I have a Rebel G which I bought around then. I still carry it as a backpack camera. I've attached one of my shots.

Did you use a filter? It's a nice shot anyway - great colours and composition. What do you use normally and how does it compare to the Rebel G, if I may ask?

Thanks. The shot is about five years old and my record keeping was pretty haphazard back then. I probably did use a polarizing filter, since there's a lot of sky. The film was Fuji Sensia 200. The location is near Williams, AZ, about 50 miles south of the Grand Canyon.

If I were doing this shot today, I'd probably use either my Hasselblad or EOS 20D - maybe even both. If I wanted to do it in 35mm, I'd use the Minolta Maxxum 7. The Hassy and the 20D get a lot more use than the Minolta, on a daily basis.

Why are you going for the Minolta over the EOS 500n, out of interest?

Basically because it was there, I was there, and the price was right. Really nothing more than that. I have to say that I have no regrets, except for the one time it crashed and had to go back to Minolta for repair (out of warranty, of course!)

I've got a 500n which I've had for about 8 years. Although I'm happy with it, I'm just curious as to what more experienced photographers like yourself think of it, compared to say your Minolta. Just in case I think about changing to a higher grade camera at some point.

Just for comparison (not that you'll be able to see a difference here), I attached a shot I caught on the fly a couple of years ago with the Minolta.

So you think there's not much between the two cameras?

Nice pic, did you do something to the film speed to get colours and texture?

On balance, I think the Minolta is better suited for day to day use because it's construction is more robust than the Canon. Also, the Minolta offers more options in aperture/shutter priority and manual modes. And I really like the fact that it records the data for each exposure. In short, the Maxxum 7 is much closer to a pro-level camera than the Rebel G.

Re the pic: I was shooting Kodak Max 400 that day (not my favorite, but it's what I had). All I did was adjust the highlights/shadows levels in PS, and boost the saturation a hair. Other than that, the colors were as you see them. The Cumberland Plateau in Tennessee is that beautiful in the fall.

What bugs me about this shot is that if I'd been five seconds faster, I'd have caught them nose to nose.

Interestingly, the picture has a different quality depending on whether the screen on my laptop is tilted or perpendicular. It looks good with the saturation, but when I tilt my screen it looks quite good darker as well. Not sure if I'm explaining that well.

Thanks for the advice. As I'm a bit low on cash it's rather academic whether to get a more pro camera. I'll probably just keep an eye out on what's available until I can afford to upgrade.

You're right, it is better darker, and the original TIFF file image is. I kicked the level up in the JPEG file for posting here.

It looks to me like the prices of used film cameras are dropping, not to say plummeting. If you can wait, you might be able to upgrade at reasonable cost. Until then, the 500 should serve you well....

I have used this camera off and on as a travel camera.
The metering system works very well but can be fooled
in difficult lighting shots. I would use it now as
a back up camera. Its best features are that its light
and very quick to use.I belive the 500N is the British
version of the camera.

Thanks brightlight for your response. Yes, 500n is the British name for it (it may also be the name used throughout europe, I'm not sure). Out of interest, what makes you use it as a back-up camera and what do you use as your main camera?

I wanted to ask ... i have an EOS 500n about 5 years old which i almost didn't use.. i want to sell it but i don't know the price (it has a 28-80mm lens of canon) eisenberg.zz@gmail.com