Canon 5D versus Canon 20D (1 Viewer)

I have been digiscoping for about a year and a half in the UK. I have got some very acceptable results, but mainly I have had a huge amount of fun out of it.

I am seriously thinking of trying bird photography using a Canon DSLR with Canon lenses. I have never used a DSLR camera before. I have read lots of threads on the relative merits of various lenses and am fairly clear as what I want. I was planning to buy a Canon 20D, but I would really welcome any informed opinion on whether it would be worth spending the extra on the newer 5D. Do the extra megapixels and the full frame represent any real advantage (with long focal length lenses)?

Barry Boswell.

Barry

Bob atkins site 20D vs 5D

http://bobatkins.com/photography/digital/canon_eos_5d_or_20d.html


Robert

Barry,the 20d is a superb camera.Think before spending the extra on the 5d.

I think you would be well advised to wait awhile (3 or 4 months?) if you decide on the 20D. The 20D is very likely to be replaced in 2006, considering how old a model it is.

To answer your question, a full-frame sensor is a DISadvantage for photograhy like bird photography, where you need as much magnification as you can get. You lose the 1.6 sensor factor - e.g. a 400mm lens is a 400mm lens with the 5D, whereas it is a 640mm lens with the 20D.

For bird photography the 20D has a considerable edge over the 5D. The 1.6x crop factor as mentioned by RAH is very important. For telephoto work the smaller size sensor is great, while the full frame sensor of the 5D is preferred for wide angle shots. Another benefit of this 1.6x crop factor is that you avoid the often poor optics of the edges of some lenses. The 20D just grabs the image from the usually near optically perfect center section of the lens.

A second selling point of the 20D over the 5D is pixel density. While the 5D may offer more pixels - they are spread out more since they have to record a larger image. You actually get more pixels per bird with the 20D!

But, before jumping aboard the DSLR ship, be sure you check out the prices of lenses. One or 2 good lenses will easily cost as much as the camera body and you are sure to want at least 3 or 4 of them!

And also, if possible, try out a DSLR and see just what you will be getting. Using a 20D along with a 400mm lens will give you about 13x magnification. When digiscoping you are likely using a 20x objective lens along with 2 to 3x optical magnification on the camera. Quite a bit more than you will be getting from a DSLR.

All that said ... I use a 20D with about 6 different lenses - I even hang it off the back of my scope at times!

I seem to remember posting to strongly dispute something Compa wrote a while back. Well this time I'm posting to strongly agree with him! His post is spot on.

Probably the best all-round birding camera on the market today is the Canon 20D (for the reasons outlined above, and quite a few others as well). Also worth considering are a number of others. To mention just a few: Canon 350D (most of the advantages of the 20D, quite a lot cheaper); several Nikon models which, like the Canon units, have a wonderful arrray of superb but rather expensive lenses to select from; Olympus have a well-respected unit, there is merit in the Konica-Minolta model, and perhaps the good but overdue for replacement Pentax *ist line. But the top three are generally regarded as the 20D, Nikon D70 and various close relatives, and the 350D.

But there are two models that are not out yet that might be worth waiting for. First the new Nikon D200 will be available within a few weeks for around the same price as the 20D. Early indications are that it looks very good indeed, but we have to wait and see how it copes with noise at high ISOs - a very important quality if you are using long lenses in poor light to photograph shy birds. At present Canon are the champions in this regard, so it will be interesting to see in Nikon have caught up yet.

Second, there is nothing official yet but Canon are almost certain to replace the 20D with a new model some time early in the new year. One assumes that it will be even better than the current champ.

Is it worth waiting? On the whole, yes. At least "yes" if you are in the northern hemisphere where winter is on the way and birding opportunities likely to be few for the next 4 months. There are several possibilities if you wait:

* The Nikon 200D will prove as good as its fans are hoping/claiming. Buy a 200D.
* The 20D replacement will be an out-and-out ripper. Buy a 30D (or whatever they decide to call it).
* Both of the above. Buy whichever one you like.
* Neither of the above. Buy a 20D for quite a bit less than they cost now.

Seems to me that you can't go wrong.

(Do as I say, not as I do. I just bought a 20D because it's springtime here in Australia and I wasn't going to throw away a whole summer just to get a slightly better camera or to save a few hundred bucks.)

Whilst to some extent I agree with some of what has been said before in this thread I dispute the following comment

RAH said:

To answer your question, a full-frame sensor is a DISadvantage for photograhy like bird photography, where you need as much magnification as you can get. You lose the 1.6 sensor factor - e.g. a 400mm lens is a 400mm lens with the 5D, whereas it is a 640mm lens with the 20D.

Click to expand...

Personally I totally disagree on this point, I use full frame in preference to APS sized sensors for nigh on all of my bird photography, sure the whole approach has to be different, but fieldcraft and understanding the subject is what leads to the very best images (get 1.6X closer), not high magnification. Getting your subject to come close to you, or getting close to your subject by stealthy methods will mean you have less chance of the atmospheric distortion problems (heat haze, pollen etc) that long lenses are prone to give, you can use shorter lenses that are less prone to camera shake, have much better Depth of field (and control of) and best of all the larger pixels give far less noise.

nigelblake said:

fieldcraft and understanding the subject is what leads to the very best images (get 1.6X closer), not high magnification. Getting your subject to come close to you, or getting close to your subject by stealthy methods will mean you have less chance of the atmospheric distortion problems (heat haze, pollen etc) that long lenses are prone to give, you can use shorter lenses that are less prone to camera shake, have much better Depth of field (and control of) and best of all the larger pixels give far less noise.

Click to expand...

And if you get that close with an APS sensor then your image will still be bigger than with a FF sensor. It's not as if using a 20D means you're not allowed to use your skill to get closer to the bird.

From what I've seen, sensor noise on the 5D is similar to that of the 20D - definitely not 'far less'.

Wot camera

Hi Barry,
For what it's worth, the 20D is a great camera, but what you really need in any event is a GOOD LENS.
The 20D with a good Canon lens such as the 100-400 IS zoom will give you superb results.
The 20D will probably be replaced in the new year, but you can get some good bargains now, ie under £1000.

Good luck and we await the results!

madmike

Spoken like a man who owns an EF 600mm f/4L!

Nigel is right, of course, but I suggest that his comments pertain to people with something approaching his own level of skill and expertise - i.e., not to most of us.

As you learn the art of bird photography, you improve (of course) and over time you learn how to get the lighting right, how to frame, above all, how to get closer to the bird. But it takes a great deal of skill to do that. More skill than most of us will probably ever muster, if we are talking FF camera and a lens small enough to carry in one hand. For someone starting out with a first camera, I don't think it's realistic to try to use full frame. Coming from digiscoping to a 1.6x crop SLR is a big jump. Going to a FF SLR would be a bridge too far, in my view. Realistically, Barry is going to be working with a lens in the 400mm class. He will need all the help he can get.

Barry, I suggest that you take Compa's comment as a useful, practical guide to buying a camera, and that you take Nigel's comment as a mantra to repeat to yourself every time you go out and use that camera. Once you get to the stage where you are having to zoom out or back away from birds to get them all in frame the way you want them, then sell your 1.6x crop camera and buy a full frame unit.

Hollis, I think Nigel wold be talking about the 1D, not the 5D. That makes his "far less noise" point a lot stronger.

What you also need to understand re noise is that if noise from both sensors is the same it will show less on 12.8 meg as opposed to 8.2meg if both images are printed at the same size.
Seriously though a full frame shot on 12.8 will be better than a full frame shot at 8.2

......"I think Nigel wold be talking about the 1D, not the 5D. That makes his "far less noise" point a lot stronger.".........
No, I mean the 5D, having tested one I was very impressed by the 'cleaness' of its images, whilst its not up to the 1Ds Mk2 standard, it ain't far behind.

I think that the crop factor does help for us "weekend photographers" and birders who want to get some shots. If you are going to concerntrate on photography then I think Nigel's advice is definitely worth listening too - his photographs show just how effective a full frame camera can be when shooting birds.

The bigger issue is the lens you use, there's no point spending £1000+ on a camera and using cheap lenses. I only use a cheap body (350D) and a reasonably good lens (Sigma 500 f4.5) and am getting results that I'm pleased with. I'm sure that if I'd spent the same amount on a more expensive body and a cheaper lens I would be getting poorer results.

As above--go for a decent lens.Cameras depreciate faster than cars!!. I Purchased a 20d for £1100 sold for £750 --Purchased a 1dMK2 for £2500 6 months ago now worth about £1600. Over a grand out of pocket in less than a year. But the lenses are still worth only a little less than what I paid.Just a thought..

Thank you very much to everyone who responded to my query. I am now much better informed, and I really appreciate all of the good advice.

Barry boswell

I noticed Jessops have knocked £200 of the 20D, now £799 so a replacement must be just around the corner.

Barry I think the hub of your question was about sensor / lens coverage.

In an idle moment I got the calculator out.

The Sensor of a 5D is 2.5 times bigger than a 20D so if the 20D was full frame it would be a 20Mp camera.

Assuming you have a 20D with a 200mm lens and your subject fills the frame this will give you a 8.2Mp image.

If you just replace the 20D body with the 5D. The area the subject now covers will only give you a 5Mp image. To get the image back to a 8.2Mp you will need to reduce the lens to subject distance by 20%.

To get the image to fill the frame so that you have a 12.8Mp image you will either need to reduce the lens to subject distance by 35% or fit a 320mm lens.

As suggested I would wait and see what the new 20D replacement has to offer.
If you go for the 5D I certainly hope your not going to fit a cheap £300 lens on it.

The higher resolution and 1.6 crop factor of the 20D can work to your advantage in getting an image with a shorter lens from a distance. Unless you have got a market for your photos where image noise and factors Nigel has introduced you will find the 20D a good buy.

If your new to DSLR make sure your not cutting corners on the lens to get a better body.

Robert

robski said:

Barry I think the hub of your question was about sensor / lens coverage.

In an idle moment I got the calculator out.

The Sensor of a 5D is 2.5 times bigger than a 20D so if the 20D was full frame it would be a 20Mp camera.

Assuming you have a 20D with a 200mm lens and your subject fills the frame this will give you a 8.2Mp image.

If you just replace the 20D body with the 5D. The area the subject now covers will only give you a 5Mp image. To get the image back to a 8.2Mp you will need to reduce the lens to subject distance by 20%.

To get the image to fill the frame so that you have a 12.8Mp image you will either need to reduce the lens to subject distance by 35% or fit a 320mm lens.

As suggested I would wait and see what the new 20D replacement has to offer.
If you go for the 5D I certainly hope your not going to fit a cheap £300 lens on it.

The higher resolution and 1.6 crop factor of the 20D can work to your advantage in getting an image with a shorter lens from a distance. Unless you have got a market for your photos where image noise and factors Nigel has introduced you will find the 20D a good buy.

If your new to DSLR make sure your not cutting corners on the lens to get a better body.

Robert

Click to expand...

Hi Robert,

Thanks for your response (and thanks again to everyone else who responded to my original query). Having already ruled out the 5D on the basis of advice given by many people in this thread, I have essentially decided to buy the 20D camera rather than wait hopefully for a new model in the new year. This is fairly readily available at around £800 now and will do everything I need (and some). Further up the thread someone made mention of "weekend photographers" and that is exactly what I am, so any marginal improvement in the spec of a new model is not going to affect me greatly.

As far as lenses go, I have been saving hard and am going to bite the bullet and buy both the 100-400mm F4.5 Canon zoom and the 500mm F4 Canon lens. I reckon these lenses will last me for a very long time even if I replace the camera at some future time.

Barry Boswell

Barry Boswell said:

As far as lenses go, I have been saving hard and am going to bite the bullet and buy both the 100-400mm F4.5 Canon zoom and the 500mm F4 Canon lens. I reckon these lenses will last me for a very long time even if I replace the camera at some future time.

Barry Boswell

Click to expand...

I think you're doing the right thing, good glassware should be the priority...putting money towards quality glassware is never wasted, the camera will be obsolete many years before the lenses.

cheers,
Andy

Glad you have made your choice,Barry,you will not be disappointed.Will look out for your postings on the Gallery.