Should we all REALLY be excited about the 20D?

[Aylwin]

There's been crazy activity here these past few days! I think we should all calm down and take a few deep breaths. Is this 20D really the latest and greatest?

Remember, Photokina is just around the corner. Why would Canon jump the gun and present their finest achievement in advance? Don't you think Canon will have a few more tricks up their sleeve? Looking at the frenzy going on, I'm led to believe that this is exactly what Canon wants. Let everyone think, "This is it!" Let Nikon think, "Ha! That's it? Just wait till Photokina."

Personally, I suspect this is all just a ploy to distract everyone and give the competitors and false sense of security. I bet the real bombshell is going to drop at the end of next month: new L lenses with new glass technology and DO, a new upgraded version of the 1Ds and, what I'm hoping for, a baby 1D MKII.

I'll be very surprised and disappointed if, after Photkina, we realise that this new 20D was "it". So, now that you've had those few deep breaths, don't you agree? :)

[KennyG]

No, I don't agree. Look what they did with the MK-II launch. Images and info leaked in exactly the same way. Accept it, the 20D is the new baby in the playpen and it looks to be what everyone has been asking for.

[Ikinaa]

I for my part am excited about the 20D.
From what I've read it's what I've waited for.
A (semi-)pro DSLR for about 1500 Euro (ok... the 10D was also this price, but I couldn't convince my wife: she had the better arguments : the kids, the house, so I bought a G3 last year for 600 Euro, the 300D just didn't seem enough for me).
And I have only the body to buy... I still got 4 lenses from my EOS500.
The only thing I'm a bit (but not much) disappointed is the 1.6 crop-factor, I'd have preferred a 1.3, but even if Canon brings out an EOS3D (as some people speculate about) that has perhaps a 1.3 crop factor, I guess that cam will be situated between 1DII and 20D, so about 2500 Euro... that's too much. I then prefer to invest the money (the 1000Euro differnce) in a year or so in the 10-22mm lens, so the crop factor is compensated.
Yes... I like wide-angle. I have a Sigma 17-35mm from my 500, but that will make an 25-56, whereas the 10-22 will make an 16-35.
So I guess I'll be happy with that...
But I'll wait perhaps till christmas or a beginning 2005, because I normally don't shoot much in winter (and there's still some money to spend for family and house till the end of the year... wife told me that the cam should absolutely NOT interfere with 'serious' expenses) and waiting 6 months will perhaps brings a new firmware where the biggest errors (perhaps there are none) will be corrected...

[evilenglishman]

Accept it, the 20D is the new baby in the playpen and it looks to be what everyone has been asking for.

I don't think its what people have been asking for.
Who actually wants EF-s??
sure they promise cheaper and smaller lenses but the lenses they are offereing aren't cheap at all.

[Jesper]

Accept it, the 20D is the new baby in the playpen and it looks to be what everyone has been asking for.

I don't think its what people have been asking for.
Who actually wants EF-s??
sure they promise cheaper and smaller lenses but the lenses they are offereing aren't cheap at all.

Who wants EF-S? Well, Nikon makes lenses that fit only on their 1.5x crop factor cameras, Sigma makes DC lenses which fit only on cameras with APS-sized sensors, and maybe other manufacturers do it as well. Canon's first priority is selling things, so if their competitors do something that sells well, ofcourse they're also going to do it.

EF-S lenses will be cheaper than full-frame EF lenses, because less of that expensive, special glass is needed to produce them.

It looks like the 1.6x crop factor is going to stay for the next few years at least and as long as there are also wide angle lenses such as the EF-S 10-22mm, there should not be much to complain about with regard to the the crop factor.

[charlesu]

Haven't you read the details? The 20D is groundbreaking even if it's not a pro camera. Holy cow, I am first in line at my dealer even though I am shooting a Mk II. I need a good backup and the 20D is it!!

You might be right about new lenses and yet another new body. I suspect the 1Ds Mk II is coming for photokina. Canon released this now to have some kick ass sales in the Christmas selling season which begins (at least in the United States) in September. They're actually about a month late getting inventory in place (assuming 9-20 shelf date).

This thing is gonna rock.

I wonder if we will see a replacement for the 100-400 IS. I just ordered one even though I have been thinking it was due to be replaced. <sigh>

[evilenglishman]

Haven't you read the details? The 20D is groundbreaking even if it's not a pro camera.

In what way?

[evilenglishman]

EF-S lenses will be cheaper than full-frame EF lenses, because less of that expensive, special glass is needed to produce them.[/quote]

The 10-22 lens is not inexpensive!!!

[charlesu]

Haven't you read the details? The 20D is groundbreaking even if it's not a pro camera.

In what way?

OK if you haven't read the press releases, then you need to. The performance and features at the price are amazing. If you have read the press releases and you disagree, well that's your choice.

Perhaps you think Nikon has something comparable? Olympus? Fuji? Kodak? I'm running out of digicam companies. Hmm, Sony? Casio? HP?

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Frankly, I think Canon will be selling a BUNCH of these and not just to the amateur market. I think there are plenty of press photographers who will line up for a camera like this. Maybe not sports guys but the rest will love this camera. And at $1400????

[scottbergerphoto]

I read the review and specs on DPReview last night. The 20D appears to be almost a 1.6 crop version of the 1D Mark II. I am very interested to see what happens in the real world to noise levels with 8mps on the smaller sensor. That has been the main drawback of the 8mp P&S's at ISO's above 200. If I didn't have the Mark II, I seriously look at buying the 20D.
Regards,
Scott

[CoolToolGuy]

The timing of yesterday's announcement is all about Christmas, so that the retailers can stock up in time. Photokina is coming, and I think Canon will fill the $3000 hole between the 20D and the 1DMKII. Other new things for the pros and serious amateurs will also likely appear there.

Have Fun,

[evilenglishman]

Haven't you read the details? The 20D is groundbreaking even if it's not a pro camera.

In what way?

OK if you haven't read the press releases, then you need to. The performance and features at the price are amazing. If you have read the press releases and you disagree, well that's your choice.

Perhaps you think Nikon has something comparable? Olympus? Fuji? Kodak?

I have read the info, it seems the consensus is that it is only a minor improvement on the 10D. It also has flaws like a dimmer viewfinder. Either way not what I would call "groundbreaking".

As for other companies offering anything comparable - this camera isn't even out yet - in 3 months there could be something twice as better available.

[CoolToolGuy]

As for other companies offering anything comparable - this camera isn't even out yet - in 3 months there could be something twice as better available.

History has shown us that in 3 months Nikon will issue a press release announcing that their response will be available next spring. :wink:

Then there is the Minolta. Would anyone like to start bashing it?
http://www.minoltausa.com/eprise/main/MinoltaUSA/MUSAContent/CPG/MaxxumSneakPreview/SneakPreview

Have Fun,

[jbradc]

Sure there are improvements over the 10D but nothing earth shattering. I hope they will put a model between the 20D & the 1 MK II. Something with spot metering would be nice (hint to canon)

[Adam Hicks]

Evilenglishman I don't think you're being realistic. You mention it's big flaw of the dim viewfinder, but so far as I've seen that's only the opinion of ONE reviewer on a pre-release camera. I'd hardly use that as a basis for judgement.

For those of us who use custom white balance based on a grey card or any other means, we'll be sitting on JPG enjoying a really nice big shot buffer.

And to get a non-SLR high quality 8mpixel camera you're shelling out $1k for the Pro1. I think the price for the 20D is just right and the features are fantastic.

And what's the big deal about EF-S? If you don't want it, use other lenses.

Adam

[evilenglishman]

Evilenglishman I don't think you're being realistic. You mention it's big flaw of the dim viewfinder, but so far as I've seen that's only the opinion of ONE reviewer on a pre-release camera. I'd hardly use that as a basis for judgement.

For those of us who use custom white balance based on a grey card or any other means, we'll be sitting on JPG enjoying a really nice big shot buffer.

And to get a non-SLR high quality 8mpixel camera you're shelling out $1k for the Pro1. I think the price for the 20D is just right and the features are fantastic.

And what's the big deal about EF-S? If you don't want it, use other lenses.

Adam

Okay, it also has no spot meter (something quite a few people want).
from the LL review:
it takes multiple button presses and screen references to set mirror lock-up
the lack of a quickly visible ISO setting.
##Edit##
Also it appears to have a smaller buffer than the 10D
The battery grip you bought for your D30-D60-10D wont fit it and you will have to buy a new one.
##Edit##

The big deal about EF-s is that one of its prime reasons for being there is cheapness - we are assured by cannon that ef-s lenses will be cheaper but:
EF-S 10-22mm USM : £649
Sigma 12-24 HSM : £449
I would really like a 12mm canon zoom lens but all canon can offer me is either:
a 14mm L lens for £1500
or a 16-35 L lens for £1100

Both are expensive and neither go as short as I want. I find this odd when Canons main business is cameras and lenses. They have brought out a 10mm that can only be used on 2 cameras (how many camera bodies do canon currently sell?) - I am really hoping they will announce an EF version at a resonable price.

[Aylwin]

The timing of yesterday's announcement is all about Christmas, so that the retailers can stock up in time. Photokina is coming, and I think Canon will fill the $3000 hole between the 20D and the 1DMKII. Other new things for the pros and serious amateurs will also likely appear there.

This is exactly what I'm thinking! I guess my original thread title is missing a word: Should we all REALLY be THAT excited about the 20D?

Yes, the 20D is pretty good and is a worthy improvement over the 10D. In fact, I may even consider upgrading. I also understand the reasons behind announcing it early (with Christmas and all). However, I don't think it's all that groundbreaking or earth shattering. If I were Canon I'd save the best for last... or at least until Photokina. That's where I'd announce the real hi-end goodies. Besides, I don't think the hi-end buyers worry too much about whether or not it's available in time for Christmas shopping.

I, too, would like to see something in between the 20D and 1D MKII. If the price/performance ratio is right then many 10D owners will bite the bullet. As it is, the 1D MKII is just too much of a leap for most enthusiasts (who aren't rich). I'd also like to see a new flagship DSLR. I want to see something that'll make Nikon, Kodak, Fuji, Sigma and all the other wannabees scratch their heads and go back to the drawing boards.

That's not too much to ask, is it? :)

[CyberDyneSystems]

Haven't you read the details? The 20D is groundbreaking even if it's not a pro camera.

In what way?

OK if you haven't read the press releases, then you need to. The performance and features at the price are amazing. If you have read the press releases and you disagree, well that's your choice.

Perhaps you think Nikon has something comparable? Olympus? Fuji? Kodak?

I have read the info, it seems the consensus is that it is only a minor improvement on the 10D.

As often is the case.. your idea of a consensus is your own "Evil" opinion and interpratation and no one elses?

All the reviews I'm reading say this camera has the best balance of price and pro level features and performance of anything yet released.

Gone are many of the "hampering" features that Canon has maintained on there "Non 1" series DSLRs including slow startup times,. slow CF write speeds.. crippled AF etc...

This Camera looks like it IS the "Digital EOS3" that many have dreamed of IMHO...

I'm getting psyched thinking about those 8MPs on a tighter pixel density CMOS for small birds using a long telephoto!

Even better tight cropping than the pro level MkII (or 1Ds for that matter)

[CyberDyneSystems]

As for other companies offering anything comparable - this camera isn't even out yet - in 3 months there could be something twice as better available.

History has shown us that in 3 months Nikon will issue a press release announcing that their response will be available next spring. :wink:


Have Fun,
Yep.. Nikon will be typically late to the party with a release that mimics the advances of Canon's year (or much more) old designs.. :roll: :wink:

** cough D2H cough**

[CyberDyneSystems]

Sure there are improvements over the 10D but nothing earth shattering. I hope they will put a model between the 20D & the 1 MK II. Something with spot metering would be nice (hint to canon)

What would be "Earth Shattering?" Just curious?

Love the "Tyrell" quote by the way!

[jbradc]

Sure there are improvements over the 10D but nothing earth shattering. I hope they will put a model between the 20D & the 1 MK II. Something with spot metering would be nice (hint to canon)

What would be "Earth Shattering?" Just curious?

Love the "Tyrell" quote by the way!
Perhaps "Earth Shattering" is over stating it a bit :D
But I was really hoping for spot metering, 100% viewfinder coverage, more accessable mirror lockup and a quickly visible ISO setting.
Not big items but it's the small details that make a great camera. Even if the price were higher, I think these little "extras" are worth it.

[timmyquest]

No, I don't agree. Look what they did with the MK-II launch. Images and info leaked in exactly the same way. Accept it, the 20D is the new baby in the playpen and it looks to be what everyone has been asking for.

The differences between the 300D and the 10D were so minimal with a much differnt price for me at the time of my purchase.

The 20D is everything the 300D is not and it is an improvement apon the 10D. I am very excited for one. I dont think i really have it by football season but come basketball season i should be with the 20D. And that really is a good time with the added ISO performance (as they claim).

[CyberDyneSystems]

jbradc,

I definately agree on those items.. particularly the Spot Meter and ISO settings... (I have a large sticker that says simply "ISO" on the top of my 10D's flash housing to remind me to check it! I still forget)

I wonder if these are some of a certain little criteria that Canon has singled out to differentiate the "pro" 1 series from the Mid level series of DSLR...

It seems with these realitively small items.. as well as say refusing to double the RAM in the buffer, (I mean RAM is a lot cheaper today than it was when the 10D was released) ...are all just to maintain a visible "specs gap" between the 20D and MkII?

[CyberDyneSystems]

...Accept it, the 20D is the new baby in the playpen and it looks to be what everyone has been asking for.

The differences between the 300D and the 10D were so minimal with a much differnt price for me at the time of my purchase.

The 20D is everything the 300D is not and it is an improvement apon the 10D. I am very excited for one. I dont think i really have it by football season but come basketball season i should be with the 20D. And that really is a good time with the added ISO performance (as they claim).

Timmy,.. i think with this asssesment you have hit the virtual "nail on the head"

By comparing the 300D to first the 10D.. then to the 20D's specs.. this really further illustrates the size of the difference between the 10D and 20D quite astutely.

Rebel purchasers could see that by saving $500.00 they were sacrficing a "small" amount of speed and perfromance.. no image quality,. a few extra features,. and getting a free lens.

Many chose the Rebel,.. and with good reason.

But against the 20D.. that $500.00 is now buying a LOT more over the Rebels base sticker price... All the timings are massively improved (except RAW buffer limit :( ) Weight is closer,. image quality is (hopefully and realistically) improved, etc. etc. etc.

You now get a lot more milage on that extra $500.00, making the 20D a much more compelling extra $500.00 investment.

[evilenglishman]

As often is the case.. your idea of a consensus is your own "Evil" opinion and interpratation and no one elses?

There is no reason for personal insults

[CyberDyneSystems]

Sorry,.

I disagree with your interpratation of the consensus.. I don't see anything personal or insulting about the disagreement.

I'll try to be more gentle in how I voice (type) a disagreement in the future.

[MarkH]

EF-S lenses will be cheaper than full-frame EF lenses, because less of that expensive, special glass is needed to produce them.

The 10-22 lens is not inexpensive!!![/quote]

Ummm, compared to what?

From Canon the equivalent focal range when used on a full frame camera is the 16-35L, is the 10-22 as expensive as that?

[Jesper]

EF-S lenses will be cheaper than full-frame EF lenses, because less of that expensive, special glass is needed to produce them.

The 10-22 lens is not inexpensive!!!

Ummm, compared to what?

From Canon the equivalent focal range when used on a full frame camera is the 16-35L, is the 10-22 as expensive as that?

First of all the 10-22 is not an "L" so it's not really fair to compare it with the 16-35L. If it's really going to cost $799 it will be even more expensive than the 17-40L ! So yes, $799 is not inexpensive.

The EF-S 17-85 IS, which is more or less the digital equivalent of the EF 28-135 IS, is also not really cheap at $599, considering that the 28-135 costs around $400 (at B&H).

[CyberDyneSystems]

Assuming we can continue to get excellent quality image results from "less than 35mm sized sensors" as the 20D is poised to prove for us yet again.. than I still stand by my observations from years ago.. when Olympus announced the 2/3rds sensor.

The smaller form factor is the wave of the future. Smaller sensor = lighter less expensive glass and camera parts.

The hurdel is pixel density and image quality.

So long as these elements can be concurred.. then there is no compelling reason NOT to move forward with smaller lens form factors.

Funny that this one area where Nikon is actually ahead of Canon would receive any greif.

[Andy_T]

I don't think its what people have been asking for.
Who actually wants EF-s??


I think you should rephrase the question ...

Do you want to have EF only?
Or EF AND EF-S?

If these new lenses live up to their price tags, then it will not be bad to have a little extra flexibility.

Best regards,
Andy

[tofuboy]

EF-S lenses will be cheaper than full-frame EF lenses, because less of that expensive, special glass is needed to produce them.

The 10-22 lens is not inexpensive!!!

Ummm, compared to what?

From Canon the equivalent focal range when used on a full frame camera is the 16-35L, is the 10-22 as expensive as that?

First of all the 10-22 is not an "L" so it's not really fair to compare it with the 16-35L. If it's really going to cost $799 it will be even more expensive than the 17-40L ! So yes, $799 is not inexpensive.

The EF-S 17-85 IS, which is more or less the digital equivalent of the EF 28-135 IS, is also not really cheap at $599, considering that the 28-135 costs around $400 (at B&H).

You need to keep in mind that B&H is considerably cheaper than many retailers. When I was looking for places to buy my 28-135 IS, Kits Camera wanted around $600 for it. So in that sense, the ef-s 17-85 IS could very well be equaly priced as the 28-135 IS.

As far as the 10-22 not being an L, the specs for it makes it look like it is very close to L standards.

ef-s 10-22 info
Photographers will achieve consistently excellent image quality throughout the zoom range of this lens because of its 3 Aspherical elements and 1 Super-UD element in a 13-element optical formula. the EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM lens has the shortest minimum focal length ever offered for interchangeable lens digital SLRs with APS-C image sensors.

16-35L info
To meet the growing demand of digital SLR owners, this ultra-wide-angle zoom offers a broader view, fast aperture, and closer focusing down to 11 in. (.28m). The first EF wide-angle zoom to combine three Aspherical elements and Canon’s UD glass, the lens remains compact while providing superior image quality across its range. Constructed to pro standards, it’s also highly resistant to dust and moisture.

From that info, it looks like the optical quality of the new lens could rival that of the L series lenses. Will have to wait to see examples to be sure. Now maybe you're asking if it's so close to an L, why not call it an L? It doesn't make sense to make a 'pro' lens that won't fit a pro camera. That's just my opinion though :)

[TonyKInTexas]

There is more to a lens than just the elements. There is build quality and other aspects that neither quoted statement provides the details on.

And I would agree that nearly $800 is expensive for that lens, especially if it is not L glass.



You need to keep in mind that B&H is considerably cheaper than many retailers. When I was looking for places to buy my 28-135 IS, Kits Camera wanted around $600 for it. So in that sense, the ef-s 17-85 IS could very well be equaly priced as the 28-135 IS.

As far as the 10-22 not being an L, the specs for it makes it look like it is very close to L standards.

ef-s 10-22 info
Photographers will achieve consistently excellent image quality throughout the zoom range of this lens because of its 3 Aspherical elements and 1 Super-UD element in a 13-element optical formula. the EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM lens has the shortest minimum focal length ever offered for interchangeable lens digital SLRs with APS-C image sensors.

16-35L info
To meet the growing demand of digital SLR owners, this ultra-wide-angle zoom offers a broader view, fast aperture, and closer focusing down to 11 in. (.28m). The first EF wide-angle zoom to combine three Aspherical elements and Canon’s UD glass, the lens remains compact while providing superior image quality across its range. Constructed to pro standards, it’s also highly resistant to dust and moisture.

From that info, it looks like the optical quality of the new lens could rival that of the L series lenses. Will have to wait to see examples to be sure. Now maybe you're asking if it's so close to an L, why not call it an L? It doesn't make sense to make a 'pro' lens that won't fit a pro camera. That's just my opinion though :)

[Persian-Rice]

I agree that the 20D is an improvement, obviously Canon won't put out a new camera yet just change the badge.

Groundbreaking? in one word..........NO.
If you want to really break it down in terms of final image, other then less noise and a little larger image, everything seems to be the same. Startup time is an annoyance rather then a quality issue. Buffer size is an improvement, fps is slightly better. Other then that, it's pretty much the same camera.

The 20D is a great Camera because the 10D is a great camera. IMO, not worth the extra price tag. I guess it will be worth it when the price drops a couple hundred bucks. At the end of the day, if you do a side by side comparison, the pictures will most definitely look almost exactly the same.

[MarkH]

I agree that the 20D is an improvement, obviously Canon won't put out a new camera yet just change the badge.

Groundbreaking? in one word..........NO.
If you want to really break it down in terms of final image, other then less noise and a little larger image, everything seems to be the same. Startup time is an annoyance rather then a quality issue. Buffer size is an improvement, fps is slightly better. Other then that, it's pretty much the same camera.

The 20D is a great Camera because the 10D is a great camera. IMO, not worth the extra price tag. I guess it will be worth it when the price drops a couple hundred bucks. At the end of the day, if you do a side by side comparison, the pictures will most definitely look almost exactly the same.

I agree completely here. I think that the 20D sounds good and is a good development from the 10D. Canon have put in some wizzy features that are a waste of time, but have also made some good improvements.

I think that the faster startup is a nice improvement, not groundbreaking.

The buffer size is unchanged, but the buffer handling has been drastically altered to give a big increase in number or frames in JPG. I would like to know how well this system works with RAW though - as in: If you take 1 or 2 RAW shots per second, how long before the camera makes you wait with a busy message. But for fast action you can use JPG and get 5 fps for over 20 frames, very nice Canon!

Going to 8MPix while maintaining image quality is a nice evolution, not groundbreaking but well done from Canon.

Better AF with a new system tuned to the new digital camera (rather than adapted from one of their film bodies), sounds good and hopefully will get good reviews if it works as well as they claim.

Canon have evolved the 10D quite nicely into the 20D, but nothing groundbreaking and I am not yet convinced that it is really worth me selling my 10D since my needs are meet quite well at the moment. I rarely miss stuff due to the slow startup (I keep the camera on whenever it is out of the bag). The buffer handling on the 10D is poor, but with 9 frames available before the buffer needs handling (even with RAW) I rarely have to wait for the camera to slowly walk the data to the card, so no biggie. I find 3 fps meets my needs quite well, I can't see myself buying a new camera to bump it up to 5 fps. I have no complaints about AF on my 10D, so no need to replace it on that basis. E-TTL II sounds good, but over 98% of my photos are available light, I don't use my 550EX enough to buy a new camera for better auto settings.

I'll read all the reviews and maybe next year if I could get a good price for my 10D I'll consider trading up, but I'm not champing at the bit to rid myself of my 10D at the moment.

[RDKirk]

The timing of yesterday's announcement is all about Christmas, so that the retailers can stock up in time. Photokina is coming, and I think Canon will fill the $3000 hole between the 20D and the 1DMKII. Other new things for the pros and serious amateurs will also likely appear there.

Have Fun,

That might have been true if Canon were not calling the 20D "the camera for professionals who purchase their own equipment" and specifically calling it a camera for "wedding photographers" and "photographers at small newspapers."

They think it's the EOS-3D.

[RDKirk]

The 20D is a great Camera because the 10D is a great camera. IMO, not worth the extra price tag. I guess it will be worth it when the price drops a couple hundred bucks. At the end of the day, if you do a side by side comparison, the pictures will most definitely look almost exactly the same.

The 10D cost just as much up until a couple of months ago. It was a great camera then, wasn't it? So the 20D will cost the same this September as the 10D did last September...maybe even a bit less.

What do we get for no more money? A more reliable shutter. More accurate focusing. A battery grip that takes AA cells. A 250v sync circuit (toss the Wein Safe Sync). Faster and more JPEGs. Probably as many RAW--not to mention CR2 like the "big boys." Slightly higher flash sync.

No, it's not ground breaking--BUT IT'S THE SAME PRICE. It didn't even have an inflationary increase. Should current 10D users buy it? Probably most shouldn't, unless it fixes things particular people disliked about the 10D. I don't think Canon expects 10D owners to buy it--auto dealers don't expect their customers to buy a new car every model year.

But I think Canon does expect to woo some mid-range pros away from Nikon and Fuji, as well as keep the 10D customers who needed to buy a new camera for other reasons.

[RDKirk]

evilenglishman>>Who actually wants EF-s??<<

Anyone who wants to get down to 10mm with the 1.6x format. Canon is not going to release a regular EF lens that does it--for some good reasons. They probably CAN'T produce one that short that covers the full 24x36 format, and the "L" designation must necessarily be usable on their 1D cameras.

I'm not interested in their EF-S offerings so far, but I hope they're not so wedded to zooms that they can't put out a 10mm or 12mm f2.8 prime, as Nikon has done with their DX series (which also doesn't cover the full 24x36mm frame).

What's the point of griping about EF-S? It's the only way to get to 10mm on the APS-C format.

[roanjohn]

I have finally settled down from all the 20D HOOPLA........whew........and sat down to evaluate my options, here they are:

With the 10D prices going down..............I might just consider buying a used 10D (for less than a thou) and a really good glass..............

.................or maybe just a 35 f1.4 :-)

Here are my arguments against the 20D:

I don't shoot sports............so 5 fps will probably not affect me much.

I miss a few shots here and there because of slow start-up time.........but is it really worth an extra 500 USD?? I think not.

So the noise is lower at iso 800 and 1600...........with a good fast prime (i.e 35 f1.4) high iso noise should not be a problem.

9 point AF...........hmmm...........it sounds good and the reviews have been very good...........but is it really THAT good??...........

..........what else??

So the flash sits higher.........it also does that on the Rebel.

It's black............. :twisted:

.............I'm just thinking out loud here.......I might end up buying it when it comes out...

Who knows?? Photography is instinctual...........

Ro1

[Aylwin]

Well, I'm definitely getting a 20D. How can I resist this one very important feature: the Canon logo is now embossed. :twisted:

Seriously though, I'm still holding out until after Photokina. Who knows, maybe they'll announce a replacement for the 100-400L. That's the only lens I feel still missing in my small collection.

However, if I can get a good price for my 10D then I may upgrade.

[roanjohn]

Well, I'm definitely getting a 20D. How can I resist this one very important feature: the Canon logo is now embossed. :twisted:


OMG!!! :shock: IT IS!!!

Thanks for telling me!!! Now I have no choice but to upgrade.

:twisted:

Ro1

[RDKirk]

Well, I'm definitely getting a 20D. How can I resist this one very important feature: the Canon logo is now embossed. :twisted:

Seriously though, I'm still holding out until after Photokina. Who knows, maybe they'll announce a replacement for the 100-400L. That's the only lens I feel still missing in my small collection.

However, if I can get a good price for my 10D then I may upgrade.

I saw that it was embossed last Thursday when the first pictures came out. Actually, I'd call it engraving. I haven't seen engraving on a Canon since the FD days. Those were real cameras and lenses.

[kufel]

my only complain about 10D is AF, it's slow and 7 points are not enough for smal fast moving objects, it is difficult to have it covered while using auto point selection. I hope that 9 points will solve that but even if not quite - it's definitely faster. My question to Canon is - why the heck not to adapt EOS 3's autofocus system even without eye selection???? (I own EOS 3 as well and what a joy....). Too bad the viewfinder is not as bright as EOS3's as well... ... I know what to do - start the company to replace the back in EOS 3 with the one containing the sensor, lets say 1.3 x 8 MPIX, I'll take preorders, delivery - sometime next year. :)

[Persian-Rice]

I am obviously not sure, but I don't think the 20D will be that good for sports photography or photojournalism anyway, as is the 10D.........................

They have said there will be better AF performance and speed, but I highly doubt it will be up to par with the mkII or even the 1D. The 10D is very capable of shooting sports but not the same way a 1 series can. If anyone wants a truly highspeed system, the 1 series is the only choice.....

[blinking8s]

I am obviously not sure, but I don't think the 20D will be that good for sports photography or photojournalism anyway, as is the 10D.........................

They have said there will be better AF performance and speed, but I highly doubt it will be up to par with the mkII or even the 1D. The 10D is very capable of shooting sports but not the same way a 1 series can. If anyone wants a truly highspeed system, the 1 series is the only choice.....

i think the 1 series users might need to step out of this forum...lol cause you can bash just about any camera when compared to something in that class...I dont even look at the 1ds as an option...its out of my league and will be unless I choose to try photography out as a profession. And if I was a photojournalist the 20d would look like a swell choice to me...just cause I hate packing a 100lb bag to go to an event that I want to take pictures at.

now as for the AF being improved...I dont understand the tech behind it all. I just know my 300d is similar in AF to a 10d, and it sucks compared to an Elan 7n...

[danphoto1]

It really doesn't matter. Quality makes life a lot easier. I took great shots with the D-30 the D60 10D and 1D I will continue tho purchase the best products that I can afford after research resarch and more research so that I can shoot shoot shoot. I just purchsed the 28-300 IS Cannon lens and I love it. the range is incredible. 10d 20d it doesen't mke andy differnce you work what you've got and do the best that you can. On occasion I still use an Olympus 2100 2.1 megapixel camera with a Olympus 1.7 lens. It works great and I have some excellent boston Bruins hockey shots. When I can afford it I will get a MKII but for now I will use the equiptment that I have. I can't get excited because I know that in another 12 to 18 monts a biger better faster cheaper camera will be in the market :roll: :roll: :roll:

[Persian-Rice]

i think the 1 series users might need to step out of this forum...lol cause you can bash just about any camera when compared to something in that class...I dont even look at the 1ds as an option...its out of my league and will be unless I choose to try photography out as a profession. And if I was a photojournalist the 20d would look like a swell choice to me...just cause I hate packing a 100lb bag to go to an event that I want to take pictures at.

now as for the AF being improved...I dont understand the tech behind it all. I just know my 300d is similar in AF to a 10d, and it sucks compared to an Elan 7n...


Though I agree the 1ds is a ridiculously priced, we can look at Canon's other 1 series camera's. The 1D can be had for less then $2000. I think it is mutually agreed that the 1D is a lot more camera then the **D's.

The AF is pretty much based on the processing power and speed of the camera. Obviously the newer or better the technology the faster the AF. The 1 is perfect for photojournalism, though they are not instant they are darn close.

I think to be honest with myself, the 20d is on my radar. I held out to see if the 20d would be a slightly better camera then it is or to settle for a 1d if I can find one reasonable priced. Now its either a 10d with grip which I am confident I can buy for under a grand and buy some nice lenses. Option "C" is a 20d if it's being sold for a good price.

[drisley]

I think the 20D has many major improvements to offer over the 10D.
For example:
-larger dynamic range.
-lower noise at high iso's equivalent to about 1 stop over the 10D.
-even though the buffer is smaller for Raw, the rate at which it clears the buffer is BLAZINGLY fast compared to the 10D, upto 3.5x faster! :shock: The 20D is the fastest DSLR camera in the world when it comes to CF card speed, even faster than the MKII. This should more than make up for the buffer for most people (and I was one who initially was miffed at the small buffer).
-a much more accurate AF system than the 10D, upto 3x more accurate with fast lenses.
-the ability to use the flash as a low light focus assist lamp without the flash firing.
-MUCH improved low light AF accuracy, even better than the MKII.
-cleaner, more accurate focus screen.
-instant startup time
-ETTL II flash metering which is said to be a MAJOR improvement over regular ETTL metering, and is proven thus on the MKII

These are only some of the bigger improvements. Considering the 20D's price tag, I think it's a worthy successor to the 10D. If Canon included a much larger Raw buffer, spot metering, 1.3x crop factor, then they would lose some potential sales on the MKII. In addition, there may be another camera coming to fill the spot between the 20D and MKII. Just look at the G series. Canon came out with the Pro1, an everyone announced the G series was finished. Now they announce a G6!
I'm all for voicing your displeasure, as I have done so many times recently, but I guess nobody is forcing us to buy the 20D if we dont want to. I for one, however, want to, and will probably buy one when one becomes available.
:D

[phillcoe]

Guys, Guys....calm down. Ground breaking would be 11mps for 2,500 dollars! The 20D is just progress, nothing more.

I've just heard from my Canon CPS contact that the 1DS replacement will be available Jan/Feb 2005, so sounds like a Photokina launch afterall as not many will be ending up in peoples chritmas stockings!!!!

[danphoto1]

Well I'm glad that Canon keeps making new cameras but I can't afford to keep buying them. Eventually they will make a camera with so many megapixels the the photos won't look realistic and all the lens will show so type of noticable distotion no mater how good they are. I tend to besatified untill I have a real need for a new camera. I think that I will go for the MKII or somthing similar when it's time. i still have two 1D's and they are work horses for what i do.

8) 8) 8)

[Andy_T]

The 1D can be had for less then $2000. I think it is mutually agreed that the 1D is a lot more camera then the **D's.


You are right, and for sports shooters, there is no way the 20D can beat a used 1D, even if it is a bit less expensive. You will *not* find a new 1D for that price.

I'm pondering this decision myself, and I'm now leaning very much towards the 20D for the following reasons:

- significantly better low light capability
- twice the resolution
- ETTL2

Best regards,
Andy

[danphoto1]

One other thought I have a 10D but the files from the 1D are about the same size because of the sensor size. there is signifacantly more information in each pixel. Also because the 1D is a Cmos sensor it is sharper because it require less noise reduction.


dan :o 8) :shock: :D

[PacAce]

One other thought I have a 10D but the files from the 1D are about the same size because of the sensor size. there is signifacantly more information in each pixel. Also because the 1D is a Cmos sensor it is sharper because it require less noise reduction.


dan :o 8) :shock: :D

Did you mean CCD instead of CMOS for the 1D sensor? Also, if you're shooting RAW (actually, I guess it wouldn't matter if it's RAW or JPEG), how can you have more info per pixel on the 1D than you can on the 10D? Or did I misinterpret what you were trying to say? :)

[Jesper]

Well, I'm definitely getting a 20D. How can I resist this one very important feature: the Canon logo is now embossed. :twisted:


OMG!!! :shock: IT IS!!!

Thanks for telling me!!! Now I have no choice but to upgrade.

:twisted:

Ro1

Yes, on the EOS 30/33(v) (Elan 7((N)E)) it's also embossed. Much nicer than the cheap stamped logo on the 10D !!! :roll: :P

[Jesper]

Though I agree the 1ds is a ridiculously priced, we can look at Canon's other 1 series camera's. The 1D can be had for less then $2000. I think it is mutually agreed that the 1D is a lot more camera then the **D's.

The 1D is not automatically better for everybody than a **D camera. For example, I rarely shoot action things, I have no need for a camera as fast as the 1D or 1D Mark II. I'd rather have a 20D with 8MP instead of an 1D with 4MP. Even if someone would give me an 1D for free I'd sell it and get a 20D.

[roanjohn]

I'm still waiting on Nikon's response to all these. Thier D100 is due for an upgrade..........and it will have to trump the D70 by a huge margin.

.............waiting...........

Ro1

[Jesper]

Pseudo-10D, 17-40 f4 L, 70-200 f4 L, 550 EX, 50 f1.8, 85 f1.8, G3, S400.

Pseudo-10D ..... :lol:

[danphoto1]

If each pixel is larger that each pixel should have more information. 20d 10D 1.6 multilpier ore smaller CMOD ie less area mass 1D 1.3 multiplier larger area mass. therfore more information within that area even with les pixels. Also I have shot numerous weddinges and events with 1D and it has worked out very well. another way to look at it is prosumer camera 8 mp cmos thumbnail size pixels all sqeezed together. I only know that if it's Canon it's usually good


Dan

[Jon]

If each pixel is larger that each pixel should have more information.

No. It just has a larger area with which to collect light. Same as film, really. High speed film uses larger grains, so there's more chance of photons affecting the silver. The larger the photoreceptor cell, the more photons it's going to collect - but you won't be able to get any more detail from a single photoreceptor cell on a D30, or on a 1D Mk II than from a single photoreceptor cell on a 20D. Just 8-12 bits of brightness level (depending on whether you're shooting Jpeg or raw).

[Persian-Rice]

Though I agree the 1ds is a ridiculously priced, we can look at Canon's other 1 series camera's. The 1D can be had for less then $2000. I think it is mutually agreed that the 1D is a lot more camera then the **D's.

The 1D is not automatically better for everybody than a **D camera. For example, I rarely shoot action things, I have no need for a camera as fast as the 1D or 1D Mark II. I'd rather have a 20D with 8MP instead of an 1D with 4MP. Even if someone would give me an 1D for free I'd sell it and get a 20D.

Completely agree that the 1D is not suited for everybody. It's a trade-off really, with a 1d you get a far better range of features. As with the 20D you get newer technology and many more MP. What really got me going was that the 20d is being pushed towards photojournalists and wedding photographers. I am not really familiar with the needs of a wedding photographer, but the 1d even being several years older then the 20d is still a better camera for the specific needs of photojournalism.

It's really a marketining tactic if anything. They are trying to give the image of a pro camera to a regular consumer/amateur camera. Branding the camera as a camera geared and created for pro's is somewhat misleading. Because well all know, including Canon, that there is a better EOS system for that use at a similar price. If they geared it towards portrait and lanscape photography, my reaction might have been a little less umm confused.

Cheers.

[RDKirk]

>>Though I agree the 1ds is a ridiculously priced, we can look at Canon's other 1 series camera's. The 1D can be had for less then $2000. I think it is mutually agreed that the 1D is a lot more camera then the **D's. <<

The initial press release for the 20D said it was a camera "for professionals who purchase their own equipment."

IOW, Canon prices the 1D for corporate purchases, not individuals.

[RDKirk]

>>Though I agree the 1ds is a ridiculously priced, we can look at Canon's other 1 series camera's. The 1D can be had for less then $2000. I think it is mutually agreed that the 1D is a lot more camera then the **D's. <<

The initial press release for the 20D said it was a camera "for professionals who purchase their own equipment."

IOW, Canon prices the 1D for corporate purchases, not individuals.

[Persian-Rice]

I'm talking in terms of a used camera, its very hard to find a new 1d, possible, but hard. Even after that fact, professionals who buy their own equipment still predominantly buy 1 series camera's over a **D if they buy a Canon.............

In reality, not even pro's always need a 1 series camera, but in specific fields its not a luxury its a necessity. RD as I mentioned before your post, Canon is really pushing th envelope by saying its geared toward pro's. If it was, it would priced higher and would have some better features.
It's just a marketing tactic to give confidence to the average consumer to think that they are buying pro, which translates to luxury, at entry level prices.

Put it this way, they are trying to sell a Honda Civic but advertise that it's to an M3. Thats all I am saying.

[roanjohn]

Canon is really pushing th envelope by saying its geared toward pro's.

Put it this way, they are trying to sell a Honda Civic but advertise that it's to an M3. Thats all I am saying.

For a PRO-sports photographer, a 1 series is the minimum.

For a PRO-wedding photographer, a 20D w/ 8 mp, 0.2 sec start-up time, 5 fps, 9 AF point and 1/8000 max shutter should be sufficient. Plus, it is lighter with low S/N ratio.

There are different type of PROs in this business.

Ro1

[Rayz]

Should we be so excited about the 20D? Absolutely! The improvement of the 10D over the D60 was not great enough to persuade me to buy a 10D. The improvement of the 20D over the 10D is clearly greater than the improvement of the 10D over the D60.

The improvement of the 20D over the D60 is so huge, upgrading becomes a no-brainer.

I'm one of those fortunate owners of a D60 who can get very, very, extremely excited about the 20D :D .

[JX]

The D20 is a logical upgrade from the D10. It only follows that Canon would incorporate the technology from the Mark II to the D10. I agree with Aylwin. He said: “Photokina is just around the corner. Why would Canon jump the gun and present their finest achievement in advance? “ I think there is more to come. The most logical would be an upgrade to the Canon EOS 1DS.

[Rayz]

b][/quote] I think there is more to come. The most logical would be an upgrade to the Canon EOS 1DS.[/quote]

Of course there's more to come. There always is. That's bleeding obvious. But there won't be more to come, for a while, at $1500 for a DSLR, from Canon.

[Persian-Rice]

Roanjoan, I guess you missed my previous post to that. I really don't know the requirements of a wedding photographer. I was generally speaking in terms of photojournalism and sports.

But from what I do know, the 20 does seem well suited for a wedding as it can handle lower light a little better for indoor use.

As I said, not every pro needs a 1 series, but many do.

Cheers.

[JX]

RayZ Wrote:
Of course there's more to come. There always is. That's bleeding obvious. But there won't be more to come, for a while, at $1500 for a DSLR, from Canon.

Ray, please read before you react. The discussion thread opened questioning the timing of the unveiling of the 20D. With “Photokina show in just four weeks (September 28 to October 3). Why would Canon announce the D20 before the show?

I am puzzled by the reaction to the 20D. The 20D in reality is not a major advance in digital technology. Canon merely took the new technology it developed from the Mark II and upgraded the D10.

[Tom W]

Ray, please read before you react. The discussion thread opened questioning the timing of the unveiling of the 20D. With “Photokina show in just four weeks (September 28 to October 3). Why would Canon announce the D20 before the show?

I am puzzled by the reaction to the D20. The D20 in reality is not a major advance in digital technology. Canon merely took the new technology it developed from the Mark II and upgraded the D10.

I think Canon's timing has something to do with having something on the shelf and ready to sell, maybe even at Photokina. Imagine visiting the Canon booth and walking away with a new camera. They might well have a stack of them just waiting there.

(I confess that I'm not at all familiar with the layout of the show - it may not even have retail possibilities).

As for the reaction, the 20D is exciting, as are all new products. I was pretty excited when the 1D Mk II came out as well, though I had no intentions of buying one. Same with this camera, but its great to see things advance.

[timmyquest]

The initial press release for the 20D said it was a camera "for professionals who purchase their own equipment."

IOW, Canon prices the 1D for corporate purchases, not individuals.

I'm sick of people telling me or others that buying "this" or "that" is stupid because it's for "profesionals".

I'll buy whatever i please for whatever reason i want.

If i want to buy a 750hp Winston Cup NASCAR then i'll do it.

[JX]

TomW:[/quote]As for the reaction, the 20D is exciting, as are all new products. I was pretty excited when the 1D Mk II came out as well, though I had no intentions of buying one. Same with this camera, but its great to see things advance.


I just guess I am getting old. I remember being excited when the Nikon F3 came out. I went right out and bought one. At the time I had 2 Nikon F2s. I thought it was a bid deal that that the motor drive could take 3 frames per second. :lol:

[gerolamo]

I am puzzled by the reaction to the 20D. The 20D in reality is not a major advance in digital technology. Canon merely took the new technology it developed from the Mark II and upgraded the D10.[/quote]

Of course it's not a major advance in technology. I didn't expect it to be. They are using the high end pro cameras to promote such advances, and it is normal to do this.

What are you guys complaining about the 20D so much?
form factor?
buffer?
It's not a MarkII guys. If you read the old posts, before it was announced, some were actually expecting all the features that would make a Mark II. And then were upset that it didn't have them.
Come on.
The 10D's advantage over Rebel was so much less... that Canon had to program in Rebel software limitations.

Now you have a camera that is closer to MarkII than to 10D. If they would have made it any closer they would have to just rename it Mark I 1/2

And the form factor... For all I care they can make it 5x, if they can improve the photo quality while doing it. And if they can make good macro lenses for it ... ;)

[danphoto1]

You guys are all nuts. the 20D is an improvement and you can bet the the think tank at Canon already is working in the next prototype. I was just at tne Canon Seminar in July at the New England Camera Club conference. Guess what the Reps were pushing the digital rebel and the 10D They absolutely were working on cleaning out the shelves of as many 10D's as possible. There was no mention of any new camera and the questions posed to them were politely not answered. I find it hard to beleive that they didn't know about the 20D then in July. It's all business and profit and nothing more. The 10 D is still a good camera and the old 1D is still a good camera. sooner or later we're all going to run out of cash and then Canon Nikon & Olympus will all have to slow down. They control prices and what is made available to us. I bet we are all being spoon fed a little at a time. I don't mind but that's good old capitalizim and free enterprise. I'll get a new camera in my time.

[Belmondo]

I stopped at Keeble and Schuchatt today. They're a large pro camera shop in Palo Alto,California. The salesperson I was talking to was telling me he's recently played with a 20D for a couple hours. It was a pre-production unit brought in by their Canon rep.

He owns a Mk II as his personal shooter, but is really considering the 20D as a backup. He said he was quite impressed with it, and feels it is a substantial improvement over the 10D, although time didn't allow for discussion in any greater depth. I asked him if they'd kept any test shots, and he said they had not.

Anyway, he said they already have an impressive waiting list, and that's in just a week. Apparently it's being well received by their customers.

[Rayz]

RayZ Wrote:
Of course there's more to come. There always is. That's bleeding obvious. But there won't be more to come, for a while, at $1500 for a DSLR, from Canon.

Ray, please read before you react. The discussion thread opened questioning the timing of the unveiling of the 20D. [/b]

Quite right! I forgot :) .

I see nothing sinister in this timing. Canon has basically got the market covered in the DSLR stakes, a camera for each need and pocket ... unless you consider the 300D out of reach.

There's no doubt the 1Ds is due for a replacement and it's a fair bet that this will be anounced at Photokina. It'll probably be 16 megapixels and unaffordable to most. If the 20D is ready before the show, why delay it? Is there any purpose served in having two cameras competing for the limelight :D ?

[RDKirk]

>>I think Canon's timing has something to do with having something on the shelf and ready to sell, maybe even at Photokina. Imagine visiting the Canon booth and walking away with a new camera. They might well have a stack of them just waiting there.
<<

Oh, hecks, yes. When you've been in R&D and pre-production for who knows how long, having spent oodles and oodles of money, the accountants and stockholders want to see a return NOW. There are forces pushing to wait--the programmers want more time to work out a few more kinks and squeeze in a couple more niceties, the assembly line foremen want a bit more training time.

But at some point they have to decide to let the non-critical bugs go, let the smaller improvements wait for the next model, let some of the larger improvements that Aren't Ready for Prime Time wait indefinitely, and GET THE CAMERA ON THE BLOODY SHELVES so it can start making money.

[Rayz]

and GET THE CAMERA ON THE BLOODY SHELVES so it can start making money.

Exactly! In any business, cash flow is critical. Unless you have very deep pockets, you can't spend 5 years developing the ultimate camera :D .