Discussion in 'Canon EOS' started by oofoto, Oct 3, 2005.
Are you going to upgrade to the 5D in the next 6 months?
No, I'll wait for the next generation FF
IMHO I think that the slope of the upgrade path is becoming less steep so waiting is a viable option.
Mine is only about 5 months old. I'll let it wear out before upgrading.
No, probably within a year, though.
The 5d wouldn't be an upgrade for me (not fast enough for motorsport), so I'll keep the 20d until a FF camera comes out cheaper. At the moment the 1dII is a better buy for me (and I couldn't justify the expense of it).
No. I will wiat. Too expensive for now.
Gaiiiii I will be buying the 5D but only because my friend Derek Hine is going to be giving it to me for free!
It seems Derek Hine is the Chief Executive of Jessops?
NO I will wait for a FF with a sample rate that matches or exceeds the 20D (>=16Mp) and ~?1000 price.
That may take a while but my origional equipment roadmap at the end of 04 have an estimate of 5 years for these conditions.
If anything Canon seem to be running much earlier than expected with the affordable FF proposition.
In the meantime I will fill out my lenses and other equipment.
no. i cannot afford it...
My first feeling was that I would like to go FF with the 5D.
BUT then I started thinking. I am very happy with my 10-22mm EF-S for wide angle and my 17-85mm is performing well (despite various adverse comments about this lens on various forums)[better than my 28-135 which was fine on film but seemed prone to flare on my DSLR's]. So my wide angle and medium zooms work well on the 20D.
My telephoto zooms always are a bit shorter than I would like so the crop factor works to my advantage there. My primes are stunning on the 20D.
If I buy a 5D I also immediately start the (fairly rapid) depreciation of a 3000 USD asset.
I also like having two bodies to act as mutual backup and I cannot afford 2 x 5D's!
Conclusion: the appeal of the 5D is really a macho / "want to play in the big league" feeling rather than based on any logic. I am very happy with my 20D so why change.
The only thing I would love is a quality prime lens of say 15mm (24mm equiv) [don't suggest the 14mm L it's too big / expensive / variable performance reports]in an EF-S mount since my widest prime (20mm) is an effective 32mm.
The 5D does not replace a 20D, it's too slow for sport so is not an upgrade in this respect. 8 or so Mp is ideal for the magority of the work I do so I won't be upgrading, but I might buy another 20D as it's price starts to come down and as people start to dump them.
no, because of the slower fps rate primarily
and i'd prefer to spend the money (if i had it) on lenses or lighting
1. To expensive.
2. The 5D may have vignetting-problems:
3. My current camera works just fine.
When an FF body is available for $1500, I'll upgrade then. But for now, my 20D does the job for me. My most used focal lengths in FF are in the range 28-50mm, so my 17-40 lens gives me that on the 20D. My 50 f1.8, which I use a lot with film, has now turned into a great portrait lens.
When I need wider angles, then I just break out my Elan7e and some Velvia/Provia. If I'm going anywhere outside the city I live in, the Elan is always with me as a backup body. It's never been needed for backup purposes, but it's great to have the option of the wider view if I need it. Inside my city, well, my city's quite small, so I'm never more than a 30min walk from my apartment (or 3 min taxi ride), so I leave it at home, unless it's a big event/festival.
No, Not that Derek Hine! I wish! My friend Derek "Russel" Hine.
No. The 5D is certainly a fine camera, but I'm happy with my 20D. I don't see $2000 difference between the two. I'll upgrade when the technology advances in digital slow down somewhat. There will always be a new camera.
I do not see the 5D as a replacement or upgrade to the 20D but as a great companion. I plan to use the 5D for wide angle and the 20D for telephoto. Go Canon!
I am doing just fine with 20D. 10-22 ef-s is more than I needed in WA area and 1.6x crop is sweet with my 300mm lens. Perhaps I will never move to FF arena unless there is a very significant improvement in sensor quality, or feature like in-built IS. I am hoping to keep 20D as long as it goes.
I have not found a good reason to upgrade from 20D. I don't take very wide
angle pictures where 5D may have an advantage over 20D. Sandy
Nope. My 20D needs to see several more years of use before I upgrade. Also, as others have said - I'll upgrade when the FPS is faster and the sensor is 16MP or more.
I don't need full frame based on the photography I do and a 1.6 is more likely to keep the cost down. I'd like 16+MP, 8 FPS, a big buffer and a 1.6 crop sensor for $2000.
The overwhelming answers on this thread are NO. Clearly the 5D is not viewed by many as
lying on the same path as the 20D. Perhaps the 1DMkIIN would be a more appropriate
candidate? I probably will be buying a 5D, but I'm coming from a 300D, I'm mainly interested
in landscape and portrait photography, I'm frustrated with trying to focus the 300D, and I
want to deal neither with the cost nor bulk of a 1DsMkII.
No, I will not be upgrading to the 5D, i know it has more megapixels and a full frame sensor but to me the 20D is still the best for the price and it still amazes me the quality of Photos from the 20D especially with my new 70 - 200 f2.8L non IS lense. It will be a few years yet before I upgrade.
For what I shoot (lots of critter closeups and portraits) I don't see a compelling reason to upgrade. Plus, I only bought my 20D a few months ago!
No. I want FF but...
1. I just got my 20D a few months ago.
2. Always wait for version 2.0 from Canon.
(see 300 vs. 350 and 10D vs 20D, etc.).
3. Price of 5D is too high considering other features
it's missing (5fps or better, etc.)
I'm actually quite surprised at the response so far as I thought many would be wanting to upgrade but could/would not afford it but it seems that the 20D is actually very suited to what people want and are using it for.
I probably expected most to want the return of large viewfinder and wide angle (yes I know wide angle is available for 20D) and full frame.
There are lots of interesting responses here.
I think Canon may have errored with this one. It seems to fit a relatively small niche and for the $3,500 price I can't see a 20D user getting it. Even if I didn't own a 20D, I would probably pass on it.
I hope some people want to because I want to pick up a used 20D and 10-20mm for a good price!
I hope some people want to because I want to pick up a used 20D and 10-22mm for a good price!
I don't view the 5D as an upgrade, it's just a different kind of camera: in order to get the same quality and range of lenses I got on the 20D/XT, I would have to lug around probably twice the weight and volume in lens gear. For a lot of travel photography, that's not worth it.
I may get one eventually in addition to the 20D/XT, together with a couple of fast prime lenses, to cover other kinds of photographic situations. The fact that the FF and APS systems can share some lenses is a bonus.
So, I think they are just different cameras for different purposes. APS is always going to have a size and weight advantage, just like 35mm always used to have a size and weight advantage over MF.
This is an interesting question and the results aren't all that surprising. I'd glanced at the 5D features when it was 'super secret' and the 3fps killed it for me. While I'd love full frame it isn't necessary and 5-8fps would be a significant improvement. Also I don't have $3k right now, I'd have to sell my 20D AND 70-200 f/2.8L IS just to get the 5D and I'd have no lenses to put on it. I'd rather have the 1Ds/II for full frame or 1D/IIn for 8fps.
The idea of a 2nd 20D body makes more sense to me...c'mon people start dumping yer 20Ds! Woo Hoo!
I was thinking about it, but the more I think about it the more I have to say NO, Unless the price comes down a lot more but even then I am thinking no. I am not a big landscape or portrait photographer and I think it fits them better then a wildlife photographer. Also I was a bit disappointed that it will not AF at F8 which for a wildlife guy would be a bonus and INCENTIVE to get it. As my 1.4 TC makes my 400mmF5.6L a manual focus lens on that camera body. If they want to sell more of them they should give the 5D a better focusing system like the Pro bodies above it so that it will focus at F8. One more thing I like to say, I like My 20D it's a good camera. ) DK.
Nope, got my 10-22, 28-135, and 100-400, so FF has no attractions for me, happy where I am
The 1.6x crop factor works well for the type of pictures I am taking with my 400mm tele. I cannot afford to buy a 5D AND a 1.6x400mm = 600mm or so tele lens.
I'll buy an EOS full frame dSLR when the price falls below about $1800 (US) - probably won't be the 5D, but maybe it will.
I held out switching to digital until last fall / winter. Once the 20D came out, I decided to jump in. I'm ended up being so happy with the 20D results I was getting, that I went out and bought a backup 20D soon after (to replace my EOS-3 that I was keeping as my backup camera - I left film for good).
I won't buy the 5D because I've just upgraded my camera(s) less than a year ago. Even if I was looking at a new camera, I don't think the 5D offers much for wildlife photography to justify the extra money - at least from what I can see without researching it too terribly much.
I suppose the one thing I'm hearing is the better noise reduction in the 5D ... I suspect this would make me look at it more closely. I can live with the 20D noise levels, and maytbe plan on buying something new in 2006 or 2007 ... that surpasses current noise reduction levels (where the 5D is today) yet again.
More importantly though, I could be half way toward a 300mm f/2.8 lens purchase with the difference in cost between the 5D and 20D. This alone makes me stop, and shovel my money towards the lens side of the equation for now.
No. I will wait one or two years for the second or third generation of the 5d. My 20D rocks and nothing in the 20d price range can touch the 20d. I definately want FF though...just not this year
<< No. The 1.6x crop factor works well for the type of pictures I am taking with my 400mm tele. I cannot afford to buy a 5D AND a 1.6x400mm = 600mm or so tele lens. >>
I am hoping that when the 5D is reviewed, someone does a comparison at crop levels between the 20D and it. Cropping out the APS-C sized image from 5D output would be a good comparson to see. Given the larger sensor sites on the 5D, I bet the image quality will be close.
I wouldn't doubt that a cropped image from a 5D could be the equal of a 20D image, and this would negate the need for longer lenses to go with it - at least for some people.
But, no, I'm not going to upgrade to a 5D any time soon. I suspect Canon will sell a slug of them, but for me, the 1.6x sensor of the 20D is just fine. There are plenty of wide lenses now available, and the quality is good on a 20D, so why rush an upgrade to full frame?
I really hate to agree with the Nikon users on this, but I don't need FF. I know there are advantages to FF, but if I don't need it, I'm not spending $3000 to get it. I also think it will be quite a few years before a FF camera sells for $1500, so I'm not holding my breath, but I'm not selling my FF lenses either.
No...I used all my good spousal karma upgrading from the 300D to the 20D one year after I got it.
It needs to be
2) Able improve the quality of the images I am taking.
I was running against some limits with the 300D - buffer rate on some action shots, metering issues, and focus modes mostly; the 20D definitely helped some of those.
Since I am nowhere near good enough to get the most out of my 20D, I have a ways to go before I'll get anything out of the 5D I can't get from the 20D. I would have to start running into some limitations of the 20D before I would be helped by anything on the 5D - at this point the limnitations in my photograph are all me.
<< << No. The 1.6x crop factor works well for the type of pictures I am taking with my 400mm tele. I cannot afford to buy a 5D AND a 1.6x400mm = 600mm or so tele lens. >>
I am hoping that when the 5D is reviewed, someone does a comparison at crop levels between the 20D and it. Cropping out the APS-C sized image from 5D output would be a good comparson to see. Given the larger sensor sites on the 5D, I bet the image quality will be close.>>
To be equivalent a FF sensor should be 8x1.6x1.6 = 20.48 Mpixels. If that beast comes out soon, it will be much more expensive than the 5D.
No. Instead I bought an awesome used 1NHS and a new Minolta Dimage Scan Elite II. My 17-40 "L" became an incredible wide angle - WOW!
No. The 20D met my minimum specs for a digital SLR to change systems - from Leica R and M to EOS. The 20D provides great 13 X 19 prints. My only lens is an EF 24-70 f/2.8 L bought in anticipation of two cycles of Moore's law bringing a FF digital EOS SLR to the under $2,000 range. By the time that happens, my son should be out of college and off the payroll - so I might have a line item for gear in the budget then.
No, I have too much investment in EFS lenses to change. Also I do not think that image quality improvements are justified for the 5D.
The features are just not compelling enough to switch from the 20D. The price is also not low enough for the difference in features. Is FF really necessary at this point? I'm not sure, but I'm not missing it that much.
<< To be equivalent a FF sensor should be 8x1.6x1.6 = 20.48 Mpixels. >>
That's rather interesting math. I wonder which universe it came from?
No, I want a light weight 1.3 without the vignette issues.
Separate names with a comma.