Help Choosing Canon 20D Setup (Body, lenses, flash, etc)

On Tue, 09 Nov 2004 21:10:01 +0000, A wrote:

Hello group. I am after advise on buying a Canon 20D setup, for a non
professional enthusiast.

Non-professional? Buy a 300D. I hear it is an excellent camera, as good as
anything else made by Canon.

Situation:
I am considering upgrading from 35mm to digital because I hate changing film
at crucial points, and also feel very restricted from experimenting with
film as much as digital. Another thing I hate is that sometimes there is a
film in my camera half used, when I want it developed. Also, I am PC
literate and am pretty familiar with Photoshop, so it would make sense to go
digital. Until now I have fought the need because I didn't think DSLR's
were capable of competing with 35mm SLR's on the functions they provide,
especially lock up, and start-up times.

So, what do I go for?

A head exam...

Body:
I am considering either a Canon 20D, or Minolta 7D, but the Canon seems to
have more spec. for the price, is available now, and has been tested by
users already. Nikon D70 is cheaper, but accessories are more expensive.
Also, the specs still don't match the 20D. Therefore, I think I will be
going for a 20D if anything.

What accessories are more expensive? That's a total fallacy. If anything
Canon accessories are way more expensive than Nikon's. There are also many
more Nikon accessories on the used market than there are Canon. Tubes,
bellows, lenses, converters, etc.

20D 'Normal' Lens Choices:
I am torn between the 17-55mm lens, and the 17-85 Image Stabiliser lens.
The main reason is NOT because one is a image stabiliser lens, but because
for the greater focal length which will allow for more flexibility in
'normal' use without changing lenses. Any recommendations?

Haven't used those lenses but if it is focal length you want then look at
the 28-135mm. USe the stiching function in the Canon software to do wide
angle stuff.

20D Telephoto Lens Choices:
Again, I am torn between two lenses. The choices are between the 75-300mm
USM, and the 75-300 Image Stabiliser lenses. The thing is, I have never had
a problem with blur when shooting at 300mm on non image stabiliser lenses in
the past. But, with a digital 35mm equivalent of 480mm, maybe the Image
Stabiliser lens would be the better choice. Or, would it be better to just
a tripod and not hand hold? Any recommendations?

IS works well.

20D Flash Choice:
I am also torn between two choices. The choices are between the 420EX, and
the 550EX. The 550EX has more manual controls, etc, but is big, heavy, and
needs a lot of understanding to get the most from it. It also works better
with 45 point autofocus, but the 20D only has 9 AF points, so it would be a
bit wasted. Power wise, the 550EX is only about 1/2 a stop behind the
420EX. (BTW, 580EX is another choice, but is the same as the 550EX, except
minor alterations to make it more efficient for digital users). Any
recommendations?

The 420EX is a waste of money. It has only one mode so you can't use it
manually. You would be better off with a Vivitar 283 if it's power and
price you want.

Media Storage Choices:
I have decided to go for 2GB (Approx. 220 RAW photos). The choices are
between the IBM/Hitachi 2GB Microdrive, and an equivalent fast CF card. The
Microdrive seems to be better value for money in this respect. Any
recommendations?

Don't put all your eggs in one basket. It is better to buy more smaller
cards than one bigger one. If your one big card fails (and they do) then
you are poked. Get 4x512MB's or 2x1GB's.

Conclusion:
Bear in mind that money is hard to come by, so I do not want spend it
unnecessarily, as I am not a pro making money from the photos. Also,
another alternative would be to stick with my 35mm setup until prices come
down and DSLR's become better value for money. After all, spending this
amount will not really compensate for the processing and developing costs.
Although will have more benefits.

Money is hard to come by? Why?

Stick with your 35mm if money is a problem.

On Tue, 09 Nov 2004 21:10:01 +0000, A wrote:

Hello group. I am after advise on buying a Canon 20D setup, for a non
professional enthusiast.

Non-professional? Buy a 300D. I hear it is an excellent camera, as good as
anything else made by Canon.

Situation:
I am considering upgrading from 35mm to digital because I hate changing film
at crucial points, and also feel very restricted from experimenting with
film as much as digital. Another thing I hate is that sometimes there is a
film in my camera half used, when I want it developed. Also, I am PC
literate and am pretty familiar with Photoshop, so it would make sense to go
digital. Until now I have fought the need because I didn't think DSLR's
were capable of competing with 35mm SLR's on the functions they provide,
especially lock up, and start-up times.

So, what do I go for?

A head exam...

Body:
I am considering either a Canon 20D, or Minolta 7D, but the Canon seems to
have more spec. for the price, is available now, and has been tested by
users already. Nikon D70 is cheaper, but accessories are more expensive.
Also, the specs still don't match the 20D. Therefore, I think I will be
going for a 20D if anything.

What accessories are more expensive? That's a total fallacy. If anything
Canon accessories are way more expensive than Nikon's. There are also many
more Nikon accessories on the used market than there are Canon. Tubes,
bellows, lenses, converters, etc.

20D 'Normal' Lens Choices:
I am torn between the 17-55mm lens, and the 17-85 Image Stabiliser lens.
The main reason is NOT because one is a image stabiliser lens, but because
for the greater focal length which will allow for more flexibility in
'normal' use without changing lenses. Any recommendations?

Haven't used those lenses but if it is focal length you want then look at
the 28-135mm. USe the stiching function in the Canon software to do wide
angle stuff.

20D Telephoto Lens Choices:
Again, I am torn between two lenses. The choices are between the 75-300mm
USM, and the 75-300 Image Stabiliser lenses. The thing is, I have never had
a problem with blur when shooting at 300mm on non image stabiliser lenses in
the past. But, with a digital 35mm equivalent of 480mm, maybe the Image
Stabiliser lens would be the better choice. Or, would it be better to just
a tripod and not hand hold? Any recommendations?

IS works well.

20D Flash Choice:
I am also torn between two choices. The choices are between the 420EX, and
the 550EX. The 550EX has more manual controls, etc, but is big, heavy, and
needs a lot of understanding to get the most from it. It also works better
with 45 point autofocus, but the 20D only has 9 AF points, so it would be a
bit wasted. Power wise, the 550EX is only about 1/2 a stop behind the
420EX. (BTW, 580EX is another choice, but is the same as the 550EX, except
minor alterations to make it more efficient for digital users). Any
recommendations?

The 420EX is a waste of money. It has only one mode so you can't use it
manually. You would be better off with a Vivitar 283 if it's power and
price you want.

Media Storage Choices:
I have decided to go for 2GB (Approx. 220 RAW photos). The choices are
between the IBM/Hitachi 2GB Microdrive, and an equivalent fast CF card. The
Microdrive seems to be better value for money in this respect. Any
recommendations?

Don't put all your eggs in one basket. It is better to buy more smaller
cards than one bigger one. If your one big card fails (and they do) then
you are poked. Get 4x512MB's or 2x1GB's.

Conclusion:
Bear in mind that money is hard to come by, so I do not want spend it
unnecessarily, as I am not a pro making money from the photos. Also,
another alternative would be to stick with my 35mm setup until prices come
down and DSLR's become better value for money. After all, spending this
amount will not really compensate for the processing and developing costs.
Although will have more benefits.

Money is hard to come by? Why?

Stick with your 35mm if money is a problem.

"Justín Käse" wrote in message
news:4193c31b.3744638@chupacabra...
In posted on 09 Nov
2004 20:16:02 -0500, Michael Meissner wrote:

Note, there is the flip side about needing to change a memory card at
crucial
points. One of the prosumer cameras (Panasonic FZ20) I give negative
marks to
because the memory card slot is on the bottom, and I would have to
disassemble
the camera from the flash bracket to change memory (and this summer, I was
photographing an event and did have to change memory cards fast).

I mentioned a technique called "tactical reload" in another thread about
digital versus film. When you get to a lull in your event, go ahead and
change memcards instead of waiting until they fill up, which usually
coincides with peak subject activity. g

--

JK

I do the same thing. I think I've actually filled a card twice in the last
six months, otherwise I usually have about 5-10 shots left when I change.

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

"Justín Käse" wrote in message
news:4193c31b.3744638@chupacabra...
In posted on 09 Nov
2004 20:16:02 -0500, Michael Meissner wrote:

Note, there is the flip side about needing to change a memory card at
crucial
points. One of the prosumer cameras (Panasonic FZ20) I give negative
marks to
because the memory card slot is on the bottom, and I would have to
disassemble
the camera from the flash bracket to change memory (and this summer, I was
photographing an event and did have to change memory cards fast).

I mentioned a technique called "tactical reload" in another thread about
digital versus film. When you get to a lull in your event, go ahead and
change memcards instead of waiting until they fill up, which usually
coincides with peak subject activity. g

--

JK

I do the same thing. I think I've actually filled a card twice in the last
six months, otherwise I usually have about 5-10 shots left when I change.

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

Justín Käse writes:

In posted on 09 Nov
2004 20:16:02 -0500, Michael Meissner wrote:

Note, there is the flip side about needing to change a memory card at
crucial points. One of the prosumer cameras (Panasonic FZ20) I give
negative marks to because the memory card slot is on the bottom, and I would
have to disassemble the camera from the flash bracket to change memory (and
this summer, I was photographing an event and did have to change memory
cards fast).

I mentioned a technique called "tactical reload" in another thread about
digital versus film. When you get to a lull in your event, go ahead and
change memcards instead of waiting until they fill up, which usually
coincides with peak subject activity. g

Yep, though that really only works if you have plenty of memory cards or a
reasonably fast portable storage drive that you can offload the cards. In the
past I have had barely enough memory cards for the day. Fortunately, I just
got a CompactDrive which is fairly fast (unlike the glacial x-drive II that it
replaced -- however in my last shoot, I had some problems offloading the
cards so I don't trust it as much as I used to).

--
Michael Meissner
email:
http://www.the-meissners.org

Ken Tough wrote:

But I've had half-used film in my FE2 for probably years now, and


"half-used film" -- does that mean it's underexposed by 1 stop?




;-)


Cheers,
Alan


--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- [SI gallery]: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- [SI rulz]: http://www.aliasimages.com/si/rulz.html
-- e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch.

Bruce Chang wrote:
As to the microdrive, I could see it draining power much faster and easier
than the IS lens. Remember, the IS lens just has a gyro in it. The
microdrive has platters (more likely heavier than the gyro) and a head and
it doesn't typically shut off until the camera shuts off. The IS function
is only on when you press the shutter button to compose a picture and stays
on for only seconds after you've taken your finger off.

-Bruce

My microdrive spins down shortly after the files are written to it.

-Dave

In message , A
writes
Hello group. I am after advise on buying a Canon 20D setup, for a non
professional enthusiast.

Situation:
I am considering upgrading from 35mm to digital because I hate changing film
at crucial points, and also feel very restricted from experimenting with
film as much as digital. Another thing I hate is that sometimes there is a
film in my camera half used, when I want it developed. Also, I am PC
literate and am pretty familiar with Photoshop, so it would make sense to go
digital. Until now I have fought the need because I didn't think DSLR's
were capable of competing with 35mm SLR's on the functions they provide,
especially lock up, and start-up times.

So, what do I go for?

Body:
I am considering either a Canon 20D, or Minolta 7D, but the Canon seems to
have more spec. for the price, is available now, and has been tested by
users already. Nikon D70 is cheaper, but accessories are more expensive.
Also, the specs still don't match the 20D. Therefore, I think I will be
going for a 20D if anything.

Good choice. I had a 10D and loved it. Now upgraded to a 20D (mainly
so I can use the new lenses)

20D 'Normal' Lens Choices:
I am torn between the 17-55mm lens, and the 17-85 Image Stabiliser lens.
The main reason is NOT because one is a image stabiliser lens, but because
for the greater focal length which will allow for more flexibility in
'normal' use without changing lenses. Any recommendations?

No personal experience, but I believe the IS lens is a good lens, even
leaving aside the IS part of it.

20D Telephoto Lens Choices:
Again, I am torn between two lenses. The choices are between the 75-300mm
USM, and the 75-300 Image Stabiliser lenses. The thing is, I have never had
a problem with blur when shooting at 300mm on non image stabiliser lenses in
the past. But, with a digital 35mm equivalent of 480mm, maybe the Image
Stabiliser lens would be the better choice. Or, would it be better to just
a tripod and not hand hold? Any recommendations?

Go IS. I have one. It is great. Most useful.


20D Flash Choice:
I am also torn between two choices. The choices are between the 420EX, and
the 550EX. The 550EX has more manual controls, etc, but is big, heavy, and
needs a lot of understanding to get the most from it. It also works better
with 45 point autofocus, but the 20D only has 9 AF points, so it would be a
bit wasted. Power wise, the 550EX is only about 1/2 a stop behind the
420EX. (BTW, 580EX is another choice, but is the same as the 550EX, except
minor alterations to make it more efficient for digital users). Any
recommendations?

Media Storage Choices:
I have decided to go for 2GB (Approx. 220 RAW photos). The choices are
between the IBM/Hitachi 2GB Microdrive, and an equivalent fast CF card. The
Microdrive seems to be better value for money in this respect. Any
recommendations?

Personally I would go for two 1GM CF cards. I don't like the fact that
microdrives are more susceptible to shock. Personally I don't bother
with RAW images. I suspect you may find yourself shooting many shots in
JPEG only. In this case you can get lots on 1GB. Two 1GB is cheaper
than 1 2GB and you don't lose so much if the card fails.

Conclusion:
Bear in mind that money is hard to come by, so I do not want spend it
unnecessarily, as I am not a pro making money from the photos. Also,
another alternative would be to stick with my 35mm setup until prices come
down and DSLR's become better value for money. After all, spending this
amount will not really compensate for the processing and developing costs.
Although will have more benefits.


You will find digital so much better because you can take hundreds of
photos rather than just half a dozen to make sure you get one good one
(is this good technique? It certainly works for me)

--

-- -------------------------------------------------------------------- --
Graham Cluer | Email: news1 at cluer dot com

(If replying by e-mail please make the above into a legal email address)
================================================== ========================

A,

Another thing to look at with the Nikon D70 and the Canon 20D plus the
other accessories are the current rebates that are being offered --

Canon 20D Rebates:
Buying the 20D counts toward additional rebates on other accessory
items. For info, see:

http://www.review-center.com/news/20...os-1d-10d.html

Nikon D70 Rebates:
Nikon also just started this week with a Fall Rebates promotion with
$100 off the Nikon D70, as well as discounts on Nikkor lenses. For
more info and a link to Nikon's list of all the rebated items, see:

http://www.review-center.com/news/20...a-rebates.html

-Scott


"A" wrote in message ...
Hello group. I am after advise on buying a Canon 20D setup, for a non
professional enthusiast.

Situation:
I am considering upgrading from 35mm to digital because I hate changing film
at crucial points, and also feel very restricted from experimenting with
film as much as digital. Another thing I hate is that sometimes there is a
film in my camera half used, when I want it developed. Also, I am PC
literate and am pretty familiar with Photoshop, so it would make sense to go
digital. Until now I have fought the need because I didn't think DSLR's
were capable of competing with 35mm SLR's on the functions they provide,
especially lock up, and start-up times.

So, what do I go for?

Body:
I am considering either a Canon 20D, or Minolta 7D, but the Canon seems to
have more spec. for the price, is available now, and has been tested by
users already. Nikon D70 is cheaper, but accessories are more expensive.
Also, the specs still don't match the 20D. Therefore, I think I will be
going for a 20D if anything.

20D 'Normal' Lens Choices:
I am torn between the 17-55mm lens, and the 17-85 Image Stabiliser lens.
The main reason is NOT because one is a image stabiliser lens, but because
for the greater focal length which will allow for more flexibility in
'normal' use without changing lenses. Any recommendations?

20D Telephoto Lens Choices:
Again, I am torn between two lenses. The choices are between the 75-300mm
USM, and the 75-300 Image Stabiliser lenses. The thing is, I have never had
a problem with blur when shooting at 300mm on non image stabiliser lenses in
the past. But, with a digital 35mm equivalent of 480mm, maybe the Image
Stabiliser lens would be the better choice. Or, would it be better to just
a tripod and not hand hold? Any recommendations?

20D Flash Choice:
I am also torn between two choices. The choices are between the 420EX, and
the 550EX. The 550EX has more manual controls, etc, but is big, heavy, and
needs a lot of understanding to get the most from it. It also works better
with 45 point autofocus, but the 20D only has 9 AF points, so it would be a
bit wasted. Power wise, the 550EX is only about 1/2 a stop behind the
420EX. (BTW, 580EX is another choice, but is the same as the 550EX, except
minor alterations to make it more efficient for digital users). Any
recommendations?

Media Storage Choices:
I have decided to go for 2GB (Approx. 220 RAW photos). The choices are
between the IBM/Hitachi 2GB Microdrive, and an equivalent fast CF card. The
Microdrive seems to be better value for money in this respect. Any
recommendations?

Conclusion:
Bear in mind that money is hard to come by, so I do not want spend it
unnecessarily, as I am not a pro making money from the photos. Also,
another alternative would be to stick with my 35mm setup until prices come
down and DSLR's become better value for money. After all, spending this
amount will not really compensate for the processing and developing costs.
Although will have more benefits.

Cheers for your help.

Alan Browne wrote:

Ken Tough wrote:
But I've had half-used film in my FE2 for probably years now, and

"half-used film" -- does that mean it's underexposed by 1 stop?

I tried to avoid the same thing happening years ago by taking
the roll out mid-use to be put back in later. After a few years
I forgot what it was, re-shot it, and so ended up with a roll
of mostly double-exposures. So it went from being half used
to being twice used. Bugger.

--
Ken Tough