Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Canon RebleXT vs. 20D?

Last response: in Digital Camera
Share
Anonymous
March 11, 2005 11:13:24 AM

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

Does anyone who has tried the XT have on opinion as to whether the 20D is
worth $500 more? I'm most interested in shutter lag. I'd really like a
digital camera that could do as good a job as a $5 throw-away film camera
when it came to letting ME decide when to take the picture. For 150 years
photographers said "the critical instant" was what made great pictures now
along comes digital and that apparently becomes unimportant -- let the
processor decide. I'll pay the extra $500 to get that control back, but not
if I don't have to. Thanks in advance.
Brian

More about : canon reblext 20d

Anonymous
March 11, 2005 11:25:42 AM

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

"Brian Downey" <brian.downey@stratcomm.com> wrote in message
news:EqcYd.16754$OU1.13736@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com...
> Does anyone who has tried the XT have on opinion as to whether the 20D is
> worth $500 more? I'm most interested in shutter lag. I'd really like a
> digital camera that could do as good a job as a $5 throw-away film camera
> when it came to letting ME decide when to take the picture. For 150 years
> photographers said "the critical instant" was what made great pictures now
> along comes digital and that apparently becomes unimportant -- let the
> processor decide. I'll pay the extra $500 to get that control back, but
> not
> if I don't have to. Thanks in advance.
> Brian
>

None of the DSLR's have the "shutterlag" problem . It's a problem that
consumer level point and shoots and ZLR suffer from.
Anonymous
March 11, 2005 2:01:16 PM

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

canongirly wrote:

> None of the DSLR's have the "shutterlag" problem . It's a problem
> that consumer level point and shoots and ZLR suffer from.

All SLR cameras have shutter lag. On something like the EOS-1ns
"pelicule" which has a semi-silvered mirror that does not flip up, the
light goes through (penalty of 1 stop of light), it is on the order of 6 ms.

On the Maxxum 9 (and most high end SLR's) it is about 50 - 60 ms, the
EOS-1v (IIRC) is about 40-45 ms. On the Maxxum 7D it is looking to be
at least 100 or so ms. This requires more anticipation for sports shots
and results in a higher 'miss' rate for "ball on bat" type shots.

While these delays seem puny compared to the P&S and some/all ZLR's, it
is an important point to photos that require close timing with the action.

There is definitely a case to be made for a pelicule SLR without a
mechanical shutter (a s/w gated shutter (A la Nikon D70 flash sync)).
One of the Oly zlr's works like this as well, I believe (no mirror up,
no mechanical shutter).

Cheers,
Alan.






--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch.
Related resources
Can't find your answer ? Ask !
Anonymous
March 11, 2005 8:24:25 PM

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

"Alan Browne" <alan.browne@freelunchVideotron.ca> wrote in message
news:D 0sfbv$aa4$1@inews.gazeta.pl...
> canongirly wrote:
>
>> None of the DSLR's have the "shutterlag" problem . It's a problem
>> that consumer level point and shoots and ZLR suffer from.
>
> All SLR cameras have shutter lag. On something like the EOS-1ns
> "pelicule" which has a semi-silvered mirror that does not flip up, the
snip
> Cheers,
> Alan.
>
Well the shutter lag on the 300D's and 10D's I use "can" be measured if you
have access to some very sophiscated timing equipment, whereas the shutter
lag on my previous fuji s602z could be measured by leaving the room making a
cup of tea, reading a newspaper, starting a family and moving to another
town. ( I may have exagerated a bit here).

As I believe the original poster was/is more concerned with a shutterlag of
10ths of a secound By comparision the millisecounds lag of any DSLR is sod
all, barely noticable, comparable to ANY film slr, and not really worth
talking about.

OK?
Anonymous
March 11, 2005 8:24:26 PM

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

canongirly wrote:

> As I believe the original poster was/is more concerned with a shutterlag of
> 10ths of a secound By comparision the millisecounds lag of any DSLR is sod
> all, barely noticable, comparable to ANY film slr, and not really worth
> talking about.
>
> OK?

No, Not OK. As I stated, for some shooting, shutter lag, even if only
1/10th of a second is a lot. You don't need very sophisticated
equipment to measure it either. On the Canon's you mention (300D, 10D),
the shutter lag is on the order of 50ms (not couinting human reaction
time). Even this is enough that the photographer has to anticipate and
depress the shutter ahead of the action. For example, try catching a
tenis ball in the racket on a hard return...

Cheers,
Alan

--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch.
Anonymous
March 11, 2005 8:34:59 PM

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

Thank you all for the info.
If there isn't any noticeable shutter lag differences, then are there other
differences that (in your experienced opinions) would warrant going for the
20D over the new RebelXT?


"Brian Downey" <brian.downey@stratcomm.com> wrote in message
news:EqcYd.16754$OU1.13736@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com...
> Does anyone who has tried the XT have on opinion as to whether the 20D is
> worth $500 more? I'm most interested in shutter lag. I'd really like a
> digital camera that could do as good a job as a $5 throw-away film camera
> when it came to letting ME decide when to take the picture. For 150 years
> photographers said "the critical instant" was what made great pictures now
> along comes digital and that apparently becomes unimportant -- let the
> processor decide. I'll pay the extra $500 to get that control back, but
not
> if I don't have to. Thanks in advance.
> Brian
>
>
Anonymous
March 11, 2005 8:35:00 PM

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

"Brian Downey" <brian.downey@stratcomm.com> wrote in message
news:7FkYd.16843$OU1.1594@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com...
> Thank you all for the info.
> If there isn't any noticeable shutter lag differences, then are there
> other
> differences that (in your experienced opinions) would warrant going for
> the
> 20D over the new RebelXT?

The 20D is more rugged and more flexible. Might be important, depending on
your needs and how the camera will be used and treated.
Anonymous
March 11, 2005 8:52:38 PM

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

In article <d0sfbv$aa4$1@inews.gazeta.pl>,
Alan Browne <alan.browne@freelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:
>
>All SLR cameras have shutter lag. On something like the EOS-1ns
>"pelicule" which has a semi-silvered mirror that does not flip up, the
>light goes through (penalty of 1 stop of light), it is on the order of 6 ms.

Minor nitpick: the EOS-1N RT loses around half a stop of exposure, with
70% of the light passing through the mirror. Of course this means that
only 30% goes to the viewfinder, so it's a bit awkward to use in low light.
But that's not the typical scenario under which these cameras are used.
Anonymous
March 11, 2005 8:52:39 PM

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

John Francis wrote:

> In article <d0sfbv$aa4$1@inews.gazeta.pl>,
> Alan Browne <alan.browne@freelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:
>
>>All SLR cameras have shutter lag. On something like the EOS-1ns
>>"pelicule" which has a semi-silvered mirror that does not flip up, the
>>light goes through (penalty of 1 stop of light), it is on the order of 6 ms.
>
>
> Minor nitpick: the EOS-1N RT loses around half a stop of exposure, with
> 70% of the light passing through the mirror. Of course this means that
> only 30% goes to the viewfinder, so it's a bit awkward to use in low light.
> But that's not the typical scenario under which these cameras are used.

Thanks for the clarification. (Also the RT (not NS)).

Cheers,
Alan

--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch.
Anonymous
March 11, 2005 11:46:23 PM

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

"Brian Downey" <brian.downey@stratcomm.com> wrote in message
news:EqcYd.16754$OU1.13736@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com...
> Does anyone who has tried the XT have on opinion as to whether the 20D is
> worth $500 more? I'm most interested in shutter lag. I'd really like a
> digital camera that could do as good a job as a $5 throw-away film camera
> when it came to letting ME decide when to take the picture. For 150 years
> photographers said "the critical instant" was what made great pictures now
> along comes digital and that apparently becomes unimportant -- let the
> processor decide. I'll pay the extra $500 to get that control back, but
> not
> if I don't have to. Thanks in advance.
> Brian

I don't see how the 350 is going to focus faster than the 20, and that is
where the "lag" is.
Anonymous
March 11, 2005 11:46:24 PM

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

Dave R knows who wrote:


>
> I don't see how the 350 is going to focus faster than the 20, and that is
> where the "lag" is.

The shutter lag that is of consequence is that that occurs after the
shutter (and possibly exposure) is locked (half-depressed shutter
button) to the time exposure begins. This is typically in the 50 - 60
ms range on high end SLR's. Exceptional SLR's (EOS-1n RT) have lags of
6 ms making them ideal for sports.

To include focus in there means looking at it for each lens for the
camera as some lenses are quicker than others.

Cheers,
Alan

--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch.
Anonymous
March 12, 2005 10:32:45 AM

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

In article <d0sk88$ifv$1@news8.svr.pol.co.uk>, "canongirly" <me@me.com>
wrote:

> Well the shutter lag on the 300D's and 10D's I use "can" be measured if you
> have access to some very sophiscated timing equipment, whereas the shutter
> lag on my previous fuji s602z could be measured by leaving the room making a
> cup of tea, reading a newspaper, starting a family and moving to another
> town. ( I may have exagerated a bit here).

Hehehehe! Do ya think? [ROFL] :) 

> As I believe the original poster was/is more concerned with a shutterlag of
> 10ths of a secound By comparision the millisecounds lag of any DSLR is sod
> all, barely noticable, comparable to ANY film slr, and not really worth
> talking about.

Heck, I endured "lag" with my T90 & 1.4 50 mm lens at 1/500. In this case,
the lag was ME focusing. :) 

Seriously, if there is any "shutterlag" on my 20D, it would be the autofocus
system doing its thing prior to EVERY frame. Heck, I'll bet if one turned-OFF
the AF, this thing could sound like a machine gun for five minutes!

I just shot the action of my first grandchild's 3rd birthday gift opening and
cake desecrating^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^Hcandle lighting. I used the 580EX flash
and am VERY pleased with the results. I don't recall being concerned with LAG
of any sort during this event.

My most valuable lesson with my new camera from this event:
I need another CF card.

I shoot highest quality w/RAW. According to the camera using the SanDisk
Ultra II 1GB card, that gives me 77 frames. For the first time since I got
the camera, I used all but 7 frames before there was a lull in the action and
I could look at the camera. I used the on-board LCD and nuked a handful of
obvious stinkers. That gave me enough to finish the day.

I assume that Canon put their newest image processor, Digic II, found on the
20D and EOS 1Ds Mark II, into the 350. Given that, I would expect the shutter
"lag" to be as negligible on the 350 as it is on these cameras.

Whether there are other differences between the 350 and 20D that make the
difference in their prices worth buying the 20D is certainly debatable. I am
thankful that I love my 20D, especially considering I paid $1500 for it.

:) 
JR
Anonymous
March 12, 2005 10:56:28 AM

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

In article <d0sl01$3tb$1@inews.gazeta.pl>,
Alan Browne <alan.browne@freelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:

> Even this is enough that the photographer has to anticipate and
> depress the shutter ahead of the action.

This it NOT an issue that I have experienced with my "new" camera.

> For example, try catching a tenis ball in the racket on a hard return...

Agreed. But, fer pete's sake, try that with a FILM camera. Are you going to
try to capture that in ONE frame on the FIRST try?

I wouldn't. It would be motor drive all the way and hope for the best. Do it
a couple or three times, using an entire roll or two of your best film and you
MIGHT catch an eye-popping Action Shot of the Century.

IOW, yours is probably not a the best example of the necessity of anticipating
a shot - compensating for digital shutterlag. Catching a kid blowing out
candles on a cake comes to mind.

To catch this JUST RIGHT with a P&S (POS?<g>), one would have to make a
SERIOUSLY intended anticipation of when the shutter would ACTUALLY release.
With my 20D, the kid blows and I pull the trigger. Done. GREAT frame. Look,
Ma! No lag!

(OK, OK... No APPRECIABLE lag to this 51-year-old experienced SLR user.)

We did a (strictly informal) digital camera "shoot out" at our "computer"
meeting a while back. Mine was the only SLR. The highest end was a 6MP P&S
and the oldest a 2MP. The newest and "highest end" camera, other than mine,
had a noticeable lag in time between shutter button press and actual shutter
release. The other cameras displayed the same behavior.

Then came my show. During the interval that all the other cameras "lagged", I
peeled-off about a half-dozen shots! I "humbly" apologized to the group for
"accidentally" having the multi-shot function set to ON! <g>

:) 
JR
Anonymous
March 12, 2005 11:09:57 AM

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

In article <7FkYd.16843$OU1.1594@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com>,
"Brian Downey" <brian.downey@stratcomm.com> wrote:

> If there isn't any noticeable shutter lag differences, then are
> there other differences that (in your experienced opinions) would
> warrant going for the 20D over the new RebelXT?

There are some notibeable differences. I think they would be enough for ME to
spend the extra $ and get the 20D.

Check-out this page and do your own comparison side-by-side. It's very handy
and revealing:

<http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sidebyside.asp&gt;

In any case, I'm sure the RebelXT (350D) would please me JUST as much as I am
now with my 20D.

:) 
JR
March 12, 2005 12:49:31 PM

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

In article <jim.redelfs-70161D.08095712032005@news.central.cox.net>,
Jim Redelfs <jim.redelfs@redelfs.com> wrote:

> In any case, I'm sure the RebelXT (350D) would please me JUST as much as I am
> now with my 20D.

The XT will make a great travel DSLR. I tried one yesterday at B&H and
I think it is the perfect size. I have a 10D and intend to get an XT in
a few weeks. I think the XT is better than the 10D. It is not crippled
like the first digital Rebel. I will keep the 10D as a backup. If one
can afford it one should always have at least two camera bodies. I do
think the 20D is better than the XT but not enough better for me, since
it is a hobby for me, not a living. If the XT had not come out I would
have waited for the successor to the 20D. At the rate of change which I
think will go on for a few years before there is a plateau I think my
strategy will be to go with the "Rebel" level, more cost efficient, and
build up my lens collection.

--
Charles
Anonymous
March 12, 2005 5:16:06 PM

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

Jim Redelfs wrote:


> Alan Browne <alan.browne@freelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:
>
>>For example, try catching a tenis ball in the racket on a hard return...
>
>
> Agreed. But, fer pete's sake, try that with a FILM camera. Are you going to
> try to capture that in ONE frame on the FIRST try?

Film or digital, you know from the viewfinder if you're hitting it
close. Add flash, and take your eye out of the viewfinder for a few
shots (or filmless shots) to 'calibrate' the lead.

> I wouldn't. It would be motor drive all the way and hope for the best. Do it
> a couple or three times, using an entire roll or two of your best film and you
> MIGHT catch an eye-popping Action Shot of the Century.

I was shooting my volleyball gang the other night. With my Maxxum 9 it
requires the barest anticipation to catch a ball flush in the smash or
flush on the block. With the Maxxum 7D, the lag was so much longer that
trying to 'calibrate' that anticipation was much harder. (Combined
human+shutter lag is about 200ms with the 7D).

As I was adding strobes to the shot (two, placed in gym corners) to
allow lower ISO shooting, and to make ball trails/frozen ball, 'motor
drive" shooting was not possible. (And it's not something I do in any
case).

http://www.aliasimages.com/images/pict0381SC.jpg 1/10s, cropped.

(You'll also notice on this shot, that the rear-curtain sync seems to
fire a hair too early as there is one image of the ball after the frozen
image. The 'strobing effect' of the blurred balls is from the ambient
Hg lighting).

> Then came my show. During the interval that all the other cameras "lagged", I
> peeled-off about a half-dozen shots! I "humbly" apologized to the group for
> "accidentally" having the multi-shot function set to ON! <g>

I had a few v'ball players say, "How is it you got the flash to go at
the heat of the action?" (They're all used to their P,S&W's. (W=wait)).


--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch.
Anonymous
March 12, 2005 5:58:49 PM

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

In article <120320050949313936%fort514@mac.com>, Charles <fort514@mac.com>
wrote:

> I will keep the 10D as a backup. If one
> can afford it one should always have at least two camera bodies.

Agreed. Since I made the switch from film to digital, however, I am back to
ONE body for now.

The 350D is very attractive as a second body to my 20D.

> [photography] is a hobby for me, not a living.

Same here.

I bought my 20D last November and haven't looked back. If I had waited until
now, it might be a different model - the 350D.

> At the rate of change which I
> think will go on for a few years before there is a plateau I think my
> strategy will be to go with the "Rebel" level, more cost efficient, and
> build up my lens collection.

Not to worry. I already had a nice collection of Canon FD lenses when I
bought my second body - the T90. The EOS system was barely 2 years old. I
chose to STAY with the mount/system of the day and enjoy years of use of TWO,
fine bodies.

Today, its still EOS. I finally bought in.

With my timing and luck, Canon will announce a new mount immediately AFTER I
buy additional EOS lenses or another body.

<sigh>
JR
Anonymous
March 12, 2005 6:55:03 PM

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

Jim Redelfs wrote:
> In article <120320050949313936%fort514@mac.com>, Charles
> <fort514@mac.com> wrote:
>
>> I will keep the 10D as a backup. If one
>> can afford it one should always have at least two camera bodies.
>
> Agreed. Since I made the switch from film to digital, however, I am
> back to ONE body for now.
>
> The 350D is very attractive as a second body to my 20D.
>

<snip>

I was thinking in that direction, too. Then I sort of dozed off and
dreamed I had the two bodies, and the lenses I have, and the lenses I
need, and the lenses I lust after. I dreamed the perfect photo opp was
just beyond the ridge ... and I couldn't drag—let alone carry—my
equipment to the top. I began dropping what I didn't need, and
eventually made it. What I had left in my kit was: 20D; 10-22; 24-70;
70-300; CP8700.

No, seriously: that 20D is a big hunk of heavy, and the glasser the
lenses get, the more heavy they get, too. In a studio or other set-piece
venue, not such a problem. On the trail of the elusive bandersnatch or
motorsport critical moment, the kaboodle is not inconsiderable.

Look at these comparisons of the 20D with 24-70 (38.4-112 equiv) and
CP8700 with 35-280mm equivalent zoom range, size-wise:

http://www.fototime.com/C898491FBD2A2CB/orig.jpg front
http://www.fototime.com/A71907824F117BA/orig.jpg top
http://www.fototime.com/4DED1BD0306F225/orig.jpg rear
http://www.fototime.com/CBF8735023E6ED7/orig.jpg Left

Trade-offs everywhere you look. I _like_ the idea of being fully
equipped, body and lensically speaking; in a previous life I carted one
each Canon F-1N, A-1, AE-1P, and AE-1 with lenses on three of them and a
couple in reserve, for days on end. The strategy (mostly) worked, but I
bet the equivalent setup today would weigh in at twice the kilos and
volume. I am half again as substantial as I was in them days, too, but
still—not a pretty sight!

Strategy is good, but tactics win the day.


--
Frank ess
March 12, 2005 7:16:52 PM

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

In article <jim.redelfs-CCEFE3.14584912032005@news.central.cox.net>,
Jim Redelfs <jim.redelfs@redelfs.com> wrote:

> With my timing and luck, Canon will announce a new mount immediately AFTER I
> buy additional EOS lenses or another body.

I have a bunch of EOS lenses collected from my film EOS bodies but only
a few of them passed muster for my 10D, those being a 50 1.8, 24 2.8
and a 28-135 IS. I have a 100-300 which is borderline, I would like to
get something better for a tel zoom and I also need something wider for
digital.

--
Charles
Anonymous
March 12, 2005 11:50:43 PM

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

In article <jim.redelfs-3856CD.07562812032005@news.central.cox.net>,
Jim Redelfs <jim.redelfs@redelfs.com> wrote:
>In article <d0sl01$3tb$1@inews.gazeta.pl>,
> Alan Browne <alan.browne@freelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:
>
>> For example, try catching a tenis ball in the racket on a hard return...
>
>Agreed. But, fer pete's sake, try that with a FILM camera. Are you going to
>try to capture that in ONE frame on the FIRST try?
>
>I wouldn't. It would be motor drive all the way and hope for the best.

That's just about the best way to guarantee you *won't* get the shot.

Even with the fastest motor drives, you're only going to get 10fps
on a film camera (and not even that on a digital, as far as I can see).

That means you've got around 1/10 of a second between shots; an eternity
compared to just how long the ball is in the best place for the shot.
Relying on the camera to pick the moment of exposure is a bad idea -
you need to be watching yourself, and anticipate the perfect moment.

Bear in mind that a tennis ball starts off travelling at anything
up to 140mph, and is still going to be travelling at at least 60mph
by the time it gets to the returner. That's around 100fps, so it
travels about ten feet in that 1/10 of a second. Admittedly it
dwells on the racket a bit, even with todays high tension strings,
but the racket head is also travelling at those sort of speeds.
With a little practice you can easily time the shot so that the
racket is within a foot of the ideal position; that's five times
the precision you'll get by machine-gunning with a 10fps drive.
Anonymous
March 13, 2005 12:14:32 AM

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

Thanks Jim - this was exactly what I was looking for!
Brian


"Jim Redelfs" <jim.redelfs@redelfs.com> wrote in message
news:jim.redelfs-70161D.08095712032005@news.central.cox.net...
> In article <7FkYd.16843$OU1.1594@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com>,
> "Brian Downey" <brian.downey@stratcomm.com> wrote:
>
> > If there isn't any noticeable shutter lag differences, then are
> > there other differences that (in your experienced opinions) would
> > warrant going for the 20D over the new RebelXT?
>
> There are some notibeable differences. I think they would be enough for
ME to
> spend the extra $ and get the 20D.
>
> Check-out this page and do your own comparison side-by-side. It's very
handy
> and revealing:
>
> <http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sidebyside.asp&gt;
>
> In any case, I'm sure the RebelXT (350D) would please me JUST as much as I
am
> now with my 20D.
>
> :) 
> JR
Anonymous
March 13, 2005 4:58:39 PM

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

Charles wrote:
> I have a bunch of EOS lenses collected from my film EOS bodies but
only
> a few of them passed muster for my 10D, those being a 50 1.8, 24 2.8
> and a 28-135 IS. I have a 100-300 which is borderline, I would like
to
> get something better for a tel

200/2.8
2x

> and I also need something wider for digital.

20/2.8
March 14, 2005 1:08:55 AM

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

bj286@scn.org wrote:

>Charles wrote:
>> I have a bunch of EOS lenses collected from my film EOS bodies but
>only
>> a few of them passed muster for my 10D, those being a 50 1.8, 24 2.8
>> and a 28-135 IS. I have a 100-300 which is borderline, I would like
>to
>> get something better for a tel
>
>200/2.8
>2x

Good advice there...nice lense, and the TC gives it an effective 400mm
for good reach and still quite sharp.

>> and I also need something wider for digital.
>
>20/2.8

While a good lense, it's not very wide on a 1.6x field of view digital
camera. It only works out to 32mm FOV and is not really wide, at least I
don't consider it wide enough for group or indoor shots.

Perhaps a more diverse choice would be the 10-22mm lense made for
digital bodies?
Anonymous
March 14, 2005 5:11:48 AM

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

In article <1110751119.479882.214060@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com>,
bj286@scn.org says...
> > get something better for a tel
>
> 200/2.8
> 2x

From what I've heard the 200mm f/2.8 is a great steal. I'm still torn
between that and the 70-200 f/4L.

> > and I also need something wider for digital.
>
> 20/2.8

Is a pretty good lens for the cost. Decently sharp, doesn't flare if
you use the hood and the CA is pretty low.
!