I have an interesting dilemma at the moment…

I have been given approval to buy a new digital SLR camera, and after a lot of research I had settled on a Nikon D70 (with the Canon 300d a close 2nd).

The decision was easy, the 300d was cheaper, but the D70 was superior enough to easily justify the \$200 difference…

Or at least that was the case until a week ago when Canon announce the replacement to the 300d – the new 350d

In announcing the 350d two things have happened:

  • Canon now has a camera of the same caliber of the D70 Nikon. Admittedly the Nikon still wins in some areas, but the tiny (relatively) size of the Canon more than makes up for those issues in my list of priorities (after all, I just want good pics – but my skill will be a bigger issue than the difference between those two cameras).

  • The announcement of its replacement has meant the price of the 300d has plummeted to \$400 less than the Nikon. I also expect this to drop even further once the 350d is actually released in NZ.

    • So I have gone from the Nikon being a clear winner, to having the following options…

  • Nikon D70 – The biggest of the three, but the best quality. This is a serious piece of camera that would definitely do the job in almost every situation imaginable. Has a 18-70mm lens.
    Currently \$1700

  • Canon 350d – The Canon is tiny, and a very tidy package. Its easy to see the development that has been made in the 18mths since the other 2 cameras came out. Its also the only 8Mega Pixel (not a big issue though). 18-55mm lens.
    Not sure ’bout price yet, prob around \$1800

  • Canon 300d – definitely the poor sibling of the other two. Just small things like 3 sec start up time (vs instant), only takes 4 pics in continuous shooting @2.5shots/sec (vs 15 at 3/sec). Body has a ‘cheaper’ feel and more prone to scratching etc. 18-55mm lens.
    Price \$1300 and dropping

    • (Note – check PriceSpy for the current cheapest prices on cameras.)

    So now the big question is do I go for Quality, Convenience or Price???

    I have had an SLR on my wish list for quite some time now, but realistically they have only recently hit the point where the quality/technology is adequate to last long enough to justify them, (ie. 6MP, all the features of a film SLR, memory is cheap enough and large enough etc) and they are also cheap enough.

    The big reason for my dilemma is Moore’s Law. Moore stated that the number of transistors per square inch of a circuit will double every 18 months (his initial guess was 12 months, but since 1965 this has been revised). Arguably this has slowed in computers over the past few years due to power/heat issues, but the theory that development is exponential still holds true.

    Either way, Moore’s Law still holds for cameras (as they are relatively new in their product life cycle, and don’t currently have heat/power issues). So in theory in 18 months time, entry level SLR’s will be 10-15 MP, and memory cards will hold twice as much (or be half the size).

    So now my dilemma is, do I buy the 300d just before it is discontinued, get it at a cheap price and replace it in 2 years (as we did with our last camera)? Or, do I buy the 350d or D70 and plan to keep it for 3-4 years?

    Annoyingly, the ‘cost per year’ works out the same as the 300d is about 2/3rds the price of the others, and will last 2/3rds as long.

    So, you see my dilemma… (or at least if you have read this far you have…)

    So here’s where you come in. What are your thoughts????

    Check dpeview for a direct comparison of each side by side.

    S.