Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Canon EOS dSLR

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Sep 11, 2005, 5:56 AM   #1
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 68
Default

Hi,

I am stuck between Nikon D50, XT and 20 D.

Can somebody tell me, rather help me out to zero my decision on one of these. WHere does 20D have its advantage over the other two. In what factors 20D better than XT. Why would one go for 20D when u have an option between 20D and XT.



And also which is advicable now. Buying a XT with a decent package of lenses or Buying a 20D with its lens variation thats available.



Its not the money that i am loooking at but really want to know where 20D has its edge over the other two. The only difference i find is in case of XT i can spend that extra 500 dollors over a new lens. Please advice



thanks

Vivek
waste is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Sep 11, 2005, 6:01 AM   #2
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

I'm not trying to confuse you, but take a look at the Minolta 5D as well - It might save you a lot of dough in the lenses department especially with 'anti-shake'

... BTW if you need the same magnesium metal alloy, the 7D can be had at the same price as the 5D after rebate: http://www.steves-digicams.com/smp/07032005.html
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 11, 2005, 9:34 AM   #3
Senior Member
 
BoYFrMSpC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 339
Default

If the 5D came out at the same time as the XT, I would have seriously considered that camera. Anti-Shake is definitely the plus when going with Minolta. It doesn't look like Canon will be integrating their anti-shake technology into the bodies anytime soon and it's a VERY expensive component in a lens.

The 20D has small advantages over the XT like

-faster (5fps vs 3)
-larger buffer
-better construction
-9 AF points vs 7
-slightly larger sensor for better noise control and ISO 3200
-(i think) better viewfinder
-some other stuff I can't quite think of at the moment...

there aren't TOO many things, and also the advantages are minor-okay improvement over the XT... not so sure if it's really 500 smackers worth. I think maybe you can save up for a lens and MaybE by the time you want to upgrade the body, the full frame cameras will be the same price as the 20D now. Never know... :roll:
BoYFrMSpC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 11, 2005, 11:06 AM   #4
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 3,396
Default

BoYFrMSpC
Yes, I think I'd consider the Minolta's over the rebel-xt at this point too.
Though now when you say 5d, do you mean Minolta or Canon since they both have a 5d model :?.

The points you listed are the main reasons for the higher price.
I'll add some detailes to them

-faster (5fps vs 3)
Though I believe the XT is 3fps only when the optional battery grip is installed. The XT also uses new batteries that are not quite as long lasting as the bp-511a in the 20D.
-better construction
20D magnesium(metal), rebel-xt polycarbonate(plastic)

-9 AF points vs 7,
20D also has one high-precision center sensor
They are both very capable cameras, just intended for different audiences with different requirements.

-----------------------
Whether this is good or bad depends on what you like shooting.
It is good if you like the wide angle scenic, (though now you will have to pay the high prices for real full frame wide angle lenses)
It is bad if you are a telephoto bird/wildlife shooter, as you loose the magnification of the smaller sensored cameras.

Quote:
MaybE by the time you want to upgrade the body, the full frame cameras will be the same price as the 20D now
Peter.

PeterP is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 11, 2005, 12:59 PM   #5
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 68
Default

Ahh,

I never had KM7D in my mind. Now comes one more camera into picture.Iam thoroughly confused. As peter said, the smaller sensor will push me for a lense that will actually fill the void created by the smaller sensor. But going for a full sensor camera like Canon 5D is like loosing all my savings. I feel 3299 is a bit costlier. 20Ds 5fps is very impressive.

Think of me as a photo enthusiast who would enjoy every thing from an ant to the lovely snow capped mountains.

Firstly i eliminated as many cameras as possible. Then was left open with D50(Nikon), Canon Rebet XT, Canon 20D and now KM7D(slowly liking it)

Somebody help me out here. KM7D is almost the same cost as the 20D(the difference is 200 dollors).

The 7D antishake may compete with the 20D higher ISO noice level.

Guys, u know how confused i am with this mail.

So do help.



vivek
waste is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 11, 2005, 5:54 PM   #6
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 301
Default

waste wrote:
Quote:
Hi,

I am stuck between Nikon D50, XT and 20 D.

Can somebody tell me, rather help me out to zero my decision on one of these. WHere does 20D have its advantage over the other two. In what factors 20D better than XT. Why would one go for 20D when u have an option between 20D and XT.



And also which is advicable now. Buying a XT with a decent package of lenses or Buying a 20D with its lens variation thats available.



Its not the money that i am loooking at but really want to know where 20D has its edge over the other two. The only difference i find is in case of XT i can spend that extra 500 dollors over a new lens. Please advice



thanks

Vivek
For a good comparison between the 20D and the XT go here:

http://www.bobatkins.com/photography...xt_vs_20d.html

The comparison between manufacturers is way more difficult, and a bit subjective. I'm sure that there are pros using cameras from all of the major manufacturers and getting some fantastic results.

For me, IS in the body is a nice to have, and as I understand it there are some advantages to having it in the lens.However, I don't have IS for any of my lenses and so farit's been low on my "needs" list.

It was interesting looking at what is available through B&H:

Canon has 122 lenses (207 including 3rd party)
Minolta has 73 lenses (162 including 3rd party)
Nikon has 149 lenses(232 including 3rd party)
Olympus has 9 lenses (12 including 3rd party)
Pentax has 34 lenses (108 including 3rd party)

When I had an OM-1 I felt that Olympus had some of the finest equipment available. I find their current camera/lens system offering to be really disappointing though. In the late 70'sfor an amateur I would have ranked Olympus #1 followed by Pentax, Canon and Nikon (Nikon was too expensive for some of us).My current opinion (just an opinion, don't shoot me) is thatthey should be ranked Canon/Nikon (neck in neck) followed by Minolta, Pentax and Olympus.
BobA is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 11, 2005, 6:46 PM   #7
Super Moderator
 
Hards80's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Cleveland, OH
Posts: 9,046
Default

imo, for an amateur the XT will do everything you could ask of it.. i love my 20d, but if the XT were out when i got it, it would have been a tough choice..

i prefer the canon system myself, and feel that they are at the forefront of technology right now.. but i am sure any of the major brands would serve most well..
Hards80 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 11, 2005, 8:18 PM   #8
Member
 
GHayes396's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 53
Default

I'm like Hards80....I love my 20D but if the XT would have been out when I bought it I would have the XT now because I'm an amateur and the differences just aren't worth the difference in price. I'm very pleased with my camera though and have no regrets!

Grady
GHayes396 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 11, 2005, 9:57 PM   #9
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

waste wrote:
Quote:
The 7D antishake may compete with the 20D higher ISO noice level.
FYI - from dpreview




... Also other manufacturers may have more lenses (many with different version of same lens) - but Minolta is the only one who has a unique 3x f/1.7 macro zoom and the only lonely autofocus 500mm mirror lens in existence... They also have a G line, some also in white for the 'pro' and they are one of the few who pay attention to the 'Bokeh' and design it into their lenses.
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 11, 2005, 10:03 PM   #10
Super Moderator
 
Hards80's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Cleveland, OH
Posts: 9,046
Default

steve's review of the 7d rates the noise handling characteristics to be worse than the 20d.. so basically there probably isn't much difference..
Hards80 is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 4:12 AM.