d70 vs 20d

[landdy]

ok, ok, ok another stupid post but bear with me. I am in hte market

for a new DSLR. I am blessed that i will recieve it as a gift. I

have been a long time nikon user but never really fell victim to the

dreaded disease of NAS. I have my first body i bought as a

teenager, an FE2, a first gen 50/1.4 af (non d), a MF 28/2.8, a N80

with a 28-105 af-D. I was very hot to get a D70 until i saw the

canon offering, the new 20D. Yes, i figure that while i am getting

into the DSLR thing i may as well get the most up to date 8 mp body

that i can. I dont feel like i will be upgrading from this for at

least a few years.

 

Only one of my nikon lenses is completely compatible with d70. I

was planning on the kit lens either way, which would certainly

provide some redundancy with my current AF lens.

 

I would wait for a d70 replacement but i have a baby on the way in

late jan/early feb and want to get acquainted with what ever system

i have. Oh, BTW, i have a epson 2200 for my printer output. I will

at some point like to be able to make larger prints afforded by this

printer. Will the D70 suffice....anyone have it and wish it had

more resolving power?

 

I am fully aware of my flame potential...so let the fun begin

[bobatkins]

Fun?

 

Basically doesn't matter. You probably won't be able to tell the difference between D70 and 20D images. If you don't need the bells and whistles that Canon offer, the D70 will do just as well.

[landdy]

Bob thank u for your input. Aside from the 8mp vs. 6mp, and 5fps and 3 fps differences, what other "bells and whistles" does canon offer...And will the 17% difference in mp translate to a noticeable difference in larger prints...14x17 etc.

 

Thank you

[landdy]

just read your profile....i grew up in bell labs back yard so to speak, also 25 miles from ny in summit, where do you reside?

[chris_patti1]

I recently decided on the d70 over the 20d. In the end, I thought that the advantages of the 20d over the d70 were quite marginal, probably barely perceptible, and the price difference (with the current Nikon rebate, about $700 if you want to get the 20d with a lens comparable to the very nice Nikkor 18-70) too great to justify. The d70 has its own advantages over the 20d, as well. A week with the d70 convinces me that it is an incredible camera. I don't think I could justify spending more unless I was getting a meaningful increase in resolution, and the difference between 6 and 8 megapixels just isn't meaningful.

[jscown]

Well, first let me start by saying that I haven't bought a DSLR yet, but I am leaning toward the 20D. I love the D70 and have used my sister's extensively, but in manual mode the grip of my small hands always seems to change the aperture wheel at the front. It's just positioned wrongly for me. With the 20D I don't seem to hit any wheels, levers, switches, or other things that mess me up.

 

There seems to be little between them in image quality, so sometimes it's as simple as what feels good in your hands, and what works best for you. Good luck in your decision!

[melvin_bramley]

STEVE; You! are expecting a baby!! WOW!! All jokes aside I have looked at both cameras,& others,but am still undecided.You,like I, have a Nikon FE2 which has a very good viewfinder.If you are like me you will find the D70 viewfinder dissapointing.FWIW if my musings over the discounted Nikon D2H are fruitless I will possibly go for the Canon 20D next spring.

[jeffcallen]

Try both of them side by side if you can. I did this and decided to get the 20D with 17-85

lens... even if I had a few old nikkors.<P> Why? Personal preference: the ergonomics of

the 20D were that much

better to my eyes and hands, and speed is very important to my type of work. You may

have a different situation/opinion, but all the reading in the world was thrown out when I

held

things in my hands. I don't

regret the 20D at all, though the price difference was noticable. I got a $28 adapter to use

my

old nikkors on the EOS, though stop-down metering is not the most convenient.

<P>I've printed 10x15 images from the 20D, they look quite good, almost as good as

those from EOS 1Ds (11 megapixel), but I haven't compared to Nikon D70 images at the

same size. Note that with the right light, lens and tweeking in photoshop, megapixels are

suddenly a bit less of an obsession.

[david_lau3]

I own a 20D and I have played with the D70 that my friend owns. The major difference is the viewfinder - looking through D70 is like looking through a tunnel. The viewfinder in 20D is much better.

 

This single factor alone is enough for me to have 20D over D70. I come from many years of using film SLR and being spoiled by the good bright viewfinders. The 20D is still not in that league but acceptable.

 

You have to make your own judgement - go to your local dealer and look through both cameras.

[peter_phan]

If you can afford the 20D, definitely go with it. The differences are definitely worthwhile. The viewfinder is bigger, the body is nicer, the resolution is higher, image detail and sharpness are higher, the shooting speed is faster, the image noise is lower. Also, I just love shooting high ISO on the 20D. The image noise has a very nice, fine-grained, organic characteristics that allows the 20D to excel at low light or existing light situations-- which can be quite valuable for shooting babies and small children in intimate environments where you don't want to disturb them with a flash.

[phil vaughan - yorkshire u]

First, let me say I've personally recommended the D70 to people in the past. I generally avoid Canon vs Nikon flaming and usually point new users to look at the entire system but Chris - "The d70 has its own advantages over the 20d, as well."

 

The rest of your answer was very general, no hard facts, and an assumption that no-one would challenge such a non-statement. Would you care to elaborate on the exact advantages (price aside)?

[chiswick_john]

You will see a difference in bigger prints between 6 and 8 mp - especialy when you look at fine detail. I hear loads of people still saying there is no real differnce between 8 and 6 mp - either thay don't know what they are looking for/at or they are just repeating what other uninformed people are saying. If you shoot RAW and post process carfully then difference is far from marginal.

[charlie_vigue]

I have the EOS-10D, and one thing that I suspect you'll get with that 17% more pixels is the ability to crop a little more and still print large. Also, there are a few types of high-frequency subjects that just are really tough to shoot and print large at 6mp. Not many, but it's happened a few times.

 

Most of the time it comes down to good lenses, good light and good technique, just like it always has.

[donald_choi]

One advantage that the D70 has over the 20D is superior flash capabilities in their CLS system. But if your are not into multi-flash photography, then this may not be important to you. I've seen first-hand results of using 6 SB-800s in a wireless setup and they are truly amazing (very studio-like). And the ease of use is equally impressive. It would be great if Canon can get their flash capability to this level of control and accuracy. Only then will they have a near-perfect system.

[peter_phan]

Donald, Canon has had multi-unit wireless TTL flash for years now...years before Nikon. And now with E-TTL2, Canon's flash system is even better. It is extremely good...certainly improved, more effective and easier to use than Canon's previous E-TTL. So with Canon's current flash system, you also have multi-flash wireless, ease of use, control, accuracy, distance information, etc. Canon and Nikon's flash performance and capabilities are now closer than ever, and there is no longer enough of a difference to choose one system over the other. Canon's latest E-TTL2 has pretty much equalized flash performance between Canon and Nikon. And as I said earlier, multi-unit wireless TTL flash has been a capability of Canon's E-TTL flash system for years now.

[notraces]

I have both cameras -- If you're looking to take photos of the baby and family -- the D70

will suffice. I also have the Epson 2200 - I can print LARGE prints -- 13 x 19 -- and they

look outstanding... I've been a Nikon shooter pretty much my whole life -- but went with

the 20D because I shoot LONG exposures at night -- the D70 has an awful purple glow

after 120 seconds or so ... the 20D shuts off the capacitor which causes the problem --

basically heat build up on the sensor...

 

Both cameras handle very well... but there is a big price difference between the two these

days... You will NOT be disappointed with the D70 -- outstanding images -- and great

prints from the images. If you can shoot RAW, by all means do so -- you'll be happy with

the latitude you have to process the image -- sort of like a digital darkroom... The kit lens

that comes with the Nikon is really nice -- I have other Nikon glass, but the kit lens would

be fine for a few months if I had to watch what I spent. A great prime to get in the Nikon

line is either the 50mm f/1.8 or f/1.4 -- both nice lenses... great for taking photos of

baby... on the D70 it'll be like using a portrait lens...

 

Hope this helps...