Xt vs. 20D

OK...I looked at both today in a camera store, and even though I was leaning
towards the 20D....is there any reason I shouldn't get the XT given that
I'll have to buy a "kit" lens with the unit? I mean, it seemed odd to me to
buy a 20d with the same kit lens as an XT for 500 samolians more....it seems
if I get the 20D I should get some good glass which brings the tag up to
around 1900 bux roughly,....you know? I'm a bang for the buck type guy with
no existing lenses other for my old AE-1..

thanks for swaying me one way or the other...

rm

"Ricardo Morte" wrote in message
...
OK...I looked at both today in a camera store, and even though I was
leaning towards the 20D....is there any reason I shouldn't get the XT
given that I'll have to buy a "kit" lens with the unit? I mean, it seemed
odd to me to buy a 20d with the same kit lens as an XT for 500 samolians
more....it seems if I get the 20D I should get some good glass which
brings the tag up to around 1900 bux roughly,....you know? I'm a bang for
the buck type guy with no existing lenses other for my old AE-1..

thanks for swaying me one way or the other...

rm




You can get a 20D kit with the 17-85 f4-5.6 IS USM lens for $1999, or so.
Or buy either body only, and get the lens of your choice. You don't have to
get it with any lens at all.
BTW, I have the 20D, and so does my wife. We both feel the Rebel XT is too
small for comfortable handling, but you may fell different.

--
Skip Middleton
http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com

"Ricardo Morte" wrote in message
...
OK...I looked at both today in a camera store, and even though I was
leaning towards the 20D....is there any reason I shouldn't get the XT
given that I'll have to buy a "kit" lens with the unit? I mean, it seemed
odd to me to buy a 20d with the same kit lens as an XT for 500 samolians
more....it seems if I get the 20D I should get some good glass which
brings the tag up to around 1900 bux roughly,....you know? I'm a bang for
the buck type guy with no existing lenses other for my old AE-1..

thanks for swaying me one way or the other...



Talked to a professional friend of mine about this very subject when the XT
first came out. His opinion was that it may be better to get the XT body
and then spend money for a good lens. Sounded like a good idea until my
local store got a few XT's in and I had a chance to hold one. IMO it's way
too small. So... I'm not holding off for a 20D to go along with my 300D.

--

Rob

"Robert R Kircher, Jr." wrote in message
...

"Ricardo Morte" wrote in message
...
OK...I looked at both today in a camera store, and even though I was
leaning towards the 20D....is there any reason I shouldn't get the XT
given that I'll have to buy a "kit" lens with the unit? I mean, it
seemed odd to me to buy a 20d with the same kit lens as an XT for 500
samolians more....it seems if I get the 20D I should get some good glass
which brings the tag up to around 1900 bux roughly,....you know? I'm a
bang for the buck type guy with no existing lenses other for my old
AE-1..

thanks for swaying me one way or the other...



Talked to a professional friend of mine about this very subject when the
XT first came out. His opinion was that it may be better to get the XT
body and then spend money for a good lens. Sounded like a good idea until
my local store got a few XT's in and I had a chance to hold one. IMO it's
way too small. So... I'm not holding off for a 20D to go along with my
300D.

--

Rob

I hear ya....that's what I'm thinking too, although I may change my
mind....damn the choices !!

i have the xt and it is great the 20d just has a metel body. the images are
the same from both cameras. i got the xt with the 17-85 f4-5.6 IS USM lens
an i love it the 18-55 f3.5-5.6 kit lens is junk canon ****ed up on that
lens. just get a good lens for what ever camera you get.

Vinnie...



"Ricardo Morte" wrote in message
...

"Robert R Kircher, Jr." wrote in message
...

"Ricardo Morte" wrote in message
...
OK...I looked at both today in a camera store, and even though I was
leaning towards the 20D....is there any reason I shouldn't get the XT
given that I'll have to buy a "kit" lens with the unit? I mean, it
seemed odd to me to buy a 20d with the same kit lens as an XT for 500
samolians more....it seems if I get the 20D I should get some good glass
which brings the tag up to around 1900 bux roughly,....you know? I'm a
bang for the buck type guy with no existing lenses other for my old
AE-1..

thanks for swaying me one way or the other...



Talked to a professional friend of mine about this very subject when the
XT first came out. His opinion was that it may be better to get the XT
body and then spend money for a good lens. Sounded like a good idea until
my local store got a few XT's in and I had a chance to hold one. IMO it's
way too small. So... I'm not holding off for a 20D to go along with my
300D.

--

Rob

I hear ya....that's what I'm thinking too, although I may change my
mind....damn the choices !!

"Vinnie" wrote in message
. ..
i have the xt and it is great the 20d just has a metel body. the images are
the same from both cameras. i got the xt with the 17-85 f4-5.6 IS USM lens
an i love it the 18-55 f3.5-5.6 kit lens is junk canon ****ed up on that
lens. just get a good lens for what ever camera you get.

Vinnie...

There's no doubt that the XT is great camera. My only issue was size.
Coming from my 300D the XT was just too small.

--

Rob

Have a careful read of the following comparison - I think it'll answer your
question ...

http://www.bobatkins.com/photography...xt_vs_20d.html

From my own observations with the 350D ...

It IS a 'petite' camera, but I haven't had any issues operating it with
"fairly average sized blokes hands" - and if size is an issue then there is
an optional battery grip that you can purchase.

Having said that, the 20D appears to have a modest number of advantages, and
is by all accounts a more solid camera. I guess the fact that it weighs more
would be an advantage or a dis-advantage depending on which you'd prefer.

I tend to think of the 20D as being "one step up" from the 350D.

Cheers,

CC


"Ricardo Morte" wrote in message
...
OK...I looked at both today in a camera store, and even though I was
leaning towards the 20D....is there any reason I shouldn't get the XT
given that I'll have to buy a "kit" lens with the unit? I mean, it seemed
odd to me to buy a 20d with the same kit lens as an XT for 500 samolians
more....it seems if I get the 20D I should get some good glass which
brings the tag up to around 1900 bux roughly,....you know? I'm a bang for
the buck type guy with no existing lenses other for my old AE-1..

thanks for swaying me one way or the other...

rm

John A. Stovall wrote:
[]
My question to you is why would anyone buy any camera with the "kit"
lens?

Because it's the cheapest way to get up and running?

David

"Cockpit Colin" wrote in message
...
Have a careful read of the following comparison - I think it'll answer
your question ...

http://www.bobatkins.com/photography...xt_vs_20d.html


That's an excellent comparison and after reading it I'm glad I decided to
hold out for a 20D.

--

Rob

In article ,
Ricardo Morte wrote:


OK...I looked at both today in a camera store, and even though I was leaning
towards the 20D....is there any reason I shouldn't get the XT given that
I'll have to buy a "kit" lens with the unit? I mean, it seemed odd to me to
buy a 20d with the same kit lens as an XT for 500 samolians more....it seems
if I get the 20D I should get some good glass which brings the tag up to
around 1900 bux roughly,....you know? I'm a bang for the buck type guy with
no existing lenses other for my old AE-1..

thanks for swaying me one way or the other...

If the XT is comfortable in your hand, it may be a good value.
I couldn't stand it. That alone did not justify the extra money
for the 20D, but together with a couple of other usability issues,
it was no contest. The information you get in the LCD on the top
of the 20D is absolutely essential, and *very* handy on top, this seems
like a small thing but I don't think so.

The control you get from the dial on the back of the 20D turns out to be
extremely useful. If you shoot any kind of action at all, the 20D buffer
is a huge win. If you shoot natural light indoors, the 20D autofocus
and exposure is better. 20D battery life is reported to be much better.
(And battery life was one of my main criteria.) I appreciate a metal
camera body more than plastic.

The kit lens is plastic with a wobbly front element. I can't believe
Canon made this lens. But, it actually is fairly good, and I doubt
you'll find an 18mm that can replace it for anywhere near the price.

One motivation for getting into the Canon system is the excellent lenses
that are available. That's assuming you have the budget for these
lenses, or whether you expect to. The f/1.4 50mm EF/USM lens is truly
remarkable. The f/1.8 50mm lens is only $75 and gets the job done.
There are some infamous EF zoom lenses out there. You might get by with
an aftermarket lens like a Tamron, they range in quality and
performance. I'm not into Zooms at all. I want a very wide prime, a
very long prime, and I think I'll be done.