The 20D is still an awesome camera. It is my backup to my 40D and I use it for remotes when shooting sports or as my second camera when shooting weddings/portraits. I've heard good things about the 30D as well. So you can't go wrong with either camera. I will say, however, the small screen on the 20D does drive me crazy after looking at the 40D screen.
2. The button layout is virtually identical between the 20D/30D and the 5D ... not so with the 40D. Someone at Canon needs to be taken out back and shot in the kneecaps.
Yeah, I shot sports for awhile with a 30d and a 40d, really sucked when switching from one to the other.
I use a XSI and it rivals my 5D up to 800 ISO and takes just a bit of work at 1600 ISO to be more than usable. I used a 20D for years and replaced it with the XSI...imho the XSI is alot better in higher ISO's than the 20D was. I dont remember for sure but I dont think the 20D can make use of a 2.8 lens or faster.
I also had a 40D for a short time and the XSI holds it's own with it too. I suppose in short...I could slap the grip on the XSI and would have no problem shooting an entire wedding with it.
George
G Lund wrote:
...I dont remember for sure but I dont think the 20D can make use of a 2.8 lens or faster.
What do you mean? In what way would any camera not "make use of" a fast lens?
I've used a 50 1.8, 50 1.4, and recently my new 35 1.4L -- plus my new 17-55 2.8 IS -- on my 20D, and really enjoy the brighter viewfinder image and the shallower depth of field compared to the old kit lens, not to mention being able to use faster shutter speeds and/or lower ISO settings for a given exposure value.
Amazing how a camera that was once a VERY good camera at high ISO, etc is no longer
I'm not saying the 20D can match a 5D, but it sure as heck worked well for many shooters....even at 1600 as stated above. Many of us are spoiled. Just wait several more years from now when we all will shoot at ISO 5 billion in total darkness and then say how crappy all today's current models are. Save your money for great glass and get yourself a 20D or even an SXI as George mentions (though George is wrong about the 20D not accepting 2.8 or fast glass....it does).
Have to agree w/ Cordell. You haven't struggled until you pushed ISO400 film. If you whipper-snappers had to go back to the film days....you would be beggin' for your mama.
dpun wrote:
Have to agree w/ Cordell. You haven't struggled until you pushed ISO400 film. If you whipper-snappers had to go back to the film days....you would be beggin' for your mama.
Dave... hate to pick on you, but I've never quite understood this argument from an older, more experienced shooter. It seems as if you're suggesting that because you had to push ISO400 film you are somehow better or tougher.... and yet you didn't do so because you chose to, you did so because you had to... you had no other choice. If you had the ability to change ISO settings every other shot you certainly would have. We all choose the path that will give us the best results, consistently... so that we can focus on composition and capturing the moment, using any and all tools available.
To the OP, go ahead a give the 20D a whirl... my wife and I both still use ours' regularly and they still work amazingly well. There might be one reason to see if you can find a 30D though.. The 30D offers ISO separation in 1/3 stop increments, so if you are shooting at 800 and need to bump, you can go to 1000 or 1250 before having to jump all the way to 1600.
dpun wrote:
...Have to agree w/ Cordell. You haven't struggled until you pushed ISO400 film. If you whipper-snappers had to go back to the film days....you would be beggin' for your mama.
400? ISO? Ha; you kids!
In my day, we shot using ASA 160 Vericolor Professional (VPS). When Vericolor 400 (VPH) came out, it was like a miracle.
RichardLavigne wrote:
...It seems as if you're suggesting that because you had to push ISO400 film you are somehow better or tougher....
cordellwillis wrote:
Amazing how a camera that was once a VERY good camera at high ISO, etc is no longer
I'm not saying the 20D can match a 5D, but it sure as heck worked well for many shooters....even at 1600 as stated above. Many of us are spoiled. Just wait several more years from now when we all will shoot at ISO 5 billion in total darkness and then say how crappy all today's current models are. Save your money for great glass and get yourself a 20D or even an SXI as George mentions (though George is wrong about the 20D not accepting 2.8 or fast glass....it does)....Show more →
Are you sure Im wrong about the 2.8 or faster lens for the 20D? Here is a copy and paste for info on the 50D..
."The high-precision 9-point wide area AF system and each of the nine AF points uses a cross-type coverage system, enabling the camera to focus faster, more accurately, and in ever more complex lighting situations than previous models. For added accuracy and precision, the 50D incorporates a diagonally mounted, high-precision cross-type sensor at the center AF point that is sensitive to both vertical and horizontal lines when fast lenses (f/2.8 or faster) are used."
My memory sure aint what it once was but Im pretty sure the 20D did not have a cross-type sensor like mentioned above for faster glass. The 20D will shoot just fine with fast glass but it wont utilize anything 2.8 or faster...I think.
That said...I have been wrong before.
George
G Lund wrote:
...My memory sure aint what it once was but Im pretty sure the 20D did not have a cross-type sensor like mentioned above for faster glass. The 20D will shoot just fine with fast glass but it wont utilize anything 2.8 or faster...I think.
Ah, so that's what you meant by "won't utilize."
No, the 20D doesn't have the higher-precision cross-type sensor, but the faster the glass the better it can focus with the regular AF sensors that it does have. More light = better focus ability...for both old eyes and old sensors.
If you have a 1.8 lens you can set it for 1.8...it just doesnt have the cross type sensor for faster glass like the cameras of today have. Nothing agin the 20D, I had mine for years and nary a complaint. As I got newer bodies tho I did feel the 20D was lacking in the higher iso range.
As always...ymmv
George
The cross type sensor is in the camera, not the lens. That has nothing to do with the glass. The 20D will utilize the faster glass just as well as the 50D or the 5D. The 20D just doesn't have the same cross type sensor.
From the tech sheet....
<<<<
All-new 9-point AF system
The EOS 20D gets an all new (not seen on any other SLR) nine point AF system which has its AF points in a diamond pattern. It's quite noticeably faster than than the EOS 10D and has better low light working range (-0.5 EV compared to 0.5 EV). Note that the center point is a 'cross type' sensor when used with lenses with a maximum aperture of F2.8 or faster.
>>>
My 20D was a wonderful camera. It was introduced in Sept 2004 and I got mine in Feb 2005. Had that thing until I got my 40D a couple years ago. Then sold the 20 to a friend of mine. She moved to northern Montana, got a job with the local Chamber of Commerce, and is posting pictures on that web site promoting the local area. Still a wonderful camera.
RichardLavigne wrote:
Dave... hate to pick on you, but I've never quite understood this argument from an older, more experienced shooter. It seems as if you're suggesting that because you had to push ISO400 film you are somehow better or tougher.... and yet you didn't do so because you chose to, you did so because you had to... you had no other choice.
I'm not suggesting that at all.
What I am suggesting is that people who have just picked up on the digital stuff within the last 3 years are really spoiled. The latest high-end digital cameras at 800 and 1600 are fantastic, some are even good at 3200. They don't know of a time when 800 or 400 pushed to 800 was pushing the limits of acceptability (subjective, I know) in terms of grain and resolution.
I was issued film during high school. Tri-X400, that's what the budget called for. I had to cover an indoor swim meet. OMG. Even w/ a 1.8 lens (HS student budget), I was pushing to 800 because it was so dark and I needed the speed. I tried pushing to 1600 once....ugh, never again. I cried because they were all blurry or very grainy.
Remember, this was all before Photoshop, AF and today's software. I am not better or tougher. However, I am much more appreciative of today's technology. And every time a younger person complains about noise at 800 or 1600...well....I just roll my eyes. To me, 1600 or 3200 stuff today is acceptable because I'm used to late 80's and early 90's quality level.
Pandacat wrote:
From the tech sheet....
<<<<
All-new 9-point AF system
The EOS 20D gets an all new (not seen on any other SLR) nine point AF system which has its AF points in a diamond pattern. It's quite noticeably faster than than the EOS 10D and has better low light working range (-0.5 EV compared to 0.5 EV). Note that the center point is a 'cross type' sensor when used with lenses with a maximum aperture of F2.8 or faster.
>>>
My 20D was a wonderful camera. It was introduced in Sept 2004 and I got mine in Feb 2005. Had that thing until I got my 40D a couple years ago. Then sold the 20 to a friend of mine. She moved to northern Montana, got a job with the local Chamber of Commerce, and is posting pictures on that web site promoting the local area. Still a wonderful camera. ...Show more →
Very good...a quote from dpreview...did not find this on Canons web site..but thats ok...I will stand corrected. I will say this tho...I have many pics from my 20D with my 70-200 2.8 IS attached and many with that same lens attached to my 5D and...anything over 400 iso from the 20D does not compare to the 5D..why that is..I dont know..Im not a tech guy, I just know the 20D has alot more noise than the 5D does, or the XSI does for that matter.
The 20D was a good camera for what it was...but lets face it...a new Rebel will give cleaner pics at 400 and 800 iso than a 20D will straight out of the camera.
Posting pics on a web site as you mentioned means little really...I can use my camera phone to post pics on a web site...pics get downsized and worked over quite a bit for posting on the net.
Again, thanks for clearing up the cross type sensor thing...I was wrong...I did not think the 20D had it.
George
What I am suggesting is that people who have just picked up on the digital stuff within the last 3 years are really spoiled. The latest high-end digital cameras at 800 and 1600 are fantastic, some are even good at 3200. They don't know of a time when 800 or 400 pushed to 800 was pushing the limits of acceptability (subjective, I know) in terms of grain and resolution.
I was issued film during high school. Tri-X400, that's what the budget called for. I had to cover an indoor swim meet. OMG. Even w/ a 1.8 lens (HS student budget), I was pushing to 800 because it was so dark and I needed the speed. I tried pushing to 1600 once....ugh, never again. I cried because they were all blurry or very grainy.
Remember, this was all before Photoshop, AF and today's software. I am not better or tougher. However, I am much more appreciative of today's technology. And every time a younger person complains about noise at 800 or 1600...well....I just roll my eyes. To me, 1600 or 3200 stuff today is acceptable because I'm used to late 80's and early 90's quality level.
Fair enough Dave... well explained. I do have the same feeling though, without ever having had to shoot film. For me, stepping up to a 20D from my 300D was a huge and dramatic step. The IQ was so much better. and I still think that in average conditions, the 20D can hold its own... it isn't until the conditions get downright horrible that my 1D and 5D really begin to show their worth.
Pandacat wrote:
From the tech sheet....
<<<<
All-new 9-point AF system
The EOS 20D ...the center point is a 'cross type' sensor when used with lenses with a maximum aperture of F2.8 or faster.
>>>
