A Site for Photographers by Photographers

Home > Equipment > Canon > Canon EOS IX

Featured Equipment Deals

Latest Equipment Articles

Choosing a Mobile Photo Printer Read More

Choosing a Mobile Photo Printer

In today's mobile, digital world, we carry hundreds or even thousands of pictures around on our smartphones and tablets. Tom Persinger looks at 4 different mobile photo printer options for getting...

Latest Learning Articles

Advanced Printing with Lightroom (Video Tutorial) Read More

Advanced Printing with Lightroom (Video Tutorial)

Building upon last week's Basic Printing with Lightroom video tutorial, this advanced printing tutorial will teach you to print contact sheets, print multiple images at a time, use Lightroom's present...


Canon EOS IX

by Philip Greenspun, 1997


This is a real camera. It might take toy APS film, but it is well made, clad in stainless steel, and really feels solid. The Canon IX is heavy and has a real metal lens mount that takes any standard Canon EOS lens.

So why don't I love this camera? Because if I want a heavy solid camera and lens, I already own a Canon EOS-5 body and 70-200/2.8 lens. The IX punishes me with 90% of the size and weight of my 35mm system but with only 56% of the negative size. Nor does it deliver fully the promise of APS.

Illustrative Deficiencies

There is no control wheel on the camera back so metered-manual mode is awkward, requiring the use of a shift button and front control wheel to change the aperture. Exposure compensation also requires this shift/front-wheel move. So it really isn't a substitute for the EOS-5, which has the best user interface of any camera I've ever used.

There is no way to select the number of prints desired, as permitted by the APS. With a Minolta Vectis S1, I can look at my four friends in front of the Eiffel Tower and press the PRINT button to instruct the minilab to make 5 copies. The Canon IX has no provision for writing this portion of the APS magnetic area.

Physical

Canon seems to be scoring hits consistently in the "will this impress the chicks?" department. My friend Kleanthes reports that his Canon ELPH APS P&S attracts women and the first thing my neighbor Kathy noted about the IX was that it looked a lot better than the Minolta Vectis. I hadn't been out in public with the IX for more than five minutes before an attractive young woman came up and said, "that's a nice looking camera."

Because Canon decided to retain compatibility with EOS lenses, the IX is essentially a hand grip for what was already one of the biggest lens mounts in the industry. The EOS mount is way bigger than the Nikon F mount, for example, which is why Canon can build some interesting wide angle and superfast lenses that Nikon can't.

My hands, which are about average size for a guy, don't fit that well around the IX. The whole affair is just a bit too small. But it isn't so small that one can stuff the IX with a 24-85 lens into a coat pocket. And the weight of a lens big enough to cover a 35mm frame plus the IX is enough to make your neck aware at all times that you're carrying a camera. You'll still need a point-and-shoot if you want to throw a camera into your street clothing and forget about it.

Canon seems to have let its SLR guys design their APS SLR. Minolta seems to have let their P&S guys design their APS SLR.

Viewfinder

The viewfinder is reasonably kind to eyeglass wearers. The standard view is for "H" format (4x7 prints). Masking for the C (4x6) and P (4x10) formats is done via LCD cross-hatching. If you aren't looking carefully, you might think you're getting something in the frame even though you aren't. On the other hand, because the masking is translucent, you get a little bit of warning before your subject comes into the frame. In any case, the full H format frame is being recorded on film; you can override your choice when you make reprints.

Autofocus

There is no substitute for a ring ultrasonic motor. Once you've gotten used to the Canon EOS system and the ring USM lenses, everything else seems like Rube Goldberg. With a 24-85 USM zoom mounted, the IX focusses like a professional tool. There are three AF sensors spaced out horizontally. You can pick a sensor manually or let the camera's computer figure out which one is best (the computer is usually right).

The camera does not seem to hunt like a Minolta Vectis. And even if it did hunt a little bit, you wouldn't be able to tell because the ultrasonic motor isn't audible.

When you are truly unhappy with the camera's focus decision, just hold the shutter release down halfway and grab the manual focus ring on the lens. Then take your picture.

One of my favorite 35mm EOS body features is the ability to move AF to the exposure lock button on the back of the body. Then you can get focussing assistance from the camera when you positively ask for it but the camera doesn't run wild with the AF motors as you are trying to release the shutter. The IX doesn't have this feature and it is a shame. In fact, the IX doesn't have the custom function configurability of the 35mm EOS bodies. I guess they did this to simplify the user interface but I miss the flexibility.

Flash

You can use standard Canon EOS flash equipment with the IX. You can set flash exposure compensation from the body. Flash exposure is measured through-the-lens using 3 sensors linked to the AF sensors. So if you or the computer chose to focus using the rightmost sensor, the flash exposure will be biased toward what's happening underneath that sensor. With the newest EX flashes, the camera will let you lock the flash exposure on an off-center subject, then recompose your photo. I'd rather have the Nikon D system, especially for fill-flash work.

With EX flashes, the EOS IX will do both high-speed sync (up to 1/4000); otherwise the maximum sync speed is 1/200th. The built-in flash covers wide angle lenses down to 22mm but does not zoom and is therefore extremely wimpy. This flash might make a nice fill light if you were using an off-camera flash, but of course Canon's flash control system is too primitive to do anything other than disable on-camera flashes when you're trying to use even a single accessory flash. Canon should copy the Minolta system of using the on-camera flash to wirelessly control off-camera flashes.

Summary

Canon built this camera for me. I own $12,000 of EOS lenses and flashes and other detritus. The IX is a quasi-professional-grade body that will work with all the stuff that I own. However, I owned $20,000 of lenses for my Rollei 6008 (a 6x6cm SLR that takes 120 film). I never said "Gee. I wish I could use all of these big heavy lenses on my Nikon." I carried the Nikon precisely when the Rollei system seemed too big and heavy.

If a client came to me and said "I need you to do this job and deliver the results in APS format", this would be the camera. However, I can't really ever imagine a client asking for APS and I really wouldn't want my wide angle lenses to turn into semi-wides. On the fourth hand, there is nothing to stop Canon from introducing a line of lightweight lenses that only cover the APS format. They'll still have that big EOS mount at the back but at least they won't be so heavy.

Where to Buy

The USA version of this camera is stocked by Adorama, a retailer that pays photo.net a referral fee for each customer, which helps keep this site in operation. For additional retailer information, see our recommended retailers page and the user recommendations section.


Text and pictures (c) Copyright 1991-1995 Philip Greenspun

Article created 1997

Readers' Comments


Add a comment



Jon Heburn , June 10, 1997; 09:47 A.M.

I own a Canon 1X and find it one of the best cameras I've ever owned. Yes, it's slightly on the heavy side - but that is a bonus for someone like me who has a tendancy to camera shake. I don't find the missing "print quantity" feature a problem either. In circumstances where you're out with a group of friends it's likely you'd order a complete set of extra prints anyway. Besides, I suspect this feature (had it been available) would be consigned the way most useful but obscure features go - the dark side of the moon. Overall, I like this camera - my only wish list is for eye controlled focusing...

Garry Wells , August 21, 1997; 11:49 A.M.

Recently, after much researching, I decided to aquire a Canon EOS IX, which by the way is my first camera. Having spent the last month on holiday taking pictures of every thing that moved I found the EOS IX user friendly and precise in terms of control, bearing in mind I am a novice photographer. The weight, I found to be just right. The design in my mind cannot be faulted it must be the best looking SLR on the market. On returning home the pictures I had taken were a world away from the ones I taken with other cameras. I recommend the EOS IX.

Ronald Ogg , September 02, 1997; 02:57 A.M.

I use several Olympus OM cameras and have several dozen Olympus and 3rd-party lenses for that system. I'm happy with the Olympus system for professional work.

However, I decided I wanted a point-and-shoot camera to carry along when I didn't want the weight of my 3 camera bags and all of my Olympus gear; and that gear is arranged exactly how I want it, so pulling one of the OMs and a lens out to take along separately wasn't desirable.

I looked at what was on the market, and bought a Minolta Vectis 40. I like the Vectis, and for non-serious point-and-shoot photography came to like the "tiny" APS film and picture formats.

However, I quickly outgrew the Vectis. The lack of through-the-lens viewing was a real irritation. I looked at the Minolta Vectis S1 and really didn't like its low-speed lenses or their quality.

So I picked up an EOS-IX (the kit cost me $799, with US warranty), a 380EX flash, and a USM 75-300 lens, and must say that I'm sold on this setup. Since my OMs are semi-automatic with manual focus, having a fully automatic auto-focus camera with all of the options of the EOS-IX took some getting used to! But I've adapted, I've gotten used to the controls, and it's a lot faster to use than my OMs for leisure shooting. The camera, flash, and zoom tele fit into a small bag which I can grab when I'm leaving for an outing.

I'm now considering the Fujifilm AS1 Image Scanner, an under-$500 device that lets you insert a processed roll of APS film and it scans it and transfers the images to a PC.

Is the EOS-IX a professional level camera? Not in the strictest sense, in my opinion. Is the EOS-IX a practical SLR? Yes, in my opinion. I enjoy using it, and find it has all of the creative control I want if I want it.

John Cryer , September 18, 1997; 09:07 P.M.

I too am an EOS-IX owner, complete with 24-85 and 75-300 IS lenses and 380EX flash. I do not consider myself anything loftier than an amateur photographer, but I am certainly a fussy one. I previously owned an Olympus OM2n 35mm and I must say that I am getting much better and more consistent quality in my prints with APS. Admittedly I have yet to blow one up above the panoramic format, but I can not perceive any extra graininess over 35mm at the same ISO rating. The pictures definitely appear sharper with APS. I would like to challenge the sceptics to come up with something better than the very subjective arguments being put forward in favour of 35mm. Lets have some difinitive facts and "lab" results. No more "APS has to be worse because of its smaller negative"

Laurence Barber , September 22, 1997; 01:26 P.M.

I read a Fugi Web page that did a test that compared both 35mm and APS film and the winner was APS, smaller neg size was not a problem. I am also delighted with my IX

Steve Rencontre , October 15, 1997; 08:06 P.M.

Hmmm... I've had an EOS 500 for a few years, and I recently bought an IX body specifically because I could use my existing lenses. I can't help thinking - is it just me? Everyone I speak to who's tried APS reckons the pictures are superb. But to me, the APS prints *don't* look as sharp as 35mm, even in 6x4 format, and the blown-up panoramic 12x4 just looks blurred and grainy.

On the plus side, the ergonomics of APS are truly wonderful. I think Canon were right to leave out the multi-print selection and the message facility. The former would be of very little use to me, and the latter is IMO a total gimmick.

Bottom line is I have mixed feelings. I like taking pictures with the IX, and things like the autofocus are clearly more intelligent than the older camera. I just wish the pictures were a bit sharper.

Robert M. Grant , January 11, 1998; 06:07 P.M.

I being a Canon shooter for almost ten years now and owning several Canon bodies and lenses I don't see any APS prints that I would consider better than the 35mm that I have shot over the years. I've seen some that were as good but you have to expect that from technology. My wife can take a picture with my Elan every once in a while that took me months to learn how to do 8 years ago. Is APS here to stay? Only time will tell. Remember "Disc" film? (They still make it!) If you like APS, fine go and be happy but don't expect 35mm to go anywhere. Personally I think the APS film is a great addition to the "Point-and Shoot" arsenal but I think I will stick with 35mm for my SLR's.

Johann Espiritu , February 04, 1998; 10:59 P.M.

I just got an EOS IX and I would like to day that I am happy with it. However, it is a small camera and I had to purchase an extension grip for it to make it fit better in my hands. I would recommend this for other people who find the camera a bit too small.

Scott C. King , March 07, 1998; 01:49 A.M.

I had a point and shoot chinon for 10 years. When I started researching cameras I looked into APS because my mother had one of the canons.

After a lot of research I got the APS IX because of its features and ability to interchange EOS parts and such. I like it and my peers are really wooed by the look of the camera. The body with a 28-200 super(tamron) really baffles most people. I find that many of them don't understand APS and they are really afraid of APS and digital technology and what everelse threatens the standard formats of 35mm. Many of these people shun off the technolgy like people did when the automobile came about perhaps.

I will admit that I am somewhat concerned of the survivabilty of APS. Even at 30 I have seen a lot of stuff come and go.(Laser disc, disc cameras, sony beta, apple computers(woops, that is another discussion)

Any how to get back to the point I like it as far as its competitors go(Nikon APS, Minolta APS). It has a good solid design.

on the downside I don't care for the extra costs of gear(film and developing). I dug the CHP print sizes at first but I scan everything now directly from the cartridge. The APS is really nice for this.

Well enough of this. I like it but I am snooping around now for a 35mm to go with it.(NiKon)....

What does this whole forum matter anyway, Everything will be digital one day........

chow

Pascal Feddema , March 12, 1998; 12:27 P.M.

Well.. i own a Canon IX (including the 24-85 zoom lens, which is wonderfully quiet) now and i am very happy with it. I used to own a Nikon F601 with two lenses (a 35-70 and a 70-210) but i got fed up with the weight of the whole pack (i travel a lot backpacker style). So i wanted a new camera which would be 1) a lot lighter 2) an SLR (i want different lenses &options) 3) not too big 4) be able to be in manual control I have taken a look at the Minolta (nice, but not convincing), the Nikon Pronea (too big & heavy; this is a marketing mistake.. stupid stupid stupid) so this only left me the Canon. so i ended up buying the canon. I'm still very pleased with it. Concerns whether the new system is gonna make it ? Well i certainly don't have any doubt. Just look at the number of Canon Ixus being sold and i think the APS system is there to stay. It's time for an evolution in the photography industry (although i think that 35 mm will exist forever). APS is just more convienent for me.

Cheers!

Pascal

Warren Marts , March 19, 1998; 05:04 P.M.

I've got an EOS IX with 28-80, a 50 1.8 and the 75-300 IS telephoto. I've shot about 15 roll with the camera so far. This is my first SLR.

There are a couple of features lacking that I kind of expected to find: depth-of-field preview and multiple exposures. There's also no mirror lockup or prefire. You can use a right angle viewfinder with an adaptor or get diopter lenses, but other accesories like the eyepiece extender won't work. For remote control is uses the same units as the Elan-II, with wired and IR units available for ~$20.

I really liked the way this camera fit my hand - I tried everything I could from Nikon, Canon, Pentax and Minolta. Other cameras that fit my relatively small hands well were the Elan-II (which is not compact, but worked well) and the Pentax Zx-5 (I really liked the manual control wheels on this one as well.) I found the Canon Rebel to be not nearly as handy as either the smaller EOS IX or the larger Elan-II.

While I find it to be nicely compact with the 28-80, by the time I put on the 75-300 lens the size and weight savings over a 35mm camera body are swamped by the bulk of the lens.

I've found the lack of high-speed print films (over 400) or B&W to be somewhat of a limitation. On a trip to the Carribean I found APS film to be hard to find and much more costly relative to 35mm than it is in the US.

I may well buy an 35mm EOS body if I want to start shooting slides or printing my own pictures. To some degree I regret buying the EO

Bryan Bennett , November 16, 1998; 01:33 A.M.

I just bought the EOS IX, and I am really happy with it. For me, the advantages of APS, such as midroll film change, are a Godsend. I have shot a couple of rolls of New Kodak ISO 100, and I'm floored by the results...APS is as serious as you want to be! Honestly, we can talk about negative size all day long, but the results I'm getting are every bit as good as 35mm Royal Gold ISO 25...which I can't even find anymore! Besides, if I wanted to get really serious, I'd shoot medium format. APS...the future is here!

Charles E. Love, Jr. -- , March 12, 1999; 03:33 P.M.

I bought an EOS IX as part of my "liberal education;" I usually do medium format, but thought I could learn something about the latest technology from this autofocus APS camera. I find Philip's comments about size odd. The camera is much smaller than, say, an Elan II (the 35 mm. camera which it most resembles). The problem, as Philip says, is that many of Canon's 35mm. lenses seem very large on the tiny APS body. But there are some small, good ones available--50mm. macro, Tokina's 17 mm. f3.5 (which is about a 21 in APS), and especially Canon's new 22-55 and 55-200 (?) zooms which cover 35 but are still very small.

The Elan II's control interface is a bit better, but the IX is a brilliant design--Canon got most of the Elan II into what is a tiny camera. Too bad we can't have an eye control version, as the Japanese do!

The camera has two big problems: (1) The viewfinder's masks are hard to see, and impossible in low light. The much cheaper (and plastic) IX Lite has solved that problem. (2) There is so little APS film. Thanks to Kodak for the black and white--but Europe has Fuji APS slide film, while we don't.

As for weight--well, it helps people handhold better, and the camera just exudes quality, unlike the other Canon bodies, which (except for the EOS-1) all seem cheap and plastic-y to me.

The film handling is wonderful. However, my results are not as good as 35. In addition, I have found APS processing to be poor, despite all the stuff about magnetic data that was supposed to improve it (I have tried Fuji, Kodak, Konica, and some local people).

Overall, I like the camera. The smaller negative is not necessarily fatal--notice the rapid improvement in films, resulting in, e.g., some view camera users switching to smaller medium format with great success. But without better film choices, APS has no future other than as a snapshot format.

Charles Love

Arief Novisto , April 22, 1999; 01:03 A.M.

For background. I'm a EOS 35mm shooter who so far have used only two lenses; the 28/1.8 and 85/1.8. I bought an IX-E with the 24-85/3.5-4.5 lens on eBay, because the price is right for the package. At first I only wanted to keep the lens and sell the camera back via eBay, but after trying 3 rolls of APS (Fuji, Kodak both 100) I decided to keep the camera. Why? Because I like, among other things: easy reprinting feature (index, no exposed negatives) of APS, super easy MRC, 1/200 X-sync, and the exposure data imprinting. Also I'm already familiar with EOS interface. My largest enlargement so far with 35mm are full frames 8 x 12, so APS suits me just fine. I'm not going to sell my Elan II because I also shoot slide and 35mm is already too small for that. But for short travel or family gathering with print films and one instead a bag full of lenses, I can see the benefit of APS.

Phil's comment about APS being punished with 90% of the weight but only 56% negative size of 35mm is valid, but if you take this further, the 35 mm user (especially EOS 1n RS, F5, etc) also being punished with about 80%-90% (maybe 100% for complete EOS1n) of the weight but only 37%! film size of say a Pentax 645N (28% for 6x6 med. format!). Phil have obviously USED an APS SLR's so his opinion is well founded, unlike some other people who never used an APS SLR before (and they are many, check the APS thread).

I'm keeping the camera BTW.

Tony Zipple , July 28, 1999; 02:07 P.M.

I recently bought an EOS IX lite for a South American trekking vacation. It is great. Small, light, good controls and when coupled to a Canon 28-105 lens, a wonderful camera for the trip. Picture quality is fine. If I lugged an EOS 3 and a bag of lenses over 4600 meter passes I am sure that the pix would have been even better but the hike would not have been as much fun. The IX lite is perfect when I want more flexibility than a point and shoot camera offers but want less weight than my A2E. For $260, it is a nice addition to my photo tools.

Michael Burress , August 18, 1999; 08:29 P.M.

Nobody mentions that APS has a 16x9 aspect ratio. I bought a IX in '97 when it first came out and spent $1k for just body & lens because I wanted to try thinking in 16x9. One day when digital cameras would be good I knew they'd offer 16x9 in still and motion. I was also shooting for the web (hollywood.com) and knew however good/bad APS might be, for the web it'd have plenty of pixels. And the body is so cute. I took the lens off and thought this kind of feels like a Leica M; put a Canon 28 2.8 on it and well, uh, not exactly. 16x9 and kinda M is what did it for me. So...outside Grauman's Chinese the press and Hollywood paparazzi say, "Wow! it's so small, it must be some new digital thing!?" Uh, right, it's digital. I'm not going to tell them it's APS because by then with 540EZ and Quantum Turbo battery attached and switching big Canon zooms, I know this "little" camera doesn't make a lot of sense. It's a nice camera, I like it and use it, but wouldn't recommend it or any APS camera other than the Elph. APS is a film-based dike a thousand feet too low for the digital flood.

andrew fildes , December 12, 1999; 12:27 A.M.

The IX body is superb - what I want is a body like this that shoots 35mm because, as mentioned by an earlier post, APS is too expensive and too inconvenient. The advantage was that it got me into autofocus and Canon lenses - I bought the kit about a year ago with 24-85 and a 75-300 USM too. Then I bought an old EOS 600 as a second body so that I could shoot B&W and self process/print. Trouble is, I never use the IX body now, only the 600. Perhaps, if I was as sexy as Greenspun and young ladies had constantly approached me while I was using it...

Kim Murphy , December 19, 1999; 12:27 A.M.

I purchased a Canon IX recently with the standard lens, 22- 80 or something like that (it's late and I don't have the camera in front of me). I'm an amateur but have used Canon AE-1 and Nikon 2002 SLRs for years. Shortly after purchase of the IX, I shot a photo of my daughter in our pool. As it happened, it was a great shot, and I had it ENLARGED to the largest size a good local developer/dealer could do, about 8 X 10 inches. At that enlarged size, I thought the resolution of the photo was FINE. The manager of the store, a Canon rep for years, thought the color and quality of the enlarged photo was EXCELLENT. Also, in regard to the flash, I recently shot some photos with the IX at full tele -- using the flash. I was PLEASANTLY SURPRISED by the good exposure and sharpness using the autofocus. Nit pickers will always pick. For my money, the IX is a GREAT camera and APS print quality is as good as 35mm. The versatility of APS is BETTER than 35mm, and with the new scanners, I can digitize my APS processed rolls using a WALK AWAY machine. Viva la APS!!

Carl Smith , March 27, 2000; 11:24 P.M.

I am an young (17) amateur who has found joy in an old Nikomat FT. Granted some things don't seem to work quite right, etc, it's fun. ANd I don't really mind the weight for some things.

I started hunting, because I own a point and shoot APS. The Pentax efina, which I personally think is one of the best point and shoot APS cameras on the market. I've seen and used canon elphs, and the name is accurate, to push the buttons, you have to be just that, an "elph."

However, when I started merrily along with the thought of SLR glimmering in my mind, I could only think, APS, mainly because, at my age, and use, it's just plain easier to keep the same medium. Also, the prices here are close to nil difference for purchasing and developing film as compared to 35 mm.

The IX will be the way I go, I don't much care for the layout and design on the Nikon APS SLR, it's nice, but not quite up to par for what I need it for.

I am a yearbook type nerd, and being able to swap rolls of film in and out will be a godsend. No more wasted film (my efina does not have this unfortunately). The only times I've noticed diminished APS quality is when either you use poor film, or get it developed fast at someplace like CVS. But where I live, there are several professional photo labs that'll have it back to you the same day with outstanding results off a mere P&S. The metal construction turned me on too. I know plenty of people who bring their cameras to school etc. But I don't want to risk beating up some crummy abs plastic housing. The stainless steel is absolutely fabulous for this. (if only titanium weren't so darned expensive) well, babble babble. I'm done, that's my opinion, and I think if you're out for a SLR, especially your first one, and if you're into APS, then this is undoubtedly the best one on the market

Dreux Grever , April 22, 2000; 11:20 A.M.

First off, this is not a camera for professional photographers, and maybe not even for advanced amatuers.

That being said, the IX is a terrific camera. I already own a full complement of Canon lenses and bodies, so when Ritz camera announced their fire sale of the IX for $219.00, I had to spring for it to try out APS format.

I really enjoy the new format. The panoramic mode is fabulous. I have a friend who has been experimenting with it for a couple of years, and he has created some stunning photos using it. Panoramic really can provide a new dimension in thinking when composing your photos (much like the square photos of medium format).

For me, the ability to rewind and swap film is also a terrific feature. Now that there is film speeds between 100 and 800, as well as the new black and white, this feature really comes in handy.

As to the price drawback, that has become less of an issue recently. You now can buy 3 packs of APS-400-25 of FUJI film over at Ritz for as little at $9.99 (less for 200 and 100) and even K-mart has Kodak at $11.99 per 3 pack. Development at Walgreens of the 25 exposure roll, single prints, is $8.99, which isn't great, but not unacceptable. (they charge $6.99 for doubles of 35mm, but what the heck, I throw 75% of my photos away anyway, most aren't keepers) Target will develop the film for even less.

In conclusion, and especially if Canon is your lens mount of choice, then this is a great camera to use when you want to take advantage of APS format. I still use my 35 mmm when I want to burn a lot of film, or want to use "real" black and white film, but the rest of the time you'll find me with my new Canon IX.

Tom B. , May 16, 2000; 11:13 A.M.

Here is my experience with APS and the EOS IX camera. Three months ago I decided to upgrade from my old Pentax K1000 and bought into the APS format. While I loved the EOS IX camera itself, I immediately started experiencing problems with APS. Here are some of the problems:

- Takes 5-8 days to process film in most labs in Toronto - No labs could do FTPM, a valuable feature for creative photography - Most labs did not do series scene (bracketing) properly - you could barely see the 1 -1.5 stop differences that I asked for. They obviously compensated during development. - Some labs do not print the standard info on the back of the print which I find very valuable (focal length, shutter speed, aperture, compensation, date, time). Some labs only printed the date/time, but it was the date/time of the development!

I should mention that I did find the quality of APS very good! With a 50mm prime lens the prints looked very sharp, but not quite as sharp as 35mm, IMHO. I then purchased an EOS 630 (mostly an impulse buy) and quickly found myself using the 630 only. With a heavy lens (eg. Tokina 28-70 ATX PRO II) the EOS IX is somewhat difficult to hold and balance.

In the end I returned the EOS IX and with the store credit and the 630 as a trade-in, I purchased a new EOS A2. Now I am happy, but I wish the A2 had a real scale in manual meetering mode (but in manual mode I usually take my time anyway, so counting 1/2 stops is not a major problem). Yes I could have purchased the EOS 5 in NY, but Canon made it clear to me that the EOS 5 will not be under warranty in Canada.

My conclusion: APS is a promising format for amateurs, but the industry failed to properly support it beyond the point-and-shoot market. The EOS IX is a wonderful camera that can handle the demands of a serious amateur. Too bad APS cannot (at least not yet).

Robert Reis , May 20, 2000; 03:01 P.M.

I've had my Canon EOS IX for one month. Purchased it with 50mm F1.8. Purchased an additional IX body after my results came in and also an APS scanner (not yet arrived.) This camera feels right, has solid construction, and almost all the features of the Elan II.

Autofocus sharp and fast. Perfect camera for pictures of active children and pets.

IMHO even a grainy great picture is better than a grainless picture that the camera wasn't ready to take.

People are more at ease with this camera than with the enormous black boxes that the superior 35mm cameras have become.

Yes, my Pentax 43mm F1.9 will produce sharper images on the larger negative, but the Canon features on the IX make it a lot easier to control the image than with my ZX5.

My guess is that I will simply get an Elan II body and share the accesories when a larger negative is mandatory.

Bob Reis

Steve C. , August 02, 2000; 07:44 P.M.

I bought the IX Lite shortly after the birth of my daughter five years ago. As a novice, I couldn't be happier with the results that I've gotten with the IX Lite. For us, it's light years ahead of the P&S realm and we really like the APS features such as mid-roll changes and easy negative and contact sheet storage. What I need to do is have more zoom than the 20-55 lens offers. I could buy new lens or just trade-up to the IX.

Ron Wielage , August 17, 2000; 06:59 P.M.

You're going to love this. I appreciate well designed products. I have an Audi TT because it's a great design. A few years ago when the EOS IX came out I wanted one badly, but thought it was pricey and picked up a used Elan IIe instead. When the price came down this spring I thought "The perfect complement to the TT -- gotta get one." So I did. Haven't shot one picture with it. May never shoot one. It's just beautiful to look at. A perfectly good reason to own one, I think!

Carl Smith , January 21, 2001; 11:09 P.M.

Well, here I am, 18 now, and I'm still loving my EOX IX (with 24-85 USM). Earlier last year I posted about it and how I chose it. I think its wonderful, I now have the 380EX and the 75-300 IS lens. It makes a great system. Even if it is APS (too bad for the pros I suppose). Although now that I'm waiting to hear back from RIT about my admissions, I've had some other things pass through my head. And mainly that follows along the line of, I need a 35 mm EOS now, because I don't want to ditch what I have lens and flash wise, but I want the ability to develope the film myself and have the less expensive medium as well. Either way, I'm looking for some EOS 35mm body, maybe used, to provide me with great joy. In addition to my good old Nikomat FT, I love that thing, click, wind, click, wind. Can't beat the old manuals. There's also the prospect that I'll be getting a digital camera. For that, I'd probably wander the way of the EOS D30, or something comprable that uses canon equipment.

One complaint I see a lot is that people don't like carrying the big lenses around for a small camera. For me the heft is good, otherwise I'd probably toss the thing up in the air. Also, for me, the focal length multiplier is handy, I usually stand back from my subject and shoot. That's why I love the image stabilizer on the 75-300. Sure it has an f of 4 - 5.6, but I couldn't afford the next step up, so I payed in the middle for the image stabilizer which IMHO, it does help.

So thats for me, thousands of dollars go towards two new bodies, a good tripod, professional light meter and more, all being things to have for RIT, or wherever I go (hopefully I'll still get it). Oh, BTW, I think the mail lost the response from RIT, I should have received it a few days ago. :(

Image Attachment: christina in lake.JPG

Puppy Face , November 13, 2001; 03:31 A.M.

Why did I buy an EOS IX? It was on closeout for only $200 and looked extremely cool. Canon's designers really pulled out the stops on this one. Plus, it can use my EOS lenses and accessories.

Oh yeah, Philip was right about this camera. It does attract women. When I hang at the mall with my EOS IX, young females approach and ask about the cute little camera. "Are you digital?" "Ah," gulp, "I wouldn't dare do that, I'm happily married." Some of them can't resist and gently caress the stainless steel skin. One even fingered the rear-mounted LCD while gazing longingly at the IX. In contrast, my EOS 3 with PB-E2 Booster Drive and EF 200 2.8L USM makes women uncomfortable and they run away quickly. Maybe I should get an Elf too?

Rob Mende , November 22, 2002; 11:29 P.M.

Even though the Canon EOS IX has been discontinued, at this time there are quite a few popping up on E-bay. This is how I ended up with an IX. I was bidding on a lens that just happened to have the IX attached to it.

I have a Canon D30 (digital) and a Canon 7e (35mm) that challenge my photographic talents, but out of curiosity, I ran a couple of rolls through it. I didn’t want to like it. And there are defiantly things about it I don’t like, but overall, it is the only APS camera I would own.

For someone who already has an investment in Canon lenses, the IX is the best of both worlds. I’ve played with a P&S APS camera and the inability to change lenses to get the shot my eye saw drove me absolutely nuts. I do like playing with the panorama setting, especially when working with specialty lenses, such as a 105mm macro or 15mm full frame fisheye. I can take the shot my eye sees without the hassle of instructions to the specialty photo lab.

As for the graininess, I’ve encountered that several times. First was with some B&W film that had expired on the shelf. (I know, dumb. But I was in a hurry. That will learn me…) I cannot say that was the issue for a fact, but I ran two rolls of B&W film through the IX on the same day in the same garden. The only difference was one roll was fresh whereas the other had past its expiration date. One roll came out good, the other grainy. As with most things, it is always buyer beware. The second time I encountered graininess was when I was playing with the exposure settings for the IX. I took a single roll of APS film, set the camera on a tripod and took the same shot through the whole roll, changing first the exposure and then the f-stop settings. The APS film seemed to be less ‘forgiving’ (for lack of a better word) of lighting conditions that were not just quite right than my 35mm or digital. I will grant this is a very subjective test and my opinion only.

When I enlarge the APS film, I rarely make an enlargement over 8x6. At that size, I rarely see graininess, but I don’t believe I would enlarge APS much beyond. 8x6 is a convenient size for enlargement for me because I can use 8 ½ x 11 specialty card stock as an easy mount / frame for the pictures.

One of the things I don’t like about the IX is its size. At 6’ 4”, I have a decent sized maul. When holding the IX, my pinky finger hangs off the camera, which makes it hard to hold for long periods of time. (My D30 and 7e each have the extended battery / hand grip accessory.) I bear most of the weight of the camera and lens on the lens, which makes manual focusing a bit of a challenge. Changing the camera settings in creative mode can be a bit of a pain depending upon what you are trying to do, as well.

Previous comments have mentioned that females seem to be attracted to this camera. That is my experience as well. A couple of shutter bugs and I got together to photograph a rose garden in the heights of bloom. One of the guys brought his wife, and she was bored to tears. When she seen the IX, it didn’t take much cajoling at all to get her to give it a try. With a three-minute lesson on the basics of using the IX and three rolls of ISO 400 film, she was merrily on her way. The next week, we compared our shots, and she had composed some fairly decent shots. Some were even better than her hubby’s. The next time we got together, she was sporting an IX of her very own. (You’re welcome, Canon…)

The IX is not my camera of choice for when I’m on the hunt for that perfect shot. But it is the camera I keep in my car when driving back and forth to work or such to avoid those ‘Damn, I wish I had my camera!’ moments.

Rick Sullivan , November 17, 2003; 12:28 A.M.

I only recently purchased an EOS IX. I have found it to be an extremely remarkable camera. Reminicent of the of the Contax 139Q and 159MM. I scoffed at APS, I don't anymore.

Bob Jones , December 25, 2003; 02:43 P.M.

I purchased the EOS IX w/ 28-80mm for $230.00 in 2000 from Ritz Camera. I had been using a cannon sure shot.

This camera has made me look like a better photographer than I really am. People we send pictures to always comment on how clear and colorful our pictures look. They look that much better vs any 35mm non slr cameras.

I just set it to dummy mode and let the camera do it all for me. Just about all my photos are great with it.

The camera is actually lighter than it appears. All the weight is in the lenses. I have no idea why some people think its heavy. If a camera body had zero weight but had a large lense on it its going to have some weight. You can get elcheapo lightweight plastic lenses if you want super light.

The film is great, just pop it in and it auto loads, auto rewinds etc. This is a pro camera for dummies. I love it.

T ARAHO , May 08, 2005; 11:22 A.M.

Along with a D60 and Elan IIe, I have - and use - an IXe. At one time I owned a Minolta Vectis - a fine camera - but changed because of the versatility that Canon provides. I can interchange every EOS lens on all three camera bodies. I don't share the purists distain for the APS format. Mid roll change is a snap. Negative storage is the best. There are "family affair" times when the IXe and APS are just what I need. I like this camera and recommend it. It is unfortunate that the market has caused Canon to discontinue it.


Add a comment



Notify me of comments