Upgrading to either 20D or XT what are your thoughts....

Hmm I wonder if I can do that as well at the camera shop.

Good point on the extra 2 fps

I could also buy some other accessories

I moved up from the 300D to the 20D and was blown away by the improvement in performance. I held the XT in my hand and it was simply too small after ten months of using the larger 300D. More recently, I bought an almost mint copy of a 1D, the first professional level digital camera produced by Canon. I'd heard the term "professional" camera but had no idea what that meant until I held this one in my hand and began shooting with it. It may be too big for you, since it is definitely heavy. My experience is that the weight helps steady me during shooting. And if you want speed, how about EIGHT frames per second with a buffer holding 22 JPEG images. I bought the 1D from its original owner for less than I paid for my 20D. If you're interested you might wish to check the Buy and Sell forum at Fred Miranda or the Trading Post at Rob Galbraith. Fred Miranda has more action, but you can find some nice gear at Rob Galbraith.

The suggestion that you get the XT in your hand is a good one. You may find the smaller size serves you well. It seems to be an excellent camera and with the Canon rebate available you can really help yourself out. I bought two lenses while a good friend bought a Digital Rebel last year and we split a rebate of $450. I know many folks buy a couple of lens simply to gain the bigger rebate, and then sell the lenses. It is not a bad strategy since lenses hold their value.

Good luck with your decision Carrie.

Thanks! I am going to go tomorrow to 'browse'

**carrie** wrote:
Hmm I wonder if I can do that as well at the camera shop.

Good point on the extra 2 fps

I could also buy some other accessories

It's more than just extra 2 fps.

The buffer for instance is better on the 20D. AF is faster and more accurate. The controls are better placed for better use as well.

The camera used, if you are in the US is going for between 1000 and 1200, usually with extra goodies like a flash card or batteries.

And for most, it probably feels better, but you've h ad a chance to test out the 20D yourself, so you should know its more than just 2fps more or however you want to term it.

From virtually all the people here you will hear that there is no difference in image quality between these two cameras. They use almost identical sensors and they do use the same DIGIC II processor. They are both 8 MP and change.

The 20D is a little larger which some people prefer (I don't have a preference, but you should handle both--preferences seem to be strong for most folks), and the layout is a little different (LDC screen on top for the 20D instead of on the back -- click wheel on the 20D instead of buttons). Alloy housing on the 20D instead of "engineering" plastic.

In terms of functionality, the biggest difference is the 3 versus 5 fps. I'm ignoring what I consider to be minor nits like 9 AF points instead of 7. Wasn't worth the 500 rocks for me, but for dedicated sports photogs it could be. For some folks, the feel alone is worth it. Poster who said try to rent them gave good advice.

For what it's worth, given my budget and the accessories I wanted, given the choice, I'd buy the Digital Rebel XT again in a heartbeat. From lesser cameras there's just lot's more functional added value-per-dollar in it IMO. But I can certainly see the 5 fps. and larger feel being worth the dough to someone else. It's a tough decision.

John

But a quality camera body, which the 20D is, can also be used for years, no?

I've currently got the 300D, and will be upgrading to the 20D next week. The biggest consideration for me is the low light performance when using higer ISO's. Everything I've seen and read about the 20D has convinced me that it's the way to go.

I checked out the 350 again last night at Staples. The contraption they had in place to keep the camera chained to the store was roughly the same size as the battery grip for that camera. I picked it up, shot a few frames, and was, again, reminded how much smaller it is than the 300D which I've used for over a year.

I could live without the 5fps on the 20D; I would rarely, if ever, use it. But the physical size, the higher ISO performance, and the physical construction of the 20D has convinced me that B&H doesn't have enough money yet, so I need to send them some of mine...

Steve

I have both and use them for different things. I use the 20D for fast action sports shooting like football and low light stuff. I use the XT for shooting sideline stuff and around the house. Both offer great image quality but the 20D has a faster AF and I like the feel of the larger frame. The XT is a great walk around camera and I like the fact that if I am using both the XT I a lot lighter around my neck with the 20D on a monopod. If you are looking for more FPS than the 20D would be a better deal if $$$ is not an object. I also like the controls on the 20D for shooting in M mode. It is a lot easier to make changes on the fly and the controls are set up nice.

Either way I think you will like the upgrade form the 300. Have fun.

I agree the XT would be about as impressive as the 20D as you will see absolutely no difference in photo quality at any print size. However, what does you mean when say depends on what you want to do with it when comparing the 2 camera bodies. I read all the reviews before i ended up with the XT and image quality is undiscernible and they can do the same things. I took a photograph of a friend and his girlfriend who were visiting handheld with only camera flash, printed it out on with my canon i9900 and sold it on the spot for 50 dollars and they felt that they cheated me. I did this with the kit lens. I shot game photos for little league football last season and the team tried to get me to do the team photos after seeing them. I didnt have flash nor experience so i declined i was afraid that my experience with the camera might end up with bad photos and was afraid that someone might be unhappy with something. Ive shot wildlife and glacier photos. Maybe there is something other than getting those 2 extra shots per second that i missed but i certainly wouldnt say depends on what you want to do if thats the limiting factor in considering what it can or cant do. I would like an example where depending on what someone would want to do would make a difference in deciding which of these camera to buy. The biggest difference in these 2 camera is size. The size difference is bigger than the 2 frames per second if you ask me.

I'm thinking about upgrading from by 10D, but with the possibility of a 20D replacement not far away, I'm going to wait as my 10D is still working just fine.

Brian

Check the buy and sell forum at fred miranda and have a look at how many people are selling their xt after only a few months to get the 20d. Do a search and see how many people are having problems with new xt's. I had to choose between new xt and gently used 20d for about the same price. I went with the 20d and I am not sorry. I love it. The way the buttons are positioned makes it very easy to use and it just feels more solid and professional.