Which Canon

[pod]

I know you guys are probably sick of this, but here goes.

 

I like to shoot in manual mode, and don't mind using manual focus.

 

I don't generally take shots in continous mode. I am travelling to

India (hopefully 2 months) and Europe (2 months). India is gonna mean

a bit of dust. And I already own a canon 24-85mm usm lens (with my 300).

 

Now, can anyone help me make a decision between a canon 20D and 300D

(blackpack with battery booster $1k cheaper than 20D) based on I don't

want to spend any more than I need to, and if I get a 300D, I can get

more lenses.

 

Will a 300D survive if I take care of it? Will the 20D I get have the

error 99 message? Will I have an inferior holiday experience without

the 20D?

 

Someone nudge me towards the 300D, cause the 20D is calling to be

purchased! Help!

 

Also, any other comments or ideas would be appreciated.

 

I am also considering getting a Bessa R2 for street photography, but

that means the usefulness of having a canon backup body disappears,

and I'd then take my fuji s7000 for digital shots....

[bestactionshots]

300D is the answer IMO. Also check Canon Triple Rebates currently. You can get 300D for $450 after $300 rebates with two additional lenses. Good luck.

[digitmstr]

>>Will the 20D I get have the error 99 message?<<

 

How can anyone answer that? If you are going to be in dusty areas the best camera would be a used 1D with proper L glass to keep the dust and some moisture out.

 

But, with the rebates you can get 2 300Ds with lenses for the prices of a used 1D.

[pod]

Okay.. The will it get a error 99 messgae was not a literal statement but an observation that this problem exists... I don't know if it has been ironed out yet.

[anthony_m1]

If $$ is a big issue, I would suggest this scenario:<BR>

Digi - go 300D / a few memory cards (1 g or higher). Have you thought about storing your digital files?<P>

Rangefinder - save money and go with the bessa r vs. R2 (R can be found for 200 or under). <P>

Keep it light since you will be out there for 4 months. <BR>

If the digital fails at least you will have a film camera to fall back on. <P>

<i>Will I have an inferior holiday experience without the 20D?</I><P>I doubt it seriously. If your goal is to document your trip and bring back some great shots, any of the above will do the trick.

[pod]

I find it hard to find any great landscape shots done with a bessa R or R2 anywhere... Have you seen any?

 

I see plenty with canon's. Ideally I'd like to have a canon digi SLR and a bessa of some sort...

[pod]

I want to try and get some great shots in India... test my skills out and develop them further. I have almost contemplated shooting straight upto medium format with a mamiya 635E. but SLR's are verstile....

[neilb]

I was just in India for two months (including a three week trek in the himalaya) and the

300D held up like a champ. On dusty days I just wiped it down at the end of the day. You

definately don't NEED a 20D. That said, you will be slowly torturing yourself if you get to

India without a wider lens than you have. Don't forget the wide end of your 24-85

becomes a normal lens with the 300D/20D 1.6 crop. The oceans of people and the

expansive landscapes just beg for wide-angle. I had a 17-40 with me which I used most of

the time, and even with it, i longed for something a bit wider a few times.

 

you can see my work from india here, if you like: http://www.plushcreative.com/india

 

best,

Neil

[phule]

<< Okay.. The will it get a error 99 messgae was not a literal statement but an observation that this problem exists... I don't know if it has been ironed out yet. >>

 

If you're talking about the Err99 message you get when trying to use 3rd party lenses, there is nothing to "iron out." Canon will continue to change their cameras and break third-party lens functionality. You will have to get any 3rd part lenses re-chipped or buy newer lenses to work with the new camera body.

[brad_w]

I just don't understand the logic here - the two cameras are in totally different

markets....if you're looking for a mini van would ever consider buying a

hatchback?

 

Peter, at first it seemed like you fit the 300D market profile perfectly: I heard

you saying that you want high image quality and are willing to sacrifice

handling in order to maintain the price point. The 20D is designed for

smoother and faster handling and the price reflects that. When you started

talking about the Bessa, you lost me...What objectives are you trying to meet

with this purchase?

 

BTW, My 20D shipped with firmware v 1.0.5 and never locked up. Upgraded

to 1.1.0 last week and still no problems.

 

-b

[carl_weller]

My advice,

 

get the 300D, lots of CF cards [i doubt you'll find handy places to burn CDs everywhere in India so at least 2-3 1GB cards would be a minimum], enough batteries to not run into problems, and some good glass [17-40 comes to mind]. No point having a 'whiz bang' camera when you run out of storage or juice, is there?

 

Your 24-85 will end up being a sad 38-136, not good for landscapes or architecture.

 

The 'added' expenses of digital are far more expensive than film. It will eat up a lot of cash. If you get the 20D, and that's a financial strain by the sounds of it, you'll still have to get all of the above.

 

The 300D will take at least the same 'beating' as your eos 300, so I wouldn't be too concerned there. Why not just take the 300 as a backup? With a 50mm 1.8 it would be small[ish], light, and good for low light.

 

regards

[jim_larson1]

DUDE!

 

You have a EOS 300 NOW and are happy? Then you want a 300D.

If you had an EOS 30 (Elan 7), then the answer would be different.

 

FWIW: The 20D weather sealing is no better than a 300D's.

[jreades]

I'm not going to say that digital can't work for you, but is there any particular reason that you can only upgrade to a digital body? For instance, would you consider an Elan 7 model? Especially a used one from a reputable dealer, for instance.

 

The main reason I ask this is that you're going to be on the road for four months -- what mechanism do you have planned for storing your digital photos? You'll either need to spend lots of money on CF cards, or carry backup hard drives with you (there's a brief overview of this method in the African safari section), or find a way to upload images to an online storage medium from multiple locations, or carry a laptop with you. None of these methods is exactly ideal, to my mind, although they can all be made to work depending on your price insensitivity, photo frequency, and tech savviness. Of course, with digital you can also prune your photo collection as you go but you might find yourself eventually being forced to choose between two images that you actually like.

 

Another consideration is what you intend to *do* with the photos on the other end -- you can quickly and cheaply get nice prints from negatives but not quite as quickly or cheaply from DSLRs (since you now need to do more colour work to get the prints right, although the printing costs are probably no longer all that much), but it's also a lot of work to convert negatives to digital if you plan to only manage your photos electronically. In my case, for instance, I like to have a photo album that does't require booting up the computer so I just fish around in the prints for the ones that I want to share.

 

On the other side, film SLRs are more wasteful (because you'll find yourself with just a few keepers for every roll you take) but in this sort of context have effectively unlimited bandwidth (because you can always buy new rolls if need be and can carry around 30 or 40 rolls without it being too heavy). You're already used to working with film so you'll know roughly what to expect in terms of output. Of course, the processing costs for a large amount of film can rapidly match the cost of a 300D. I seem to recall my 26-odd rolls from Africa running me almost $500 to develop and print (although that was with 3 copies since I owed copies to two others on the trip)! Film SLRs also *tend* to be less sensitive to dust that DSLRs (of course, the usual caveats on good handling apply) and would be easier to repair or replace while on the road if the unthinkable happened, so that might be an additional factor to consider.

 

Anyway, just wanted to put a few ideas out there for you to kick around. Personally, I think it could go either way. Although I do tend to lean towards going digital if you're contemplating a substantial outlay on a new body these days, the fact remains that under certain circumstances film bodies can offer substantial benefits from a performance standpoint (which is the only meaningful one for this discussion since the aesthetic advantages of one over the other can be debated ad nauseam).

[jim_larson1]

Don't underestimate the importance of image handling.

 

Shooting film, I used to shoot one roll per day on vacation. Shooting digital, I shoot 120 digitals per day. . . and also one roll of film. (gah!).

 

That works out to about 750mb of RAW photos. Per day.

 

What I do is bring a laptop AND a CD burner with me. While settling in for the evening, I would dump the CF cards to the laptop AND burn a backup CD or two -> and recharge all the batteries while I sleep.

 

I could purge images at night. . but life is to short for that. First opportunity to review images is usually on the airplane home. :)