1ST DSLR purchase: Rebel xt w/17-85 IS or 20D w/18-55

[leo_lee1]

I'll try to keep this as linear as I can manage

 

?: what would you buy given roughly the same amount of money: A rebel

xt w/the 17-85 lens, or the 20D/w the 18-55 kit lens.

 

HISTORY: I learned (photo classes/darkroom etc) on a 7e with the

24-200 tokina and 50mm 1.8. This purchase will be my first DSLR, in

addition to the 7e I own the canon S70 (7mp compact digi).

 

My current impressions: I'm not a fan of the rebel's size (I feel that

the nikon d50 "fits" my hand perfectly, but it's a little late to

switch over), I'll need a grip to make the rebel work for me. I like

the 2 control dials on the 20D as well as it's larger viewfinder. BUT

I'm not convinced that it is "worth" the price difference, esspecially

if that means that I'll have to resort to the 18-55 lens.

 

My needs/perspectives. Weight is not an issue for me (I carry around a

17in laptop everyday). On one hand, I'm reminded of the saying that "a

camera body is simply a light-tight box, spend money on lenses" yet

I'm wondering if that saying still applies to the whole DSLR scene.

Basically my deilema is choosing a better body (20D w/18-55)<> better

lens(rebel xt w/17-85IS) as my first DSLR.

 

Future DSLR developments: In the back of my head, I'm worried that if

I buy an EF-S lens I will not be able to use it on my next DSLR body

(5 yrs down the line), with the advent of the 5D and it's larger

sensor size, it seems to me that canon might make full frame sensors

more acessable to consumer level bodies. So if I get an EF-S lens such

as the 17-85, whould it be rendered useless in the future if Canon

offers a full frame sensor on a sub $1K bofy? Therefore, given that

logic, would any of you recommend something like a sigma 15-30?

[denisgermain]

.... a little over a year ago, I bought the Digital Rebel instead of the 10D saying exactly what you are saying: is it worth it?

WIth the grip, memory cards, flash and an extra lens it was the price of the 10D body alone (no lens included, nor flash, nor memory cards). and with the russian firmware I was able to do most of the stuff that only the 10D could do...

 

A year later, my D Rebel is dead (after 67000 photos) and thanks to an extended warranty, I got the XT for free... but the same question came up: should I upgrade to the 20D or get great lenses?

My answer was the same - no . simply because in two months Canon will launch the next xxD camera with even more bells and whistles... for the same price.

 

I didn't plan to purchase the XT (or the 20D) as I wanted to skip a generation.... but wanted to avoid the XT because of its size (wich kills me), but with the grip it is ok.

 

I only have 1 EFs lens and will avoid them at all cost as they will become obsolete quickly.... and instead of spending the extra money on a couple of features I got myself a 70-200mm f2.8 L!

 

The problem now is that I am hooked on the "L" quality.... but that's a different story.

[danny lee]

about " On one hand, I'm reminded of the saying that "a camera body is simply a light-tight box, spend money on lenses" yet I'm wondering if that saying still applies to the whole DSLR scene "

 

I believe that this saying now holds true. The Rebel XT is capable of making photos as great as the 1DSII. if you were to print them in the same size as former 35mm prints.

 

I still remember when I used film, FPS wasnt important, as I have to change a roll with every 36 shots. ISO 800 Film was grainy, and without a poloarid back, no one knows whats going on !

 

Digital fixed all that, and I am glad !

 

the price you pay for digital camera bodies nowadays isnt for the image quality anymore.. considering printing at traditional 35mm sizes.

 

Rebel XT, Fast enough to shoot 36 burst at 3fps, Large Jpegs 8mp sensor rivals film, need wide ? 10-22 efs

 

20D - Fast enough to shoot more than 36 a burst, 8mp sensor rivals film, need wide ? 10-22 efs

 

1D MkII - as good as the 20D, wider but no efs so Sigma 12-24 ! sensor rivals film. Weather proof

 

5D - Sensor rivals film, fully wide as possible with any film lens,

 

1DsII -- sensor rivals film, weather resist, fully wide with any film lens.

 

Well anyway, So with the current lineup from canon, the old saying holds true. ( if you are printing in traditional 35mm film sizes ) in terms of image quality.

 

I dont think the final results of using the same lens on any of the canon's dslr will result in any better image quality. ( as was with the film cameras rebel to the 1's )

[kemmerichphoto]

The rebel xt uses a microdrive to record its pictures...slow and I think the only dslr that uses microdrives. The 20d uses compact flash which might give you room to grow. As to the EF-S lens...in five yrs you can always sell it on e-bay, today you are never stuck with your camera equipment. Good luck and I hope you enjoy your purchase.

[martin_doudoroff1]

From my perspective, the decision between the XT and 20D is a personal one based on

form factor or features. For example, I ruled out upgrading to the XT from my 300D

quickly, because the camera is simply too small for my hands and my big lenses. Besides, I

was also ready for user interface and viewfinder upgrades (I ended up buying a 5D, which

is very similar to the 20D, and I couldn't be happier.) You will have to make your own

decision. Yes there certainly is a price trade-off between all these bodies, and compared

with film bodies, these bodies cost a fortune. And in the end, the differences have

relatively little to do with image quality.

 

You've complicated your comparison by including two lenses in the scenario. Given that

you already have two Canon-compatible lenses, my recommendation would be to buy your

digital body without an additional lens. Use what you have with it until you know what

other lenses you want/need.

[martin_doudoroff1]

Keith's assertion about microdrives is incorrect. The XT uses Type I and Type II compact flash

cards, just like any other Canon DSLR and includes support for CF cards greater than 2GB.

[lotsawa]

Of course it depends on your personal situation, but personally I would always prefer the XT plus the better lens. For me, the 20D's advantages don't balance the better image quality, longer zoom range, USM and IS of the XT + 17-85 IS. Considering your budget, you have to make a compromise, and this combo seems much more satisfying to me. YMMV.

<p>

I don't have problems with the size of the XT, I even like it, and I think many of those people who critize its small size never really worked with it for a longer period. When you had a much larger body before, it may feel too tiny in the beginning, but there is a great chance you'll get used to it and like it.

<p>

Concerning your doubts about future dSLR developments: I don't think the EF-S lens will be rendered useless (ok, probably everything in the material world will be rendered useless one day). See <a href="http://www.bobatkins.com/photography/digital/canon_questions_eos30d.html">Bob's comments</a> on this issue mentioned in a <a href="http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00E9xB">post a couple of days ago</a> here in the forum. It seems clear that Canon will continue to produce the crop cameras, and if you ever want to go FF (which has disadvantages, too), you can still throw your EF-S lenses in the bay.

[lotsawa]

> The rebel xt uses a microdrive to record its pictures...slow and I think the only dslr that uses microdrives.

 

Nope. No difference here. Both can use any CF card or microdrive. Of course, microdrives are generally slower than fast CF cards, but that's the case for both the XT and 20D.

[John Crowe]

The 17-85 IS is not a deal maker. Go for the 20D. If you really want to push your dollar farther go for a used 10D and one of several affordable "L" lenses, like 17-40, 70-200/4, 135/2, 200/2.8, or 300/4. Good luck.

[darrick_coleman1]

Go with the XT + nice lens. I bought one about 3 months ago and love it. It too was my first dSLR. The size is actually nice after working with it for a while. I'm 6" with average to large hands and it works great for me. Actually, now the Nikon d70 and 20d feel too large and clunky now. Also, with regards to the efs lenses, if/when you do upgrade, you will likely keep the XT/efs as a backup no? In 5 years that kit probably won't even be worth selling.

Good luck!

[pto189]

XT + 17-40 or 20D + 17-40.

[pto189]

+ 85 1.8 + Canon Triple Rebates.

[jake_v]

What he said...

 

The 17-85IS is already pretty expensive, might as well get a NICE lens that will work on both FF and cropped sensors. The 17-40L is GREAT. If you can afford it, add a third lens (as suggested 85 1.8 is a good one) for the triple rebate.

 

20D with 17-85 IS: $1675 after rebate (B&H)

350D with 17-85 IS: $1255 after rebate (B&H)

20D with 17-40: $1750 after rebate (B&H)

350D with 17-40: $1290 after rebate (B&H)

20D with 17-40 & 85 1.8: $1930 after rebate (B&H)

350D with 17-40 & 85 1.8: $1495 after rebate (B&H)

 

For $35 more, the rebel with the 17-40L is well worth it, IMO. And for $240 more ahan the 17-85, you can get the 17-40 AND the 85 1.8.

 

This is of course assuming the cost isn't too much for you.

 

Oh, and if you ever decide to use 2 cameras together, don't make the same mistake I did and assume that the rebel and 20d have same size sensors. I am currently selling off my 350D (rebel) because the sensor is ever so slightly smaller, which screws up all my resize actions in photoshop (when trying to do them together with 20d pictures).

[tjalf]

Go for the 350D. I'm 1.93, have pretty large hands and used to work with an EOS 5 (bigger than 20D). The 350D is half the size of an EOS 5 but after two days of shooting with the 350D, I just can't imagine I have used (and even have liked)a big camera like the 5. Love the size of my 350D, love the 350D, what a great first dSLR.

Go for the EFS 10-22 or Tokina 12-24, combined with your 50 1.8, maybe add a 85 1.8 or 100 2.8 macro, you'll have a great set up.

[affen_kot]

when you upgrade to that sub $1000 FF body

in 2011, you can always sell your EF-S lens(es) to a happy 1.6 owner and recoup

quite a bit of the cost. the xt and 17-85 is a fine combo.</p>

<p>for supplemental information: click <a href="http://www.bobatkins.com/photography/digital/canon_questions_eos30d.html" target="_blank">

here</a> , or <a href="http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00E9xB" target="_blank">here</a>,

or <a href="http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00EAYH" target="_blank">here</a>.</p>

<p></p>

[grant g]

Philip To has the *best* idea.

 

The stacking rebate is a big one for both the XT and 20D if you buy a couple of EF lenses on the list.

 

Even if you buy a 2nd lens with the intent to sell it immediately, the whole package can be cheaper that way.

[kemmerichphoto]

sorry about the wrong information

[charlesshupe]

I chose the XT over the 20D so I could get the 17-40/4 L. I like the size and weight of the XT. With the rebates going on now, you can get TRIPLE rebates with one body, one lens and one printer. YES, THAT'S RIGHT. Buy the printer on the list for $179, and get a rebate that's more than the cost of the printer alone. That's a no brainer.