Canon EOS 20D

[atCam]

Do you think, that the camera Canon eos 20D is still good to be acquired for all purposes photography ? what alternative (to be from Canon) if otherwise ?
Thanks

[JR1]

Do you think, that the camera Canon eos 20D is still good to be acquired for all purposes photography ? what alternative (to be from Canon) if otherwise ?
Thanks

You don't say

1. What it is to be used for
2. Your budget
3. Why it has to be Canon

the 20D is very outdated

[Manfred M]

The camera is almost 10 years old, so it rather ancient as far as digital cameras go. Dynamic range and low light performance were pretty mediocre compared so more modern cameras. I personally would not bother with one even if someone offered it ot me for free. This is not a comment just with this particular camera, but any piece of digital camera gear that is that old.

[DanK]

I agree with both JR1 and Manfred. Also, please put your real name and location in your profile. It is hard to give advice about purchases if we don't know where you are.

Not knowing more about what your photographic needs or budget are, I would suggest that if you want a used camera in that series, stick with either the 40D or 50D. I just checked KEH, which is a very reputable dealer of used equipment here in the States. They have the 40D for $289 and the 50D for $429 (body only). The 50D model is perhaps 5 years old, but it is is far better than the 20D and is still a perfectly fine camera. One of my bodies is a 50D, and I still use it.

[Geoff F]

Well let's put it this way; It was better than the 10D and was once considered to be an excellent camera. So as previously mentioned, it depends on the cost and intended use.

It is very low in MP numbers compared with modern cameras but the latest options often have far more MP than is needed by the average user. A 20D would be ample for prints around 6 x 4 ins or even up to 12 x 8 ins and fine for internet use.

So if you are looking for a free, or very little cost, starter camera to learn serious photography I wouldn't totally reject it.

However, if you can afford a little more, the 40D is an excellent choice and I still use mine. Possibly getting a little 'outdated' now but still worth purchasing at a reasonable price.

But also to be considered, are lenses. Does the camera come with some decent lenses? If not, what would be required? Which is where we need to know more about your intentions.

[Glenn NK]

Do you think, that the camera Canon eos 20D is still good to be acquired for all purposes photography ? what alternative (to be from Canon) if otherwise ?
Thanks

1) The difference between a 20D and a 30D is not significant (the 30D was considered a "wasted" upgrade). I believe the most significant change was an increase in the LCD size for the 30D.

2) I use my 30D quite a bit even though I have a 5DII.

3) I use if for most things where a bit more "reach" is beneficial or if I want to use a particular lens that doesn't fit the 5DII.

In the XXD series, we are now at the 70D, so some would say the 20D is out of date - tell them where to go, but be polite.

I regularly do 11" x 14" prints from it. And quite a while ago on a forum, someone suggested that an 8 MP sensor was about equivalent to 35 mm colour film positives for resolution - I've used both and wouldn't argue otherwise.

The absolute best bird image I've ever seen anywhere is of a loon pair at their nest - taken with a 20D.

Don't tell me my 30D is passe - most of the images at the site below are with a 30D.

[Raysha]

Well I am gonna mention that I am not as experienced as those who posted but I will share my experience :

I started photography with a digital point and shoot 10mp or 12mp camera made by Sony, back then I wasn't that much into photography.. I just used to mess around Photoshop and stuff like that..

Next: I found myself into photography (I got affected by a guy) I managed to get an old DSLR made by Olympus : the E-300 for FREE, and it was horrible... there are a few shots taken by this thing that I liked, but the shots never satisfied me, still using it I learnt the basics, until I had the money and experience to upgrade to the 650D.

The 20D is outdated indeed but the E-300 I had was worst... It used a four-third sensor, it could shoot up to 60s without any modification though.

So, if your just starting your journey in photography, and that body is offered to you in a reasonable price, go for it, learn and get some experience then upgrade to a better body.

Even if you owned the best gear ever, its not guaranteed that your photos will be the best, it depends on how good is your taste and how well you put use to what you have.

[mknittle]

Even if you owned the best gear ever, its not guaranteed that your photos will be the best, it depends on how good is your taste and how well you put use to what you have.

well put!

[Colin Southern]

I'm going to disagree with most of you

As a digital camera is was - and is - absolutely fine. Sure, it's not my first choice compared to more modern offerings, but the cost will no doubt reflect that.

I'd go so far as to say that if I shot with it in my studio - and presented the images at "regular internet size", folks here would struggle to see the difference between the 20D and my 1D X.

Worst thing about it that I recall was the viewfinder.

Some of my 20D images ...

[Bill Yeung]

I owned a 20D years ago too, mainly use it for travel, casual photos,,,,,, I also got lots of pictures of my daughter from born to 3.5 years old. I accept all these pictures well.
as I am still very young in photo skill. I enjoy capturing the kid's moment rather than 11x7 or whatsoever. ( my biggest print is 5x7)

the next step I took is not upgrade my camera body or lens, is add a 580 EX speedlight!

it is until my daughter do figure skating and I jumped to 7d all because of the 8fps.
the 8fps for sure got more pictures in breaking down the skating jumps, monkey bar's moment.
But, honestly, my photography skill still not much advance since I owned the 20D.
and this makes me agreed to many other that: is not about what 20D worth, is all about how far you want to go in the endless of artistic photography road. 20D serve basic photography well.

I also regret gave away my 20D after I got 7D!
I don't want to bring my expensive 7D and 24-70L len to my renovation job site and suddenly remember that how good it is if I still keep the 20D, where I never worry about dusting it, banging it.... and still can give me 8m pixels picture.



this is my experience.

[atCam]

No doubt Colin, beautiful images...!

[ajohnw]

I more than like that post Colin. I love it. I doubt if my even older 6mp 300D will ever go. The 5D will. All I need worry about on the 300D is the cameras "wonderful" ability to clip whites without much provocation. Some cameras have improved a little in that respect. Give it a 30 sec exposure and all I get is a few warm pixels.

John
-

[William W]

Iconic advancement in the EOS series - "Useable ISO3200" and very bobust design . . .

Mine still works fine today and I would part with it.

It was the first camera and the test camera that we used when we cut over our studio to Digital.

Subsequently we bought 30D’s and 5D’s for the full refurbishment.

The 30D had Spot Metering I recall which (for us) was a vast improvement over the 20D.

The 20D was, at the time quite an advancement from the 10D and the 20D introduced the EF-S Bayonet Lens Mount to the xxD EOS Series (along with the release of the 300D for beginning the xxxD Lineage).

Here are some test shots I did at a Swimming Pool to see what the 20D could maintain at “H” (“equivalent” ISO 3200).

These were shot in the mid 2000’s maybe 2004 – these are JPEG capture and have only some mild tweaking.

The glass would have been the EF 70 to 200 F/28L USM

They all print fine to 14” along the long side:







WW

[rpcrowe]

I did not opt for the 20D when I wanted to replace my aging 10D. Instead, I waited for the 30D. Believe it of not, I still occasionally shoot with the 30D!

I attend many dog rescue events and want to get pictures of our rescue dogs with their new adopted families. I have a Canon 30D set up with a 40mm pancake lens that I use for this purpose. I keep the camera and lens in an insulated lunch bag. This keeps the camera safe from heat, bumps and very likely theft. Many of our volunteers bring sandwiches for lunch in this type of bag and it is unlikely that someone would want to steal a bag containing a ham sandwich and a Coke.

The 30D does a creditable job (it shoots every bit as well as when it was the Flagship of the Canon crop DSLR line). However, if I were thinking of purchasing a used camera, I would seriously consider the Canon 40D. IMO, the 40D was the best pre-7D Canon crop DSLR camera. In fact, I like it better than the later 50D.

Here in the USA, you can pick up a used 20D on eBay for between $100 and $150 USD. A used 30D will cost a bit more and a used 40D will be a bit more than that. I would recommend the 40D but, if your wallet is really thin, a 20D could provide decent images for a long while.

BTW: the lens you choose will very likely have more impact on the quality of your imagery than the camera...

If you purchase the 20D with an 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 Kit Lens, it will most likely be the non-IS version of that lens because the non-IS version was sold as a kit with the 20D. The IS version of the kit lens is optically superior and would be a better purchase. IMO, the difference in price between the non-IS lens and either of the two IS versons would be well worth the added cost...