To 30D or not to 30D

evilhomer

EOS 30 D + EF-S 18-55/3.5-5.6 €1.242,00

EOS 20 D + EF-S 18-55/3.5-5.6 €1.069,00

Which one would you choose?

oh and on another note is the upgrade to the EF-S 17-85 IS USM worth it?

EOS 30 D + EF-S 17-85 IS USM €1.646,00

All prices from http://www.AC-foto.com (Has anyone dealt with AC-foto before?)

I'm dying to get one of these bad boys and start snapping.

joolsveer

I wouldn't buy a 20D as they are obsolete now. If I wanted to trade in in the future the next camera I would go for would be the 30D without a doubt.

DotOrg

i don't understand buying a camera body body over €1000 and then sticking the cheapest of cheap kit lenses on it. you'd get better photos with a 350D and a good lens rather than the options above

rabbitinlights

Defo agree with DotOrg, get the 350D and a few nice lenses, money better spent.

The 17-85 IS lense is pretty much the best everyday lense (without getting stupid with the €€€€), there are slightly sharper lenses like the 17-40 L, but the focal range is limited, so the 17-85 wins out.

I bought my 350D and 17-85 IS and a 50mm 1.8 prime lense off AC-foto and its was the cheapest deal i could fine, very fast delivery and great for questions too, if you can afford the 30D and the 17-85, go for it, but other wise the 350D will do nicely.
S.

evilhomer

DotOrg wrote:

i don't understand buying a camera body body over €1000 and then sticking the cheapest of cheap kit lenses on it. you'd get better photos with a 350D and a good lens rather than the options above

I never said that I was going to be sticking with the kit Lens.
It's just all I will have for maybe a month or two at most.


So what lenses would you get with a 350D for maybe a total of €1300+ ?

EF lenses?

joolsveer

rabbitinlights wrote:

Defo agree with DotOrg, get the 350D and a few nice lenses, money better spent.

The 17-85 IS lense is pretty much the best everyday lense (without getting stupid with the €€€€), there are slightly sharper lenses like the 17-40 L, but the focal range is limited, so the 17-85 wins out.

I bought my 350D and 17-85 IS and a 50mm 1.8 prime lense off AC-foto and its was the cheapest deal i could fine, very fast delivery and great for questions too, if you can afford the 30D and the 17-85, go for it, but other wise the 350D will do nicely.
S.

As I see it the thread originator is deciding between a 20D and a 30D so why discuss the 350D? I have a 350D and am happy with it. Maybe the TO would not be.

Fionn

ok
I was thinking at trying my hand at some photography for a good while and had seriously considered a high end point & shoot eventually tho, i got a Canon 350 D and a kit lens after weighing up all the other choices. i believe it's was an ok decision. The price was a factor, the point & shoot was almost the same price and may have been ok for what i wanted however with this i have a base from which (if i ever start taking pics) to start from and also (if i ever get money) i can build on a collection of lenses, remember the 'S' series of lens will only fit certain EF cameras so are not as future proofed as the higher quality lenses.
The only thing i'll say is i'm happy enough to try and learn with what i invested in and see where that goes, sorta walk before you run !!

peace!

ChityWest

My vote would be get the best camera body you can afford - then add to your lens collection over time.

Even if the camera you get is beyond your ability you will grow into it and it will take longer to get constrained by it - so it would be of more use to you for a longer period of time.

Fionn

which is more important or more benefit

good lenses or good camera?

rabbitinlights

Good question, one without the other is pointless though, as someone said the kit lense on the 30D would be a waste, but if you were gonna get a decent lense soon after then it would be worth getting the kit lense with it for a while, but if your not doing large prints of your shots, is it really worth spending the extra money on the 30D over something like the 350D, especially as they are both non-full frame DSLR.

evilhomer

The reason I was looking at the 20D/30D is that I plan on doing a lot of wildlife photography where the buffer size and spot metering would help.

ladgie353

Another important advantages of the 20/30 series over the 350 is the viewfinder. Go into a shop and look through both one after the other with the same lens on the body.
Between the 20 and 30, I would go for the 20 and keep the difference to start funding that lens collection. 2nd resale value will be hopeless anyway...
L

rymus

joolsveer wrote:

I wouldn't buy a 20D as they are obsolete now. If I wanted to trade in in the future the next camera I would go for would be the 30D without a doubt.

Obsolete? Are you mad? The 30D is nothing more than a 20D with a couple of extra bits stuck on. The extra expense in no way justifies the small amount of change. The 20D is still very much a capable and top quality bit of kit. In no universe out there is the 30D an upgrade for the 20. In fact, if you had a 20 and were thinking about upgrading to a 30, you should have your assets frozen until you come to your senses.

One logical upgrade from a 20D is to the likes of a 1D MKIIn.

andy1249

I have the 20D , and the 28-135 IS lens , that lens is pretty much the main workhorse for me , it is a rare shot that cant be done with that lens.

With regards to the 20D , it is much faster than the 350D , at 5fps instead of 3fps, and for some wildlife photography that is a definite advantage , there is no difference in speed between the 20D and the 30D.

In terms of handling between the 20D/30D and the 350D and also in build quality the 20D/30D wins hands down , it has a much better grip , and feels more solid than a 350D.

For wildlife photography I'd recommend the 20D , the 30D as said above , is not worth the extra money , it has a bigger LCD screen but whether thats worth the extra 2 hundred is definitely debateable.

evilhomer

Ok so if I go for the 20D for €1069

What Glass would you buy with €300-€350.
Bearing in mind I would like to do some wildlife stuff?

evilhomer

lots of threads started today and I got washed away to the "second page of doom"

Just a quick bump cause I want to place my order Mon or Tuesday

sorry if this annoys anyone

andy1249

I dont have it myself but the brother does , and there are some threads here mentioning this lens , its apparently a great lens for the money and falls well within your budget ,

http://www.komplett.ie/k/ki.asp?sku=311090

Check out technik-direckt as well , they have some great prices on lens

ChityWest

evilhomer wrote:

lots of threads started today and I got washed away to the "second page of doom"

Just a quick bump cause I want to place my order Mon or Tuesday

sorry if this annoys anyone

(That second page is doom alright - no one ever goes there and if they do they dont come back ! We need longer pages for this forum I reckon. )
- -

If its specifically for wildlife stuff from a distance your going to have to get a zoom.

If you go with just one good zoom that will limit you when it comes to more general use. Though having said that portraits through a zoom (from about 15 feet away) can look really good - theres great bokeh effect from a zoom portrait. IF you do only get a zoom dont expect to get any shots of say buildings from reasonably close up - you will only get a detail on a building unless your far away. Group shots are not going to be easy either.

If I were you and wildlife shots were not the primary use fot it I would go for a good prime lens. You could probably get a few other cheaper ones instead of one good one - but you may well end up kicking yourself later on. Just my 2 cents.