Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

350XL or 20D

Last response: in Digital Camera
Share
April 8, 2005 1:42:30 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

As some time now has passed on the 350XL is there any reported problems with
it as in the case of the 20D as lock up problems, poor flash results, soft
pictures, battery pack was screwed up ( now fixed as reported), and banding
in the higher ISOs. What I have seem there has been no reported banding in
the 350XL, pictures are more crisper, and the built in flash works. I know
there is more options with the 20D but I want a camera that works. In other
words for $500 more do I get a camera with more features but buggy. Before I
buy I need to decide.

More about : 350xl 20d

Anonymous
April 8, 2005 2:16:58 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"John" <JF@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:Q66dnalqH_A4csjfRVn-uA@comcast.com...
> As some time now has passed on the 350XL is there any reported problems
> with it as in the case of the 20D as lock up problems, poor flash results,
> soft pictures, battery pack was screwed up ( now fixed as reported), and
> banding in the higher ISOs. What I have seem there has been no reported
> banding in the 350XL, pictures are more crisper, and the built in flash
> works. I know there is more options with the 20D but I want a camera that
> works. In other words for $500 more do I get a camera with more features
> but buggy. Before I buy I need to decide.
>


This might help.

http://www.bobatkins.com/photography/digital/eos_digita...
>
>
Anonymous
April 8, 2005 8:29:49 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"John" <JF@comcast.net> wrote in
news:Q66dnalqH_A4csjfRVn-uA@comcast.com:

> As some time now has passed on the 350XL is there any reported
> problems with it as in the case of the 20D as lock up problems,
> poor flash results, soft pictures, battery pack was screwed up (
> now fixed as reported), and banding in the higher ISOs. What I
> have seem there has been no reported banding in the 350XL,
> pictures are more crisper, and the built in flash works. I know
> there is more options with the 20D but I want a camera that works.
> In other words for $500 more do I get a camera with more features
> but buggy. Before I buy I need to decide.
>
>
>

Check out Phil Askey's professional review of the XT...

http://www.dpreview.com/news/0504/05040601eos350dreview...

--

Bill
Related resources
Can't find your answer ? Ask !
April 8, 2005 9:17:57 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

In article <Q66dnalqH_A4csjfRVn-uA@comcast.com>, John <JF@comcast.net>
wrote:

> As some time now has passed on the 350XL is there any reported problems

There is no 350XL. If you mean the Rebel XT (350D), there does not seem
to be the sort of bugs that required a firmware update on the 20D soon
after release.

--
Charles
Anonymous
April 8, 2005 4:32:01 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

I asked myself the same question but bought a 20D simply because it was more
comfortable to hold.
Cheers
DP
Anonymous
April 9, 2005 2:20:52 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

It almost sounds like you've made up your mind already. From what
I've heard the latest firmware has eliminated many of the Canon EOS
20D bugs reported earlier. I haven't experienced any problems with
latest firmware - that should already be in 20D you buy new from a
reputable dealer - if that's any consolation. The banding issue, I
don't know where that issue presently stands or how Canon has
addressed it. I'd be surprised not to see another firmware update for
the 20D in the near future, as current firmware tweaks are refined and
other potential bugs identified and (hopefully) fixed. The ability to
remedy issues via firmware flash updates are a good thing, IMO.

I think rather than look at the extra money the 20D costs, you should
consider the additional features and ease of operation the 20D
affords. Would you miss a couple FPS you'd lose with the Rebel XT, or
the larger buffer of the 20D, or the extra buttons you'd need to play
with on the Rebel XT if in a hurry to compose a picture, or the higher
ISO of the 20D (see complete list at the referenced link below)?
These seemingly insignificant options mean the world to a serious
amateur or professional photographer, but to the occasional
photographer might not matter. As you progress in your photographic
skills, will the camera be able to accompany you and would you care?
All said for the excellent EOS 20D, if you want a just want a very
good camera that takes great photographs and you can live without the
additional functions of the EOS 20D, I don't see where you'd go wrong
with the lower-priced Rebel XT in your hands.

On Thu, 7 Apr 2005 22:16:58 -0500, "grenner" <regencytr1@hotmail.com>
wrote:

>
>"John" <JF@comcast.net> wrote in message
>news:Q66dnalqH_A4csjfRVn-uA@comcast.com...
>> As some time now has passed on the 350XL is there any reported problems
>> with it as in the case of the 20D as lock up problems, poor flash results,
>> soft pictures, battery pack was screwed up ( now fixed as reported), and
>> banding in the higher ISOs. What I have seem there has been no reported
>> banding in the 350XL, pictures are more crisper, and the built in flash
>> works. I know there is more options with the 20D but I want a camera that
>> works. In other words for $500 more do I get a camera with more features
>> but buggy. Before I buy I need to decide.
>>
>
>
>This might help.
>
>http://www.bobatkins.com/photography/digital/eos_digita...
>>
>>
>
April 9, 2005 1:22:27 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Woodchuck Bill <bwr607@hotmail.com> wrote:


> Check out Phil Askey's professional review of the XT...

Professional - in what way? I though he was an ameteur with a popular
web site...
Anonymous
April 9, 2005 5:44:36 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

In message <v7ie5190hpnu591fhlh6fvlodbc5psrrq8@4ax.com>,
Zenophobe <Zenophobe@blossom.com> wrote:

>It almost sounds like you've made up your mind already. From what
>I've heard the latest firmware has eliminated many of the Canon EOS
>20D bugs reported earlier. I haven't experienced any problems with
>latest firmware - that should already be in 20D you buy new from a
>reputable dealer - if that's any consolation. The banding issue, I
>don't know where that issue presently stands or how Canon has
>addressed it. I'd be surprised not to see another firmware update for
>the 20D in the near future, as current firmware tweaks are refined and
>other potential bugs identified and (hopefully) fixed. The ability to
>remedy issues via firmware flash updates are a good thing, IMO.

I'd be very surprised if Canon fixed the 20D banding through firmware.

Here is my prediction:

ACR will will address the banding at the converter level (this is
already true, not part of the prediction; it just remains to be seen how
well it works).

Other converters will follow suit, but Canon will continue to say,
"Problem, what problem?", and then release the 30D, advertizing
non-banded shadows.
--

<>>< ><<> ><<> <>>< ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<>
John P Sheehy <JPS@no.komm>
><<> <>>< <>>< ><<> <>>< ><<> ><<> <>><
Anonymous
April 9, 2005 6:43:16 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

<JPS@no.komm> wrote in message
news:njmf51dq39t8uod04gt6d6a8ot7jev3n1i@4ax.com...
> In message <v7ie5190hpnu591fhlh6fvlodbc5psrrq8@4ax.com>,
> Zenophobe <Zenophobe@blossom.com> wrote:
>
> >It almost sounds like you've made up your mind already. From what
> >I've heard the latest firmware has eliminated many of the Canon EOS
> >20D bugs reported earlier. I haven't experienced any problems with
> >latest firmware - that should already be in 20D you buy new from a
> >reputable dealer - if that's any consolation. The banding issue, I
> >don't know where that issue presently stands or how Canon has
> >addressed it. I'd be surprised not to see another firmware update for
> >the 20D in the near future, as current firmware tweaks are refined and
> >other potential bugs identified and (hopefully) fixed. The ability to
> >remedy issues via firmware flash updates are a good thing, IMO.
>
> I'd be very surprised if Canon fixed the 20D banding through firmware.
>

of course they fixed it with firmware. That's why nobody has reported it since
they did the update. Or do you have some clever alternate explanation?
Anonymous
April 10, 2005 8:14:54 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

In message <8SR5e.994$nt3.519@trndny04>,
"SamSez" <samtheman@verizon.net> wrote:

><JPS@no.komm> wrote in message
>news:njmf51dq39t8uod04gt6d6a8ot7jev3n1i@4ax.com...

>> I'd be very surprised if Canon fixed the 20D banding through firmware.

>of course they fixed it with firmware. That's why nobody has reported it since
>they did the update. Or do you have some clever alternate explanation?

They fixed banding due to the flash recharging during the readout.
That's not the banding that I'm talking about. On the 20D, there is
banding in the RAW data because each horizontal line can vary a bit from
it's neighbors as far as what level the blackpoint is. On some 20Ds,
the banding is visible at normal exposure at high ISOs; on all 20Ds, the
banding is visible if you under-expose.

Banded noise is much more visible than unbanded noise of the same
intensity.
--

<>>< ><<> ><<> <>>< ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<>
John P Sheehy <JPS@no.komm>
><<> <>>< <>>< ><<> <>>< ><<> ><<> <>><
Anonymous
April 10, 2005 8:14:23 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

SamSez wrote:
> <JPS@no.komm> wrote in message
> news:njmf51dq39t8uod04gt6d6a8ot7jev3n1i@4ax.com...
>> In message <v7ie5190hpnu591fhlh6fvlodbc5psrrq8@4ax.com>,
>> Zenophobe <Zenophobe@blossom.com> wrote:
>>
>>> It almost sounds like you've made up your mind already. From what
>>> I've heard the latest firmware has eliminated many of the Canon EOS
>>> 20D bugs reported earlier. I haven't experienced any problems with
>>> latest firmware - that should already be in 20D you buy new from a
>>> reputable dealer - if that's any consolation. The banding issue, I
>>> don't know where that issue presently stands or how Canon has
>>> addressed it. I'd be surprised not to see another firmware update
>>> for
>>> the 20D in the near future, as current firmware tweaks are refined
>>> and
>>> other potential bugs identified and (hopefully) fixed. The ability
>>> to remedy issues via firmware flash updates are a good thing, IMO.
>>
>> I'd be very surprised if Canon fixed the 20D banding through
>> firmware.
>>
>
> of course they fixed it with firmware. That's why nobody has
> reported it since they did the update. Or do you have some clever
> alternate explanation?

This is from a 20D s.n 520317639, mid-december from a high-volume,
reputable dealer, came with 1.1 firmware installed.

ISO 1600,
exp comp -0.67,
1/200 sec,
f/3.2,
Canon 24-70mm f2.8L,
70mm

Purposely underexposed to test the lens/ISO capabilities.

http://www.fototime.com/3F76E09F7A4A14B/orig.jpg original, decoded
Camera Default without further adjustment in PS CS and reduced to
760x???, save for web at 60 PS quality.

http://www.fototime.com/6E5366E4C33DF68/orig.jpg decoded and adjusted
from original so the feature of interest is visible.

http://www.fototime.com/9266A5A62F097E9/orig.jpg what I pulled out and
printed with my poor PS and Epson skills. Banding is still visible, but
not obtrusive in arms-length viewing.

So, if they fixed it in firmware, they did it in a manner that did not
resolve it in these circumstances.

Of course no rational person is purposely creating these circumstances,
is s/he?



--
Frank ess sez
Anonymous
April 11, 2005 12:00:43 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Keith" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:1guqvbn.eyukt51de4qyiN%nospam@nospam.com...
> Woodchuck Bill <bwr607@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> > Check out Phil Askey's professional review of the XT...
>
> Professional - in what way? I though he was an ameteur with a popular
> web site...

Can we see your professional review instead then?
!