New 30D or 2nd hand 20D

[David Smith]

I was about to buy the 30D when a colleague let me know he was selling his 20D. Don't have the price yet but assuming it's a reasonable deal is it worth doing i.e. apart from the smaller screen is it as good a camera.
Are there any reasons to steer clear ?
Thanks

[Keith Reeder]

It really depends on whether the 20D has been well cared for, how many shutter actuations it has (and that's not something we can find out from Canon cameras by looking at the EXIF) and how much he's asking.

For me 20D would have to be insanely cheap before I'd consider it.

Then again I like the security that comes from buying new.

[David Smith]

Thanks Keith.
How cheap is "insanely cheap".
I'm glad it's you that responded-in your opinion will the 20D/100-400 work with the 1.4 TC ?
The thing that tempts me is the new 30D should be out & the 2nd hand should tide me over until then-any ideas when it's due ?

[Tannin]

I'm going to disagree with Keith and say that it is well worth thinking about the 20D, so long as it is in good nick and hasn't done too many actuations. Things you would miss:

Bigger screen (who cares?)
Spot meter (you get used to not having one)
Smaller RAW buffer (only if you need long bursts and shoot RAW)

I can't think of anything else. You have the same sensor, the same great image quality, the same solid, practical body. I'd be looking to pay around half as much for a 20D used as I'd pay for a 30D new. Less than that and it's a no brainer. Two-thirds of the 30D new price and I'd probably not buy it unless it was in absolutely immaculate condition. No, on reflection, it wants to be closer to half of the new 30D price - 2/3rds is too much.

[IanF]

I'm going to disagree with Keith and say that it is well worth thinking about the 20D, so long as it is in good nick and hasn't done too many actuations. Things you would miss:

Bigger screen (who cares?)
Spot meter (you get used to not having one)
Smaller RAW buffer (only if you need long bursts and shoot RAW)

I can't think of anything else. You have the same sensor, the same great image quality, the same solid, practical body. I'd be looking to pay around half as much for a 20D used as I'd pay for a 30D new. Less than that and it's a no brainer. Two-thirds of the 30D new price and I'd probably not buy it unless it was in absolutely immaculate condition. No, on reflection, it wants to be closer to half of the new 30D price - 2/3rds is too much.

Same thoughts as me. The 20D is an excellent camera (I'm biased ;) ) the only thing I dislike is the loud shutter noise. I'd happily replace it with another 20D if picked up at a bargain price and from a trusted source. Bodies come and go so I'd rather spend the cash saved on a decent lens which should last a lifetime.

The 30D is a very nice camera and one day I may buy one or it's successor but there's no real advanatge over the 20D as regards specification for my use at least.

[David Smith]

Thank you all for the advice.
Do you know if the 100-400 plus 1.4 TC will work the same on the 20D as it does on the 30D. (I know from comments that this combination gives problems with the 400D)

[citrinella]

I bought a second hand 20D just after the 30D came out. Then it had an accident and the insurance provided me with a 30D. I don't think I have a good 30D but the retailer refuses to accept that. I'd happily have my 20D back.

My 30D ain't bad, I just have to have -2 stops exposure compensation almost always. Except where spot metering is appropriate. Without that I would still say there is little to choose. Comes down to "how second hand is it" and "how much saving".

Mike.

[Keith Reeder]

I'm going to disagree with Keith and say that it is well worth thinking about the 20D, so long as it is in good nick and hasn't done too many actuations.

Oh I don't disagree in principle, Tannin - I'm just nervous of buying second hand, especially when (as far as I know) only Canon can tell you the number of actuations.

[IanF]

Thank you all for the advice.
Do you know if the 100-400 plus 1.4 TC will work the same on the 20D as it does on the 30D. (I know from comments that this combination gives problems with the 400D)

It works okay as regards autofoucs and exposure, but I'm not so struck on the image quality with the teleconverter and zoom. At close distances the results are decent enough - but for those you don't need a teleconverter. More distant birds I find come out a little soft - nothing like as sharp as when using the 400 f5,6+teleconverter. It could be down to my technique though as I've never used that lens on a tripod.

Really I should experiment more with it as it could well be that the IS doesn't work with the teleconverter so the softness could be camera shake. Using a tripod may cure this.

[Photovisions]

David

The upgrade from 20D to 30D is not huge with only minor advances. I used a 20D and can confirm that it is a really good camera. Last September, I sold mine on ebay for £500, so a fair price now would be around £450 and anything less would be a bargain.
Adrian

[paul goode]

Thank you all for the advice.
Do you know if the 100-400 plus 1.4 TC will work the same on the 20D as it does on the 30D. (I know from comments that this combination gives problems with the 400D)

Hi David,

I've been using the lens and tc with the 20d. Generally it seems far more stable than on the 400d. Once (as I mentioned previously) the image 'leapt around', but the battery was pretty flat, so that may have been the reason.

Got to say that the quality I'm getting is absolute garbage compared to Keith, but having pm'ed him I think that there are reasons more connected to light, distance and the idiot holding the camera rather than the kit.

I've attached some images to give you an idea. All taken with the kenko tc

RE the 20d or 30d, I'd say that if the 20d is in very good nick at a very good price i'd go for it, especially if its a stop gap until the 40d (or whatever) comes along, at which point it will be a good backup for when the new one packs up 8-P

Paul

[Charlie M]

I switched to the 30D from a 20D when the motherboard "broke" (as the guy in the camera shop told me). I'd only had it 12 months. If you go on the Canon forums there do seem to be quite a few people with 20Ds that aren't lasting as long as they should. I realise that there are numerous factors involved in "breaking" a camera, but the 30D seems far more robust, and the bigger screen - though next to useless in bright light - is great for checking images.
I'd have to agree with Keith that it would have to be very cheap for me to want to take a punt on a second-hand 20D unless I knew the seller personally.
Cheers

[David Smith]

Just to thank everyone for the input.
The guy has brought it in today. I only know him from working in an adjacent office but he seems genuine. It's probably had lots of use as he is a semi professional but if the price is right I'll have a punt.
He is also selling a 17-85 IS which is his back up lense to go with the camera. Just to sicken everyone- he is buying the new 1D!!

[Jaff]

Don't forget the rumblings about a forthcoming 40D. May want to hold off for a little while.

[David Smith]

GOT IT!!!!
Still in the box-never used (as it was his back up) plus the 17-85 IS which I wanted anyway. All I need now is the 100-400 plus TC (KEITH IF YOU'RE SELLING YOUR LENSE FOR £50 I MIGHT BE INTERESTED).
Once again thank you to all for your advice

[paul goode]

GOT IT!!!!
Still in the box-never used (as it was his back up) plus the 17-85 IS which I wanted anyway. All I need now is the 100-400 plus TC (KEITH IF YOU'RE SELLING YOUR LENSE FOR £50 I MIGHT BE INTERESTED).
Once again thank you to all for your advice

sounds good David. Nice lens the 17-85, good for birding. My wife snapped this Oystercatcher with the 17-85 on her 400d.

Paul

[pe'rigin]

Good grief Paul,

Where was she when she got this one....fantastic.

[paul goode]

Good grief Paul,

Where was she when she got this one....fantastic.

On Sarah's behalf, thanks pe'rigin. It was taken at Thornham Harbour, Norfolk. We were taking some landscape shots when this Oystercatcher flew in front of us and then headed for the dead trees. I was well impressed that Sarah whipped round and got the shot. Admittedly the settings on the camera were for a shot with the sun behind us rather than this shot straight into the sun, but photoshop rescued it pretty well and the printed version we've got i think looks great.

Paul

[Boy George]

Thank you all for the advice.
Do you know if the 100-400 plus 1.4 TC will work the same on the 20D as it does on the 30D. (I know from comments that this combination gives problems with the 400D)

Hello David,

Glad to hear of your excellent purchase (I too have the 20D plus 17-85mm IS Zoom and 100-400mm IS Zoom and Kenko 1.4 TC).

Like many things photographic, results are largely dependent on the operator. Once you have the equipment "It's not what you've got, it's what you do with it" as the actress said to the bishop! But to be serious, the following link was provided to me by Roy C in another thread and should help with linking the 100-400 Zoom, TC and camera. I have found that AF and IS work as normal with pins taped but, as others have said, you are better off if blessed with good (not necessarily fantastic) light.

http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=29503

Let us all know how you get on.

Regards

Adrian

[pe'rigin]

Hats off to Sarah, Paul,

Looks sharp to me, colour wise as well, and super composition.

Rule 1. Women with cameras....dangerous, never go out with them in the field, they will always show you up.

[Keith Reeder]

never go out with them in the field, they will always show you up.

Heh!

Ask Paul about Sarah's red kite..!

;)

[Keith Reeder]

Got to say that the quality I'm getting is absolute garbage compared to Keith

Oh stop it - these are superb!

[paul goode]

Heh!

Ask Paul about Sarah's red kite..!

;)

My ego would rather you didn't! ;) ;)

[paul goode]

Oh stop it - these are superb!

Cheers Keith, hopefully I'm being a bit harsh on myself. I think its the Wheatear I'm unhappy with but looking again at the exif data it reminds me how crap the weather was that morning. I guess I've over pp'ed an image that wasn't sharp enough in the first place.

Maybe you can't expect miracles from handholding a 560mm (900mm even!) lens at 1/160 sec in a howling gale! Dread to think what it would have been like without the IS

Paul

[Tannin]

What a fantastic Oystercatcher!

[Keith Reeder]

Paul, I think the wheatear is the best of the three - subject, exposure, detail, sharpness and bokeh are all top-notch.

F/5.6 as well, remember.