>>2846817
the EOS 300 is a film camera so you'll be shooting film I hope you're aware of that. You'll have to get it developed and scanned before you get your pictures

>>2846822
Yeah I'm aware, will it still take a decent picture?

I know hipsters love to use old cameras but I'm sure they care more about their own image than visual fidelity

>>2846817
Funny my dad had the same old camera and yeah it's a decent enough camera
As for tips on photos just take some and learn from future criticism

>>2846824
>Yeah I'm aware, will it still take a decent picture?
can't really say, that's entirely going to depend on you and your photographic abilities. The camera itself won't do the work. Try to read up on exposure and maybe some basics of compositions if you haven't already and well, get some film so you can actually shoot it

>>2846817
>>2846824
You decide where you point the camera at and when you release the shutter. The camera is just a tool you need to know how to operate, but all it does is capture the light you're pointing it at.

>>2846835
yeah but what makes the difference between a good photo and a bad photo, assuming exposure and focus are perfect in both

>>2846840
That is no question that can be answered generally as it depends on the content and the photographers intent.
I know you're pointing at "compositional rules"/framing but these do not make the difference between a good and a bad photo as it is technically impossible to shoot a photo without any composition.

Do you understand that you will need to buy a whole bunch of film for the trip?

Semi-related, while in Macedonia focus on the nature - mountains, lakes, forests. Stick to the villages and maybe Ohrid for the churches, avoid Skopje at all costs. The city has become piece of shit due to kitsch architecture built in the past 5 years.

>>2847616
>The city has become piece of shit due to kitsch architecture built in the past 5 years.
Not going there shooting this exclusively.

>>2846840
A technically good photo? Mostly glass.

If your lenses are good and your camera doesn't let stray light in, and you nail your exposure and focus, and your film has been properly stored, and your film has been properly processed, and you don't introduce camera shake during the exposure...

Then your photo should be _technically_ good. But we're not robots to appreciate technically good pictures of boring subjects, ugly colors and distracting elements, so work on composition instead.

>>2846817
Just get a Rabal, OP.

>>2846824
>will it still take good pictures

99 percent of film cameras are perfectly capable of taking great photos but its up to the photographer to determine wether the photo will actually be good, just buy a 50 1.8 and learn to use manual mode

just make sure you send it off someplace good to get developed.

i used three local chain stores and they all came back terrible.

i tracked down a local lab and did a roll there and it was just as bad.

i found a place 30 miles away and drove there one day with 10 rolls of film to drop off. guess the fuck what? all 4 of the previous places i dropped my film all sent it to that place to be developed.

i have 5 working film cameras and about 40 rolls of film. and absolutely no motivation to ever will use any of it again.