Remember, you will get what you pay for.

buy the new panasonic fz7 instead for $599, WAY better camera.

www.dpreview.com

Nikon D50!!!

Get the Nikon D50, BEST Value for the money.

get it an finally become a NIKONIAN!!!

Actually the Sony H1 is a pretty good camera for that price...

Sony CyberShot 5.1MP Digital Camera (DSCH1)
Aperture Range f/2.8 - f/8.0




Canon PowerShot 5.0MP Digital Camera (S2 IS)
Aperture Range f2.7(W) - 3.5(T)



That makes a huge diffrence. Shooting at F8 is useless your outside during sunny conditions.

I just played with the Sony T30 today. Good camera, but a little big compared to the T9

Dilemma: Rebel XT or EOS 20d?
 

Okay, some may remember from my other thread where I announced that I purchased a Rebel XT, which should be delivered tomorrow. However, futureshop.ca has a sweet deal going on right now with an EOS 20d and the accessory pack (battery grip, battery, bag) for $1499. That's a very hard deal to resist. My dilemma is this though.... I am very amateur, the Rebel XT would be my first venture into the world of good cameras. My skills aren't that great yet. Would the 20d be too much for me at this stage in the game? What are the benefits of it over the Rebel XT?

I really want to have either one by the weekend for SCN, but I was hoping to use my Rebel this week to get acquainted with it this week, but I guess I'd be willing to suffer a few more days for the 20d if it's worth it.

Thoughts?

stick with the XT for now, that way you have more money for lenses.

PS: there is a thread for this very type of question>> "need advice on a new camera? ASK HERE!"

For FEEL, there no doubt the 20D is WAY WAY batter, its full magnesium body and had a larger hold. Also its superior in many ways.

I say go for the 20D, $1499 WITH a grip is a great deal. The rebel looks and feels like a cheap PS when compared to a entry-pro level 20D (corrected, mark 1 Ds or Mark 2 is pro)

20D is nowhere near pro-level!

I say go wth the 20D, you can grow into it. I think you'll grow out of the xt very fast.

i grew out of my xt UNTIL i bought my battery grip :p

I respect everyone's need to ask these questions, but for the love of God and all things holy:

USE THE THREAD MEANT FOR THESE QUESTIONS INSTEAD OF CLUTTERING UP OUR LIST OF THREADS!

ps. I <3 my Rebel.

Personally I had to choose 20D due to the lack of grip on 350D compared to 20D. My hands are not THAT big but you know.. it feels much much better with 20D.. and I like a tiny bit of extra features on 20D which I don't really care for nowadays..

If you've got a money 20D is a better buy. but if you are going to be in debt for buying 20D, I'd say keep 350D :)

I went with the 20d :)

May be a little much for me right now, and definitely a bigger dent in the wallet, but I might as well cut to the chase and get what I ultimately want, especially since the price is right.

Excellent! Congrats. :)


............another Canon user....*grumble, grumble*

Congratulations!

I soo wouldn't mind the better autofocus, bigger buffer, faster continuous drive, bigger body, etc etc, blah blah. I think you made a good choice, this camera should help you get more keepers. Now make sure you shoot lots!

I had a xt, but the AF sux. (may be me, or may be the camera). Then I exchange for a 20D, it is better now.

congrats! it's a very very good camera... definitly something I'd love to have if I shot Canon.

and it's SUCH a good deal as well. damn. Hopefully the D200 will have the same discount when the D200s or whatever comes out next year (highly unlikely judging from how fast Nikon puts out their updated cams).

start shooting and posting! yay!

congrats :)
20D was my first camera as well :)
I'm still a newb too. lol

i really don't understand what you mean when u say u can grow out of the XT very fast.

why would u grow out of the XT very fast?

the biggest real problem for me is that it doestn' have a spot meter, and i'd very rather have one. but even the 20D doesnt

the real difference between the 20D and the XT is the magnesium alloy body instead of a plastic body.

i don't see any other material difference other than this. well, it has a bigger viewfinder too.

it has a better grip OBVIOUSLY because its a much bigger and more expensive camera.

its wrong to say that the more expensive one is always better, because it isn't necessarily so.

THE both camera can take the same quality pictures, so i don't see why u can't get a XT and save the difference for a better lens.

there is nothing that a 20D can do that an XT couldn't.






well, except if you like dropping ur camera on concrete floor a lot.

I guess it really depends on what you shoot. If you do a lot of still life, landscape, or normal walkaround photography then I don't think a you will be able to make use of the features of the 20D

The biggest thing for me wanting to upgrade is the autofocus, faster continuous drive and bigger buffer. You're right, this stuff won't necessarily take better quality pictures, but it'll help you get more keepers.

If you feel the bg-e2 is useless to you, sell it to me :D

He asked for people's opinion, so I gave mine. For me, the lack of a decent spot meter is a deal breaker, as is the cheaper construction, small size, fingernail sized viewfinder and lightness.

- Without a spotmeter, how can one take a good spot reading in a darkened thatre or similar venue? Or, less importantly in this day of the in-camera histogram, take multiple readings of a certain scene to figure out the proper exposure?

- Cheaper construction = less durability. There are many times where I have been thankfull of my cameras' more robust construction. I've dropped my cameras and banged my cameras against many tree trunks, church pews, caskets and in one case, the wedding limo ( :shhh: ).

- Small viewfinders make manual focusing with a macro lens eye-watering....hell any type of manual focusing is difficult at best.

- Light weight is good for carrying around a camera, but not good for stability. Camera shake is more of a problem with light bodies than the heavier ones.

Notice I never said anything about the quality of the picture the camera produces or that more expensive = better. In the film world, the price of the camera had almost no bearing on image quality. It was the optics, first & foremost. In the digital world, more expensive can mean better pics.
I will argue, however, that a more expensive camera with more bells & whistles will help one be more efficient.

There are a number of things that the 20d does that the XT cannot, that's why it's the more expensive cam. Granted, most of these things are more functional things that operate in the background, but I found a list of differences between the two the other day, and there's more than I thought.

http://www.bobatkins.com/photography...xt_vs_20d.html if you are interested