| Author | Thread |
|
|
11/18/2005 05:13:48 PM · #51 |
| You guys are the best. Thanks for all the replies. I'm going to go over to Ritz tomorrow and "play" with the two and get a feel for them. I'm still going to wait until February though and see if the 20D gets replaced. If so I'll be able to pick up a 20D for cheaper. Thanks again. |
|
|
|
11/18/2005 05:42:26 PM · #52 |
Originally posted by Keith Maniac:
Originally posted by Uusilehto:
Originally posted by Keith Maniac:
Originally posted by deapee:
Originally posted by Keith Maniac:
I'm not sure that metal-bodied cameras are more durable than plastic ones, anyway. |
lol, joking, right? |
No. |
Wow... |
Look, a chain is only as strong as its weakest link, right? Let's say you take two cameras and drop them from the same height. One camera has a plastic body and the other camera has a metal body. After impact, you inspect the cameras and find that the plastic housing is cracked, whereas the metal one is still intact. Hooray for metal!
One small problem... the delicate electronic components inside BOTH cameras are destroyed. Neither camera works.
Consider two eggs. You put one egg inside a plastic box and the other egg inside a metal box. Drop both boxes from the same height. BOTH eggs will break.
Even if your camera body is CNC machined out of solid steel, the electronic components inside the camera are just as vulnerable if you drop it.
:) |
ok dude...no way around it, a metal body is more sturdy than a plastic body...just take back your words and admit it. I'm not talking about eggs or a drop test or anything else related to anything else in life...if you can PROVE that plastic is STRONGER or JUST AS STRONG as metal, as you are intending to say, then I will eat my words...until you prove it, you're wrong, 100% every day of the week...metal bodies ARE more sturdy than plastic bodies...nice try though chief.
|
|
|
|
11/18/2005 05:59:01 PM · #53 |
Originally posted by deapee:
Originally posted by Keith Maniac:
Originally posted by Uusilehto:
Originally posted by Keith Maniac:
Originally posted by deapee:
Originally posted by Keith Maniac:
I'm not sure that metal-bodied cameras are more durable than plastic ones, anyway. |
lol, joking, right? |
No. |
Wow... |
Look, a chain is only as strong as its weakest link, right? Let's say you take two cameras and drop them from the same height. One camera has a plastic body and the other camera has a metal body. After impact, you inspect the cameras and find that the plastic housing is cracked, whereas the metal one is still intact. Hooray for metal!
One small problem... the delicate electronic components inside BOTH cameras are destroyed. Neither camera works.
Consider two eggs. You put one egg inside a plastic box and the other egg inside a metal box. Drop both boxes from the same height. BOTH eggs will break.
Even if your camera body is CNC machined out of solid steel, the electronic components inside the camera are just as vulnerable if you drop it.
:) |
ok dude...no way around it, a metal body is more sturdy than a plastic body...just take back your words and admit it. I'm not talking about eggs or a drop test or anything else related to anything else in life...if you can PROVE that plastic is STRONGER or JUST AS STRONG as metal, as you are intending to say, then I will eat my words...until you prove it, you're wrong, 100% every day of the week...metal bodies ARE more sturdy than plastic bodies...nice try though chief. |
I don't much like the tone of your voice, deapee.
If you look back to my original post you'll see that I said that "I'm not sure that metal-bodied cameras are more durable than plastic ones..." I did not say that plastic bodied cameras are better or equal, I simply said that I'm not sure metal is better.
Then... you posted your SMART-ASS remark "lol, joking, right", and so I decided to make the case for why it might be possible that plastic is as good as metal. Kind of like high school debate club, where you pick a topic and support it. You know?
Anyway, I don't know whether plastic is better, worse, or the same as metal. My point is simply this: it's not clear to me that metal is obviously better than plastic. |
|
|
|
11/18/2005 06:09:30 PM · #54 |
Originally posted by Keith Maniac:
I don't much like the tone of your voice, deapee.
If you look back to my original post you'll see that I said that "I'm not sure that metal-bodied cameras are more durable than plastic ones..." I did not say that plastic bodied cameras are better or equal, I simply said that I'm not sure metal is better.
Then... you posted your SMART-ASS remark "lol, joking, right", and so I decided to make the case for why it might be possible that plastic is as good as metal. Kind of like high school debate club, where you pick a topic and support it. You know?
Anyway, I don't know whether plastic is better, worse, or the same as metal. My point is simply this: it's not clear to me that metal is obviously better than plastic. |
First, I don't care if you don't like my 'tone'...I do not respond to impress you...not now, not ever, so don't make that assumption.
Second, I know what you said, and I simply asked if you were joking. Sort of trying to make you take a second look at things...you said you weren't sure if a metal body was more durable than a plastic body...I'm telling you, IT IS...so you should now know that a metal body is in fact more durable than plastic...where is the problem, am I missing something?
Anyway...if it's not clear to you that a metal body is more durable than plastic, you need help...not the kind of help you can read about on the internet either...check yourself into your nearest emergency room, and ask where the psyche ward is....the can help you there.
--
Message edited by kirbic - Edited for ToS compliance. |
|
|
|
11/19/2005 06:16:45 AM · #55 |
this discussion has gone from wich camera is a better choice for the money to wich is stronger, metal og plastic
Of course the metal is stronger and under normal use the 20D will last longer, atleast the metal casing.
the only thing i was saying that in the event of dropping the camera from a table wich of course i dont recommend to anyone the plastic would propably give in better and absorb the blow more then the metal.
so cant we just leave it at metal stronger and more durable, plastic more shock absorbant.
Sorry for the bad spelling, English is not my native language :P
for the money i still think the XT is a better choice, but everybody has to handle the two machines and find out what you are looking for.
I bought the XT as my first DSLR Camera an intend to upgrade it in about 2 years, no reason to buy the most expesive one since im just learning how to use the features that a SLR gives you. |
|
|
|
11/19/2005 12:12:45 PM · #56 |
| Best way to check it is to drop your cam, so friends let us keep dropping our cams ! |
|
|
|
11/19/2005 01:42:57 PM · #57 |
Just to add an engineering perspective... either side of the "metal vs. plastic" debate can be argued coherently and with much supporting evidence. The question is, how do you define durability? Plastic housings can be incredibly tough, and can deform more without permanent damage (will spring back, whereas metal will dent). The lower flexural modulus of the plastics can also result in less shock being transmitted to the internal components. Plastic housings can usually be made lighter than their metal counterparts, and conduct heat less efficiently, so they feel warmer when very cold.
Metal housings also have advantages, including resistance to becoming brittle at low tempertures, a more solid "feel" due to the stiffer material, much lower thermal expansion and contraction, ability to hold tighter mechanical tolerances (better fit of parts), and electrical conductivity (grounding and shielding is a built-in feature).
All in all, there is no one "best" solution, but there may be a preferred solution for a particuylar application. In the case of DSLRs, I would maintain that either material set, properly specified and manufactured, is a very valid choice.
|
|
|
|
11/19/2005 02:43:42 PM · #58 |
Re: durability, it's worth observing thast Canon uses a more robust shutter assembly in the 20D. They "rate" the 350xt at 50,000 clicks and the 20D at 100,000 clicks. This was one of the factors that weighed hevily in my decision to go 20D.
Robt. |
|
|
|
11/19/2005 03:00:32 PM · #59 |
another minor detail, the 20D is about .5 lbs heavier...
Might not sound like much, but I'm still suprised when I pick up my 10D at how much difference that .5 lb from the 300D makes... |
|
|
|
12/15/2005 05:33:18 AM · #60 |
| I just got my 20D to get back in to the hobby. I went from a A-1 to my new 20D and I tried a friends 300 and XT and there in no other way to go if you can come off teh extra money. Just do it! Get er done. |
|
|
|
12/15/2005 06:11:11 AM · #61 |
As to the general 'survivability' of the 350D: I've spent four months on the road this autumn with the 350D. It lives in a decent (though only cost £20) light-metal and foam case, other than that it gets no protection. It gets carried in a standard back-pack, unprotected; it's been dropped from a chair onto a stone floor, and from bar-stool height onto a woodedn stage; it's travelled in the hold of a couple of flights, it's been around stages no end and had a few impacts - one careless person walking past me hit it hard enough to break a lens cap and damage their hand. The camera is fine.
As to plastic bodies flexing with heavy lenses - well, hold the lens - then there is actually less weight on the nount than with a heavier body, and so less flex.
The price difference is a decent lens - which I think for many people at entry-level is a real issue.
For me, I'm absolutely delighted with it, and the thought of moving 'up' to a 20D hasn't even crossed my mind.
e |
|
|
|
12/15/2005 01:40:21 PM · #62 |
The issue of "which is stronger, plastic or metal?" is not as important as "is it strong (durable) enough for my intended use?". IMO Canon built both the 350D and 20D bodies strong enough for most, if not all, use. As others point out, the moving parts are what will wear out and they are the limiting factor in the life of the camera. (Well, the next generation or the one after that may be what causes me to replace my body.)
Plastic can be used in place of steel. My car has fiberglass (I think its fiberglass) leaf springs in the rear. Glock pistols (and other brands) and many rifles and shotguns have polymer stocks. Both of these applications show that plastic can stand up to repeated impacts and can be strong. |
|
|
|
12/15/2005 01:47:46 PM · #63 |
| any camera can break if you drop it. A lot of it depends on how it hits the ground. |
|
|
|
12/15/2005 02:33:37 PM · #64 |
Photo quality wise, both are about the same. Continuous shooting speed is the biggest plus for the 20D in my opinion. If you shoot sports or action a lot, go with the 20D. The camera snobs will say the 20d looks and feels more like a real camera, but the results are the same for the most part and that is all i care about.
I have the XT on my christmas list because size/weight is important to me, I don't shoot much action and I'd rather not pay $400-500 more for something bigger and heavier. You'll have to weigh what is important to you and make your choice.
Metal vs Plastic? From an aerospace engineer I'll tale plastic any day of the week. When done right it's stronger, lighter, cheaper, more durable and does not corode. We can even make it bullet proof. Is the plastic body on the XT stronger then the body of the 20D? Probably not, but I don't plan on banging my camera around so that is not much of a concern to me.
And... the extra $400-500 for the 20D does not justify the argument that it might survive a drop that the XT wouldn't. Spend a extra $100 and insure your camera through your homeowners or renters insurance and you won't have to worry about it with either camera. |
|
|
|
12/15/2005 02:42:36 PM · #65 |
[quote]
ok dude...no way around it, a metal body is more sturdy than a plastic body...just take back your words and admit it. I'm not talking about eggs or a drop test or anything else related to anything else in life...if you can PROVE that plastic is STRONGER or JUST AS STRONG as metal, as you are intending to say, then I will eat my words...until you prove it, you're wrong, 100% every day of the week...metal bodies ARE more sturdy than plastic bodies...nice try though chief. [/quote]
Glock, Need I say more. |
|
|
|
12/15/2005 03:03:06 PM · #66 |
I believe that the 350 has a metal sub frame, onto which the lens mounts, so there is the rigidity of the metal combined with the resilience of the plastic. Ultimately, one would have to go pretty far to break either type of camera.
|
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 08/22/2025 02:43:48 PM EDT.
