|
| Author | Thread |
|
|
03/18/2006 04:12:23 AM · #51 |
Yeah anyways, I looked at that DPreview forums thing and I didn't see anything by anyone about anything breaking off or falling apart or smashing on the 350XT. It was just the same-old same-old of people complaining and whining because they didn't like the way that it felt so small in their hands. No facts, just their feelings and opinions.
As I mentioned before, I don't think that I have seen anything like this for the D50 either. Plastic CAN be strong. Indeed, time could quite easily show that the plastic lens mount of the D50 is plenty strong and itself does not have any issues.
But I HAVE heard of plastic mounted LENSES breaking off in metal mounts. I would assume that the plastic used in lens mounts on lenses is pretty much the same as the plastic used in Body lens mounts.
One user review of the 350XT on the link you provided by dsiegl mentions that the camera took some serious abuse and falls onto unfriendly surfaces. He did not experience any breakage or problems. This tells me that the 350XT has the potential to take some abuse. This also tells me that there is no real issue with strength in the build quality of the 350XT.
FWIW though, I take DPReview's product testing with some seriousness, but their forums I view as some pretty light stuff.
Now as to your question, please remember that in the post you were referring to, I was not actually comparing the 350XT to anything other than the D50. I already stated that the D70 is indeed not even in the same class of cameras as the 350XT and is better by no small degree *especially where it comes to build quality*.
Please also note that I am only about 90% sure about my information regarding the D50's mount. I could not find the supporting material for that point, although I'm pretty sure it's accurate as it was a major point in my decision process for a DSLR for myself. Further, I have not seen anything to indicate that there is a metal chassis in the D50, mostly because I don't care enough to look. The chassis is not the weak link in the chain, so it's irrelevant.
What then is stronger?
(A) Plastic lens mount + metal Chassis (unconfirmed D50) or (B) metal lens mount plus metal chassis (pretty much anything else) or (C) Metal lens mount + composite metal/plastic construction (350XT)?
Well, the answer is pretty easy. First B, then C then A.
Why?
Well, the reasoning for a Metal mount and a metal chassis is obvious.
The C option is stronger because the point of stress is the point where stress and forces are the highest. In general usage, that point is the lens mount. When mounting to a tripod, a second point of stress comes up at the tripod mount. With plastic bodied cameras, the tripod mounting area is likely pretty similar in strength, so when comparing the 350 to the D50, this becomes a non-issue. It comes down to the simple fact that at a POINT of stress, you need strength.
The chassis or rest of the body is designed to SPREAD the stresses out through the rest of the body and this means that whether it be a chassis or composite construction, the real weak link in the chain occurs at the lens mount, where leverage and small surface of contact combine. This is the same in a car, where your points of stress are more likely connected with the drive train and body support than, say, a randomly chosen point in the middle of a body panel or even any single point in the chassis itself.
If you take a mining pick and weaken a part of the chassis, the car will be damaged, but probably won't fall apart.
If you take a mining pick and weaken a major point of stress (like where the wheels meet the car, or where the drivetrain meets the frame), it's safe to say that serious failure is much more imminent.
Spreading stresses and forces out is a foundation (no pun intended) of engineering and architecture.
Judging from what people say about their Actual Experiences with the 350XT, I'd say that the engineers at Canon have done their homework for the overall structural strength of the 350XT. You "never" hear of people having problems with their camera's internal chassis falling apart simply because it's not subject to as much focused stress.
The point I made about the 350XT being 12 months old is the fact that according to Canon's 18 month pattern of rotation, it's pretty old to be comparing LCD size with "today's standards", and this will likely be addressed in about 6 months with the updated version.
EDIT: added half a sentence in the middle that somehow got sliced out when I first wrote/edited.
Message edited by author 2006-03-18 22:31:03. |
|
|
|
03/18/2006 05:32:42 PM · #52 |
Originally posted by eschelar:
... No facts, just their feelings and opinions.
|
Truthiness |
|
|
|
03/18/2006 08:52:12 PM · #53 |
Originally posted by eschelar:
Yeah anyways, I looked at that DPreview forums thing ..... |
Wow.
Helluva post there Keiren.
Thanks for making the time to reply.
cheers,
bazz. |
|
|
|
03/20/2006 01:12:17 PM · #54 |
| Hey, thanks everybody, i really appeciate the time you have taken to explain the pros and cons. Helps expose some of the rumors that sometimes seem to get out of hand, and point out more of the things i should be looking into when making the purchase... (hopefully very soon!) |
|
|
|
Current Server Time: 12/30/2025 04:26:22 PM  |
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: 12/30/2025 04:26:22 PM EST.
|
