Digital Rebel XT vs. EOS 20D

[feah]

I have read the side by side comparison on the dpreview website, and other than saving a few $$ and losing some weight, I don't see much difference between the two cameras. Does anybody know what practical differences I might find? Does anyone see a disadvantage for buying the XT over the 20D?
I would use either camera for eco-touring and nature/action shots.

[TheObiJuan]

If you have the extra money then get the 20D.
If you dont mind the small size, plastic body, and light weight, the get the 350D.
Everything else is too similar to matter. 3fps is plenty fast, .2mp difference is not noticeable, AF times are very similar, and the digic II chip makes them pretty much equalls in speed.

The only disadvantage is that it doesn't look like a pro camera, so people mock it and put their noses up in the air to it. The size, shape, weight, and build are fine for me. The plastic is solid! and not your ordinary plastic.

here is a good site with a comparison.
http://www.bobatkins.com/photography/digital/eos_digital_rebel_xt_vs_20d.html

[speaklightly]

feah-

My husband and I own and use the Canon 20D, which we purchased first, about six m onths ago, and the Canon 350 XT which was purchased 2 1/2 weeks ago. We use both dSLR's as primary cameras, so we do not lack for experience with them.

Keep in mind that the 20D is a physically larger dSLR. It takes a bit of getting used to on a day to day basis. It does have one rather important advantage for me, and that is the better low light/existing light/ no flash capabilities, as I do a lot of theater and stage based photography.

The difference between the two cameras, image quality wise is there, but it is not as great a difference as was found between the Canon 300D and the Canon 20D. Personally, I feel that the Canon 20D has better ergonomics for a person who has to shoot rather rapidly in dark under somewhat trying situations calling for speed and accuarcy in making any camera setting changes.

So in summation, the 350XT is close but not quite there. As one wag said: "...buy the 350XT and have enough extra money for a desired lens..."

Please keep in mind that I am not a "know it all" nor a professional camera reviewer. What I have shared are nothing but my own person opinions and perceptions garnered from a lot of day to day use. As the saying goes:"...your gas mileage may vary..."

Take the cameras in hand and take a few shots. Give a lot of consideration to the kind of photos that you will be taking, then make a well studied decision. It is your camera and your decision.

Sarah Joyce

[TheObiJuan]

very inceteful! How much better would you estimate that the 20D is better in low light focusing?
What was that picture shot with? It is a stellar image.

[speaklightly]

Juan-

The photo, seen above, was shot with a Canon 20D. The exposure was F 7.1 at 1/160th with the ISO set to 1600. The Canon 28-135 IS was set to 85mm.

Here is another taken in the same session with the Canon 20D:

Sarah Joyce

[feah]

The colors are fantastic. I am almost convinced to buy the 20d, but the weight thing makes me hesitate. I do a lot of trekking through forests looking for birds and other animals. The extra weight might be a real bother. Then someone told me or I read that the Nikon D70 was the better choice for outdoor and changing environments. Also the Nikon has this instant response that the XT doesn't have. So, here I am swaying in the breeze wondering which of these three should I commit to OR should I wait for the new Nikon D 70s to see what they will offer. Does anyone have a comparison between the two Canon cams and the Nikon?

[speaklightly]

feah-

Because my husband and I utilize the Canon 350XT, the Canon 20D and the Nikon D-70 extensively, I feel qualified to speak to the issue that you have raised.

In the Spring of 2005 there is indeed not a great deal of difference between the three digal cameras. Yes, of course, the Canon 20D users will rise up rather quickly and agressively to remind you that the Canon 20D has the very best High ISO (3200) abilities. That is most probably true, The Canon 20D does indeed do a wonderous job at 1600 and 3200 ISO.

However, nobody can possibly call the Canon 350XT a slouch, even though its maximum ISO is 1600, In my mind, and please understand quite clearly, that I am speaking only for myself, the Canon 350XT represents a real bargain. It comes very close indeed to the photo quality of the Canon 20D, and offers it to you in a much smaller and more compact package, that is highly desired by many folks.

Please understand that we are indeed speakling of very small differences in these three dSLR cameras. The Nikon D-70 and it future successors fall somewhat between the photo quality of the Canon 350XT and the Canon 20D. Nikkon has always had a devoted following, and the Nikon D-70 is no exception. Is it better. That is very hard indeed to say exactly. All three of these dSLR cameras are very close.

So bottomline, feah, you must now make a choice. Which dSLR will you choose as your primary digital camera?

Sarah Joyce

[TheObiJuan]

I have no idea how the D70 can adapt faster than the 350D outside...:confused:
With the 350D the weight difference bw it and the 20D is negligible when my 420EX, RC4 QR plate, straps, 135SF, and etc.
Telling the difference between 1lb and 1.3lbs is possible, but 5lbs and 5.3 pounds, the weight difference is harder to determine.

[feah]

Thanks for all your help. I got the 20D with the 17~85 lens. When I actually held the two cameras to compare, I realized that my hands are too large for the Rebel. It felt cramped. So far, so good. I am still in the "getting to know you" phase, but I have high hopes for this camera.

[Bluedog]

Good choice either way and whatever felt comfortable is best. Obijuan jumped ship with the 20D too ... ;)