20D or Rebel XT now?

External Since: Nov 29, 2004 Posts: 10

From all the advice and tips I have received lately it appears for me that
Canon is the way to go for sports, action, general use and low light
wildlife (hunting). I understand the Canon IS is better than the Nikon VR
(maybe not by much however) Canon has a broader lens selection than does
Nikon (which has quite a few). So it boils down to getting a 20D now, and
not much else, or getting a Rebel XT now, and having a chunk of cash left
over to put towards a nice lens now--such as a 70-200 f/2.8L IS. So--what
do you guys suggest? For me, I am sure both cameras would take fine photos.
The 20D is 2fps faster, and has ISO 3200 (great for hunting racks on deer
for cataloging what's out there).

The D70 has been out there for over a year so I am sure it will be replaced
soon just as the original Rebel has been. I am pretty certain the 20D is
going to upgraded too in the next 9 months or so--therefore the XT would
remain "current" longer. Besides, my sister would take an XT off my hands a
year from now real fast!

As for a general purpose walk-about lens--should I stick with the "kit lens"
or get the 17-85 IS lens? (with either camera).

Or should I just say the heck with it and put another grand on the card and
get the 20D!

As for flash--should I get the new 580EX or the older 550EX or the smaller
420EX? I think the 550EX is too big to carry around often in a pocket and
the 580EX is pretty high priced--do most get buy with the 420EX? What about
the Sigma flash?

Thanks--Rudy

External Since: Aug 30, 2004 Posts: 278

Rudy--K8SWD wrote:

> From all the advice and tips I have received lately it appears for me that
> Canon is the way to go for sports, action, general use and low light
> wildlife (hunting). I understand the Canon IS is better than the Nikon VR
> (maybe not by much however) Canon has a broader lens selection than does
> Nikon (which has quite a few). So it boils down to getting a 20D now, and
> not much else, or getting a Rebel XT now, and having a chunk of cash left
> over to put towards a nice lens now--such as a 70-200 f/2.8L IS. So--what
> do you guys suggest? For me, I am sure both cameras would take fine photos.
> The 20D is 2fps faster, and has ISO 3200 (great for hunting racks on deer
> for cataloging what's out there).
>
> The D70 has been out there for over a year so I am sure it will be replaced
> soon just as the original Rebel has been. I am pretty certain the 20D is
> going to upgraded too in the next 9 months or so--therefore the XT would
> remain "current" longer. Besides, my sister would take an XT off my hands a
> year from now real fast!
>
> As for a general purpose walk-about lens--should I stick with the "kit lens"
> or get the 17-85 IS lens? (with either camera).
>
> Or should I just say the heck with it and put another grand on the card and
> get the 20D!
>
> As for flash--should I get the new 580EX or the older 550EX or the smaller
> 420EX? I think the 550EX is too big to carry around often in a pocket and
> the 580EX is pretty high priced--do most get buy with the 420EX? What about
> the Sigma flash?

Personally, if I could "afford" it, I'd bite the bullet and get the 20D;
it's a far more substantial camera just a few FPS more. But that's me.
The 18-55mm kit lens with the DRebel is a remarkably good lens... for
what's ostensibly a $50 lens. Given the choice I'd much prefer the
17-85 IS. Actually, IS aside, I'd pick up a Tamron 28-300 XR, as I've
always really liked Tamron's glass for the price (they're no Canon
L-series, but neither is the price tag).

As far as flash, I have a 420EX, and it's a pretty nice unit. I've used
it effectively at stock car races (always be careful never to shoot
flash at the front of the car in low light!).