and the sun is in the frame.

No spot metering on the 300d (or 10d). They have a Partial mode which instead of the 2-3% a spot meter covers, uses something like 9% at the center.


Yes, one command DIAL, but it uses a 4-way pad on the back instead of the other command dial.

One other note on the AI Focus. Although it seems to be new, because it's not a selectable option on the 10D / D60, but it's been around for a while now. On my Elan 7, you could actually choose AI Focus, while on the D60/10D, it's only available in Full Auto mode (green box). It works pretty well with linear motion as Herb proved. It's a little harder to get consistent results with unpredictable movement like a clownfish. That said, I've probably missed more shots in One Shot mode because of movement than you would in AI Focus.

Hi Todd,

1/125th sync speed won't make much of a difference, although it may in one in 100 situations. Look at a 1/125th sunray shot and compare to 1/180th - can you tell which is which? And remember, the S2 actually has a slight advantage, because f22 @1/125th ISO100 is actually a darker shot than f22 1/180th ISO200

Like Craig said, the only time you will want to go any darker is when shooting straight into the sun in shallow water. In that case, neither camera will do well, but they both will do better w/ the use of a gel or a neutral density filter.

Cheers
James

The Sigma 50mm macro will focus to 1:1 . The Canon 50mm macro will only do 1:2.

A faster flash sync is much more valuable than that. For wide angle shots a factor of 2 in shutter speed will often extend the range of your flash by one stop. When shooting into a bright background, not necessarily directly into sun, the choice of setting is usually determined in this order:

1) Set highest shutter speed

2) Set aperture for the desired background exposure.

3) Set strobe power to light the foreground subject.

A factor of 2 in shutter speed will let you open the aperture one stop and extend the range of you stobes one stop. In this case the difference between the S2 and the 300D is only a little over half a stop, but I consider it significant. Think of it as making your strobes more than 1.5 times as bright without having to carry more weight and bulk.

The extreme case, where you're shooting into the sun, the faster shutter will reduce the size of the sun ball, which in my opinion often determines if the shot is any good.

I typically do the following:

1) Set strobe power (usually to full).
2) Set aperture based on estimated distance to subject.
3) Set shutter based on a meter reading of the water.

In the case Herb mentions, there is no reason not to set strobe power to full first since you are fighting to overcome the bright ambient light. Full strobe power allows the use of the smallest aperture and therefore the slowest possible shutter, hopefully slower than the maximum strobe sync speed. The only reason to fix the shutter at a high speed is when you specifically want to freeze motion (like light rays).

Now, if you are trying to freeze the sun's rays and the above technique produces too low a shutter, adjust the shutter up the number of stops allowable, then open the aperture and adjust down the strobes by like amounts. There's a case where the ROC would be handy.

Two Z220's are good for f/11, ISO 100 at three feet as far as I know. I'm hoping to get a controlled test of that soon. Even though they are modestly sized, the Z220's have some reach. If you need more you should consider a strobe like the Hartenberger 625's.

According the table half way down this page (click here) AI Focus is selectable in P, Tv, Av and M modes on the 10D. I can't verify this. I have been forbidden from opening the package containing my new 10D until Dec 25th

Yup, you're right, I thought that the 10D and D60 were the same in this regard, but



I'm obviously wrong based on Phil's review. Regardless, the user cannot change the focus mode on the 300d.