Help needed ASAP!

Discussion in 'Canon EOS' started by richard_duncombe, Aug 13, 2007.

  1. Im just about to get an SLR and am certain i want Canon for the lense options, however i dont know what
    to get, i did narrow it down to the 30D, but its pricy, so then i looked at the 400d, but also saw that
    1-2year old 20D's go for less than a new Xti, which is the better option from these two? Bearing in mind a
    new 400d(Xti) is around ?460 ($880) whereas a 20D body goes for about ?350 ($700) - i concentrate on
    landscape long exposure photography so need the best for this, i will be combining it with the 50mm 1.8
    and sigma 10-22mm. Please advice needed, auction for the 20D ends in 2 hours!

    Thanks
     
  2. No need to rush things. Cool down. There will always be another one to buy if you decide to go that route.
     
  3. I personally would opt for the 20d but the 400d has it's advantages.. newer technology and more MP.. if that makes a difference. otherewise the 20d has it all.
     
  4. The 20D is a great camera but a little long in the tooth now. The 400D is a new camera that will have full warranty etc. I don't think the used 20D is work the risk at the stage -- the shutter could fail and then you would be toast. In addition the successor of the successor to the 20D is about to be released which pushes the resale of the 20D back further (admittedly not a great argument).

    The 400D is a new camera model with all the latest features and fully backed by warranties etc.. I think it is a safer buy and you will be very happy with it. The only caution I would have is if you like the body -- the 400D is quite a bit smaller than the 20D. You should go to a store and look at the 30D (same size as 20D) and the 400D, to see what you think.

    Best of luck!
     
  5. Thanks chaps, i prefer the 20D myself, the reviews it gets are second to none, although you
    have to bear in mind that these were written before the 400d came to be. The cheaper price
    gives me some money toward the lenses as well. Im not sure the jump from 8-10MP will be
    of that much concern to be honest, from what ive seen more MP can lead to noisier pictures
    at this level. I leave for life in Africa in a few days which is why im looking to get hold of a
    decent camera quickly, i guess i did make it seem a little dramatic!
     
  6. -- "Please advice needed, auction for the 20D ends in 2 hours!"

    Never rush things ... auctions come and go ... and this isn't the last 20D being sold on e*ay.
     
  7. Thanks, just spoke to my local Camera World store and 400d body only is ?379.99 after the
    rebate, which pretty much puts them at the same price, at the end of the day its which takes
    the better photos - and i dont like the sound of that Shutter failing one bit, surely a once
    ?900 camera should have a few years life in it?
     
  8. I went through the xxD vs. 400D decision process earlier this year. THe big differences between the 20D and 400D are: 1) the control layout, 2) the sensor, 3) physical size/weight, and 4) continuous-shooting rate and buffer-size.

    Many people like the top-mounted LCD and rear control wheel on the 20D, along with the 20D's more-solid feeling construction; others really like the size and control layout on the 400D (esp. people with small hands).

    If you don't shoot action, where the 3 FPS and small buffer of the 400D make is almost a "non-starter", then I'd personally go with the 400D because it's newer.

    FWIW, I ended up decided to get another xxD (likely 30D) to backup my current 20D. I almost only shoot action, and the 20D's buffer is marginal, so even a used 30D is an improvement.

    Cheers,

    Geoff S.
     
  9. BTW, unless you burn through shutter actuations at a high rate, you probably won't wear out the shutter on a 400D very quickly. Most "normal" people typically shoot less than 5000 frames a year, which would give you many years of service.

    I'm beginning to worry about my 20D (after a year and a half) only because I probably fire off 20,000 frames per year (and I've lost track of how many times the image-number counter has "rolled over").
     
  10. Whew! I thought you had caught your pants on fire. Glad it's just another "Which camera?"
    thread.

    And if one does burn through the shutter unit, I think Canon charges about $200 for a
    replacement, installed.
     
  11. Except for the frrame rate your pictures won't be much different no matter which one you get. The quality is not between the bodies but between one of them and the efficacy of the lens you use. I have made pictures with so many different Canon bodies that I understand that it's not the equipment but the photographer and flexible enough lenses to allow each photographer to practice her or his art. Just go buy the one you like.
     
  12. The biggest difference is the build quality and the UI. After trying to use a friend's Rebel, I'm very happy I bought my 10D & 5D. The Rebels seem cheaply made and hard to use to me. The more I shoot the more I really appreciate the quality difference of the XXD series over the Rebel.

    Shutter replacement is cheap, but it does take your camera out of commission for a few weeks. I got about 12,000 clicks on my 10D before I had to replace the shutter.
     
  13. Richard, I looked at a 20D yesterday as was thinking about getting one to go with my 10D collection. It's a great camera, but the one I looked at was used (although not much) and eventually sold yesterday on ebay for GBPounds 396.00, at over a year old. This was with the kit 18-55mm lens and a 512MB card. Body only ones of similar age are selling for GBP 350.00 or so. BUT UK seller "emilyandlily" sells the same camera and kit lens as a proper Canon refurb with 3 month warranty for a smidge under GBP 440.00 including 4GB CF card - this may be the better option. I've bought from them before and been very happy - brand new Canon Speedlite 430EX flash for ?40 less than anywhere else!
    If choice is between 20D and 400D, the 20D would win for me any day. It's by no means long in the tooth in REAL terms - only to those who have the urge to keep right up to date with every movement out of the manufacturer's factory door! Go for the one with the 3m warranty and I'm sure you'll be more than happy. And don't worry about any possible fall in prices when the 40D comes out - you'll still get good money for it, which you could put toward a 40D when the next one comes out!
     
  14. Richard,

    I "upgraded" to the 400D's predecessor - the 350D/Rebel XT, but I wasn't happy with it - it was just too small/toyish.

    I sold it (at a loss) and got myself a 20D - and never looked back - the specs might look similar, but in reality they're a world apart.

    Cheers,

    Colin
     
  15. Richard - the Digital Rebel series is MUCH smaller physically than the 20D/30D/5D family. Before you get all wrapped around the axle over specifications and features, go somewhere where you can actually handle samples from both families. Once you have decided which one feels right in your hands, then and only then start the detailed search.
     
  16. You will be able to buy my 20D and my 10D, both in excellent condition, if the 40D is what I hope it to be....
     
  17. William Michael

    William Michael Moderator Staff Member

    >>> and I've lost track of how many times the image-number counter has "rolled over <<<

    I know I am into 20k group on my 20D, because I have two little `K`s I put on the bottom of the body with a dremel [sp?] tool.

    Yep, I know: `anal retentive`, my wife is a psychologist, she labelled me a long time ago.

    WW


    WW
     
  18. William Michael

    William Michael Moderator Staff Member

    RE: original question:

    >>> which is the better option from these two (i.e. 20D used vs. 400D new) <<<

    If cost and landscape work are the main criteria, get the 400D new.

    I doubt for the work you detailed, there will be much practical difference between the three cameras (including the 30D), but that comment may spark a debate based much upon theory.

    As pointed out, it is unusual for the average photographer to go through more than 5000 shots a year, (perhaps), but really one has no way of telling how many shots a 1 to 2 year old 20D HAS done: only the owner`s word, if they kept count accurately: but a new shutter assembly will not cost the earth, but it will cost money.

    As a contrast to the opinion I just gave, and by way of personal example: I have a 20D need a second APS-C body, for a colleague to use with me.

    I did not buy a 400D because: it is physically too small; I want a similar layout to the 20D, (so we may swap bodies without swapping lenses); I want 5fps.

    The last is a very important criterion for me, if I did not require 5fs, I would have saved money and bought a 400D, and compromised the other two criteria.

    From the needs you have spelt out, a 400D new seems a better and safer choice than a 20D used, IMO.

    WW
     
  19. The current Rebel XTi would probably be a great camera for what you want to do. It is cheap, high resolution, and you probably don't need the speed, durability, and ease of use of the other models if you will mostly be shooing landscapes. My friend has one...I love the little sucker!

    The 40D will be out soon, though. I'd wait to see what it does to the 20 and 30 D prices.

    Keith
     
  20. William,

    That's funny. I do all sorts of the same weird crap myself.

    Wouldn't two overscored Xs be a better choice, though? You should have 20 Ks there...heh heh.

    Keith
     
  21. Do you think the Xti will stand up to life in Africa? I know its cheaply made but i wont be throwing it around but i will be taking it on rock climbing and treking, and I guess you can get jackets for them? as boy does it rain out there!
     
  22. If you're traveling often by air the XTi has some advantage. Some airlines such as Qantas, are extremely restrictive regarding the weight of cabin carryon. I recently went to Australia and an XTi, two lenses, accessories and a laptop in a lightweight backpack barely made it under the maximum allowed weight. I personally prefer the XTi because I also use it for backpacking, along with a Fuji g617. The pound saved in terms of body weight over the 30D, etc. means a lot when you're down to drilling holes in your toothbrush to lighten the load.
     
  23. William Michael

    William Michael Moderator Staff Member

    Keith,

    (from one sick puppy to another) I thought of `X` right up to `XXXX`, which I was happy with, but then what?

    A line through the `XXXX` and scribe and `L`?

    It was a sickening thought, I decided on `K` . . . .

    though, after considering your previous comment, a series of `XK` has real potential, I think? (heh heh . . .)

    regards,

    Bill
     
  24. Neither the 20d or the 400d are waterproof or dust proof. It is not until you get into the four thousand dollar range that you get that with Canon and the EOS 1 series are not weahterproof only, like my L lenses weather resistant and I am not sure about the front glass on my 28-70 without a hood. I have an XTi and I carry some big green plastic garbage bags with me to keep the rain and dust out. A well padded, partitioned, well sealed camera bag would probably be helpful. I own three L lenses and they are much more rugged than My XTi. The idea that the 20d may be more weather resistant I think is an unfounded assumption. I would expose them to neither rain nor dust. You cannot avoid vibration but I have had at least eight Canon bodies and that has never presented a problem even with some rough newspaper work. I did lose a Canon A2 body to rain. It's illness was terminal and I gave it to my repair guy for parts.
     
  25. William, Keith....what was wrong with Roman numerals?
     
  26. William Michael

    William Michael Moderator Staff Member

    >>> William, Keith....what was wrong with Roman numerals? <<< (PM)


    Hi Pete I hope you are still reading this thread.


    Let me more fully explain the quandary I alluded to above, regarding Roman Numerals.


    In Roman Numerals, there is not a unique symbol for 10,000, rather those using such large numbers, more than 1000 , (1000 = M and the largest symbol used), would place a bar across the top of the symbol indicating it should be multiplied by 1000.


    Thus, X with a bar on it would be the number 10,000, and that would
    (partially) suit my needs for the bottom of my 20D.


    But, as I mentioned, what would happen when I got to XXXX, * (all with a bar on top = 40,000) and had to place the next one?


    I would have to erase the XXXX (40,000) and replace it with an L with a bar on it (= 50,000).


    Because Roman Numerals represented NUMBERS, not a tally, thus: XXXXX is not only impossible, but just plain WRONG, and I could never have that!


    So, I had to move from Rome to Greece and find a suitable symbol (but not number) to represent 10,000.


    In the accepted decimal system there is none, hence my choice of K (kilo = thousand) and I had to be content with the fact I have to remember in this instance it means a tally of (ten) thousand.


    Perhaps, on the sick puppy stakes I get one more point, for sharing that.


    : )


    WW


    * Footnote to avert any argument and just for any still reading this:


    XXXX is traditionally / historically correct for 40, as is IIII correct for the number 4.


    From my study & research, only for the factors of 10 was `subtraction` used to make the numbers shorter in length.


    IX , XC, CM were used to represent 9, 90, 900.


    Numbers like IV, XL, CD, (representing 4, 40 and 400) are a modern `invention` rather than the traditional use; 4, 40 and 400 would have been IIII, XXXX, and CCCC.


    So 444 would be CCCCXXXXIIII but 999 would be CMXCIX


    And one more sick puppy point for the footnote, please.


    WW
     

Share This Page