10D or Rebel XT.........

[Alan Dye]

OK, I've decided to move my 300D (DReb) and I'm leaning towards 1 of these 2. I'm mainly looking for something that'll help with shooting indoor sports (Hockey and Volleyball). My landscapes and cityscapes seem to be fine right now. Both have the features I need and want.

I'm interested in the body only, as I have the lens I plan to use. (given that they are compatable with both?) They are the Canon EF 28-90mm f4-5.6, a Canon 75-300mm f4-5.6 and a Sigma 70-200mm f2.8 HSM (not sure if this one will work with the XT?). I will build off of these.

Right now I'm leaning towards the 10D. But the new DReb XT has peaked my interest. Whatever I purchase, will be my mainstay for quite some time. Which would you choose???

Thanks!

[Skip Souza]

Why not the 20D? $?

[Geeeyejo]

I have the 10D for about a month now. Couldn't be happier, fast, metal body, real "pro-feel" and great features. haven't held the new XT but the old rebel just felt too light in my hands...

[Alan Dye]

Why not the 20D? $?

Yea, A little out of my league. Once I sell the the Dreb, The 10D or XT will be more in my budget. Plus with any extra funds, I could put toward more lens.

[Skip Souza]

Gotcha. I believe the XT uses a sensor with lower noise and also has two more megapixels resolution. It is just plain further up the chain in applied technology. I was all set to pull the trigger on the XT when the wife convinced me to get the 20D and quit complaining. Happy as a clam. Like she said; "It's only money. We'll make more."
Remember you already have a good start on glass which is a never ending quest no matter what body you have.

[juneappal]

I would strongly recommend that anyone thinking about the xt go into a camera store and hold one for five-ten minutes. Shoot stuff in the store - change aperture and shutter speed between photos. I was totally satisfied with its feature set, but the small size made my fingers ache after about 20 sample shots. I am only 30, so arthritis shouldn't be kicking in so soon!
I know that money is, in general, better spent on glass, but I just couldn't picture holding this camera long enough to get the shots I wanted, so I dropped my glass budget and got the 20D.

[dsze]

10D... hands down. :) The 10D is a proven camera that is built to last. You'll get a less-noisy/high-ISO image with the XT maybe, but personally, I'd rather deal with the noise and have a better built camera. My personal feeling is also that the XT & 20D provide a less-noisy/high-ISO image by slightly softening the image. There are many who feel the same way. There are also many who will laugh at this and not care or strongly disagree. I'm sure enough though, that if you offered me $1500 for my used 10D right now, I wouldn't sell. (if I had enough saved for the 1dmkII, then I might consider it), but no way would I sell my 10D and get an XT or a 20D.... my opinion.

-daniel

[tim]

In your place i'd get an XT, subject to holding it myself first and liking it. The reason is for indoor sports you'll want to use a high ISO, and the XT is much better at high ISO than the 10D.

[tabrandt]

I think I am in the same situation. I currently use a DReb but find that for indoor sports it is a bit frustrating. I went to the local camera store and picked up an XT and played with it for a bit thinking about how small it felt in my larger hands. I then picked up the 20D and there is not comparison, I will save for the 20D. If it is a bit too much $$ like you mentioned above I would definitely go with the 10D.

Good Luck.
Tom

[Avalonthas]

go with the XT. newer tech, lower noise

[Alan Dye]

I've made a couple phone calls and plan on going to a local shop this weekend to try them both. I'm going to take my own lens to see which feels/handles better. Hopefully I can make up my mind???

[wavshrdr@airpost.net]

For me it was an easy choice between the 10D and XT or even the 20D. I have big hands and I still bought the XT. Definitely more bang for the buck! The money I saved immediately went into glass. One BIG plus for me over the 10D is the faster boot up times.

I can't tell you how many shots I lost because of other camera's slow boot up times. After having my XT for several weeks I couldn't be happier. Sure there are some things I'd change but for me it was awesome. 20D photo quality at a lower price. The savings paid for half of my 70-200 2.8 L lens.

So far I've used my XT with my Canon lenses of the kit lens 18-55, 50 1.4, 70-200 2.8, 100-400 IS, 55-200 Sigma, 18-125 Sigma and I couldn't be happier. The high ISO/low noise combo is hard to beat. A 10D just can't compete regardless of any allegedly build quality difference. I bought a camera to take great photos not marvel over its build quaility!

In 2 years there will be something better than my XT and by then a 10D won't be worth much at all. SO... my thought was to put my money in lenses which don't depreciate as much as cameras which suffer more from the BBD (bigger better deal) syndrome. Why buy and old design when there is no real reason to do so UNLESS you can get a deal on it to make it worth while or it won't do something the newer ones won't?

How many of you will actually keep a camera long enough to really appreciate the difference in build quality OR will you like most of us be looking at the new 40D (hypothetical) with 16MP, ISO 3200, 7FPS, internal camera IS and continuos shooting until our 12GB CF cards are full? Do you still want to hold onto until then? It isn't a Leica or Hasselblad! It is a relatively inexpensive camera by comparison. I am not married to my XT but realize it for what it is, a stepping stone until the make MY ideal camera whenever that may be. I don't always need more pixels but it is better to have more than enough than not enough.

If the 10D is YOUR ideal camera, then bless you, you need look no further! You have achieved your personal holy grail of digital photography. I OTOH am still looking for what I want but the XT definitely was a step in the right direction. Small enough to travel but still great photos. If I were a studio photographer then it might not be my best choice but what good is a camera if it is too big to carry with you. My XT with a kit lens or my Sigma 18-125 WILL fit in my jacket pocket and I can easily conceal it. I couldn't do that with the 10D or 20D! Buy what you like, whatever it may be and don't look back! 10D, 20D, XT are all good cameras but the real standout value is the XT. My original intent was to buy a dSLR and an additional decent lens for under $1500. I failed miserably at that. I pretty much doubled my intitial estimate of what I wanted to spend. The XT lured me into buying more and more lens to exploit its abilities!

[skyphix]

What are you more comfortable with? Afterall, you can't take effective photos no matter how good the camera is if you aren't comfortable holding it.

[dsze]

I can't tell you how many shots I lost because of other camera's slow boot up times. After having my XT for several weeks I couldn't be happier. Sure there are some things I'd change but for me it was awesome. 20D photo quality at a lower price. The savings paid for half of my 70-200 2.8 L lens.


- If you lose that many photos because of slow start-up time....why are you turning your camera off? When I know I need my camera on for something important, I don't let it turn off... the start-up time is almost pointless for me.

[size=2]How many of you will actually keep a camera long enough to really appreciate the difference in build quality ...

ME. If you really use your camera, then you will appreciate (or wish you had) the build quality within 6mos. Or, if you are shooting something like a wedding or other paid work where you don't necessarily have the time to spend on extra precautionary measures, you will appreciate the build quality in 1 Day!

Like I said, I wouldn't trade my 10D for an XT or a 20D even if you threw in $200 on top. Honestly, I'd keep my 10D.

-d

[wavshrdr@airpost.net]

I can't tell you how many shots I lost because of other camera's slow boot up times. After having my XT for several weeks I couldn't be happier. Sure there are some things I'd change but for me it was awesome. 20D photo quality at a lower price. The savings paid for half of my 70-200 2.8 L lens.


- If you lose that many photos because of slow start-up time....why are you turning your camera off? When I know I need my camera on for something important, I don't let it turn off... the start-up time is almost pointless for me.

[size=2]How many of you will actually keep a camera long enough to really appreciate the difference in build quality ...

ME. If you really use your camera, then you will appreciate (or wish you had) the build quality within 6mos. Or, if you are shooting something like a wedding or other paid work where you don't necessarily have the time to spend on extra precautionary measures, you will appreciate the build quality in 1 Day!

Like I said, I wouldn't trade my 10D for an XT or a 20D even if you threw in $200 on top. Honestly, I'd keep my 10D.

-d

Problem is leaving your camera on every minute isn't practical in a lot of my travels. I travel a lot in Russia and I can only carry so many batteries and so much equipment with me. Also when hiking through remote regions of Siberia it is best to not leave your equipment on as it is more prone to damage when turned on than off. SO...I leave it off until I am normally in position to shoot until I am ready. Unfortunately sometimes a unique animal presents itself and by the time my previous camera with 3 second boot up times woke up, the animal would be gone along with the shot.

If the XT or 20D is such an inferior camera quality wise, why did Canon deign to make it? Obviously they thought there was room for improvement or there wouldn't have been the 20D. It is not like the 10D is a some MK series. If quality is that important buy one of them. It is like agonizing the differences in mid-price level sedans when what you really want is a Lexus or MB. If you do pro work then buy a pro camera and not a prosumer camera.

If we look at this objectively there is a world of difference in how quickly technology marches forward in even a brief period of time. The 10D is using the older version of the Digic processor. That may or may not be very useful to you. It shots the same FPS as the XT but not for near as long. In many ways regardless of the allegedly better quality it is an inferior camera. Whether the areas where it manifests its inferiority is important is up to you to decide. It's not a bad camera but Canon does make better ones now. Just as in 1 year I am sure Canon will have a better camera for the money than my XT.

As for the extra cash and a XT or 20D, I'd take that deal and run if I had an 10D to sell. The market has spoken and people have unloaded their 10D's pretty quickly so if you like it so much, it's a great time to pick up a spare. It is still a good camera but even Greta Garbo and Tina Turner at some point couldn't defy the passing of time forever. Technology is even less forgiving...

[transcend]

They unloaded their 10ds for a 20d, not a digital rebel.

[wavshrdr@airpost.net]

They unloaded their 10ds for a 20d, not a digital rebel.

If you look at the software hack, the original DRebel becomes very close to a 10D in disguise. Look at the quality of the 20D photos vs. the XT and I bet you'd be hard pressed to see any differences in most photos if you could see any if taken under identical circumstances. I am not trying to gore anyone's sacred cow here but the 10D and original Rebal are very similar in many ways and the XT in some ways can replace the 10D while the 20D moved up a notch.

I don't worship at the altar of Canon cameras and I came into my purchase of the XT very objectively. I was all set to buy a 20D when I walked into the store and instead I walked out with an XT. I could have bought a 20D or any of the MK series, price wasn't a real issue for me. What swayed me was the excellent value the XT is and that I could have all that without some huge cumbersome body that if it was hanging around my neck in Moscow might last 5 minutes whereas in my pocket it will probably remain in my hand instead of some thieve's. 10D is a good camera but Canon did improve upon as a result they discountinued it.

[dsze]

Ok. :) I'll still keep my 10D.

-daniel

[Cobra351]

I was considering the 20D or the XT recently and finally went with the XT (along with a new 70-200 F4, all close in price to the 20D).

I'm a big person (6'3") and admit that the XT is quite a bit smaller, but it's not at all uncomfortable to me. I've had the camera for about three weeks now and have taken close to 1000 pictures, and I love it!

I figured, the way technology is rapidly moving, I'd be getting the 'newest and greatest' in about 1-2 years anyway. This will work quite well for me. I had planned on keeping my 300d for several years, and it's already my backup camera after not even a whole year!

I would strongly recommend though going and trying out an XT before you buy it, just to make sure you're comfortable with it. Just my opinion.

[z28quetzal]

Cobra351,

I picked up the 350 at a camera store the other day. They had a 300 there too, and the 300 'felt' better because of its bigger size. Just out of curiosity, does one get 'used' to the size of the 350 after getting familiar with the camera?

ANother question: the XT's shutter speed dial is much bigger than the one on the 300. Has this been better/worse? Or am I just being too picky?

Sorry for asking so many questions... I'm doing my research - I have narrowed my choice to the 350 - I wish I could get the 20D but I don't have the $$ in my budget for it...

thanks for any help...

joe

[Cobra351]

Cobra351,

I picked up the 350 at a camera store the other day. They had a 300 there too, and the 300 'felt' better because of its bigger size. Just out of curiosity, does one get 'used' to the size of the 350 after getting familiar with the camera?

ANother question: the XT's shutter speed dial is much bigger than the one on the 300. Has this been better/worse? Or am I just being too picky?

Sorry for asking so many questions... I'm doing my research - I have narrowed my choice to the 350 - I wish I could get the 20D but I don't have the $$ in my budget for it...

thanks for any help...

joe

I've had the 300d for close to a year and yes, the larger size is more comfortable. At first. Now that I've had the 350 for a few weeks I'm totally comfortable with it, I've adapted quite well. Before I bought it I too was quite concerned with the size and accepted that I'd likely have to buy the battery grip to be comfortable. Now that I've had it though there's no reason for the grip. I'm that comfortable with it.

The dial isn't a problem in the least. The only part I really don't care for (and this might be really picky) is that in order to change the ISO you need to select the ISO you want, then press the "set" button. I didn't have to do this with the 300d and I often forget to now press "set". I mostly change the ISO then start shooting, realizing only later that the ISO didn't change. I'm learning though, I still have enough intelligence left in me (barely!) that I can adapt to this.

Overall I'm extremely happy with the 350 and have absolutely no regrets over buying it. The only thing I regret now is waiting that agonizing week trying to decide between the 350 and the 20d, I wish I had just made up my mind sooner! Either way you go it'll be a new camera that you'll have to get used to, but I can honestly say the quality of the 350 for the price blows me away. I'm quite happy I went with it.

Hope this helps some, if there are any more questions feel free to ask.