Torn between 350D and 20D

[amarsaleem]

I am about to purchase either one of 350D or 20D. I have seen sample

images of both the cameras with same lense and the results look

identical to naked eye.

 

I know there are certain specification differences; but not many

really, but there is a huge price difference.

 

My initial choice was 20D, but now I am in two minds.

 

Any suggestions? Please.

 

Amir.

(www.amirsaleem.com)

[davidmccracken]

The 20D is a much tougher camera. If the camera is going to take a lot of abuse, go for that. There are spec differences as you point out. Will you use the features on the 20D? If you will, there is no question.

 

The cost difference is significant. Think about what you want to photograph and make the decision.

 

I always go with the theory that if I am going to buy something and I can afford the better model, then buy the better model.

 

A lot of people who have the 20D will be upgrading to the 5D. It might be woth considering a second hand 20D.

 

What ever happens... good luck.

[matthias_meixner2]

Most sources claim that the image quality of the two is on par. Therefore, if you do not need the toucher housing or the additional features, you can save the money and buy better lenses.

[rick s]

Purely based on speculation, I'd wait 3 months and see if Canon announces a new DSLR around February. Many people expect some sort of upgrade to the 20D. It was probably due anyway, but even more likely with the Nikon D200. <br><br> If you can't wait, then aside from price, the difference between the two cameras you mention mostly comes down to usability. Image quality is very close and for most practical purposes, identical. The 20D is built more solidly and many people find it more comfortable to work with because of the better control layout and viewfinder. Not sure what your goals are, but if you are serious about photography the 20D is worth it. If you are a snapshooter coming from a point-n-shoot, the XT will probably be okay.

[amarsaleem]

P.S.

 

I am into travel photography; so the camera is bound to go places with me. Currently I am using Elan7e and its time to move to better lenses as well digital equipment.

 

I can wait for like a couple of months ... will give me time to save some bucks for a better lense as well.

[andre_mcnichols]

You really gotta try them out first. I'm very satisfied with the rebel XT and I love the low weight which helps a lot if you like to walk for hours with the camera around your neck. Others won't like how it handles because it's a bit small for their hands and it's true that even if your lens is not too heavy it will often hang with the lens down unless you also use the battery grip to balance it out. On the controls side the only feature I'd like to see added (apart from the one touch mirror lock up which the 20d also lacks) is separate wheels for shutter speed and aperture in manual mode. No big deal, the button+wheel combo is acceptable if you don't use full manual mode too often.

 

Whatever you choose, you'll have a fine tool in your hands.

 

Andre

[tom_m2]

Here is a good comparison:

 

http://www.bobatkins.com/photography/digital/eos_digital_rebel_xt_vs_20d.html

 

Whether the differences matter to you, you have to decide for yourself based on your shooting style.

 

The only differences that mattered to me were the slightly better focus performance on the 20D vs. the lighter weight on the XT. The weight won out as far as I'm concerned. In particular, with a 24/2.8 or 50/1.4, the XT is small and unobtrusive, which is important to me.

[m_keiser]

Before you buy an XT go to a store where you can hold them both. Look particularly at the viewfinders.

 

The 20D's is fairly mediocre but... It looks like the best in the world next to the XT's tiny-tiny viewfinder. Even the original DRebel is much better.

[gdanmitchell]

I read one comment that that 20D is a "much tougher camera."

 

I'm not so sure.

 

I could have purchased either a 20D or the 350D - in other words, the cost was not an

issue. I chose the 350D because I do a lot of backpacking and hiking photography and I

valued the smaller size and (half pound) lighter weight of the 350D.

 

As you can imagine, I don't necessarily treat this camera gently. I have used it in light rain

and in tough terrain and I haven't had any problems.

 

The image quality of the two cameras is essentially identical. Most people agree that no

one can tell the difference between images taken on the two different cameras with the

same lens.

 

There are some differences in the interfaces of the two cameras. Some regard the 350D

interface as a bit more cumbersome. Depending upon what and how you shoot this might

make a difference. It is a non-issue for me.

 

Dan

[goulden]

i have both, i've had both fall onto the ground and survive and both have survived camping and being carried around in muddy crowded conditions for days on end. build quality isn't a huge issue for me as a daily hands on user of both

 

if you have the money and you'll use the camera for long periods of time, I'd say the 20D without doubt. If it's for occasional shooting, the 350D would probably suffice

 

you maay be better spending the difference on lenses as that's really what determines image quality

[lotsawa]

Both cameras a great, so I wouldn't worry to much.

 

If you feel the price difference is huge and not negligible for you, that's probably a sign that your budget is limited, so I'd think it's wiser to use that money for a good lens.

[gluteal cleft]

Pick them up and use them. One of them will probably make you think "wow, this feels good." Pick that one.

 

steve

[v.anisimov]

(1) Amar Saleem - your title should've been:

 

"Torn between the 20D and the huge price difference."

 

(2) Dan Mitchell - "...cost was not an issue. I chose the 350D because I do a lot of backpacking..."

 

Bollocks. The 20d is hardly bigger or heavier. Most better lenses are larger than both cameras.

[danny lee]

I just purchased the XT, after weeks of debate.

 

I find that I cannot justify the shortcomings of the xt is worth the 500 dollars more I have to pay for a 20D.

 

the images are about the same, and photography is all about the image, am I right?

 

Now the XT is a wee tad slow, but I find that if I do take so many frames, it just bogs down the browse feature of the photoshop with plenty of dupilcate pictures.

 

I always use a portrait grip on my cameras, with the XT it is like a reverse of the Elan II with grip ! the portraint grip on elan II is small whereas the regular grip is thick, it is the reverse on the xt.

 

I find the xt borderline in comfort, with the 20D very comfortable, but I just cant justify the 500 dollars for a little speed and comfort, but thats me.

 

If 500 bucks means little to you, then you SHOULD buy the 20D, it really is nicer and if I really had the money to spare to invest in a 20D + Grip + wireless controller, I would.

[gdanmitchell]

<p> I wrote:</p>

 

<blockquote>(2) Dan Mitchell - "...cost was not an issue. I chose the 350D because I do a

lot of backpacking..."</blockquote>

 

<p>To which Vladimir replied:</p>

 

<blockquote><i>Bollocks. The 20d is hardly bigger or heavier. Most better lenses are

larger than both cameras.</i></blockquote>

 

<p>As one who spends a lot of time in the backcountry (scores of pack trips, some up to

14 days in length), <i>for me</i> any advantage that the 20D might have is

not worth the extra half pound of weight, nor the bulkier camera hanging around my

neck. I would feel differently if the 20D provided advantages for the <i>kind of

photography I do</i>. I generally work slowly, with the camera on a tripod. You might

find me carrying about 7-10 pounds of photo gear including multiple

lenses and a tripod, so I'm not willing to carry any extra weight that doesn't produce any

gains <i>for me</i>. Half pounds matter. </p>

 

<p>My lens choice would be the same for either camera so the camera weight difference

remains.</p>

 

<p>I recognize and respect that others may have a different view (and a stronger back! ;-)

and may find the differences between the two cameras compelling enough to carry the

extra weight. I also recognize that the weight/size advantages of the XT will mean little to

those who do not venture far from the trailhead. (I would carry a larger camera that gave

me greater image quality. For example, I

expect to move to a full frame camera like the 5D eventually.)

 

<p>As someone (Colin Fletcher?) said, "Look after the ounces and the pounds will take

care of themselves."</p>

 

<p>Take care,</p>

 

<p>Dan</p>