1D or 20D?

[wibbly]

I've been offered a mint condition 1D inc a Canon 28-105 lens for the same price as a new 20D + 17-85 IS bundle would cost me. The only downside I can see on the 1D are less pixels and more weight. But I may get better overal pictures from the 1D anyway.

Anyone got any insights they'd care to share?

W

[Cadwell]

What are you shooting? If it's primarily sports then get the 1D, no question. If it's not sports or action photography then get the 20D.

[wibbly]

That's my dilema. I bit of everything. The 1D *is* pro camera (some paid £4K for it!), unlike the 20D. But is it a bit long in the tooth now? 4MP are better than the 20D if it does a better job anyway.

w

[Cadwell]

Well if it's just occasional sports shooting and you don't need the water/dust proofing of the 1D then I'd go for the 20D. By all accounts the 20D should be competent at sports work.

[sGu]

if you shoot mainly sports and news/reportage/photojournalism type of photography, 1D is THE one to go for.

If you can decide if that's your main area of photography, then go for 20D.

[wibbly]

Thanks all. I think I'd pass up the 1D 'opportunity' and go for the 20D when they have ones that don't crash all over the place. I'll get a warranty, easier option to return, and will then be able to reconsider later if needs be.

I guess I could resell the 1D and lose almost nothing, if I were to get that and change my mind, but that's prob more hasle.

W

[cmM]

I think you should look up timmyquest's indecisive 1D vs. 20D threads. He's gone through the same dilemma.

[timmyquest]

I think you should look up timmyquest's indecisive 1D vs. 20D threads. He's gone through the same dilemma.

Sure did...but look what i own now

http://www.questphotos.com/1d.jpg

That said, when i can afford a second body, perhaps by next summer, the 20D will be on my list (in part because i expect a replacement to the 20D around then).

The ISO noise of the 20D is simply jaw dropping, but so is the speed of the 1D. It may rain tonight at the football game, worry not say I for the 1D is nice and sealed.

[timmyquest]

I just got back from the football game, it rained the whole time. I think my bones are actually saturated. I was hydrated through osmosis.


Camera worked flawlessly. Ziplock over the 550EX with a rubber band and some electrical tape for the hotshoe.

It worked great the whole game (although on the last 2 plays the flash started to discharge on it's own, thats when i called it quits.)

Point is that this couldnt be done with my 300D or a 20D.

The lady who shoots the games with a D100 (nikon...not water proof) had her gear under a towl for most the game, where i had the confidence in a 1series camera in that my photographs and my gear was safe.

[Mark Kemp]

Another point to consider,

How big do you want the prints to be.

20d is 8mp and 1d is 4mp, so for the same number of pixels per inch the 20d prints are bigger.

So if you may want larger prints (say A3 or over) quite often the 20D may have an advantage. Not that the 1d pics would look awful, but the 20D should be better still.

[Persian-Rice]

There are Pros and Cons with both.

1D vs 20D

1D pros:
-Faster & more accurate AF
-Better FPS
-Better Build
-Build to last almost 4 times the life expectancy of the 20D.
-Water Sealed
-More metering modes.
-Bigger Sensor
-Well balanced, already has a vertical grip built in.
-1.3 crop for better wide angle.
-Better viewfinder performance.

20D pros:
-Compact and light.
-Built in flash. (Does anyone even use it? lol)
-Newer Technology...proccessing, metering etc etc.
-Superb High ISO:Noise performance.
-Cheaper
-Instant Startup
-EF-S Compatible
-1.6 Crop for longer zoom.

---------------------------------------------------------------

1D Cons:
-Size & Weight (user specific, many find it perfect)
-Substantially Less MPX
-Pretty old model, lacks some of the newer technology.
-More expensive, even though you will only find used ones.
-No built in flash(Its a pro camera.........get a dedicated one)

20D Cons:
-Size (user specific, IMO and in many others, its slightly on the small side)
-Slower in terms of shooting speed and accuracy.
-Lower life expectancy.
-Image quality & noise performance under lower ISO not quite as good.
-BG is an extra option.
-Darker viewfinder


All in all, the 20D, on paper and in the mindset of a "gadget freak", is a slight winner, because some of the new technologies. In terms of photography performance, the 1D is a winner. The 1D series are made with a pro in mind, so it will perform like a gem when it comes to being used what it's meant for.

The 20D is geared more toward the general consumer/enthusiast/amateur. It is a more convenient camera that will be faster and easier to work with.

In terms of what you want to do, in reality, you can cure the lower 1.3 crop factor with a longer telephoto, but you can't cure the problem of wide angles on a D series sensor, they only make lenses so wide.
Technically, since the 1D is faster, and can take better wide angle images, The 1D wins by a fair margin if you are looking for a true photographers camera.

Cheers. I am slightly biased toward a 1D, but the thing is, it is the better camera, at least in terms of photography. In terms of technicals, the 20D is obviously going to win.

[Malaxos1]

I would love a 1D but I am completley satisfied with the 20D. I recently went to a PPA meeting and was surprised to see that most digicams there were from Canon. One was a D Rebel and one was a 1D MkII. I didn't dee any 10Ds but I did see quite a few D60s. I was impressed to find out that these huys were all pros and were very happy with these non pro cameras (all but the 1d). I am also impressed with some of the people shooting almost exclusively with these non pro models, like Monte Zucker. I have done a number of weddings with the D60 and got very proffessional results, I just did my first wedding with the D20 and it was no exception. I know that these cameras are not aimed at the pro, but the 20D bridges that gap. At 5 fps ( I shot 70 photos yesterday in less than 10 seconds) this camera is more than capable of doing action. I think this camera looks like a 10D but shoots like a 1D...Dean Oh, 2,000 photos and not one lock up.

[wibbly]

There are Pros and Cons with both.

Nice summary. Thanks. I'd be comparing 1D & 20D both offered with lenses as per top post.

I think the 1D probably has the edge overall - all because it IS a pro body, but I'd feel the requirement to get another lens or more quickly, putting the price up. For the same ~£1500 in the UK, a 20D is bundled with the 17-85 IS lens (& a warranty) which will I suspect keep me happy for a while.

The extra pixels in teh 20D is, for me, a benefit to get more cropping possibilities. On the 1D to get a reasonably full 4MP image, the framing has to right on when I shoot - more lenses! Of course more lenes is one reason for getting a SLR in the first place, but I don't want to feel I need to buy more that my £1500 first of kit now. Especially since I was initially considering a D70 at coming on for half that, and decided it's moire issues would be a source of constant worry every time I took a shot.

And isn't it just amazing that this conversation is worth having at all!? A 20D non-pro solution and a $5000 pro-body announced 'just' 3 years ago. Shows how far and fast we've come.

W

[danphoto1]

For sports the 1D is still a better camera 8 frames a second with 20 fram bursts and It does focus very well. It is a difficult choice. I would opt for the 1D unless you want billboard size photos .

[wibbly]

For sports the 1D is still a better camera 8 frames a second ...

This is the popular wisdom. For sports. Less clear distintion for other types of photography.

W

[timmyquest]

For sports the 1D is still a better camera 8 frames a second ...

This is the popular wisdom. For sports. Less clear distintion for other types of photography.

W

Not really, not to me at least. If i didnt do sports photography it would be a no brainer if you ask me.

[wibbly]

Not really, not to me at least. If i didnt do sports photography it would be a no brainer if you ask me.

Even with
20D & 17-85 IS USM (new/under warranty) compared with
1D (second hand) with a (micromotor) 18-105?

I've no other glass.

W

[timmyquest]

Not really, not to me at least. If i didnt do sports photography it would be a no brainer if you ask me.

Even with
20D & 17-85 IS USM (new/under warranty) compared with
1D (second hand) with a (micromotor) 18-105?

I've no other glass.

W

I dont know anything of either of those lenses.

I need more glass, badly, but i really only have two lenses that i use. 50mm f/1.8 and the 70-200 f/2.8

I have a 28mm sigma, but it's a peice.

The 50 was cheap, and i use it all the time.

I just dont think an hobbiest who doesnt shoot action shots really needs a 1D and the 20D will give you better looking photos in some cases.

[Persian-Rice]

Wibbly, little off topic but just to add a point regarding the cropping advantage.
I totally agree, but one thing I have heard from several well know pro's, my Prof and several major photography related companies/agencies that I have contacted lately(Getty, AP, Time, Nat Geographic etc etc) shoot things properly through the camera the first time around.

Keeping that always in your mind, it helps you develop your style and technique. Though digital has created some ease for "fixing" problems, it facilitates bad habits and poor technique as well. So Keep this in mind, if you want to warm a picture up, use a filter if possible, not photoshop, want right composition? frame it and compose it properly.

At the end of the day, any modification you make through photoshop deteriorates the quality of the image no matter how you look it. Even worse, it can hold you back from reaching you fullest potential.

Other then that, the 8 MP of the 20D provides greater detail and is by far the largest advantage it has over the 1D.

Cheers.

[timmyquest]

Other then that, the 8 MP of the 20D provides greater detail and is by far the largest advantage it has over the 1D.


I disagree personally (did anyone ask though? :twisted: )

The only feeling of regret i've had over this purchase is the fact that the 20D is free of noise in what seems like all shooting situations compared to the rather high noise of the 1D

[Persian-Rice]

Other then that, the 8 MP of the 20D provides greater detail and is by far the largest advantage it has over the 1D.


I disagree personally (did anyone ask though? :twisted: )

The only feeling of regret i've had over this purchase is the fact that the 20D is free of noise in what seems like all shooting situations compared to the rather high noise of the 1D

Timmy, how do you disagree? print the same picture taken with each camera at anyhting over oh 8x10 and you will notice a differnce, though that would be to the the eye of a photographer, to a regular Joe, they would look the same.

[timmyquest]

you sais the largest advantage. To me it isnt the Largest, thats all.