Register FAQ / Rules Forum Spy Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
Go Back   MacRumors Forums > Special Interests > Visual Media > Digital Photography

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old Feb 11, 2009, 12:58 PM   #1
smackay
macrumors newbie
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Canon EOS 20D Vs. Canon Rebel XSI

I currently own the 20d and was thinking of selling it and getting the xsi. I've heard that the new processor in the xsi would produce much better photo's. Would this be a silly move on my part? Main reason would be a smaller, lighter camera with better picture quality. Any feedback would be appreciated.
smackay is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 11, 2009, 01:03 PM   #2
FX120
macrumors 65816
 
FX120's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
It won't produce better looking images.

You'll be gaining resolution, but loosing several other features that come with a Canon "prosumer" body.

It's smaller, but at the cost of a cheaper-feeling body, a lower quality viewfinder, no LCD on the top, more menu-dependant operation, ect.

IMO keep your 20D, buy better glass if you want better looking images.
FX120 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 11, 2009, 01:31 PM   #3
Phrasikleia
macrumors 68040
 
Phrasikleia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Over there------->
Here's how the sensors compare:



So you see, you wouldn't be gaining much of anything. If you want to improve IQ, I would have to agree with FX120, better glass is the way to go. That's the investment that will provide the most bang for the buck.
__________________
Photography by Phrasikleia

Last edited by Phrasikleia; Feb 11, 2009 at 01:55 PM.
Phrasikleia is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 11, 2009, 01:50 PM   #4
smackay
Thread Starter
macrumors newbie
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Ok, so it seems like I wouldn't be gaining much by changing. What glasses do you recommend? Also what about not being able to use IS lenses on the 20D? Isnt that a negative?
smackay is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 11, 2009, 01:57 PM   #5
Phrasikleia
macrumors 68040
 
Phrasikleia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Over there------->
Quote:
Originally Posted by smackay View Post
Ok, so it seems like I wouldn't be gaining much by changing. What glasses do you recommend? Also what about not being able to use IS lenses on the 20D? Isnt that a negative?
What lens is best depends entirely on what you most like to shoot. I didn't realize that the 20D can't use IS lenses. If that's the case, then it might be worthwhile to upgrade the body if you are doing a lot of handheld shooting.
__________________
Photography by Phrasikleia
Phrasikleia is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 11, 2009, 02:03 PM   #6
Phrasikleia
macrumors 68040
 
Phrasikleia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Over there------->
I did some googling and found that one of the kit lenses available with the 20D was the 17-85 mm, F4-5.6 EF-S IS. So that camera can use IS lenses.
__________________
Photography by Phrasikleia
Phrasikleia is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 11, 2009, 02:04 PM   #7
jaseone
macrumors 65816
 
jaseone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Houston, USA
Send a message via MSN to jaseone
Quote:
Originally Posted by smackay View Post
Also what about not being able to use IS lenses on the 20D? Isnt that a negative?
Where did you hear that? Been talking to some dodgy retailer trying to get you to "upgrade" your camera body?

Here is just one IS lens that is for the 20D:

http://www.adorama.com/CA1785AFS.html
__________________
flickr | Twitter
jaseone is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 11, 2009, 02:13 PM   #8
toxic
macrumors 68000
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
every Canon EOS body will work with IS lenses. IS is in the lens, what camera it's on has nothing to do with it...

the only things a 450D has over the 20D is spot metering and live view.
toxic is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 11, 2009, 03:00 PM   #9
smackay
Thread Starter
macrumors newbie
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
You guessed it. Hunts photo told me that.

Have you heard anything positive or negative about the EF-S 17-85mm f4-5.6? My carry lens is the kit 18-55 lens and yes, it is crap. Would this be a smart upgrade? Basically, I want a good lens that I can use for shooting baby pics and then a good outdoor / landscape lens.
smackay is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 11, 2009, 03:09 PM   #10
jaseone
macrumors 65816
 
jaseone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Houston, USA
Send a message via MSN to jaseone
DPReview has mixed feelings on it:

http://www.dpreview.com/lensreviews/..._c16/page4.asp

I'd give you some recommendations but I'm a Nikon guy so don't know the Canon range at all well.

I can't believe a retailer told you that though, I'd be tempted to go back and have a chat with their manager!
__________________
flickr | Twitter
jaseone is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 11, 2009, 04:07 PM   #11
FX120
macrumors 65816
 
FX120's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by smackay View Post
You guessed it. Hunts photo told me that.

Have you heard anything positive or negative about the EF-S 17-85mm f4-5.6? My carry lens is the kit 18-55 lens and yes, it is crap. Would this be a smart upgrade? Basically, I want a good lens that I can use for shooting baby pics and then a good outdoor / landscape lens.
You might want to consider the Canon 17-40 F/4 L, you can find them used for about $500, it's a sharp lens with good contrast and colors. It's not the fastest lens in the world, but for landscapes this isn't as important, on the long end it works well for portraits on a crop body.

The other lens you might want to take a look at is the Canon 50mm f/1.4, it is a wonderful portrait lens on a crop body, very fast, and is also very sharp when stopped down. Used they go for as little as $250, new they can be hand for $325 off Amazon.

At some point a good telephoto zoom would be a nice addition, the 70-300 IS f/4-5.6 is very good for the price, but not as sharp as the 70-200 L zooms. Price used is about $450 used, $550 new. If you can live with out IS, the Canon 70-200 f/4L is about the same price, but is much sharper, has better control of CA, and also has a constant aperature so it is faster on the long end. If you want IS, you can move up to the same lens with IS, but it is about $500 more.
FX120 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 12, 2009, 11:24 AM   #12
Kronie
macrumors 6502a
 
Kronie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by toxic View Post
every Canon EOS body will work with IS lenses. IS is in the lens, what camera it's on has nothing to do with it...

the only things a 450D has over the 20D is spot metering and live view.
That's not true. EFS lenses only work on crop cameras like and XSI or a 10-50D series. Any EF lens will work on any EOS camera. Same with L lenses.

As others have said keep the 20D, its a fine camera. Invest in better glass.
Kronie is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 12, 2009, 11:30 AM   #13
Benguitar
macrumors 65816
 
Benguitar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
I use a Canon EOS Digital Rebel XSi and it has been serving me very well. The picture quality is outstanding and when you attach another Canon lens (Macro, Telephoto, Zoom) etc it maintains that amazing picture quality even if the Canon Lens' are from an older model.

You will not be disappointed if you choose the XSi.


__________________
"No plan survives first contact with the enemy." -M.R.
Benguitar is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 12, 2009, 11:32 AM   #14
Kronie
macrumors 6502a
 
Kronie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by smackay View Post
You guessed it. Hunts photo told me that.

Have you heard anything positive or negative about the EF-S 17-85mm f4-5.6? My carry lens is the kit 18-55 lens and yes, it is crap. Would this be a smart upgrade? Basically, I want a good lens that I can use for shooting baby pics and then a good outdoor / landscape lens.
Here is a great site for lens reviews.
http://www.photozone.de/canon-eos

The 17-85 is OK lens. Its range is great but its weakness is the barrel distortion you get at the wide (not good for architecture) end and its slow, 5.6. If you can afford it, buy a 17-55.
Kronie is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 12, 2009, 12:02 PM   #15
leighonigar
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: May 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phrasikleia View Post
Here's how the sensors compare:


So you see, you wouldn't be gaining much of anything. If you want to improve IQ, I would have to agree with FX120, better glass is the way to go. That's the investment that will provide the most bang for the buck.
I agree that you wouldn't gain much - the screen being the main thing - but I don't think that the DXO thing takes into account resolution when they come up with those numbers. So they are on a per-pixel basis.
leighonigar is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 12, 2009, 12:33 PM   #16
FX120
macrumors 65816
 
FX120's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by leighonigar View Post
I agree that you wouldn't gain much - the screen being the main thing - but I don't think that the DXO thing takes into account resolution when they come up with those numbers. So they are on a per-pixel basis.
The resolution difference between 8MP and 12MP is negligable, and either way will have very little impact in the overall quality, in fact it can actually make it worse. Most lenses have a hard time resolving 12MP on a crop body anyway.

And DxO isn't rating per pixel, because you're not viewing per-pixel. If you take a picture of a flower with the 20D and with the XSi from the same position with the same optics and the same settings, they'll look nearly identical regardless of the additional resolution.
FX120 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 12, 2009, 06:20 PM   #17
leighonigar
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: May 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by FX120 View Post
The resolution difference between 8MP and 12MP is negligable, and either way will have very little impact in the overall quality, in fact it can actually make it worse. Most lenses have a hard time resolving 12MP on a crop body anyway.

And DxO isn't rating per pixel, because you're not viewing per-pixel. If you take a picture of a flower with the 20D and with the XSi from the same position with the same optics and the same settings, they'll look nearly identical regardless of the additional resolution.
The first bit I understand, but clearly 4mp have some value at some print sizes. Of course you will need to use good glass.

Your second paragraph doesn't seem to make an intelligible point. Feel free to bash me for my stupidity with further explanation.
leighonigar is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 12, 2009, 07:23 PM   #18
Kronie
macrumors 6502a
 
Kronie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by leighonigar View Post
The first bit I understand, but clearly 4mp have some value at some print sizes. Of course you will need to use good glass.

Your second paragraph doesn't seem to make an intelligible point. Feel free to bash me for my stupidity with further explanation.
I think he is saying that at smaller print sizes like maybe 8x10 or smaller you wont see much difference between 8 or 12 MP. At larger sizes I'm sure you will see a huge difference.
Kronie is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 13, 2009, 12:56 AM   #19
FX120
macrumors 65816
 
FX120's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by leighonigar View Post
The first bit I understand, but clearly 4mp have some value at some print sizes. Of course you will need to use good glass.

Your second paragraph doesn't seem to make an intelligible point. Feel free to bash me for my stupidity with further explanation.
The difference between 8MP and 12MP is 700 lines. If you're printing at 300DPI this works out to be a difference of about 2 inches. If you're like most people, you resample your images to get larger prints, and while those extra 700 lines might make a very marginial difference once you get up to very large prints (20x30), for your average 8x10 I would be willing to bet that you couldn't tell the difference.

Megapixles aren't nearly as important as everyone likes to believe.

I've blown up prints from a 10MP 40D to 20x30" and had them look great.

What is a much bigger factor is finding glass that can accuratley resolve the full resolution of the sensor. You will always get a better print out of a 8MP 20D with say a 300 f/2.8L IS than you will out of a 21MP 1Ds Mk III with a 75-300 f/4-5.6.

Last edited by FX120; Feb 13, 2009 at 02:09 AM.
FX120 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 13, 2009, 02:00 AM   #20
scotthayes
macrumors 68000
 
scotthayes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Birmingham, England
Send a message via AIM to scotthayes
Have to agree with most on here. Keep you 20D and buy some nice glass. maybe look at the 17-40 f/4 L and/or 70-200 f/4 L (IS or non IS doesn't really matter with it)
scotthayes is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 13, 2009, 03:10 AM   #21
DSG
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kronie View Post
That's not true. EFS lenses only work on crop cameras like and XSI or a 10-50D series. Any EF lens will work on any EOS camera. Same with L lenses.

As others have said keep the 20D, its a fine camera. Invest in better glass.
EF-S lenses do not work (or even fit) on the EOS 10D, despite its being a crop-sensor body. They do, indeed, work on all XXD bodies from the 20D onwards. Not hard to see why there is confusion about this...
DSG is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 13, 2009, 09:28 AM   #22
jaseone
macrumors 65816
 
jaseone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Houston, USA
Send a message via MSN to jaseone
Quote:
Originally Posted by DSG View Post
EF-S lenses do not work (or even fit) on the EOS 10D, despite its being a crop-sensor body. They do, indeed, work on all XXD bodies from the 20D onwards. Not hard to see why there is confusion about this...
How come this never comes up in any of those discussions about if you go with a Canon all lenses that are not older than you will work with it? Is it just that the 10D is never recommended these days?
__________________
flickr | Twitter
jaseone is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 13, 2009, 09:47 AM   #23
ziwi
macrumors 65816
 
ziwi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Right back where I started...
Where were you able to do this comparison?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Phrasikleia View Post
Here's how the sensors compare:



So you see, you wouldn't be gaining much of anything. If you want to improve IQ, I would have to agree with FX120, better glass is the way to go. That's the investment that will provide the most bang for the buck.
__________________

ziwi is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 13, 2009, 09:53 AM   #24
Narcosynthesis
macrumors member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by jaseone View Post
How come this never comes up in any of those discussions about if you go with a Canon all lenses that are not older than you will work with it? Is it just that the 10D is never recommended these days?
Unless you already own a 10d (and should already know the situation) I can't see it ever really being recommended - it is an older outdated camera, and nowadays you should easily be able to get a newer generation for little extra - something like the 30d which is still discontinued, but two generations newer...

So while I wouldn't recommend you go out and buy one, if you already own an older generation camera like the 20d or 30d, you still have a great camera, which will take great pictures, so upgrading is not a necessity, unless there are specific features you are missing compared to a new model.

as for 20d versus 450d, you both gain and lose features swapping to the 450d, higher resolution and live view being the two obvious upgrades, but at the same time losing the better build quality, rear dial, top screen and some of the fancier options of the 20d.

Personally I would be tempted to stick with the 20d for now and put the money in some new glass, what is useful to you depends completely on what you shoot, but you could look into lenses like the 17-40mm, 70-200mm series and some of the higher end primes as great upgrades over a more 'kit' setup.
Narcosynthesis is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 13, 2009, 10:32 AM   #25
jampat
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
I have the 17-85, it's fine, but I have always regretted buying it. I should have saved up for a while longer and picked up the 17-40 or 24-70. In most of the places I am taking pictures, I am battling low light and the 17-85 gets up to 5.6 before it gets to 50mm. Even in good light, the pictures taken with the 17-85 are incredibly different than those taken with my 70-200. You can even tell from thumbnails which lens took the pic, the 70-200 is just that much better. Save up, buy good glass, you will never regret it.
jampat is offline   0 Reply With Quote

Reply
MacRumors Forums > Special Interests > Visual Media > Digital Photography

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Canon EOS 60D Software help mulo Digital Photography 17 Oct 24, 2011 03:48 AM
Canon Eos 550D VS Canon 60D... FOR VIDEO dbl.ceo Digital Video 97 Jan 6, 2011 08:24 PM
Canon 30D vs. Canon Rebel XSI vs. Nikon d60 vs. Nikon d40 vs. matthewcap Digital Photography 18 Dec 15, 2008 07:48 PM
iPod Camera Connector + Canon EOS 20D + iPod Video driftingaway Mac Basics and Help 1 Jan 2, 2006 01:37 PM
FS: Canon EOS 20d NIB Zeke Marketplace Archive 1 (Posts count) 2 Nov 10, 2005 04:33 PM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:28 AM.

Mac Rumors | Mac | iPhone | iPhone Game Reviews | iPhone Apps

Mobile Version | Fixed | Fluid | Fluid HD
Copyright 2002-2013, MacRumors.com, LLC