Canon 350D v's 20D

Merlin66 (Ken) · #1 24-03-2006, 08:07 AM

Guys,
Help me here...
These two cameras appear to have the same CMOS 8.2Megapixel, and the same features ie 30sec + Bulb settings.
What's the REAL difference when considering either for astro DSO work????
There's a hellava price difference???!!!!

acropolite (Phil) · #2 24-03-2006, 08:48 AM

Early reports that I have read indicated that the 20D does not have the same sensor as the 350D and that the 350D sensor is in fact only 8mP, whereas the 20D is 8.2mP (no real size difference there). The performance seems to be close if not the same, given the choice I would take the 350D with a quality lens for the same price as the 20D with a budget lens. The 20D has better burst frame rates and is built quite a bit more solidly. (the 350D was non existent when I bought my 20D) If you have the money the 20DA factory modded for astro use is a good option as it will still take daylight pics without additional filters, whereas hutech modified 20D/350D/5D need a screw on filter to correct colour balance for daytime use.

Striker (Tony) · #3 24-03-2006, 11:10 AM

For value for money you can't beat the 350d.

The chip is different but the biggest difference is the quality of the make...the 350D is all plastic...the 20D or DA is Magnezium body.

Most Pro photographers consider the 350 a toy compared to the 20D but again it has more to do with the build quality....once you put a large lense on a 350d it is way to heavy for the plastic 350D.

Saying all this...like I said for astrophotography you cant beat the 350D for value for money.

Vermin (Tom) · #4 24-03-2006, 12:13 PM

The 20D has been superseded by the 30D, a few improvements (same chip) and cheaper too.

Read about it here: http://www.dpreview.com/news/0602/06...anoneos30d.asp

Only available in Australia at the moment, but all reports so far are good.

New features at a glance:

Redesigned body (more EOS 5D like)
Larger LCD monitor (2.5")
Soft-touch shutter release button
AE/AF lock remains set if shutter is kept half-pressed between shots
Faster startup and wake from sleep times
Direct print button on rear of camera (woo!)
Spot metering
100,000 shot shutter cycle
ISO selectable in third stop steps
ISO speed shown in viewfinder as you change it (still not once changed though)
Selectable 5 or 3 fps continuous shooting
PictureStyles instead of simple image parameters
9,999 images per folder (instead of 100 as per the EOS 20D)
15 menu languages (3 new)

fringe_dweller · #5 24-03-2006, 03:30 PM

AFAIK? I have read a few times, the 20D allows you turn power down/switch off? the internal amp during long exposures, thus removing the need to remove the amp noise later in processing.
The 350d doesnt have this feature - this would be the biggest diff. re astro work I would imagine, if my memory is correct in this.

Merlin66 (Ken) · #6 27-03-2006, 09:01 AM

Harvey Norman and others seem to have some good prices on the 350D. There's a twin lens package for $1600, plus memory plus adaptors etc takes the "package" up to about $2000. Still a lot to pay!!!!!!!!
Need to sell the Olympus gear first I think!!

cjmarsh81 · #7 27-03-2006, 05:30 PM

A couple of weeks ago Harvey Norman was advertising the canon 350d with the two lenses for $1488. It is still on the website. Awfully tempting, if only the budget extended that far.

If you want to find out the features of these cameras do a google search for Steve's Digicams. It is a website that provides really good reviews of most cameras available on the market.

Striker. Are you serious about the large lenses being too heavy for the plastic case? I am currently saving up for a 350d, might keep saving for a 20d if they are too plasticky.

Striker (Tony) · #8 27-03-2006, 05:49 PM

I personaly wouldn't worry about the weight.....I have just read from lots of reviews that owners didn't like the feal of the camera with large lenses as the 350D camera is so light making the lense so call top heavy compared to the camera.

Best thing to do is to have a look at the camera and put a decent size lense on it...they say it's all got to do with the feel.

rogerg (Roger) · #9 27-03-2006, 11:41 PM

IMHO You have to be very serious about your photography to care about the "ruggedness" and lens handling capabilities of the 350D.

I've had a 300 (film) for years, used it extensively with my 70-200 F/4 L and 100-400 IS L. I don't have any problem using these lenses with the 350D. The 300 (film) even had a plastic lens mount, still had no problem with that (years of hiking, outdoor use swapping lenses etc). When you get to anything even the size of the 70-200 you don't just hold the camera, you hold it by the tripod colar on the lens, it's not like you have to support all the weight by just holding the trip on the camera. Of course that's how you pick it up but I'm talking about stabalising yourself for a good shot.

The 350D does have a metal "chasis" and metal lens mount, but plastic body/case and definitely not as solid as the 20D which is has much more metal construction.

I am disapointed that the 350D has a smaller grip than the 300 (film) did, but I've come to get used to it. I would only ever use the 350D (or 300 for that matter) with a verticle grip, to provide the extra gripping capability.

I bought the 350D instead of the 20D because of price, I simply don't have the extra money for the 20D right now. Also, I always go on the philosiphy of buying top lenses (hence the L's) and upgrading body later. The glass in the lenses lasts for ever, the technology in the 350D/20D gets out-grown in months.

Considering all the other factors that can affect every photograph (daytime or astronomy) (skill, lighting, tracking, DOF, focus, etc etc) I wouldn't worry much about the difference if you can't decide, and get the 350D. Then later upgrade to a 12+ megapixel camera if you outgrow the 350D.

Roger.

Quote:

Originally Posted by cjmarsh81

Striker. Are you serious about the large lenses being too heavy for the plastic case? I am currently saving up for a 350d, might keep saving for a 20d if they are too plasticky.

Merlin66 (Ken) · #10 28-03-2006, 08:19 AM

I agree 100% with rogerg.
If you worked for the AGE, or were a war co-orespondent where your job and reputation were on the line every day in difficult situations, then of course you could justify the 20D.
For average guys like us who will use it one or twice a week, come on...
the 350D body I'm sure can handle the minor knocks and bumps we're likely to give it.

cjmarsh81 · #11 28-03-2006, 09:14 AM

Thanks. You had me worried there that the 350d was a little plasticky. I haven't seen one of these yet. I have played with a 300d and thought that felt reasonably solid.

Rogerg. Your theory of keeping the lenses and upgrading the camera body would have been ok for film cameras. However, I do not think they are as compatible in Digital ones. You can't change brands of cameras and keep the lenses as far as I know. And who is to say that canon won't decide to use a different mount down the track.

I find the fact that the 350d doesn't take film lenses very annoying. My dad has an old pentax SLR with hundreds of dollars of lenses that can't be used on a digital slr.

rogerg (Roger) · #12 28-03-2006, 10:53 AM

I disagree.

The 350D takes all the standard canon EF lenses, just as my film EOS 300 did. Those EF lenses have been the same format for something like 10 years or more, and I don't expect that to change anytime soon.

You cannot change camera brands and keep the lenses, but that is usual, that was always the case with film and will always be the case with digital, they'll never agree on a standard format, it's not in their best interest.

I made the choice when I first bought my EOS 300 about 6 years ago that I was going to go with Canon and stick with them for the forseeable future. Having done that, my lenses are compatible with all their current SLR/DSLR cameras and I'd expect that to continue for years to come.

I'm not very knowledgeable on the FD and EF formats but my impression (which could be wrong) is: If you have the older FD canon lenses then I believe there are adaptors to be able to use these on EOS without autofocus apabilities of course. In the comparison between FD and EF you are looking at manual vs the introduction of electronics, with EF they are a standard that's capable of handling extra electronics/processing as lenses evolve vs FD which simply had no electronics.

Roger.

Quote:

Originally Posted by cjmarsh81

Thanks. You had me worried there that the 350d was a little plasticky. I haven't seen one of these yet. I have played with a 300d and thought that felt reasonably solid.

Rogerg. Your theory of keeping the lenses and upgrading the camera body would have been ok for film cameras. However, I do not think they are as compatible in Digital ones. You can't change brands of cameras and keep the lenses as far as I know. And who is to say that canon won't decide to use a different mount down the track.

I find the fact that the 350d doesn't take film lenses very annoying. My dad has an old pentax SLR with hundreds of dollars of lenses that can't be used on a digital slr.

cjmarsh81 · #13 28-03-2006, 12:16 PM

That's good if canon do keep using the same lenses or at least making the new cameras capable of using the old ones. More than likely I will stick with canon anyway, so that is good to know.

rogerg (Roger) · #14 28-03-2006, 12:25 PM

There's never any guarantees, but I consider lenses much more "stable" than the body. Perhaps you get 20-30 years from lenses, when you only get 5 years from a body before it's out of date.

Roger.

Quote:

Originally Posted by cjmarsh81

That's good if canon do keep using the same lenses or at least making the new cameras capable of using the old ones. More than likely I will stick with canon anyway, so that is good to know.

Merlin66 (Ken) · #15 28-03-2006, 12:50 PM

I think I've got the best deal so far. About to sign up on the twin lens deal at $1430. Computerworld- Melbourne

cjmarsh81 · #16 28-03-2006, 12:53 PM

I think that is the place I bought some PDA accessories. They do have some good prices at times.

Gama · #17 30-03-2006, 02:04 AM

Well, then theres Nikon. The D100 has the same CCD sensor as the Starlight Xpress SXV-M25 (6 Mpixels), and its a CCD not a cmos chip.
Then the newer Nikon D200 has a 10 Mpixel CCD chip, again not a cmos chip.
Images ive seen are great. I own a 20D, and although a nice camera, its just not a CCD camera, and thus suffers from sensitivity issues.
Do a search on the cameras, as my new camera to get is the D200 !.
Any in the market for a 20D soon .......

Jonathan · #18 30-03-2006, 03:42 AM

Roger has summed it up pretty well I think. Spend the money on the glass rather than the body, that's what will make the difference, especially for astrophotography. The body will be very outdated in 5 years time but you'll still have good lenses to use on your next Canon.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gama

Do a search on the cameras, as my new camera to get is the D200 !

Me too

, that is when Nikon can keep their supply up with the demand for them. Then the Australian prices should go down to where they're meant to be, still won't be cheap though.
And they work with every Nikon lens made since 1977

, with full metering as well from what I've read.

Merlin66 (Ken) · #19 30-03-2006, 08:18 AM

The D200 with the magnesium body appears to be also expensive, reviews quote $ 1700 us (aus$2400) for just the body!!
Sounds like a great camera, just need to mortgage the kids.

MiG · #20 30-03-2006, 01:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gama

Well, then theres Nikon. The D100 has the same CCD sensor as the Starlight Xpress SXV-M25 (6 Mpixels), and its a CCD not a cmos chip.
Then the newer Nikon D200 has a 10 Mpixel CCD chip, again not a cmos chip.
Images ive seen are great. I own a 20D, and although a nice camera, its just not a CCD camera, and thus suffers from sensitivity issues.
Do a search on the cameras, as my new camera to get is the D200 !.
Any in the market for a 20D soon .......

I strongly suggest you check out the noise of the Nikons. If there's one area where the Canons are significantly better, it's noise. I've seen comparisons of the D200 to the 20D and it's not pretty.