the 20D isnt for me, its for my fiance, we shoot together, and we're thinking is the cost difference between the two worth the extra features? Does the 20D take better photos (provided all other factors are the same, lens, lighting, photographer)?
the 20D isnt for me, its for my fiance, we shoot together, and we're thinking is the cost difference between the two worth the extra features? Does the 20D take better photos (provided all other factors are the same, lens, lighting, photographer)?
I've never used an XT. It's a newer model than the 20D and may have more advanced technology but their megapixel count and max resolution is about the same. The 20D is bigger and heavier (built on a metal chassis) and should be more durable. I would expect that given the same conditions they will produce nearly equal results. The big difference in performance is the 20D's burst rate speed of 5 frames per second, which is about twice as fast as the XT. If the camera you buy is one you plan to own for a long time; or you want to use it for fast moving action shooting such as sports or birds in flight, then get the 20D.
Personally, I get the 20D just so that you don't have two of the same thing. You'll be able to share lenses either way.
I had the 300D for about 4 months before I upgraded to the 20D, and I'll tell you, WHAT A DIFFERENCE .. Other than the general solid feel of the 20D, the thing that made it for me the most was the 3.5 seconds delay when I turn the camera on, I lost so many shots because of it, the 20D is instantly on as soon as you touch the shutter. Also the burst rate is much higher, and the I believe there are more focusing points than the 300D and the 350D ..
I had the 300D for about 4 months before I upgraded to the 20D, and I'll tell you, WHAT A DIFFERENCE .. Other than the general solid feel of the 20D, the thing that made it for me the most was the 3.5 seconds delay when I turn the camera on, I lost so many shots because of it, the 20D is instantly on as soon as you touch the shutter. Also the burst rate is much higher, and the I believe there are more focusing points than the 300D and the 350D ..
- Size (XT is too small for many guy's hands)
- Speed (it's very very fast)
- Jog-wheel (it is so much easier to use then button pressing)
- More focus points
This is my recommendation:
If you are looking to replace and upgrade, there is little reason to do so from an XT --> 20D.
However, if you are looking to buy a 2nd unit (for a back-up) than buy the 20D and make the XT your backup.
If you are looking for a camera for your fiance and you already have an XT. My thoughts are this. Buy the 20D. Which ever one of you has the larger hands should take the 20D.
I upgraded from a p&s so the size of the rebel was perfect for my large hands :-)
... basically the question is do you mind paying the difference in price, performance wise they are similar with the 20d having an edge when it comes to raw stats, fps and all that other fancy stuff. i think they have the same sensor so the images should be the same or nearly the same and i think the rebel xt has a newer image processor.
They don't have the same sensor, but their capture performance is "similar".
Except regarding noise. The 20D is less noisy at high ISO, particularly 800 and 1600. But the Rebel XT isn't too bad for noise, much less at high ISO than the original dRebel, and I use ISO 1600 when I need to without too much reservation. As with any digital camera, you have to watch your exposure, as the noise appears in underexposed areas, particularly if you need to increase the exposure during postprocessing (RAW).
I think they both have strong points, the Rebel XT's strengh is size to some (like me, I prefer a smaller camera), and price to all (ok, who "wants" to pay more?). But the 20D should last longer than the Rebel, and has more pro features you are effectively paying for, so maybe that evens it out!
I love my Rebel XT, and I don't think it's "too small". When you're in the camera store, holding each camera in your hand, the 20D may well feel somewhat more comfortable to grip. But in actual real-life shooting situations, your focus is on getting the shot, not on whether the camera is as comfortable to grip as it could possibly be. I like that the Rebel XT is smaller and lighter, too (685g vs. 490g) And if you buy the Rebel XT, you can put the money you save towards a nice lens :)
I'm also purchasing a digital SLR soon, and I wondered what extra features the 20D has over the 350D.
I know it has mirror lock-up (but I don't know how that works, or what it's used for), and a higher burst shot speed, but other than that, are there any advantages as far as features go?
Since I don't own either camera I guess I can't really comment too much. But having owned a 300D for nearly 2 years and having been very happy with it I wouldn't have a problem with the 350D I think. But, in saying that, when my time does come to upgrade then I guess the 20D (or it's replacement depending on when I buy) would be the logical move and keep my 300D as a backup! It has been fantastic!
The XT and the 20D has same imaging quality, although the 20S has 0.2MP more, the images are pretty much same. Check photo.net and DPReviews comparison of XT's imaging quality vs the 20D.
The extra stuff you are paying for goes toward more fps, magnesium body, better focusing, and some other features. If you need/want the features for the price increase, then it's worth it. If you don't need/want the features for the price increase, then I guess you answered your own question.
Either camera will give you lots of great images, can't go wrong with either one in my opinion.
In the 20D, I found the main differences to be the ease and speed of focus even in lowish light and the bodys build and layout. The controls are really easy and quick to use.
Heresanother comparison which explains the strengths and weaknessess of them both
