For Me? 20d or 350d+lens

[zachary]

I asked this in another forum and then I realized that this is

probably a more appropriate forum for this type of question:

<P><P>

I am just curious for <B> my </B> needs if the 20d is worth the extra

money over the 350d (Rebel XT). My priorities (as far as the

differences between the camera are) are in no particular order

(because they vary for each picture situation).<P>

Autofocus speed, Shutter Lag, Low Noise with High ISO, Flash

Compensation, Ease of menu navigation... I am upgrading from the

Canon Pro1, if that makes a difference. <P><P>

 

Thanks,

<P><P>

 

ZAch

[pto189]

Please read <a href="http://www.photo.net/equipment/canon/digital_rebel_xt/">here</a>.<p>If you have big hands, you'll feel XT is too small for you. If you plan to buy big and heavy lenses such as Canon 24-70 and 70-200 IS, then XT is too small as well. Ohterwise, XT could be a better choice if you stick with Canon EF-S lenses, 24-84, 28-135 IS, 70-300 IS, or prime lenses.

[fernando lopez]

1. Do you use heavy telephoto lenses ? If yes, get the 20D.

2. Will you be using the cam in harsh circumstances? If yes, get the 20D or even the 1D.

 

In all other cases the Rebel XT will do fine assuming you're a hobbyist. Remember that the body won't make much of a difference, the lenses do. I would go for the Rebel XT and invest some more money in good glass. Lenses are going to bring you joy for years to come and can be mounted also on your future EOS cams.

[Gerry Whitmarsh]

>>If you plan to buy big and heavy lenses such as Canon 24-70 and 70-200 IS, then XT is too small as well.<<

 

Sorry for answering a question with another question but you have now got me worried. I have a 350D and am saving up hard for a 70-200 f2.8 L (possibly IS). Will the 350 body take the weight or is it just a question of balance?

 

Thanks,

Gerry.

[henrik.ploug]

The small handgrip and the poor balance with heavy lenses can both be fixed with a battery-grip, which by the way also increases the number of photos you can shoot without changing batteries.

[Gerry Whitmarsh]

Thanks for the answer Henrik, I will keep saving.

[everheul]

I can't speak about the 350d, but I have the 20d and can attest that the high iso settings are lower in noise than my fathers d-reb. Prints to 8x10 have less visible noise than similar enlargements from NPZ in my film camera.

 

You can check in my portfolio under the dance section. All the 20d shots were at 1600 iso. I'm sold on the low light capabilities.

 

cheers

[pto189]

Even with the battery grip, the XT cannot handle the 70-200 IS. However, you can hold the tripot ring instead of holding the lens or the camera. If you do want to get the 70-200 IS, just think of the XT being attached to the lens, not the other way around.

[marymac]

I agree with Phillip. I've been using an XT on a 400mm f/5.6 but I hold the lens and not the camera. The 70-200 2.8 IS weighs about twice a much as my 400mm so you'll just want to be careful how you handle the XT with a heavy lens attached.

[mark u]

Here's some seriously heavy glass hanging from a Digital Rebel:

 

http://www.pbase.com/dadas115/image/31795237

 

Beam me up, Scottie, the camera can take it!

[marymac]

Mark that's a scary picture. I don't doubt that the camera can take it but why would you risk it! Man, the D-Reb is a plastic body and that's a $6500 lens that could crash to the floor if the mount failed. I'd rather just hold it by the lens or use a tripod (attached to the tripod mount!)

[henrik.ploug]

The 350D with battery grip weigh 1,1 kilo, while the (heavy, professional) EOS-1Ds Mark II with battery grip weigh 1,5 kilo. The difference is 400 gram.

 

The 70-200 IS also weigh 1,5 kilo. So if you need to hold the tripot ring to balance the lens with the 350D, I guess you have to do the same to balance it with the EOS-1Ds Mark II.

[Gerry Whitmarsh]

As a beginner I bought the 350D kit and an EF 55-200 f/4.5 II USM. This was well over my budget but now after about two months I am completely smitten. As I stated earlier I am now saving up for the 70-200 f/2.8 as nearly everyone agrees it is a great lens, but judging by your comments I think I will forego the IS. After all I am just an amateur and (good) photographers were taking brilliant photos years before IS was invented.

Thanks for the comments,

Gerry.

[henrik.ploug]

To Gerry,

 

The difference in weight between the IS and the non-IS is only 260 gram. So if you think the IS is to heavy for your 350D, you shouldn't buy the non-IS either.

 

Of course you can take great pictures with the non-IS, but the extra tre stops you gain with the IS will help a lot - especially in low light at 200mm.

 

The IS cost about 30 percent more than the non-IS. But if I were you, I would save until I could afford the IS.

[Gerry Whitmarsh]

Thanks, Henrik. I can still learn a lot with my present lens and by the time my skill level reaches the point where I can justify an ?L? maybe I have enough saved for the IS. Now to convince the wife :)