20D previews...... - DPChallenge Forums

08/19/2004 08:52:34 PM · #29

no ISO in the viewfinder either.

On the flip side, power consumption is good - 1000 frames on a single battery without flash, 700 with 50% built in flash usage. 1.5x to 10x zoom on playback is also good from a D60 users perspective.

08/19/2004 08:53:23 PM · #30

Originally posted by dwoolridge:

No per-channel histograms?

But you get the always useful (!) built in B&W and fake digital filters modes...

What is an 'entry level pro' camera anyway ? :)

08/19/2004 09:04:28 PM · #31

Luminous Landscape has a hands on preview too including noise comparisons, which are favourably equal to the 10D at all ISOs

From the article above:

20D vs. 1D Mk II

A debate that will ring through the web's discussions forums for months to come is one which compares the 20D to the 1D Mk II. They're both 8 Megapixel cameras, and though not quite as fast as the Mk II, at 5FPS the 20D is fast enough for many photographers. The price difference is considerable, and so why not buy a 20D instead of the much more expensive Mk II?

Indeed. But the answer is obvious, and so to debate the point (and I know it will be done, ad nauseam) serves little purpose. Here are the main pros and cons:

â�� the Mk II is much more expensive (nearly three times the price)

â�� the MK II is much bulkier and heavier

â�� the Mk II is a lot faster, more so than just the number of frames per second would suggest

â�� the Mk II has a 1.3X factor vs. the 20D's 1.6X cropping factor

â�� the Mk II has larger photosites (pixels) and therefore a theoretical (at least) advantage in terms of noise at high ISO

â�� the Mk II has far superior weather sealing

â�� the Mk II is considerably more ruggedly built

â�� the Mk II has a 200,000 cycle shutter

â�� the Mk II has a significantly larger and brighter viewfinder

There you have it, the major pros and cons. Now simply ask yourself; given these differences, is the extra cost, weight and bulk of the Mk II appropriate for the type of shooting that you do? If so, go for it. If not, then the 20D may well be the camera that you've been looking for.

Worth $3000 to you ?

Message edited by author 2004-08-19 21:22:44.

Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM

08/19/2004 09:08:24 PM · #32

More random stuff I never knew

The battery grips both have a slot to hold the camera's normal battery cover, or a spare CF card...

EddyG

Canon EOS-1D Mark II

08/19/2004 10:20:01 PM · #33

I think there are quite a few other advantages that the Mk II has over the 20D. Interchangeable focus screens, information LCD on the back, larger & higher resolution (230,000 pixel) LCD, configuration options up the ying-yang, FireWire connectivity, larger shooting buffer (40 frames), ISO 50 support, ability to use SD and CF cards, either in tandem for instant backup or sequentially for more storage, 45-point AF system (including 7 high-precision AF sensors instead of just 1), more detailed in-viewfinder information display, etc.

Now I'm not saying any of the above will help you take better pictures (except for maybe the 45-point AF system), but there are some pretty significant differences between a 20D and 1D Mark II. That being said, I think the 20D will make a really nice, relatively affordable backup camera for a lot of Canon shooters...

One thing that caught my eye in the Luminous Landscape review was about the smaller mirror in the 20D compared to the 10D:

As mentioned, the 20D has been reduced in size over the 10D and previous models in this line from Canon. Such shrinkage is not without its price though. It has been achieved by reducing the size of both the pentaprism and the instant return mirror. This makes the viewfinder a bit dimmer and a bit coarser than the previous generation.

(Unrelated, but interesting to note that 1D Mark II will be getting a firmware upgrade when the 580EX is released to utilize the new features, such as automatically adjusting the white balance on a shot-to-shot basis.]

BTW, yet another review of the 20D on Imaging-Resource, complete with measurement graphs at the end.

Message edited by author 2004-08-19 22:27:55.

KevinRiggs

Canon EOS-1Ds

Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM

08/19/2004 11:16:16 PM · #34

It's probably noteworthy as well that the 1D MkII is a professional grade body which means that you get weather seals on the housing, better performance and closer tolerances when integrated with the "L" lenses and the shutter is designed for 3 times this life expectancy (150,000 actuations as opposed to 50,000 actuations for the 10D). I assume the 20D will be more in line with the "prosumer" 300D/10D variants and only expect a 50,000 actuation life cycle on the shutter assembly.

Kev

Canon EF 70-200mm f/4.0L USM

08/19/2004 11:19:07 PM · #35

Originally posted by KevinRiggs:

Not disagreeing about the build quality, but have Canon actually come out with what these numbers actually are ? I've seen internet numbers stretching from 200k for the 1D to about 10k on the 300d...

I noticed that the 20D is a metal body, like the 10D and not plastic/polycarb like the 300d, though slightly lighter than the 10D was.

All your and Eddy's points about the differences are certainly true, as was mostly covered in the list I'd posted from the LL site. The question is if it's worth an extra $3k to whoever buys it.

jab119

08/19/2004 11:29:57 PM · #36

the 20D does sound very tempting. I just want to see some night shot samples (pointing to the night sky) greater than 2 minutes @ iso 400 to ISO 1600 and see how the noise looks, if it is a lot less then the D60, Im all over it.

James

paganini

Canon EOS-1D Mark II

08/20/2004 12:35:01 AM · #37

Yes, 10D is 9 raw buffers, so this is definitely a downgrade :( I think this is Canon's way to squeeze profit margins -- large buffers = more cost, as memory cost is linear.

Yup, my "dream" camera would be:

Fuji S3 Pro's dynamic range sensor :-)
45 AF 1D mark II autofocus/metering
for $2500-3000, it'll be a nice point.

I don't know if Fuji is planning on a Canon mount for the S3....

Anyway, yes, for $3000, i'd like to get 1.3x 8megapixel sensor (same as 1D mark ii), 3 fps, 45 autofocus (same as 1d mark ii), maybe half the buffer of 1d mark ii and with the same body. Same thing as EOS 3 is to a EOS 1 v (basically EOS 3 has everything EOS 1v has, just slower speed). There seems to be a fillable gap between the 20D and 1D mark Ii ($1300 to $4000 camera -- there is room). Maybe Canon is just waiting until Photokina to announce it -- i cross my fingers.

I hate to say it but since the autofocus system in 10D is "completely new"... i'd predict tehre might be focus issue with it. :) just my two cents.. anything that is "new" is usually error prone unless THIS time they really spend the time to get the bugs out.

Originally posted by Gordon:

Originally posted by paganini:

i was really hoping for a EOS 3 equivalent. but i guess that's not gonna happen.

What would that be ? The same camera as the 20D with the 1DMkII sensor ?

The only other thing would be the 45 point AF, but this seems to have a completely different AF system with the 9 point diamond.

I see the rear joystick is for AF selection, probably replacing the registered AF thing as well, with the press-select option that it has.

On the negative side, the shooting buffer is actually fewer frames than the D60 and 10D in RAW mode. D60 would do 8, this 20D is 6, 10D was 9 ?

aKiwi

Canon EOS-7D

Canon EF-S 17-85mm f/4-5.6 IS USM

08/20/2004 10:28:46 AM · #38

Look here DcResource
Comes in three kits:
Body only for $1499
With 18-55 mm EF-S lens for $1599
With 17-85 mm EF-S IS lens for $1999

jonr

Olympus OM-D E-M5

Olympus 9-18mm f/4.0-5.6 M.Zuiko Digital ED

08/20/2004 10:40:55 AM · #39

I must say, if I were looking for a DSLR now, I would be very, very tempted by the 20D. It fixes many annoying things the 10D has.
But other concern is growing. It looks like Canon are forking their EOS system with more EF-S lenses, and it looks like it is no clear upgrade path. So if I buy the 10-22 to go with the 20D, I need to upgrade the wide-angle lens too. Almost if I were upgranding to medium format.
Telephotos are pretty safe bet, even if I would need to get a 1.4x teleconverter to get the same reach. But wide-angles are still APS-sensored cameras Achilles heel.
I'm still quite confident that I made the right choice. :)

paganini

Canon EOS-1D Mark II

Canon EF 70-200mm f/4.0L USM

08/20/2004 10:49:43 AM · #40

I guess Olympus was right -- you just can't produce a 35 mm size sensor in the mean time for it to be affordable. The thing I don't like about the 4/3 is the dimension size, i prefer the 3x2 format (the 35 mm), it makes getting 4x6 prints a lot easier :-)

Originally posted by jonr:

PaulMdx

Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L USM

08/20/2004 10:52:25 AM · #41

Originally posted by Gordon:

On the negative side, the shooting buffer is actually fewer frames than the D60 and 10D in RAW mode. D60 would do 8, this 20D is 6, 10D was 9 ?

Think I must be missing something.. The 20D can do 5 fps for 5 secs (25 frames continuously over 5 secs), right? Is that just jpeg?

kirbic

Canon EOS R5

Canon RF 24-70mm f/2.8 L IS

08/20/2004 10:56:41 AM · #42

Originally posted by PaulMdx:

Originally posted by Gordon:
On the negative side, the shooting buffer is actually fewer frames than the D60 and 10D in RAW mode. D60 would do 8, this 20D is 6, 10D was 9 ?

Think I must be missing something.. The 20D can do 5 fps for 5 secs (25 frames continuously over 5 secs), right? Is that just jpeg?

Yep, the RAW buffer actually decreases from the 10D, while the JPEG increases. I would guess they elected to go with a smaller buffer that can be cleared faster, that way JPEG performance goes way up, but RAW does suffer.

PaulMdx

Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L USM

08/20/2004 10:59:08 AM · #43

Originally posted by kirbic:

Lucky I shoot in jpeg. Yay! :-D I think I'll buy one sometime next year..

thatcloudthere

Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L USM

08/20/2004 11:00:05 AM · #44

So, with all of you rich kids (just a joke!) upgrading to this new one, are there any digital rebels or 10d's for sale? I'm looking for a digital SLR but I'm too German to pay a lot of money!

rich

Canon EOS-40D

Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM

08/20/2004 11:13:18 AM · #45

Originally posted by kirbic:

Originally posted by PaulMdx:

Originally posted by Gordon:
On the negative side, the shooting buffer is actually fewer frames than the D60 and 10D in RAW mode. D60 would do 8, this 20D is 6, 10D was 9 ?

Think I must be missing something.. The 20D can do 5 fps for 5 secs (25 frames continuously over 5 secs), right? Is that just jpeg?

Yep, the RAW buffer actually decreases from the 10D, while the JPEG increases. I would guess they elected to go with a smaller buffer that can be cleared faster, that way JPEG performance goes way up, but RAW does suffer.

Or is the buffer size the same, but the 8.2 MP images are bigger and consume more of the buffer per image?

Konador

Canon EOS-500D Rebel T1i

Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS

08/20/2004 11:17:07 AM · #46

Originally posted by Jacko:

Well I'm getting one. Dass fo shoah.

I'll give you $5 for your old crappy 10D.

Jacko

Canon EOS-20D

Canon EF 17-40mm f/4.0L USM

08/20/2004 11:19:15 AM · #47

Sorry ... already poured led in it to make a paper weight

Originally posted by Konador:

Originally posted by Jacko:
Well I'm getting one. Dass fo shoah.

I'll give you $5 for your old crappy 10D.

thatcloudthere