Buying Canon EOS 20D in NYC

aaf

Here goes. I'm going to New York in Dec and am strongly thinking of getting myself a Canon EOS 20D. My sis has one and it really does take fantastic photos. I'm not a photographer but it's something I've been keen to get into for a good while now, maybe even do an evening class to help me get started. I'm pretty handy with Adobe Photoshop and am very tech savvy so no probs on that end. I'm going to have a budget of about $2,000 and I might be able to stretch that a bit more if needs be. I'll probably get all my equip in bhphotovideo but am open to suggestions. I was going to go for one of the packages there with the 17-85mm lense and 2GB CF card. Any opinions on this package? Overall, I want the base, more than one lense if possible, a spare battery, decent size CF card and a bag. I am a beginner but would like to get as much as I can afford right now as it may be a good few years before I'll be able to splash this much on photography again. Any help at all would be great. I know I'll have to post the manuals and receipts home from NYC to avoid customs. I have done a bit of research and while this thread was very informative regarding lenses, I don't think I'll be able to afford any of them.

elderlemon

Do you really need the 20D? If you are just starting why not get a cheaper body and invest in good quality lens. That way, as you get better you can replace the body and keep building on your lens collection. With a budget of 2K you can get the 350D/XT, a very nice Sigma 2.8 (18-50?) and possibly a Canon 70-200 F4 L (nice glass). A decent lens on the 350/Xt will give you stunning photos whereas an average kit lens on the 20D will give you just that - average photos.

aaf

elderlemon wrote:

Do you really need the 20D? If you are just starting why not get a cheaper body and invest in good quality lens. That way, as you get better you can replace the body and keep building on your lens collection. With a budget of 2K you can get the 350D/XT, a very nice Sigma 2.8 (18-50?) and possibly a Canon 70-200 F4 L (nice glass). A decent lens on the 350/Xt will give you stunning photos whereas an average kit lens on the 20D will give you just that - average photos.

Will take that into consideration but as I said, it's going to be a good while before I can spend this much on photography so I was thinking of getting the 20D with the average lenses, get used to it and add lenses as I go. My sis has a few lenses I could borrow from time to time anyway.

elderlemon

Your budget is $2K. So work though the numbers.


20D/18-55 lens/2GB compact flash $1600
= total $1600

350/XT/18-55 lens/1gb sandisk $950
Canon 70-200 F4 L lens $569
= Total $1500

to me the 350 is the much better option. You get a camera body you can use for a year or two and lean. plus you get a decent high quality lens that you will have forever.

DotOrg

i personally thinkit is crazy to spend so much on a camera body and then stick the cheapest crap lens canon has to offer on the front of it.

unless you are printing bigger than 12x8, i'd strongly advise getting a 300D and spending the rest of the money on quality lenses

jacket

Digital camera bodies get cheaper and better as fast as computers.

Lens don't.

Spend the money on the lens.

Sigma 30mm 1.4, a short zoom (17-85?) and a decent telephoto (80-200 or Sigma 50-500 if you lift weights) and a 350XT body.

Takeshi_Kovacs

if you buy it, make sure you throw away the packaging it came in, and put the manuals in different bag , so as it looks like you didn't just buy it over there, otherwise customs might be looking for a cut out of it..
keep the reciept of course though

DotOrg

aaf wrote:

am strongly thinking of getting myself a Canon EOS 20D. My sis has one and it really does take fantastic photos.

No it doesn't! the person behind the camera takes fantastic photos, the camera is just a box for capturing what the photographer sees and uses the lens to aim them into the box in the way they want

preilly79

if photography is a new pursuit for you might i recommend the following:

350d
1gb cf card
17-40 f/4 L
lowepro nova 4 bag

i bought all the gar above only last week and it's an amazing little setup (€2147 ... conns cameras). luckily, i had two other prime lenses, a 50mm f/1.8 and an 85 f/1.8.

for me, this covers all my bases as i shoot mainly environmental portraiture, regular portraiture and landscapes, and the odd concert every now and then.

the lens i use the most? the fast 50. you're going to want to learn photography, and any evening class worth its salt will recommend a normal aspect prime lens. this is not in the interest of saving money, or restricting you to a particular scene; put simply, it helps you develop a mental lens that will allow you to look at the world around you and pick out a scene that would look perfect in that lens.

a fixed lens will help you learn about composition, depth of field etc, and will do justice the sensor that sits behind the lens. these primes are very contrasty, very sharp, have excellent bokeh, and are fast so that you can use them in low light situations, often the time with you come across the most interesting light and shade (when the sun is low).

obviously, this is just my two cents, but it's a view many people share and i think it would do you the world of good to learn this way.

ps; in general, primes tend to give much more bang for the buck in terms of performance and quality, and you'll revel in both the pictures they help you take and the fun in adding a new lens to your kit by discovering the opportunities that that new lens will offer.

preilly79

oh, one other thing to note: canon ireland will NOT honour the warranty on any digital camera body bought outside the EU. lenses as far as im aware will come with an international warranty but if the body breaks you'll either have to pay to have it repaired here, of pay to ship it back to the states and wait 6 weeks (at least) while it gets repaired there.

aaf

DotOrg wrote:

No it doesn't! the person behind the camera takes fantastic photos, the camera is just a box for capturing what the photographer sees and uses the lens to aim them into the box in the way they want

Well, her 8M Canon sure does take a better pic than my 2M FujiFilm A201! It was also able to capture some great shots of bison jumping over a road in Africa! I'll check out some reviews of the 300D and 350 XT

blorg

You might consider 2x 1gb cards, should be cheaper than a 2gb and if you get an Image Bank type thing (_highly_ recommended if you ever take your camera away for longer than a few days) then you can keep taking photos on card two while card one is copying over.

leinsterman

Hi,

I am relatively new to digital photography too ... my last camera was an old EOS500 with two lenses (one Sigma 28 - 75mm and the other a Tamron 75 - 200mm). I purchased this camera second hand in Buenos Aires after my general purpose digital camera (a Canon Sureshot) was damaged on a long trip through Sth America.

It was this trip and a subsequent one a year later that really got me into photography. As a result I decided to get a digital SLR.... I looked very closely at the details including specification, ergonomics, trying out each camera etc. I considered the 20d, 300d and the 350d (which was only just on the market at the time). I ended up with the 20d for the following reasons -

• I tend to take pictures in harsh environments (try Antarctica for example). The 20d seems more able to take a beating, having for example a metal body.
• I don't want to upgrade for a good while if possible. If you can afford it then, the argument over rapidly advancing technology making it obsolete says to me "get the most advanced camera you can afford now" not "get the second cheapest and wait for a better one to come along" as a previous commenter has indicated.
• The 20d handles better than the others and feels better in the hand.
• I like having more features than I use, it is far better than not having the feature you need.
• I could afford the extra $400 for the camera (in my case) ... so why not ?
• I do lots of different types of photography including sports ... for sport you need something capable of shooting as many frames per second as possible
• At the time the 20d was still getting rave reviews everywhere.
• I like the layout of the 20d better than the 350d/300d

To be honest the 300d or 350d would more than meet my requirements... but I went for the 20d anyway. I do not regret this decision at all as it produces wonderful pictures even with my cheapest older Tamron lens. So my advice is go for it!! ... but do consider getting a better lens too!

I think the advice you are getting re buying the 350d and getting a better lens is good advice but you can get great deals for 20d body with an upgraded lens in New York if you look around. In addition lens technology is also advancing for example currently Image Stabilisation is quite expensive .. but it is getting cheaper (on this note - I recommend getting an IS lens for your long lens if you can afford it, I regretted not spending an extra $250 to buy a 75-300mm Canon IS zoom after having the use of one for a few days) ...

In my case I looked at lots of shops including B&H, Abe's of Maine and J&R (I had used B&H & J&R before ... and can recommend either). In the end I went to Abe's of Maine (strangely enough the shop is in Brooklyn and not Maine!! ... www.abesofmaine.com). I found Abe's the be excellent at least on a par with the others ... They offer better prices on package deals (though not always) and the guy I dealt with (Charles was his name) had a great attitude and knows his cameras ... give them a call before you go and ask to talk with Charles in the shop (their on line sales guys are not so impressive).

In my case I bought the following for $1750 including tax -

20d body kit including -
20d (of course!!)
Sigma 18-125mm f/3.5-5.6 DC Lens for Digital SLR Cameras (great lens, I love it ... better than the Canon standard one, though the Canon 17-85mm IS lens package option was tempting)
Extra battery (not Canon made)
2GB CF Type II (my advice - get the biggest memory you can afford ... you will need it, especailly if you shoot RAW or max JPEG settings)
Case (which is cheap garbage and I never use)
Cleaning kits for CF and Lenses (cheap crap and not really important in the overall package but useful nonetheless)

I also bought the following at Glazers camera in Seattle during another trip -

Canon Speedlight 400 flash (very useful if you are doing lots of indoor sports and family work ... the integral flash is not very good outside 5m range and can't be bounced)
Canon 75-300mm USM Zoom (this is an OK lens for sports but the guy in the shop strongly urged me to spend an additional $240 to get the IS version of this lens ... I wish I had listened to him !!)
Canon BG-E2 battery adaptor

Lots of stuff I know, but I use everything ... all of the time ... so there is nothing I don't recommend for your kit! ... you definitely should consider buying a second longer lens so long as it does not mean a compromise in quality.

Hope this is useful. Enjoy the new toy !!

Simon

leinsterman

... forgot to add to my previous message ...

If like me you go on long trips to remote places then consider getting yourself an iRiver h340 MP3 player ... why ? ... well apart from the fact that it is an excellent open platform 40GB HD MP3 player with far better sound quality than the iPod and video playback capability ... not to mention that fact that the iPod has a tendancy to explode with long usage at altitudes over 3000m (seen this happen to 3 players) ... it also has USB on the go ...

This means you can directly attach your CF to it without a PC host to backup your pictures and/or empty the card ... it is a slow and cumbersome process but well wort it!!

Simon

aaf

Thanks Leinsterman for that. Will be deciding over the next few months on which camera to go for. I already have an iRiver H140. Don't know if it has USB on the fly jobbie but I'm sure it has especially with the fantastic rockbox firmware. Will start to get up to speed on lenses. Thanks

tonyj

aaf wrote:

Well, her 8M Canon sure does take a better pic than my 2M FujiFilm A201! It was also able to capture some great shots of bison jumping over a road in Africa!

You think megapixels have anything to do with it?

Here's what Ken Rockwell has to say....

Why Your Camera Does Not Matter
Why is it that with over 60 years of improvements in cameras, lens sharpness and film grain, resolution and dynamic range that no one has been able to equal what Ansel Adams did back in the 1940s? Ansel didn't even have Photoshop! How did he do it? Most attempts fall short, some are as good but different like Jack Dykinga, but no one is equal.

Why is it that photographers loaded with the most extraordinary gear who use the internet to get the exact GPS coordinates of Jack's or Ansel's photo locations and hike out there with the image in hand to ensure an exact copy (illegal by US copyright laws and common decency), that they get something that might look similar, but lacks all the impact and emotion of the original they thought they copied?

Why is it that even though everyone knows that Photoshop can be used to take any bad image and turn it into a masterpiece, that even after hours of massaging it looks worse than when one started?

Maybe because it's entirely an artist's eye, patience and skill that makes an image and not his tools.

Click Here for rest of article....

aaf

tonyj wrote:

You think megapixels have anything to do with it?

Here's what Ken Rockwell has to say....

Well, the more information you capture, the more you have to play with! Well, that's my spin on it.

leinsterman

tonyj wrote:

You think megapixels have anything to do with it?

Here's what Ken Rockwell has to say....

Fair enough ... we all know taking a good photo takes a lot of skill and patience ... I totally agree with you on that point but ...

Do you really think Ansel Adams used low quality gear to take the majority of his masterpeices ? ... here's a quote to consider -

"... it is easy to confuse the hope for accomplishment with the desire to posess superior instruments. It is nonetheless true that quality is an important criterion when evaluating camera equipment, as are durability and function. Inferior equipment will prove to be a false economy in the long run. As his work evolves, the photographer should plan to alter and refine his equipment to meet changing requirements ...... Ideally, the photographer will choose basic equipment of adequate quality, with nothing that is inessential. It is certainly preferable to work from simple equipment up, as needs dictate, than to "overbuy" equipment as first. Starting with basic equipment allows the phtographer to develop a full understanding of the capabilities of each unit before advancing to other instruments ....... Do not lose sight of the essential importance of craft; every worthwhile human endeavor depends on the highest levels of concentration and mastery of basic tools...... The next time you pick up a camera think of it not as an inflexible and automatic robot, but as a flexible instrument which you must understand to properly use. An electronic and optical miracle creates nothing on its own! Whatever beauty and excitement it can represent exist in your mind and spirt to begin with." Ansel Adams, Carmel, California, January 1980 ..Taken from the introduction to the book "The Camera"

As I see it you are spot on to say the real skill is in the photographer not the camera ... but as YOUR hero Ansel indicated quality equipment is also important ... you have your head up your bum replying to a request for advice on buying equipment with such arrogance and elitism !!! Try putting you apparent knowledge to good use next time ... and actually answering the question you have been asked rather and making a feeble attempt to show off!!

tonyj

leinsterman wrote:

Try putting you apparent knowledge to good use next time ... and actually answering the question you have been asked rather and making a feeble attempt to show off!!

Are you talking to me or Ken Rockwell? - It was his article, not mine.

Perhaps you should take up the discussion with him directly, as I don't think he reads these forums;

ken@kenrockwell.com

leinsterman

tonyj wrote:

Are you talking to me or Ken Rockwell? - It was his article, not mine.

Perhaps you should take up the discussion with him directly, as I don't think he reads these forums;

ken@kenrockwell.com

Actually I owe you an apology ...

I actually meant to have a go at what I thought was an attempt at elitism ... you tend to get a lot of it in these fora ... but on reflection and having read the full article you referenced, it is quite an interesting take on things ... but I don't agree fully with it ... good equipment lasts longer and makes it easier to get good results ... simplicity is key for a beginner but not at the expense of quality, which usually (though not always) comes with a budget... To follow form the Rockwell analogy ... I doubt Michael Schumacher would win too many races driving a ford fiesta against his Ferrari... the key is having the right equipment fit for purpose ...

On this basis perhaps the approach many are offering of getting a good lens and buying the simpler and cheaper 350d is the best option for aaf ... but I still love my over specified 20d

tonyj

leinsterman wrote:

Actually I owe you an apology ...

I actually meant to have a go at what I thought was an attempt at elitism ... you tend to get a lot of it in these fora

Hey, no problem. Besides, I can hardly afford to be elitist with my lowly Coolpix 990 It's just that when I start obsessing over equipment, I find these Rockwell articles help put things into perspective.

leinsterman wrote:

To follow form the Rockwell analogy ... I doubt Michael Schumacher would win too many races driving a ford fiesta against his Ferrari... the key is having the right equipment fit for purpose ...

Absolutely. And perhaps a relevant question to the original poster would be what sort of conditions they're using the camera under? Does aaf plan to take panoramas from the top of Mount Everest, or swans down in Bushy Park?

leinsterman wrote:

On this basis perhaps the approach many are offering of getting a good lens and buying the simpler and cheaper 350d is the best option for aaf ... but I still love my over specified 20d

Yes, the 20D is a lovely piece of kit indeed. But working within the constraints of the budget I'd tend to go with the 'good lens' advice, over spending extra on the body.

A nice sharp 50mm 1.8 (which I still love using on my film camera, and what better way to learn photography?) and a zoom.

It's easier and cheaper to upgrade the body 4 or 5 years down the line (when Canon have released their 20megapixel full-frame for $500...), rather than start out with cheap glass and be stuck with it.