20d Vs. Rebel XT. Please Contribute.

[GoldFISH_no641]

So, I've been eyeing the RebelXT since day one. I've spent a good amount of time this past week reading various reviews and getting the low down on this new camera.

Today I decided to stop by my local Ritz camera to check out how it felt, and if it's size would be an issue. I was amazed that it didnt feel as tiny as I had worried it would be. Being new to camera's, but always having an interest in Photography to support my PhotoShop work I really had no idea what I was getting into. I'd be a fool to purchase from B&H w/o physically holding the camera, and I was impressed.

And then I asked to see the 20D and was completely blown away. The hardened exterior is definately comforting and the size was just perfect. The grip didnt feel too small or large, and the weight was not an issue. I'm in awe, it's a beautiful machine.

So, all the research time I've spent on the XT has been purged because I just had to take a glance at the notably "superior" camera, by opinon of many of the board memebers here. I'm starting over at square one with little to no information reguarding the feature-set and mechanics of this work of art.

In direct comparison of the two camera's, what are some things I should take important note of?

Are there any areas where the RebelXT excels greatly over the 20D? It would seem illogical for it to, because of price, but it is also the newer of the two models.

As far as I know the 20D is still a fairly new camera, so I'm going to assume that I wont have to worry about it becoming outdated soon. I'd hate to make such an investment to have to trade it in the near future.

These forums have been a godsend for information and I appreciate all the feedback I've recieved. Thanks again for the support... Keep at it ^^

--GoldFISH_no641, respek'

[Adam Hicks]

Sounds like you're convinced. Get the 20D. Otherwise you'll shoot the XT for a few months and sell it at a loss to buy a 20D. Save yourself the frustration :)

I don't know of any area it is superior. If you had tiny hands it would win. That's about it. The 200D is faster and better made... if you don't need the extra speed and larger buffer, you might not need it... but for the price difference I'd say go 20D and do it right the first time!

Adam

[mbze430]

There isn't anything I can think of that the Xt is superior to the 20D except the weight. Aside from that, the 20D is every way better than the Xt. The Xt button system, imo, is confusing and lack ergonomics.

I speak with experience of the 20D, since owning it since November. I personally have only maybe 10 hours on a Xt, but I find the menu very clumbersome compared to the 20D.

[roanjohn]

20D > XT

Ro1

[SDK^]

This a good comparison of the two cameras here - http://bobatkins.photo.net/photography/digital/eos_digital_rebel_xt_vs_20d.html

[evidence tech]

Goldfish, I have been having the same problem. Although I really like the 20d, I can't decide if it is worth an extra $500. I probably have changed my mind 100 times since Canon announced the XT. My problem is that while I am saving "extra" money to purchase a hig quality SLR, I talk myself into saving money by buying the XT. The next day, I talk myself into "digging a little deeper" to buy the 20d. I wish you more luck then I have been having.

[Dante King]

I started out with a 300D and went to a 20D and am very happy. To each their own, but the need to upgrade made the 20D a perfect choice.

[Pelao]

I have the 300D and feel that sometime soon I will want to upgrade. I will move to the 20D. While the XT is an amazing little machine, and it removes many of the 300D's barriers, I don't like the ergonomics of the XT. Simple.

One thing: you mentioned a little concern that your choice might be replaced and you would need to upgrade. I suggest you lose that approach or you are going to give yourself headaches and make your banker happy. If you purchase either of these you will be taking great photos for years, long after each one's replacement is in turn replaced. I suggest you only upgrade when the camera fails or when your current weapon is frustrating you in the type of photography you enjoy.

Rather spend that upgrade energy and cash on the best glass you can afford.

[robertwgross]

Are you a beginner consumer in photography? If so, move toward the XT.
Are you serious in photography? If so, move toward the 20D.
Are you on a tight budget? If so, move toward the XT.
Are you a stickler for technical details? If so, move toward the 20D.

---Bob Gross---

[mxride]

I ve been debating this same question. I bought the 300D for sports but with the XT being introduced with selective AI servo focusing in the creative zone I was already to buy an XT, until I tried the 20D sitting next to it. WOW! Could not believe how quick it was. I would have to believe that the 5FPS over the 3FPS has to be a big asset in any type of sports or motor sports photography. I now have to decide if the 5 FPS is worth the extra $500. I went home empty handed but hope to make a decision in the next couple of weeks.

[poke]

I have just ordered the 20D as an upgrade from my 10D. To me it was an easy choice, the 20D is the best in its range, both in ergonomics and functionality. I may not be able to utilise the camera to its fullest potential, but so what. I will grow into it.

The extra cost was a concern for me, but who wants to die rich when you can die happy :)... Besides, its just even more of an incentive for me to increase the amount of money that I make from taking photos with it.

[mxride]

20D owners- Do you feel the 5 FPS is a big advantage in sports photography over the XTs 3 FPS ?

[CyberDyneSystems]

I'll contribute the last few threads on the same subject... ;)
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=60387&highlight=rebel
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=60209&highlight=rebel
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=63076&highlight=rebel
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=58446&highlight=350D
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=61464&highlight=350D
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=61205&highlight=350D
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=59569&highlight=350D
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=58379&highlight=rebel

[Arsonist lolol]

I, like most others here, are going to go with the 20D. I constantly hear how well it was designed, ergonomics are supposed to be amazing. And it's bigger, which makes me feel more professional :) Bob made a good point, if you're leaning more towards pro photography then 20D, but if it's just a hobby and you're on a slight budget, then XT

Would you be buying from Ritz?? They're pretty pricey...wonder how their 20D price compares to B&H or 17

[liza]

Buy the 20D! I've been shooting baseball with it this past week and am simply blown away by both the speed and the image quality. You won't regret spending the extra 500 bucks in the long run.

[tpinchback]

The difference between 5 and 3 are huge IMO. I can get at least a 40 shot burst before the 20d slows down on me.

[Ronald S. Jr.]

here's a question...I wanna get a 20D, and keep my XT as a backup body. However, I need to have the grip on the 20D (2500mAh each AA's, for 6000 shots!). My concern is that the 20D, with the grip, will be too big to be comfortable with. Any chance someone can get a single shot of the 20D with a grip next to a XT with a grip? That'd be awesome!

[Ronald S. Jr.]

btw, I love my xt, and I think the tiny size is just awesome. I love a "light" slr.

[roanjohn]

Ronald.....your wish will be my command!!! Tonight.

Ro1

[JDrex05]

I love the feel of my XT (though i have somewhat small hands)
Other than size, the only advantage of the XT is if you are interested in Infrared photography, since the XT is much more sensitive to ir. I saw a test done and with an IR filter it took the 20D 15 seconds and the XT 2.5 seconds to get an equivalent exposure.

[NickyBlade]

lol... Just like Adam said! I sold my XT at a loss after less than two months and got the 20D.

[mebailey]

I got the XT to kind of reintroduce myself to SLR photography after a 20 year hiatus. The only thing I dont like about the XT/20D is the 1.6 FOV that costs us so much in terms of wide angle lenses. I am probably going to get a 5D instead of a 16-35 L so my 24-70 is really 24 on the short end. So back to the question I would consider the 1.6 FOV before buying either the XT or 20D. If you do alot of wide angle work and can afford the high $ a full view camera like the 5D may be a consideration. If wide angles are not important then get the 20D if you like more control, durability, and flexibility than the XT. The output of both the XT and 20D is similar under many conditions, IMHO.

[soupdragon]

The XT's diminutive proportions make it a hot favourite for those, like myself, who prefer to travel light.
I would be more than surprised if, when tested under identical controlled conditions, there was a discernable difference in final image quality between the two. Given the rate of obsolescence in the Canon line (or any other for that matter) I do not see, at UK prices, any point in paying an extra 40% just for a "bigger" camera.
Given that within the next 9-12 months there will likely be a price war (Canon vs Nikon) for supremacy in the "budget price 12mp slr" I would spend my money on glass and hang out for the 400 XT to hit the shelves.

Just my opinion though.

[jobber73]

There isn't anything I can think of that the Xt is superior to the 20D except the weight. Aside from that, the 20D is every way better than the Xt. The Xt button system, imo, is confusing and lack ergonomics.

Debating the flip side, I can't think of a single thing the 20D does that I needed to spend the extra $$$ on that the XT doesn't. If you don't need those extras, it looks like the money is much better spent on upgraded lenses from my side of the fence.

It's all about your needs.