Reaction to the 20D, EF-S, 580EX press releases...

[sheldonnalos]

Well, I've read the press releases, and a couple quick reactions...

 

1) No references in the 20D literature to improved dynamic range.

 

2) The noise concerns of many posters because of the increased pixel

count seem to have been completely addressed. Supposedly ISO

performance at 1600 on the 20D is equivalent to ISO 400 on the 10D!

 

3) They stuck with the stainless/magnesium chassis, but made the 20D

smaller and lighter.

 

4) Canon quotes an estimated street price of $1,499 without a lens;

$1,599 with the EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5 -5.6 zoom lens; and $1,999 with

the new EF-S 17-85mm f/4-5.6 IS USM Wide Angle Zoom lens. Slightly

more than I was hoping for...

 

The 580EX sounds like the user interface is improved over the 550EX,

and that the flash is faster and more powerful (esp with the optional

battery pack) while being smaller than the 550EX. Definetly will be

the flash to own for everyone.

 

I was startled by the specs and prices on the 10-22mm EF-S lens... 3

Aspherical elements and 1 Super-UD element in a 13-element optical

formula - that sounds like an L lens! Also, the price is in the L

ballpark, estimated street price of $799.

 

It's about what most people predicted, but I'm curious whether the

noise levels will hold up to Canon's claims, and whether the 10-22mm

lens is of "L" quality!

 

Sheldon

[javier_guinea]

Oh, my God, you just ruined my day!!. It looks a much better camera than the 10D...

[socke]

I'm disapointed about the smaller viewfinder and that I can't use the 10-22 on my D60.

 

An upgrade from my D60+BG-ED3 to 20D+BG-E2 is not an option due to the viewfinder.

So I'll probably buy the Sigma EX 18-50 and wait another year for a camera with a bigger viewfinder and sensor.

 

There must be a market for a body between the 20d and 1d MkII!

[bobatkins]

Well an $800 10-22 EF-S lens should shut those people up who have been complaining about the crappy quality of AF-S lenses.

 

Now they'll be able to complain about the price instead.

 

I was kinda hoping for a semi-crappy EF-S 10-22 lens selling for $300 or less...

[sheldonnalos]

Here's another tidbit.... there's a full Pre-review/Review contained at Rob Galbraith's site. I'm still reading it, but thought you guys might like to see it. They have a pre-production 20D on hand and there's quite a few additional specs in their info...

 

http://www.robgalbraith.com/bins/multi_page.asp?cid=7-6458-7153

 

Sheldon

[grant_.]

800$ is high for a slow lens like that....

[sheldonnalos]

Yes, $800 is a lot for a slow lens like that. *BUT* the implication of having a ISO 1600 that works like an ISO 400 is that the lens effectively gets 2 more stops over what it would on a 10D. It's not really a f/3.5 - f/4.5 lens, it's more like a f/1.8 - f/2.5 zoom on the 20D (depth of field issues aside).

 

A disappointing piece of info from Rob Galbraith's review. The camera will hold from 25-44 large/fine jpg shots in the buffer when shooting at 5fps, but if you shoot in RAW format, it clogs up after 6 frames! Not putting in enough RAM into the camera might be a subtle choice by Canon to keep it from stepping too heavily on the pro market (esp 1D Mark II sales).

 

Still reading the Galbraith review....

 

Sheldon

[sprouty]

<I>"It's not really a f/3.5 - f/4.5 lens, it's more like a f/1.8 - f/2.5 zoom..."</I>

<P>

Until you actually try to look through the viewfinder at night or in a dark club.

[sheldonnalos]

Regarding the viewfinder... a quick excerpt from Rob Galbraith review:

 

Viewfinder Canon's 1-series digital SLR cameras have sharp, clear, colour-cast free viewfinders. They're wonderful. By comparison, the 10D's viewfinder image is somewhat flat and a bit fuzzy to look through. This is typical of most cameras in the 10D's class in our experience, and it makes it more difficult to see the focus snap in when manual focusing. The 20D viewfinder and its New Precision Matte Screen make for a clearer, sharper image that's closer in quality to 1-series digital SLRs than the 10D, though the size of the viewfinder image is still about the same as the 10D.

 

Looks like they at least partially addressed the issue...

 

Now off to read part one of the Luminous Landscape review, also just posted!

 

www.luminous-landscape.com

 

Sheldon

[vishwanath_nukal2]

One thing I would have liked to see on the 20D was the 2inch 235K pixel LCD viewfinder such as found on the Powershot Pro1(a $999 camera).

The 20D still carries the same 1.8 inch 118K pixel LCD panel from the 10D.

[jim_larson1]

Just read the preview at dPreview.

 

First thoughts:

 

The 20D sounds like a winner of a camera. One can nit pick the specs, but the bottom line is higher resolution and lower noise. Also, a high precision center focus is a real, real plus and one the two things I want in a 3D. If I was buying today, I would go for this camera.

 

The lenses. GAH. I think Canon is heading in a direction I don't like. $800 for an EF-S 10-22 that is slow as molasses? Not even an "L"? With a reduced image circle? WHAT???

 

The 17-85/EF-S IS for $600? I was saying "WHY?" when we thought the price was $350. F5.6? I shoot GROUP SHOTS at F5.6.

 

If these new lenses were the *only* choices available, I would save money and get a P&S camera. The shallow DOF of SLR lenses makes killer portraits and is half the reason to get SLR's in the first place.

 

I hear the comments about the 10-22 being a high end performer. At $800, one would hope so. Then I think about the 70-300/DO-IS. $1300 for a lens of clearly non-premium optical quality. The 28-350/L is substantially more expensive than the 35-300/L it replaced.

 

Let's be honest. On a 1.6 crop camera, do you want a 17-40/4L or a 17-85/IS? I am *so glad* I got the 4L.

 

And where are the E-TTL2 compatible prime lenses?

[sheldonnalos]

The LCD is supposedly much improved, per Rob Galbraith's site, although it is the same size.

 

Regarding my earlier quote regarding the viewfinder... the plot thickens! Michael's review from the Luminous Landscape indicates that he thinks the viewfinder is a step backward from the 10D, primarily due to the smaller revised mirror box. Hmmmmm!

 

Sheldon

[astcell]

But the EF-S lens will not work with my Mark II :(

[peter_phan]

Imaging Resource has their 20D review up:

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/E20D/E20DA.HTM

 

As for the question of improved dynamic range, Imaging Resources writes:

 

"Sensor Improvements: Incorporates improvements from the EOS-1D Mark II. Larger microlenses, size of gaps between microlenses reduced by 50%. Greater area of each pixel on the sensor sensitive to light, due to elimination of transistors in each pixel. Canon claims higher sensitivity, higher dynamic range."

[bob_bell]

I think EF-S 17-85mm f/4-5.6IS will be a hot seller for a walk around outdoor lens if it can be modified on used on D60/10D's. This is the review I will be waiting for from Bob and the other respected reviewers. On the 20D front, it just doesn't seem like there is a lot to gain moving from a D60 to the 20D unless you need the shutter speed or iso from my point of view.

[tom_burke3]

Well, I've decided. There are just too many uncertainties with the current generation of

consumer digital SLRs. I wish I could afford a 1Ds but I can't, so I have to plot another

course. This is it:

 

a) I'm going to sell my D60 for whatever I can get for it - with no support for EF-S lenses it

now feels like a camera that been cut off at the knees, ;

 

b) Having just bought a 33V (Elan7E in the US?) I shall use that as much as possible, mainly

for monochrome (XP2, which scans well) and some colour slides. I shall get my best slides

professionally scanned;

 

c) with the money I hopefully raise from a) I shall get either a G6 or an A95 as a walk-

around point'n'shoot digital.

 

Waddya'll think?

[gavinbell]

Reading on <a href="http://www.dpreview.com/news/0408/

04081907canon_efs_flash.asp#speedlite">dpreview</a>, it would appear that the

580EX is designed to work with a good range of cameras. The AF-assist beam

is linked to 45, 9, 7, 3 or center AF-points. Thus it works with the Elan7 / EOS30/

33 7 point pattern.

[r_n]

<B>Canon Design Philosophy</B>

<BR><BR>

I think we can see a thaw in the rigid approach Canon seems to have taken in the past to allocating features to price point. There appears to be a breakdown in the "1.6 as consumer level" model here, too.

<BR><BR>

True, in the 20D we don't have 45 pt af, weathersealing, or spotmetering -- but the 9 pt af pattern is roughly akin to the subsetted af point pattern selectable by CF on the EOS 3. The 20D still has a mag body. And the 2.8-sensitive central sensor would seem to be a feature designed with a 70-200 2.8L or a BWL in mind (although it will be great for fast consumer-level primes as well.) As was pointed out above, the 580EX was made compatible with just about every af point pattern in the current Canon line. Heck, even the new Rebel T2 has selectable af mode!

<BR><BR>

It smells of spring in the Canon design department. May a thousand flowers bloom!

<BR>

[jim_larson1]

Tom;

 

I feel for you. The EF-S series can make you feel cut off at the knees. BUT. Consider the last six lenses that have been released:

 

1) 17-40/4L: Released at $800. $650 18months later.

 

2) 18-55/EF-S USM and non USM: about $169

 

3)28-350/IS-L: $2500 I think

 

4) 70-300/DO-IS: $1300

 

5) 10-22/EF-S: $800

 

6) 17-85/EF-S IS: $600

 

Yes, half the lenses are EF-S. But considering the prices and ignoring the EF-S issue the only lens that *I* would want is the first lens, the 17-40/4L. The 18-55 is kit lens quality, and the other lenses are HUGELY expensive for what you get.

 

So, yeah, I think there is a creeping Canon lens issue. I would recommend the 20D body to anyone and everyone. But my recommended lens list will remain: 17-40/4L, 50/1.8, and 70-200/4L. I am not sure I would recommend any of the other 5 recently released lenses.

 

I certainly am not going to look backwards! And EF-S would not in anyway influence my dSLR buy decisions at this point.

[steve_dunn2]

<p>Dpreview and Luminous Landscape disagree on whether the viewfinder is better or worse than the 10D's. We'll have to wait for more hands-on tests and real user opinions to settle that score.</p>

 

<p>Someone pooh-poohed the 10-22 lens because it has a small image circle (duh - that's the whole point! Any part of the image circle which falls outside the sensor is of no use) and it's not an L lens. Check the specs: 3 aspherical elements, one super-UD element (which has never before been used in any EF lens other than L lenses), ring USM, FT-M ... don't assume it's going to be a crappy lens just because it's an EF-S lens or not a constant f/2.8 lens. From the specs, this one looks like it could be a pretty darn good performer. Again, we'll have to wait and see.</p>

[r_n]

Yes: check out the prices of its competitors. The Nikon 12-24 weighs in around $1k. The Sigma 12-24 is about $670. The Canon is wider and, at the wide end, faster -- and has all that fancy glass. We'll see how it performs optically, but at $800 it's in the ballpark of its competition. Unfortunately.

[tom_burke3]

Jim

 

17-40: Yes, I've got the 17-40 and I love it, mainly at the 17mm end. Which of course I

don't get on the DSLRs. Hence my decision to stick to the film SLRs for now, and wait,

either until Canon's directions become clearer, or indeed until full-frame DSLRs get

cheaper. There is after all the Kodak whatever-it's-called, as well as the 1Ds.

 

Or perhaps even move away from Canon altogether for DSLR! The 4:3 format has its

attractions, and the E series of cameras has received very good reviews. The prices of

those will come down as well, in time....