Hi

Couldn't see this covered before so would like as many views and as much advice as possible.

I used to own a Canon EOS 500n and loved it, got married, had child, wife thought camera was too bulky and in a moment of complete madness "we" traded it in for a shiny new compact digital to take on holiday. I know, stupid boy and all that. Anyway I can't afford to upgrade to a decent digital SLR for another 12-18mths so have decided to go for another EOS for Christmas so I can have a play around and of course convince her we will infact need to get a decent digital SLR next year, perhaps.

With a budget of around £100 I can't decide whether to go for:

A 2nd hand EOS 300 with a couple of lenses, say 28-90mm + another upto 200mm or even just a Sigma 28-200mm like I had before. I've seen this for around £80-£110 on ebay.

OR

A brand new EOS 3000V with a 28-90mm (non USM) lens for about £90-£100, again on ebay, then maybe pick up another lens later.

I'm not and never will be a professional so could do with some honest advice on which option to go for and why. Are these 2 cameras that different? etc....

Really appreciate your help. Thanks.

You should be careful when buying second-hand cameras, especially ones manufactured in the last 14-17 years. The build quality has gone down, so they won't last as long.

That being said, the EOS 300 is a fantastic camera. It feels sturdy, and is a sinch to use. The 3000V is not a bad choice either, but the body isn't as steady as the 300.

If you want to go for second hand, I recommend going for an older film camera, some thing with a metal body and a fixed prime. That will last you more than a new SLR camera with a terrible grade kit lens.

I don't own a camera that is less than 20 years old. I found those last the most. My current SLR (non-digital) is a Yashica FX-3, with a 50mm 1.7 Yashinon lens, and I swear on it with my life. It has fallen down countless times, and it still works. It is very simple to use, and you feel a special bond with it. And if you are using film, then you will enjoy it much more than a new automatic SLR.

If you feel the need to use film, I say go for a second hand metal SLR. I can recommend some cameras for you. If you realize that its too costly on the long run to stick to film, then I recommend the digital SLR.

From my own personal experience I would go second hand from an authorised dealer who will give you at least 6 months warranty- Taking that a stage further, I would buy a second hand manual camera with manual lenses which is not dependent on batteries to function. I would also buy a second hand CDS light meter, load the camera with something like FP4 and enjoy

You should be careful when buying second-hand cameras, especially ones manufactured in the last 14-17 years. The build quality has gone down, so they won't last as long.

That being said, the EOS 300 is a fantastic camera. It feels sturdy, and is a sinch to use. The 3000V is not a bad choice either, but the body isn't as steady as the 300.

If you want to go for second hand, I recommend going for an older film camera, some thing with a metal body and a fixed prime. That will last you more than a new SLR camera with a terrible grade kit lens.

I don't own a camera that is less than 20 years old. I found those last the most. My current SLR (non-digital) is a Yashica FX-3, with a 50mm 1.7 Yashinon lens, and I swear on it with my life. It has fallen down countless times, and it still works. It is very simple to use, and you feel a special bond with it. And if you are using film, then you will enjoy it much more than a new automatic SLR.

If you feel the need to use film, I say go for a second hand metal SLR. I can recommend some cameras for you. If you realize that its too costly on the long run to stick to film, then I recommend the digital SLR.
[/quote]

I am fully agree with but I more prefer new camera instead of second hand.