20D will be good for how many years?

[OceanView]

I am about to purchase the 20D and was wondering how long could I realistically use this camera before I would want to get the next latest and greatest.
I hate to buy it and have a new model introduced within a year and make the 20D outdated.

Any ideas as how long we can really use this camera body?

[J Rabin]

Til the camera limits what you want to do with photography, not because new models come out. I know people using 1980s Canon SLRs. I still use my Olympus OM gear from the 1970s (less since digital). It's not a dispostable toy or a 18 month PDA. Jack

[Carzee]

It'll be cheaper sooner or later, its a law. Same thing applies to cars. For the price of a new car I could buy 2 similar used cars. For the price of a 20D body I can buy two 10D bodies...

Wrapping my head in tinfoil, I see that the new camera will still have a 1.6 APS size, will still be CMOS and under 16megapixel, but it will have better fps and writing due to Digic VR or something, better AF, and it will come with a 250 dollar rebate applicable to L lense line purchases only (because Canon want to sell more Ls) and it will have a neat IR-cordless remote shutter controller standard. Oh, the body price will be $100 less than the 20D body too.

[OceanView]

It'll be cheaper sooner or later, its a law. Same thing applies to cars. For the price of a new car I could buy 2 similar used cars. For the price of a 20D body I can buy two 10D bodies...

Wrapping my head in tinfoil, I see that the new camera will still have a 1.6 APS size, will still be CMOS and under 16megapixel, but it will have better fps and writing due to Digic VR or something, better AF, and it will come with a 250 dollar rebate applicable to L lense line purchases only (because Canon want to sell more Ls) and it will have a neat IR-cordless remote shutter controller wire standard. Oh, the body price will be $100 less than the 20D body too.

Your kidding right? or do you know something that I don't.

[tim]

The camera will perform for years, perhaps with a shutter replacement after 50K pics or so. The "upgrade urge" is entirely up to you. For me, the 30D would have to be a big jump to make me upgrade, but I wouldn't want to be more than one generation behind. I might even jump to the 1 series at some point in the future.

[Carzee]

Oceanview - you read it here first - thats all I can say for now...


Jack - I am selling the last OM-1n and a 24mm soon.. to finance more glass, which is the most important thing (more important than the bodies I think).

[MarkH]

I am about to purchase the 20D and was wondering how long could I realistically use this camera before I would want to get the next latest and greatest.
I hate to buy it and have a new model introduced within a year and make the 20D outdated.

Any ideas as how long we can really use this camera body?

5 Years.


I will replace my 10D in 3 years time, because it will have then been in use for 5 years. Hopefully by then the replacement to the camera that replaces the 20D will be out.


Yep, definately 5 years!


Don't question it, it's 5 years!

[Starfleet_EMH]

To me, it's not so much the latest in technology that drives me to a new camera, but its usability. I had my D30 for 3+ years and decided to upgrade to my current 20D because the latter was so much more practical in low-light situations, ie. higher noiseless ISO's and remarkably better autofocus. It was the best decision I made -- encouraged by my wife, too. IMHO, the 20D is as good as a camera can get in its price class, unless Canon would decide to sell the 1D Mark II at the same price range in a year or two. (Canon, that was a hint! :lol: )

Of course, you could wait and wait and wait -- always hoping for the latest camera. I'd rather shoot the heck of what I have right now and enjoy the learning experience ;).

I also fully agree with Jack: it's the person BEHIND the camera that takes good pictures, not the camera ;) . BTW, Jack: Hats off for still using your "analog" gear...

just my 2 cents.

EMH

[chris.bailey]

The trouble is that every new model has 'must have' features that promote upgrading. I had a Pentax Spotmatic for near on 15 years, a Super A for about 10 years, D30 for 2 years, D60 a year, 10D for 18 months.....

[Starfleet_EMH]

The trouble is that every new model has 'must have' features that promote upgrading. I had a Pentax Spotmatic for near on 15 years, a Super A for about 10 years, D30 for 2 years, D60 a year, 10D for 18 months.....

Wow, I think you don't need a new camera, but "professional help" :mrgreen:

j/k

EMH

[Wazza]

Some people are still using D30's, and they were released May 2000. That's 5 years ago. I would also imagine, the 20D would still be "usable" by then, but the megapixel count may look a bit ridiculous. It's quite a rapid growth with megapixels, it's measuring the total number of pixels (or really area of dots), and with a small gain in pixels width and height, it can dramatically increase megapixel size. Double the 20D pixels, and it is a 32Megapixel. Sounds crazy. It won't be tooooo long, before they're talking Gigapixel in consumer cameras. Of course, there already is a 1Gigapixel camera.

Keep up the good work Canon. :D

[Rob612]

I am about to purchase the 20D and was wondering how long could I realistically use this camera before I would want to get the next latest and greatest.
I hate to buy it and have a new model introduced within a year and make the 20D outdated.

Any ideas as how long we can really use this camera body?


IMHO, as long as it satisfies your needs (real or psychological, it doesnt really matter). It may be 3 weeks or 15 years.

[joeseph]

Had my D60 for three years, and only recently been questioning it's focussing speed.
(actually it worried me awfully earlier this evening thinking the shutter was sticking - Doh! mirror lockup = enable!)

it'll likely be always be a better camera than I am a photographer.

[Andy_T]

The camera will take the same crisp, sharp, natural color 8 MP pictures in 10 years that it takes now when you buy it. The camera is really not the problem.

The question is whether you will still be content with it.

There are people who are still driving a 1985 model car, and others who can't stand if a new model is released and they can't immediately dump their 2 year old model.

Best regards,
Andy

[O/confusion]

It'll be cheaper sooner or later, its a law. Same thing applies to cars. For the price of a new car I could buy 2 similar used cars. For the price of a 20D body I can buy two 10D bodies...

Wrapping my head in tinfoil, I see that the new camera will still have a 1.6 APS size, will still be CMOS and under 16megapixel, but it will have better fps and writing due to Digic VR or something, better AF, and it will come with a 250 dollar rebate applicable to L lense line purchases only (because Canon want to sell more Ls) and it will have a neat IR-cordless remote shutter controller standard. Oh, the body price will be $100 less than the 20D body too.

You're foil is leaking, there, chum--you failed to notice the Auto Skillset and Talent Update feature! :D

regards,
Terry

[O/confusion]

Some people are still using D30's, and they were released May 2000. That's 5 years ago. I would also imagine, the 20D would still be "usable" by then, but the megapixel count may look a bit ridiculous. It's quite a rapid growth with megapixels, it's measuring the total number of pixels (or really area of dots), and with a small gain in pixels width and height, it can dramatically increase megapixel size. Double the 20D pixels, and it is a 32Megapixel. Sounds crazy. It won't be tooooo long, before they're talking Gigapixel in consumer cameras. Of course, there already is a 1Gigapixel camera.

Keep up the good work Canon. :D

Yes, Wazza, you're absolutely right. But let's hope some people start to understand that all the megapixels in the world at one's disposal won't make a boring image look any more interesting! :)

regards,
Terry

[lmelendez]

But let's hope some people start to understand that all the megapixels in the world at one's disposal won't make a boring image look any more interesting!

That's sooooo true.....

I expect to be taking the same boring pictures with my 20D for many many years.... :) :)

6MP was a lot for me (with the DRebel), 8MP is more than enough.... with 32MP... I will have to buy new compact flash cards, new computer, etc, etc, etc...to process the same boring pictures...:):) ? ... no thanks!!!

Leo.

[Jon]

I am about to purchase the 20D and was wondering how long could I realistically use this camera before I would want to get the next latest and greatest.
I hate to buy it and have a new model introduced within a year and make the 20D outdated.

Any ideas as how long we can really use this camera body?

You've really got two different questions here. The easier one is your second, Any ideas as how long we can really use this camera body? for which the answer is "Until it dies, which should be (shutter life) somewhere around 50K exposures, but then the shutter's only about a $200 repair. So, quite a while."

The harder one is I . . . was wondering how long could I realistically use this camera before I would want to get the next latest and greatest. where we suspect the 20D successor won't be out for a good year or so, but then only you will be able to tell whether you "would want to get the next latest and greatest" at that time.

[dewmuw]

I am about to purchase the 20D and was wondering how long could I realistically use this camera before I would want to get the next latest and greatest.
I hate to buy it and have a new model introduced within a year and make the 20D outdated.

Any ideas as how long we can really use this camera body?

I have this same dilema with buying a car. Everytime I go to buy one a new one comes out. I reckon eventually they'll be making space cars so I'm going to stick with my penny farthing for now. ;)

[O/confusion]

The camera will take the same crisp, sharp, natural color 8 MP pictures in 10 years that it takes now when you buy it. The camera is really not the problem.

Right on, Andy. My two completely manual P****x bodies (bought new in the late 70's) are still totally reliable, durable, and competent camera bodies for film, and if not for a recent inheritance which has allowed me to buy into first-rate digital gear and finally get the kind of creative control I've always desired over the output aspect of my photography, they would still be my primary equipment today.

Of course it's good to have autofocus now that I'm hitting middle age and my manual focussing acuity is no longer what it used to be, but there's no way I'd ever be so deluded as to believe that I had wrung the last ounce of creative potential out of my old cameras. Often, the constant leaping onto the bandwagon whenever some new piece of whizz-bang kit comes along only serves to highlight the operator's shortcomings in terms of knowledge and mastery of camera technique, and unfortunately this--as has been seen here all too frequently--can lead to a lot of misdirected anger and frustration.

Unless you are in a position where your creativity, shooting skills, or output requirements have truly outstripped the capacity of your equipment, I personally am a firm believer in sticking with the tools you already have until operating them becomes so instinctive that you can spend the majority of your time concerning yourself instead with what ought to be the number one priority on any serious photographer's list: creating interesting, beautiful, or provocative images that will make people want to take a precious slice out of their limited allotment of time on earth to look at them and be moved in some way--emotionally, spiritually, or intellectually--by them.

Another good lens or two will probably be added to close up some of the gaps in my current lineup as funds become available, but I cannot identify any needs for my current image-making purposes that some other, newer model might be able to meet with any more capability than the camera I just bought; I'm sticking with my 20D for the long haul.

regards,
Terry

[Hellashot]

A replacement for the 20D can be out as soon as 12 months from now, but could be 18-24 months away or longer if Canon decides to settle down a little.

[cyclone]

The question is what features need to be upgraded in order for you to be dissatisfied with the 20D. Would more Mpix be enough? That will most certainly come. I personally would like to see an ultrasonic sensor cleaner like the Olympus Evolt and a built-in image stabilizer like the Minolta 7D. Would either of these make me upgrade in less than five years? Probably not for me, but everybody is different. If a built-in image stabilizer came out, economics might dictate that it would be cheaper to upgrade the camera rather than buy the xxx/2.8IS lens.

Cyclone

[OceanView]

Right on, Andy. My two completely manual P****x bodies (bought new in the late 70's) are still totally reliable, durable, and competent camera bodies for film, and if not for a recent inheritance which has allowed me to buy into first-rate digital gear and finally get the kind of creative control I've always desired over the output aspect of my photography, they would still be my primary equipment today.

Of course it's good to have autofocus now that I'm hitting middle age and my manual focussing acuity is no longer what it used to be, but there's no way I'd ever be so deluded as to believe that I had wrung the last ounce of creative potential out of my old cameras. Often, the constant leaping onto the bandwagon whenever some new piece of whizz-bang kit comes along only serves to highlight the operator's shortcomings in terms of knowledge and mastery of camera technique, and unfortunately this--as has been seen here all too frequently--can lead to a lot of misdirected anger and frustration.

Unless you are in a position where your creativity, shooting skills, or output requirements have truly outstripped the capacity of your equipment, I personally am a firm believer in sticking with the tools you already have until operating them becomes so instinctive that you can spend the majority of your time concerning yourself instead with what ought to be the number one priority on any serious photographer's list: creating interesting, beautiful, or provocative images that will make people want to take a precious slice out of their limited allotment of time on earth to look at them and be moved in some way--emotionally, spiritually, or intellectually--by them.




I understand what you mean but untill I get a camera that is truly equal on a 1 to 1 basis with a 35mm film camera (I think 16M pixel+) then I will have to buy at least 1 or more cameras until I get there. I don't want to spend $8000 for the 1Ds now but would want to wait till technology gets cheap enough so that pricing will be more affordable for the masses.

[Andy_T]

Well, if that is your requirement, then the solution is simple:

- estimate how long it will take for a 16 MP camera being available at your price point
- estimate how many photos you want to take until then and what it costs with film
- estimate how much value the 20D or 350D you could buy now will lose in this time

If the value loss is higher than what you think you will spend on photos, then stay with film.

Best regards,
Andy

[blue_max]

In reality, the next successor has probably already been made. It's just a matter of marketing, ramping up production and sub-contracting that is the deciding factor to when it is released.
I am sure that canon are probably working on the successor to the next generation by now. They have recouped a lot of development money by bringing out incremental changes to the models, just like computers.

The full frame ccd chip probably costs no more to make than a smaller one, but while you can sell one for considerably more, then why not do so.

We demand constant change and we get what we demand. While we effectively throw away the 'old' model, we fuel the upgrade fever.

Or am I wrong entirely?

Graham

[Andy_T]

The full frame ccd chip probably costs no more to make than a smaller one...

Not true, unfortunately. It's a lot more expensive, and the sensor is the single most expensive part of the whole camera.

Best regards,
Andy

[blue_max]

Not true, unfortunately. It's a lot more expensive, and the sensor is the single most expensive part of the whole camera.

Best regards,
Andy

I have no knowledge of such things – just assuming that low production and high development costs have made the larger one more expensive, the same way that memory is dirt cheap per megabite now, unless there is a lack of it. Compact flash cards were exactly the same cost for a fraction of the size not long ago, but they have doubled plus in size and remained the same cost.

Computers do the same. I paid rather more than I did today (even allowing for inflation) than I did a few years ago for a machine that was rediculously slower.

Nobody thought that digital cameras would be as good as film even five years ago.

If you strip out development costs, I would be interested to hear why a full frame sensor would cost more than a few pence more to produce. When there are a few competing manufacturers, you will see the price plummet (and you can quote me on that).

Graham

[Andy_T]

For digital sensors (just a kind of computer chip, actually), the production is very capital-intensive, takes a long time and is extremely sensible.

Simplified - out of a single wafer of silicium, you can cut either 4 reduced frame sensors or one full frame sensor. If you have an impurity (they happen in the process), you will have one unusable reduced frame sensor in a lot of 4, so you get 75% output.

The same impurity makes one full frame sensor (out of a lot of 1) unusable, so you get 0% output ... this results in exponentially higher costs for full frame sensors.

Best regards,
Andy

[jetli188]

I sold my 300D last week and wanted to buy the 20D.My regular camera shop told me to hold on until July,he was told to clear all his 20D stocks as replacement for the 20D will be out by then. Any one out there heard about this ?? :rolleyes:

[robertwgross]

Let me paraphrase the famous quote by Bill Gates and say: Define "good."

---Bob Gross---

[blue_max]

Yes Andy, I am sure they are having trouble at the moment, but as production ramps up, they will deal with it. Nothing changes. They moved up from very fine microchips to even finer microchips and again, you guessed it, at first it was tricky, but now they have many times surpassed it. If they can do it once, they can refine it. Supply and demand means it won't cost more eventually and these days that means sooner rather than later.

jetli188, The oldest trick in the book, keep the customer coming back and asking when the new one will be in. Anything to keep the interest and the opportunity for a sale and if it comes true, seem to be in the know. I doubt a camera shop will be the first to have this information. The ones I know are a joke. They have staff that have never even held a camera before (and I don't jest).

Graham

[OceanView]

I sold my 300D last week and wanted to buy the 20D.My regular camera shop told me to hold on until July,he was told to clear all his 20D stocks as replacement for the 20D will be out by then. Any one out there heard about this ?? :rolleyes:

Oh No!
Now your gonna make me wait till July.
I hope your right cause I would hate to buy the 20D and find out in a month or 2 that there is something new coming.

Anyone else know of any new models being introduced?

[blue_max]

Let me paraphrase the famous quote by Bill Gates and say: Define "good."

---Bob Gross---


Hi Bob, I don't know if you referred to my use of the word 'good', but I think they are as good as a film transparency scanned in by a drum scanner of a few years ago. I have a drum scanner that I used to scan Hasselblad trannies of (my own) and it sits in the cellar waiting for a tinker to come by. Nuff said.

Graham

(disclaimer – I may have been a bad photographer, the scanner may not have been very good, but did cost 11.5 thousand pounds! or I am a halfwit, all of which may be true).

[Phil V]

Yes Andy, I am sure they are having trouble at the moment, but as production ramps up, they will deal with it. Nothing changes. They moved up from very fine microchips to even finer microchips and again, you guessed it, at first it was tricky, but now they have many times surpassed it. If they can do it once, they can refine it. Supply and demand means it won't cost more eventually and these days that means sooner rather than later.

Graham

The single most important aspect of making technology cheap is miniaturisation. The numbers of sensors on a CCD, chips on a stick of memory or transistors on a computer processor. Technology moving forward by miniaturisation therefore gets cheaper.
There's exponentially more transistors on a modern processor than on an old one, but is it bigger? No, it's smaller.
There's loads more sensors on a new sensor than on an old one, the determining factors for it's size are to do with mating it to older technology lenses etc. not to do with making it cheap. We will see 24 megapixel 1.6 sensors before we see cheap full frame sensors (with god knows how many pixels) but resulting from slightly higher yields in manufacture. And as has been said, no matter how cheap a full frame sensor gets a 1.6 one will cost less than a quarter of that price.

[blue_max]

But before this gets very boring as I have no basis apart from historical experience, if people don't buy 1.6x sensors, there will be no market for them (maybe why they have invested in cf-s lenses).

We will all see in a couple of years time and I'll stand corrected if I am wrong about full frame sensors. I do want to stress that I have no knowledge of what I am talking about, just my view of the way things have seem to have gone in the past.

Graham

[deedas]

The camera will perform for years, perhaps with a shutter replacement after 50K pics or so. The "upgrade urge" is entirely up to you. For me, the 30D would have to be a big jump to make me upgrade, but I wouldn't want to be more than one generation behind. I might even jump to the 1 series at some point in the future.

How much is that shutter replacement? I've had my 20D for about 2 weeks and I've shot close to 1000 pictures already. At this rate I'd need a new shutter about every 6 months. :confused:

[lost]

Read into the shutter life statement that your milage WILL vary. I have heard of some poeple getting well over 100k and still not needing to replace the shutter. That said I think someone said it was like $250-300, but I could be wrong.

[thomasrhee]

You can use the 20D until:

1. It physically breaks down and the cost to repair wouldn't make sense vs. buying a new camera.

2. The camera no longer performs to your satisfaction.

3. A new model supercedes it and you feel you need to have the latest and greatest.

If you're worried about the 3rd scenario, look forward to upgrading every 1 to 2 years. Digital cameras are comparable to the computer industry where everything is getting faster, better, cheaper every year. Don't get too caught up with what might be coming out in the future because it's surely going to be "better" than what you have now. Life is short. If you need/want the 20D now, buy it and enjoy it. Stop worrying about what might be around the corner.

[FlyingPete]

IMHO, the 20D is the first 'mature' middle tier D-SLR, the 10D was close but not quite there.

I have been watching closely since the D30 was released, waiting for a suitable digital replacement for my EOS30, the D30 was way off, D60 getting closer, the 10D almost there but the 20D clinched it. The only thing I am missing is the eye control, which I have learnt to live without.

I certainly hope that it will last me 5 years, as I have said before the only thing that would make me consider running out there and upgrade (unless a newer version comes out at a quarter the price!) is significantly higher dynamic range or very high low noise ISO (3200/6400 with 400/800 noise levels). The 20D has everything else I need now, and will need for some time, as for glass that is a different story!

[puttick]

My 2cents. The digital SLR camera body is a piece of computer kit (think laptop), not a piece of jewel-like machinery (think OM-1, Leica M, Nikon F). It will inevitably be superseded, in every reespect. The lenses you buy, on the other hand, are for the longer run, so buy the best you can afford. Upgrade the body when you feel there is a significantly better version for your needs. Canon and Nikon have made a commitment to stay with 35mm-format lenses for their DSLRs, so the lenses are a fairly safe bet, and will still be usable when 24MP full frame sensors are the norm.

[FlyingPete]

Canon and Nikon have made a commitment to stay with 35mm-format lenses for their DSLRs, so the lenses are a fairly safe bet, and will still be usable when 24MP full frame sensors are the norm.

Actually, probalby not. The vast majority of lenses have trouble now resolving 16MP, let alone 24MP.

24MP may never be the norm anyway, there are too many physical constraints in making a small low noise sensor with that pixel count. When we do see it, it will be DSLR's only. Who needs 24MP anyway? 4MP is pleanty for the average Joe User (none of those around this forum :cool: )

[Bob_A]

Til the camera limits what you want to do with photography, not because new models come out. I know people using 1980s Canon SLRs. I still use my Olympus OM gear from the 1970s (less since digital). It's not a dispostable toy or a 18 month PDA. Jack

Hi Jack,

I used to have an OM-1 with a 50mm f1.4 (beautiful lens) and a bunch of other lenses/gear. I'd still be using it today if my eyesight was a bit better ... still my favorite camera of all time. Unfortunately I had to trade it in for something with autofocus and ended up buying an Elan II.

It's strange, but now that I have a 20D, I really wish I had my old OM-1 as a film camera instead of the Elan II.


Bob

[FlyingPete]

Hi Jack,

I used to have an OM-1 with a 50mm f1.4 (beautiful lens) and a bunch of other lenses/gear. I'd still be using it today if my eyesight was a bit better ... still my favorite camera of all time. Unfortunately I had to trade it in for something with autofocus and ended up buying an Elan II.

It's strange, but now that I have a 20D, I really wish I had my old OM-1 as a film camera instead of the Elan II.


Bob

Actually if I could get a Digital Conversion for an OM-1 I would get one in a flash! Great camera, had one for a couple of years, my first SLR.

[Mthorpe_Davies]

Oh No!
Now your gonna make me wait till July.
I hope your right cause I would hate to buy the 20D and find out in a month or 2 that there is something new coming.

Anyone else know of any new models being introduced?

There will always be a new model coming. Since the 20D isn't even a year old I don't think Canon will kill it off just yet especially since it doesn't really have any competition in this market space. Nikon are still plugging away with the D100 and D70 both with 6mp and the the others KM and Pentax also have only 6mp, I don't think a 20D replacement will have more mp nor will it be around anytime soon.

[Carzee]

Actually if I could get a Digital Conversion for an OM-1 I would get one in a flash! Great camera, had one for a couple of years, my first SLR.


If you could retro fit a CMOS etc into a OM-1, WOW!

My own 'mint' OM-1 webpage (http://charisma.videopic.net/), for the fans.:cool: I want to do another version using the 10D and a tripod, instead of a handheld Sony DSC.

[FlyingPete]

If you could retro fit a CMOS etc into a OM-1, WOW!

My own 'mint' OM-1 webpage (http://charisma.videopic.net/), for the fans.:cool: I want to do another version using the 10D and a tripod, instead of a handheld Sony DSC.

Nice! Unfortunately I did not give mine up voluntarily, it drowned whilst out of the country (Fiji actually), I needed a quick replacement, and all I could get was a Pentax P30N, not quite the same.

Otherwise I would probably still have it!