Topic: Digital SLR Recommendation?

[Ed.]

ok, you guys sold me on canon over nikon idea...however, now i'm debating if i should get the rebel xt or the 20d.  obviously the 20d is a better camera, but would it justify the extra money?

I have an old canon rebel slr that used to suit my needs for college photography classes, but now i'm trying to up the bar a bit and get me something that'll last awhile.  Do ya think the xt will work, or should i spend the extra money and get the better model?

[jpschust]

ok, you guys sold me on canon over nikon idea...however, now i'm debating if i should get the rebel xt or the 20d.  obviously the 20d is a better camera, but would it justify the extra money?

I have an old canon rebel slr that used to suit my needs for college photography classes, but now i'm trying to up the bar a bit and get me something that'll last awhile.  Do ya think the xt will work, or should i spend the extra money and get the better model?

that's something you will have to decide for yourself, but i like the expansive options of the 20d.  your old canon rebel's lenses will work with the current bodies by the way.  the build of the 20d is significantly better than the rebel imho and that's a big deal to me.

[Ed.]

good info.  won't the aspect ratio (i think thats what i mean) be off using an old film lens vs the new lenses for digitals?

perhaps i'll go into the local camera shop and play with both of them.  I'm sure I'll end up spending the scratch on a 20d tho, might as well get the better in the situation.

[jpschust]

good info.  won't the aspect ratio (i think thats what i mean) be off using an old film lens vs the new lenses for digitals?

perhaps i'll go into the local camera shop and play with both of them.  I'm sure I'll end up spending the scratch on a 20d tho, might as well get the better in the situation.

no, the crop factor is in the sensor, not the lens.

as long as they arent f series lenses (from the early 80's/late 70's) then they will work- all eos lenses basically work with eos bodies.

[HBK216]

Honestly I'd look at the Nikon D70. The D70 compares in quality to even some of the higher priced SLR's & cost so much less. I am sure you would find a good % of pros who would tell you it is better compared to most Canon's. If you are ever on Ebay, you can pick up a good deal (on any type) from Cameta Camera. They are a well known store in Long Island & they have a huge Ebay following as well. You can usually get a ton of great deals on factory demos which are practically brand new cameras. As far as sites go, I'd check out the Dpreview forums as the people who post there are very helpful no matter how many questions you may have.

[jpschust]

Honestly I'd look at the Nikon D70. The D70 compares in quality to even some of the higher priced SLR's & cost so much less. I am sure you would find a good % of pros who would tell you it is better compared to most Canon's. If you are ever on Ebay, you can pick up a good deal (on any type) from Cameta Camera. They are a well known store in Long Island & they have a huge Ebay following as well. You can usually get a ton of great deals on factory demos which are practically brand new cameras. As far as sites go, I'd check out the Dpreview forums as the people who post there are very helpful no matter how many questions you may have.

The biggest problem with the D70 is that the build quality is rather lacking and it is nearly impossible to get the white balance correct.  The AWB is awful in that thing.  This isn't a Canon/Nikon thing- I've used both quite a bit.

BTW, I use dpreview's forums from time to time, but I find the fredmiranda forums to be more on topic, a little gentler, and generally to be more informative.

[Ed.]

one negative side of the d70 is 6.1mp, the 8.3 that you get with canon's is appealing.

[jpschust]

one negative side of the d70 is 6.1mp, the 8.3 that you get with canon's is appealing.

i highly suggest not using mp as your deciding factor unless you intend on blowing images up larger than 16x20.

[dmonterisi]

one negative side of the d70 is 6.1mp, the 8.3 that you get with canon's is appealing.

i highly suggest not using mp as your deciding factor unless you intend on blowing images up larger than 16x20.

that's not entirely true, imo.  the extra mp do not only pertain to the final print size.  there is increased resolution and detail in all aspects of how the sensor resolves the image.  so the extra 33% in resolution is quite important, imo.  additionally, the extra pixels will allow for larger prints from cropped images.

additionally, the 20d/drebxt has better AF than the d70, better low light performance, much better high ISO performance and the 20d/drebxt goes down to ISO 100, while i believe the d70 cannot go below iso 200.

[Ed.]

yeah, 6.1 would be fine for me...however, i can take classes for free since i work at a university, so i plan on taking some photography classes to get me back in the swing of things.  the photography professor recommended canon to begin with because of the extra mp's, since we will be blowing things up, cropping and whatnot in the class.

My original plan was the d50 because i could afford it now, however, i can't get into any photo classes until next fall anyway, so i might as well hold out and get something better.

[Ed.]

...the d50 actually has better lowlight performance than the d70, thats one of the main reasons why i was looking at it over the d70.  thought it'd be better for concert photos

[jpschust]

one negative side of the d70 is 6.1mp, the 8.3 that you get with canon's is appealing.

i highly suggest not using mp as your deciding factor unless you intend on blowing images up larger than 16x20.

that's not entirely true, imo.  the extra mp do not only pertain to the final print size.  there is increased resolution and detail in all aspects of how the sensor resolves the image.  so the extra 33% in resolution is quite important, imo.  additionally, the extra pixels will allow for larger prints from cropped images.

additionally, the 20d/drebxt has better AF than the d70, better low light performance, much better high ISO performance and the 20d/drebxt goes down to ISO 100, while i believe the d70 cannot go below iso 200.

when I was enlarging from 5mp (canon powershot) on my epson 4000, after the basic run of photoshopping I couldn't really see any digital artifacts from the enlargement- interpolation was key though.  this was for a 16x20.  i can't go much larger than that on the 4000.  Though if you know someone who wants a 4000 let me know

[Ed.]

all my printing will be done on the schools computers...for free!  woot!

[dmonterisi]

...the d50 actually has better lowlight performance than the d70, thats one of the main reasons why i was looking at it over the d70.  thought it'd be better for concert photos

the difference between the 10d and 20d at high ISO is really astounding.  for concert shots at 1600, i don't even feel the need to run any noise reduction any more.  if you are going to be doing any concert shooting, waiting for the 20d or drebxt is definitely a good idea.

jonny- you're missing my point, i'm saying the 8mp sensor is just a better sensor all around, and the additional resolution has a lot to do with this.  it allows for much greater dynamic range in your images as well as much more detailed and sharp photos.  the images are all around more crisp than the 10d sensor's.  IMO, the second generation digic sensor and processing chips were a gigantic step forward in the digital slr world, just from my own experience.

[Ed.]

good info damon.  i'm sure i'll be bugging you guys more and more as the purchase gets closer.

sounds like the 20d is what i need.