I used to think this was a silly kind of question but I’m really stuck on this decision. I’ve been going along with no backup digital body for a while. I currently have a Canon 20D that just passed 20,000 frames and is probably due for some TLC. I have just enough cash (and no credit) to purchase either a new 30D or a new Rebel XTi with vertical grip and maybe turn the change into a 580EX to replace my wimpy 420EX. I‘d rather not gamble on used gear or eBay. I need the vertical grip because I have big hands and shoot a lot of vertical compositions. The BG-E2 from my 20D fits the 30D just fine. I’d have to buy a BG-E3 with the Rebel which brings the price over $800 plus. With the 30D I’d have pretty much exact same handling and controls as the 20D. With the XTi I’d get the sensor cleaning technology, light weight, and as I mentioned, possibly squeeze out a flash upgrade. With the XTi I am concerned about shutter failure. I killed an Elan 7 film body somewhere around 15000 clicks. Generally, my largest print size is 17 x 22 so I don’t know if I’d notice the difference in the megapixel count. I’m mostly shooting land/sea scapes and getting into avian. I’m not however a ‘way deep in the woods backpacking hiker’. (Bad hip.) My most used lenses are 17-40 L, 70-200 L, 100-400 L IS.
Sorry bout the long rambling post. I wanted to give enough info. I’d really appreciate any feedback. The pros and cons on this one are pretty close and perhaps someone will bring up a ‘clincher’ that I haven’t thought of.
Why not just keep shooting the 20D until it breaks? You can buy another one for $600 on eBay. I would have no qualms buying a refurb 20D from a dealer either. Personally, I just don't see enough difference between the 20D and it's slightly revamped form the 30D to justify that kind of money. I would NOT buy a Rebel--a used 20D blows it away in every way, especially in value for the money. Save your money and see what turns up. I highly doubt you will see a difference in photos because of megapixel count.
The question really is do you need a backup body? And that question partially revolves around intent and opportunity. If you take assignments or shoot weddings or portraiture, for example, you can't sleep at night unless you have a backup body. Same deal if you spend jing on travel and/or setups. If you're just shooting for the fun of it, maybe you don't need one.
If you need one, you need one.
I wore out the shutter on a 20D in 90,000 clicks, and had picked up an XT w/grip a few months earlier as a backup. Same sensor, essentially, and same image quality as the 20D. Just slower to operate. I also have big hands, so I needed the grip. I shoot primarily the 100-400L IS and 17-40, much like you.
Awhile ago, I picked up a new 30D/grip because I couldn't stand shooting with only one body, and with anything less than a 20/30D as my main body. I shoot weddings, portraits, and assignments. One body is asking for trouble in those situations.
In my opinion, you should consider holding on to the 20D and getting as a second body either a factory refurb 20D or an XT, not an XTi. There's a significant difference in money between the XT and XTi. The XT is still sold new from many vendors for about $500, and the difference in max print size between 8 and 10 Mp isn't much. The self-cleaning sensor on the XTi is a nice feature, but you'll still end up having to clean it yourself or send it in now and then, IMO. In comparison, a factory refurb 20D with 3-year Mack warranty can be had for about $750, and if you have two 20D bodies, you don't have to make mental switches in controls when moving back and forth from XT/XTi to 20D. Nor do you have to settle for a dumber camera when you use the backup.
While I like a few things about the 30D, like the spot sensor and finer increment adjustments in iso (the larger viewing screen on the back of the camera doesn't matter to me at all), if the 20D was still going strong I'd not have replaced it. Period. I got the 30D instead of a factory refurb 20D because I got a phenomenal deal on the camera, and it only had 1,100 clicks on it.
I actually have 3 Canon bodies: 20D, 30D, and a 1D MkII. Also, I bought a Rebel XT for my daughter. I'm not about to give up any of those bodies! Why? Because I have found the Canon dSLR reliability to be close to zero..0...zip...nada. I never leave home without 2 bodies. All 4 of my Canons have been to Canon Service for one problem or another and the Rebel XT has been to Service twice!! Not one of my Canon bodies is over a year old yet! If it weren't for IS on the long telephotos I would switch over to Nikon in a heart beat even though Nikon lenses are much more expensive than Canon lenses!! (OK, rant over. )
Actually, if you shoot a lot of action images the 30D is a better choice over the 20D. I think it is a bigger upgrade than people give it credit for being. 1) It has a larger buffer and can hold more images before they need to be written to the memory card. If you are photographing moving subjects, such as small birds foraging, this is a big, big advantage over the 20D. 2) The algorithm that controls AIServo focus is much better. Predictive autofocus is much faster and more accurate than the 20D. It is so much better that I actually use the 30D now for most of my bird photography and just use the 1D MkII for extreme environmental conditions. 3) That larger LCD on the 30D is a godsend. You can actually see the histogram and menus so much better. 4) I, also, like the RGB histogram better, too. Canon dSLRs have problems exposing reds and yellows (another reason I would consider a switch to Nikon: RGB metering!) and it is good to view the individual color histograms to make sure the reds don't get blown. The 1D MkII has this feature but it has a rear LCD the same size as the 20D and this makes the RGB histograms nearly useless.
Get the 30D. You won't regret it, especially for bird photography.
Here's my two cents. I used to shoot Nikon and I always went out with teo cameras - different cameras for different lenses and situations. I switched to canon and have only had one camera. sometimes I wish I had a second camera, because its easier to swhitch cameras than to change lenses. I've never really felt the need for a back up camera as a fail safe.
My Canon is a 10D approaching 40000 shots. I can't afford to buy every new camera that comes along so I've been saving for an upgrade. I plan to upgrade in the near future (when the new 1 series is released) then the 10D will become my second/back-up body. I don't see the point in getting a second body that isn't a step up from my current camera.
Unless you really feel the need to have a second body with more or less the same capability as your current 20D, I'd say wait and keep saving your money. Canon will probably announce their next round of new camera bodies sometime around August. Maybe the price of the 5D will decrease. Maybe they will announce a successor to the 30D. Keep saving and wait till August. The 30D will be a year and half old by then - maybe time for the 40D.
Thanks to all for the advice. A common thread seems to be "the voice of reason". I've been heartened by folks recounting good experience with refurbs That plus a couple of articles I found on the web and in print seem agree that a 20/30D refurb is reasonable way to go. Tried Hunt's yesterday but they didn't have any. Didn't see any on Adorama's website. I'll have to carefully search around for a reliable vendor. (Kent, if you see this, recommendations on reliable vendors is welcome.)
I'm lucky to have managed to save up this little stash as it is. I'm probably going to act soon before some crisis comes along and eats the dough.
Discussion
5 repliesSorry bout the long rambling post. I wanted to give enough info. I’d really appreciate any feedback. The pros and cons on this one are pretty close and perhaps someone will bring up a ‘clincher’ that I haven’t thought of.
Kent in SD
If you need one, you need one.
I wore out the shutter on a 20D in 90,000 clicks, and had picked up an XT w/grip a few months earlier as a backup. Same sensor, essentially, and same image quality as the 20D. Just slower to operate. I also have big hands, so I needed the grip. I shoot primarily the 100-400L IS and 17-40, much like you.
Awhile ago, I picked up a new 30D/grip because I couldn't stand shooting with only one body, and with anything less than a 20/30D as my main body. I shoot weddings, portraits, and assignments. One body is asking for trouble in those situations.
In my opinion, you should consider holding on to the 20D and getting as a second body either a factory refurb 20D or an XT, not an XTi. There's a significant difference in money between the XT and XTi. The XT is still sold new from many vendors for about $500, and the difference in max print size between 8 and 10 Mp isn't much. The self-cleaning sensor on the XTi is a nice feature, but you'll still end up having to clean it yourself or send it in now and then, IMO. In comparison, a factory refurb 20D with 3-year Mack warranty can be had for about $750, and if you have two 20D bodies, you don't have to make mental switches in controls when moving back and forth from XT/XTi to 20D. Nor do you have to settle for a dumber camera when you use the backup.
While I like a few things about the 30D, like the spot sensor and finer increment adjustments in iso (the larger viewing screen on the back of the camera doesn't matter to me at all), if the 20D was still going strong I'd not have replaced it. Period. I got the 30D instead of a factory refurb 20D because I got a phenomenal deal on the camera, and it only had 1,100 clicks on it.
So, just some more thoughts for you to ponder.
Actually, if you shoot a lot of action images the 30D is a better choice over the 20D. I think it is a bigger upgrade than people give it credit for being. 1) It has a larger buffer and can hold more images before they need to be written to the memory card. If you are photographing moving subjects, such as small birds foraging, this is a big, big advantage over the 20D. 2) The algorithm that controls AIServo focus is much better. Predictive autofocus is much faster and more accurate than the 20D. It is so much better that I actually use the 30D now for most of my bird photography and just use the 1D MkII for extreme environmental conditions. 3) That larger LCD on the 30D is a godsend. You can actually see the histogram and menus so much better. 4) I, also, like the RGB histogram better, too. Canon dSLRs have problems exposing reds and yellows (another reason I would consider a switch to Nikon: RGB metering!) and it is good to view the individual color histograms to make sure the reds don't get blown. The 1D MkII has this feature but it has a rear LCD the same size as the 20D and this makes the RGB histograms nearly useless.
Get the 30D. You won't regret it, especially for bird photography.
My Canon is a 10D approaching 40000 shots. I can't afford to buy every new camera that comes along so I've been saving for an upgrade. I plan to upgrade in the near future (when the new 1 series is released) then the 10D will become my second/back-up body. I don't see the point in getting a second body that isn't a step up from my current camera.
Unless you really feel the need to have a second body with more or less the same capability as your current 20D, I'd say wait and keep saving your money. Canon will probably announce their next round of new camera bodies sometime around August. Maybe the price of the 5D will decrease. Maybe they will announce a successor to the 30D. Keep saving and wait till August. The 30D will be a year and half old by then - maybe time for the 40D.
I'm lucky to have managed to save up this little stash as it is. I'm probably going to act soon before some crisis comes along and eats the dough.
Again Thanks