20d vs 350d, hoping to do some higher-speed stuff

<p>I'm trying to decide on the 350d vs the 20d. I can't afford either, so I'm hemming and

hawing on the $300-400 difference...</p>

 

<ol>

<li>Yes, I've read as many reviews as I could get my hands on (here, including Bob Atkin's

20d vs 350d article, dpreview.com, megalpixel, et al).</li>

 

<li>I've had limited photo experience, due largely to never owning a camera (when I took

a photo class I borrowed an AE-10, fwiw)</li>

 

<li>I'm a geek, so I like toys...er, tools...that have all sorts of controls, and I strongly

suspect that I'd want to put a real lens on any camera I bought sooner or later. For this

reason, I want to go SLR.</li>

 

<li>Two of my other interests are skiing and auto racing. I can't afford really getting into

the latter, so I'd like to be able to shoot photos of them. Skiing is particularly tough

because, in addition to high speeds at an actual ski race (30-40 MPH plus), lighting

conditions can be quite interesting. I was at a <a href="http://

www.maineforestrally.com">car rally in Maine</a> last weekend, and the combination of

scenery to and from there and the desire to shoot cars as they came through have

convinced me to go out and actually buy a camera.</li>

 

<li>My girlfriend is actually a photographer (currently doing photo work part time until

she can get enough cash doing it to go full time), and she is currently shooting with a

60D; she may get a 20d in the relatively near future, but probably not soon enough for me

to acquire her 60d. She is, of course, engaged in ongoing investment in lenses.</li>

</ol>

<p>If it weren't for (4), I'd have ordered a 350D already; (5) gives me a large incentive to

stick with Canon, as I can borrow lenses from my girlfriend (not to mention knowledge).

The sticking points on the 350d vs 20d seem to be

<ul>

<li>speed -- the 20d can buffer and record shots a lot faster than the 350d</li>

<li>quicker access to change exposure settings on the 20d (can be done without resorting

to menus and actually looking at the LCD</li>

</ul>

Given those considerations, does anyone have any feedback? At this point, I've managed

to resist the urge to buy a camera immediately because the too-good-to-be-true deal for

the 20d on Amazon went away (it <em>was</em> too good to be true) and nothing will

ship until Monday anyhow.</p>

I was where you are just a few months ago. The decision was very easy for me after I went

and tried them out in my own hands. It all depends on your hand size and where you are

coming from. Most seem to think the 350D is way too small. I was coming from a Rebel

2000 and point and shoots so the 350D was actually larger and heavier than my older SLR

and much easier to grip. The 20D felt HUGE to me and I couldn't get comfortable with the

distance between the controls - the wheel was too far (nevermind the weight). Just goes to

show it's a personal thing and you should got try it them out first.

 

The other thing to consider is they are both pretty much capable of taking the same

quality shots. If you are really tied for money you can afford better lenses if you go with

the 350D.

 

I thought if I got the 350D I would always wish I had the higher-end camera. I'm not sorry

at all, which is not typical of me. The biggest thing is the shots I'm getting. I should have

upgraded my SLR a long time ago.

 

As for your last two bullets, You will need to be shooting at very high shutter speeds to

need more buffer. I take continuous shots of my son when he's moving fast and I get a lot

of shots in before I run into the buffer. The exposure settings are pretty quick on the

350D as well. They provide shortcuts to the frequently used settings. 20D is faster I'm

sure, but the 350D is not a pain in that area in my opinion.

 

Again, I think it's just a personal thing. I think it will be pretty easy to decide once you

compare the two for a little bit.

If you really can't afford either, you might want to look at something less expensive. A used 10D or 300D might be a better option financially. No point in having a nice camera if you're wondering where your next meal is coming from.

Blah. Let me rephrase. Replace the word "nice" with "top-of-the-line-prosumer".

 

Both the 10D and 300D are nice cameras. Slightly fewer megapixels than the 20/350D, but...it's not the camera that takes great pictures, it's the person behind the viewfinder.

"it's not the camera that takes great pictures, it's the person behind the viewfinder."

 

I see. We read that a lot on this forum. But I've yet to see a photograph made without a camera. If the tool is so unimportant, try making a photograph without one. And then when you realize that it's impossible, you might think seriously about what tool is most appropriate for the job at hand, rather than repeating tired cliches.

"went and tried them out in my own hands"

 

I agree with Rob, go out and put them in your hands. I was looking at the XT, 20D, and D70s. I was having a hard time deciding until I went down to the local camera shop. As soon as I picked up the 20D I knew it was the one for me!

 

-James

I have both the 20D and the Rebel XT (350D). Before getting the XT, I was using the 10D and 20D. Originally when I tried the XT at the store, I considered it to be too small. But I bought an XT on behalf of a friend who wanted one as her first DSLR. Before handing it over to her, I took it out for a "test drive". After about an hour of shooting with it, I was surprised to find that I actually liked its smaller size. It no longer fealt "too small". I ended up liking it so much, I went out and bought one for myself. I sold off my 10D. The XT is better, electronically, than the 10D in just about every respect. I really like the XT now. I think its smaller size is an asset. I regularly use it side-by-side with my 20D.

 

In terms of speed, the 20D does not "record shots a lot faster than the 350D". But it does buffer 6 shots RAW, compared to 4 shots RAW on the XT/350D. Write speeds on the 350D are MUCH faster than write speeds on the D60 or 10D. If you are shooting JPEG, I don't think you have anything to worry about. The XT will be able to keep up with fast-paced shooting. If you are shooting RAW, you'll have to pace yourself. But even with the 20D, you still have to pace yourself because the 20D's buffer isn't that much bigger. Using fast cards helps too.

 

As for quicker acces to changing exposure settings, I'm not sure what you're talking about here. If you are talking about access to aperture and shutter settings, they are equally quick. I usually shoot in Aperture Priority (Av) mode or Shutter Priority (Tv) mode, and there is absolutely no difference in control access between the 20D and XT. Both use the finger wheel near the shutter button.

 

As for other settings, like ISO, WB, AF, and Metering, I don't see much difference in speed of access either. On the XT, you're looking at the large illuminated color LCD screen on the back. On the 20D, you're looking at the small non-illuminated (unless you hit the illumination button) monochrome LCD on the top plate.

 

Personally, I prefer the XT's access to these controls for a number of reasons. For one thing, when I hit the ISO button with my right thumb (or the AF, WB, or Metering button), the back LCD lights up and ONLY the ISO selection options are visible, and I ONLY have to use my right thumb to toggle to the value I want. On the 20D, when you hit the ISO button, that button actually activates ISO and Drive selection. Turning the finger wheel cycles through the Drive Modes (Single Shot, Continuous, Self-Timer). Turning the large Quick Control Dial cycles through the ISO values. Sometimes, it's easy to turn the wrong dial, so you end up changing the Drive mode when you really wanted to change the ISO. You just have to remember which one to turn, which can be more difficult to remember than it seems, especially in the heat of shooting. And the other thing about the 20D's top-plate LCD is that it doesn't automatically light up when you use it. On the XT, it does light up automatically. That's nice when you are shooting in lower-light conditions where seeing info on a dark LCD can be difficult. Plus, it's nice to not have to look at a top plate LCD when you have the camera mounted at eye-level on a tripod. On the XT, you just look at the back LCD without having to stand on your toes to try to see a top-plate LCD or having to tilt the camera back to see the top-plate LCD.

 

About the only place where I think the XT's control system is at a disadvantage is with Flash Exposure Compensation, which doesn't have a direct access button like all the other settings. You have to go into the menu to access it. Also, some people don't like the fact that you have to hit the Set button after you select a setting (like after you choose the ISO you want). I don't think it's a big deal. Choose, hit set, you're done.

 

So my whole point is that the two issues you have with the XT/350D-- one being speed of recoring, and the other being quicker access to settings-- really aren't as significant as different as you think they are. The buffering capacity should be insignificant if you shoot JPEG. In RAW, you'll have to pace yourself with both cameras because neither of them have huge RAW buffers.

 

If money weren't an issue, I would say definitely go ahead and get the 20D. It costs more, but you get more. But since money seems to be tight, I would say get the 350D/XT, if you don't mind the smaller size. However, for less money than the 20D, you can get the 350D/XT with the battery grip, which will increase its size and increase its battery capacity. Oh, and the other thing is that the XT definitely has a smaller battery capacity than the 20D. Make sure you get a second battery, which I would recommend regardless of which camera you bought, but more so for the 350D/XT.

<p>Regarding access to exposure settings, I was basing that in part on what I had read in

a couple of reviews. From <a href="http://www.bobatkins.com/photography/digital/

eos_digital_rebel_xt_vs_20d.html">Bob Atkins's comparison</a>:

<blockquote>The EOS 20D has a rear QCD (Quick Control Dial) which can be used to set

exposure compensation, flash compensation, shutter speed or aperture in manual mode

and has several other functions. The same functions are available in the Digital Rebel XT,

but require the pushing of buttons. The advantage of the QCD is you can do things faster

and without taking your eye from the viewfinder.</blockquote>

Also from the same review:

<blockquote>The EOS 20D autofocus is faster than the autofocus on the Digital Rebel

XT</blockquote>

(which is also a concern when shooting sports, particularly wintersports, where extreme

temperatures don't help battery-powered electric motors move any faster).</p>

<p>RAW is generally a more attractive format to shoot in, with the major caveat being the

increased file size and write time; the difference in burst ability would seem to be a lot

more significant when shooting in RAW instead of in JPG.</p>

<p>And with regards to the 300d or 10d, I'd like to have the option of using EF-S lenses

in the future, which limits the choice to the 350d or the 20d (again, according to what I've

read).</P>

<P>I will be trying to handle both cameras before I buy one, but I'm not entirely sure I'll

be able to find a local merchant with both in stock.</p>

<p>Thanks for the replies.</p>

The 300D can take EF-S lenses too. If by "changing exposure" you mean ISO setting, then yes, you'll need to look away from the viewfinder to do that. Changing aperture and/or shutter speed can be done without reference to the LCD.

 

Obviously the 20D is the nicest of the cameras you're contemplating, but I think a 350D or 300D would also be usable.

A big hangup of the 300D is the smaller buffer. You can only shoot 4 continous shots before it fills up. This has lead to some missed opportunities for me in nature and wedding situations. I would imagine that could come up for autoracing.

 

The 10D has a 9 shot buffer. It doesn't take EF-S lenses, but if you're shooting sports, it doesn't matter much, as there aren't any telephoto EF-S lenses anyway.

 

Good luck

I have the 350D and shoot mainly birds with it. I find that focus speed is more dependent on the lense rather than the camera that this level. Once you have fast lenses (read: way more expensive than the camera), then the camera will make the difference.

 

As for speed, I can go 9 frames continuously at 3frames/sec at Jpeg/Large/Fine, pause for a sec and go at 9 frames again, although I rarely do it... not that many fast moving things stick around the frame long enough. If it takes over 3 sec to move out of the frame, then it's too far away. At jpeg/large/medium, I could shooting continuously at 3fps for over 30 frames before I gave up.

 

My typical shooting style is short bursts of 3-5 frames at jpg/large/fine, and I can keep shooting like that pretty well until the card's full.

I think the answer will be obvious once you put both cameras in your hand. Go to a store and put the camera's in your hand. Be sure to do this with the *same* lens attached (the 20D will tend to be sold with a heavier, more expensive lens).

 

I have a 10D. I like the size. The 300D seems toylike to me. . .and the 350XT is smaller yet. But this is a personal preference.

 

Honestly. . .the quick dial on the back is not a big deal to me, even though I shoot a fair bit in manual and often use exposure compensation. BUT. . diving into a LCD menu to change ISO would drive me bananas.

 

Definately consider used if money is an issue. The 20D/XT are better than the 10D/300D, but many who have both have stated that the difference is INCREMENTAL, not BREAKTHROUGH.

 

And don't get hung up on EF-S lenses. The only one's worth getting are the $100 18-55 kit lens and the $800 10-22. The 17-85/EF-S is $600, but way overpriced compared to the $400 28-135/IS. The 60/EF-S macro is just as expensive - and not any better than - the full fram 100 macro. Plus. . .if you have a GF that shoots a D60. . then you don't want to be buying any lenses (especially at a premium) that won't fit that camera.

 

Honestly. . if the GF is making money with her D60, then I would seriously consider pushing her timing on an upgrade to a 20D and give/sell you the D60. The D60 is a fine camera to learn on. . . .and this would help her upgrade at lower cost. May as well get the most out of that (original $2000) asset.

<blockquote>I think the answer will be obvious once you put both cameras in your hand.

Go to a store and put the camera's in your hand. Be sure to do this with the *same* lens

attached (the 20D will tend to be sold with a heavier, more expensive lens).</blockquote>

<p>And indeed it is. Unfortunately, I hate the way the 350D feels and feel very

comfortable with the 20d (per a visit to BestBuy last night). The comparison isn't entirely

fair because neither camera had a battery grip and both were attached to security cables,

but my hand just doesn't feel comfortable on the 350D--it feels too small, and I felt like I

was going to drop it. The 20d, however, felt quite comfortable.</p>

<p>With regard to convincing my gf to upgrade her D60, I'd love to. However, I don't

think that's in the cards in the time frame that I want to pick up a camera; I've decided to

hold off at least a week or two, but I don't think she'll be particularly inclined to upgrade

that soon.</p>

<p>Thanks again for all the advice.</p>

I have seen different statements (mainly from Atkins site) regarding "focus" performance, not necessarily accuracy. Under controlled conditions, looked like the both focused well. But life is not "controlled"...moving objects therefore speed of focus is important...

 

 

 

From the Atkins review:

 

# The EOS 20D provides full cross-type performance with maximum apertures as small as f5.6, yet it achieves up to 3 times the standard focusing precision when used with EF lenses featuring maximum apertures larger than or equal to f/2.8. The autofocus system of the Digital Rebel XT is inherited from the film Rebel XT body and has normal precision f5.6 sensors.

 

I have a couple of F2.8 lens (e.g., 70-200F2.8L) how differences would I experience between the 300D, 350D and 20D when using this lens on 2.8 given this statement above?

 

# The EOS 20D autofocus is faster than the autofocus on the Digital Rebel XT

 

Is there "data" somewhere on focus speed and accuracy under different conditions (car moving by, flower standing still). Would like to compare the 300D, 350D and 20D.