D70/Rebel XT/20D

I've been looking at lots of reviews for these three cameras. They all have different opinions. This is my first digital slr. I dont have any lenses compatable with them. I'm going to be doing abstract type close ups, some landscapes, and some sports. What will work best for me?

ok i think the rebel is out...its either a d70 with two lenses for $1330 or a 20D with one lens for $1330 ( i would probably buy another lens)

note: the sports are lacrosse and skiing (maybe golf). so i need to get a clear picture of a skiier going 55-75 mph.

my dad owns a d70s, i think its great. he takes lots of pictures of me playing lacrosse and they seme to be good, but u better get a lens with a much better zoom cause the stock one is small, so for distances ud need a bigger lens.

Any one of them is fine. I own a Rebel and 20D. I have always preferred Canon to Nikon which is why I started with Canon. Obviously the lenses are the most important part but the XT is a fantastic beginners camera. You won't notice too big of a difference between the XT and 20D unless you really start getting into changing all of the settings

yeah but i want a more solid bigger camera as opposed to the smaller rebel.

theres not much of a size difference between the two. I would go for the rebel xt and put the difference in cash for a better lense. The XT was good for me but I had expendable cash so now when I do a sports shoot I have my 20D with my 70-200 IS f/2.8 and on the XT i have the 100-400 IS f/4.5-5.6 so I can just switch quickly

the money isnt a problem...i want to be able to lots of fine tuning with colors, wb and stuff. i want the camera to be sturdy and heavy/strong. i know that the 20d is magnesium alloy compared to the xt's plastic. so for the canons my choice is most likely the 20d. any opinions on 20d vs. d70?

You aren't going to be able to do much with the colors on the camera itself, and white balance isn't important with the camera when its much easier and more accurate to do it in a program like Aperture now

i guess. im just not sure i want such a small camera. im afraid it will feel weird with some bigger lenses on it. and it just seems a little small to hold. im definetly going to go to the stor eand check them both out. do u like your 20d or xt better?

The Rebel definitely doesn't feel awkward to use with a bigger lense. Most big lenses have a tripod mount on them which I don't even use because I like having full control over the camera and mono/tripods just don't do it for me, and they still feel fine with both of the cameras. I like the navigation functions more on the 20D but I honestly can't tell the difference between the shots with them when I use the same lenses.

There really isn't much of a techincal difference between the 20D and XT unless you get really technical (nobody will notice the difference between an 8.0 and 8.5 mp picture). The 20D has a slightly faster shutter speed but again that won't be a factor if your lense isn't getting in focus quick enough.

I love both of my cameras, I had the XT first and would be perfectly satisfied with it even if I didn't also get the 20D. I use both of them equally as often when I do sports shoots so its not like the XT is just there for backups, it gets the job done

I have had some shots that came out much better with the XT than I have the 20D and some the other way around, there are so many more factors that come into play with shooting than just the camera

ok. thanks so much for all of your help. i think im going to go to the and mess around with them both. again thanks for all of your help recently.

They are pretty much equal cameras. The Canon cameras have larger spot meters, so Nikon wins that edge. Canon at that level has better noise control on images shot ISO 800-3200. I think Canon has ISO 100 on the XT and 20D, both of those points would lead to Canon. Nikon cameras are more solidly built than Canon, I know what you mean about size I have seen the 20D and remember thinking how small the camera appears. I have not used the 20D, this was a camera being used by someone near me.

Lenses will be your most expensive purchases. Nikon and Canon both make outstanding lenses, you could go that route shopping your lenses you would want of both manufacturers and seeing if there is money savings that way.

I own nikon equipment, and actually am selling a D70, 18-70 kit lens, 300mm f/4, Adobe elements 3.0, 3 batteries total (two nikon one promaster) assorted extras for 1500.00 (U.S.) If interested let me know, the D70 is one year old and has 2 years left on an extended waranty.

After moving digital with the D70 fell in love with digital and now own a D2X, and no longer use the D70 as much.

trpnmonkey41 said:

You aren't going to be able to do much with the colors on the camera itself, and white balance isn't important with the camera when its much easier and more accurate to do it in a program like Aperture now

Click to expand...

I am sorry but to adjust in aperture is just bad, it will never come off as true.

the nikon has some great preset and modifiable preset white balance settings.

the canon out of the box produces alot warmer images on auto settings, with a slightly higher saturation of colours.
but once you get into the setting you can tweak that easily.

note** I am not sayign to never adjust in aperture, but get as close as you cna outside, becasue adjusting midtones highlights and shadows of rgb or cmy image iis increadibly difficult.

Yea you want to do what you can when you are shooting...but Aperture does one helluva good job in adjusting pictures when you get into it.



I took that photo in just terrible conditions..just after a storm, still very cloudy but with some very bright spots. The photo before editing wasn't even worth saving but I got it to look like that in Aperture

haave a before shot?

I can take a look but I don't think so. I did a lot of house keeping on my system (i cant even find the full shot of that right now which is why I just grabbed the small one I have on the web)

I would highly reccomend the XT, great camera for the price. I own both the XT and 20D, and I find the image quality is not noticeable at all on the 20D. Sure the 20D has some nicer features, larger, more fps, tougher build, higher iso.. but in the end you have to ask yourself.. if you really need those things.

trpnmonkey41 said:

Yea you want to do what you can when you are shooting...but Aperture does one helluva good job in adjusting pictures when you get into it.

I took that photo in just terrible conditions..just after a storm, still very cloudy but with some very bright spots. The photo before editing wasn't even worth saving but I got it to look like that in Aperture

Click to expand...

yeah, I jsut said that not to come off as a jerk but to let the oerson who made this thread know that, becasue you said not t worry so much about it, but it is indeed impportant

also overcast gives the best shadow and highlight detail and contrast, but sunlight brings out teh most saturated colours, its a trade off, but you cant controll mother nature.

ive got an xt, and love it. the only reason id switch to the 20d right now would be because of the female pc connection on the 20D but if you arent doing portraits, its really not needed. you say money isnt an issue, so id go with the 20D, as those extra frames per second can make all the difference when shooting sports... and just make sure you get the right accessorys.

i dont know if u have anything right now, but theres some really great tripods out there to be had at a amazing price if u know where to look, and great glass for both cameras.

i didnt realize that this was a little older thread, but thats ok i spose. let me know what you decide, and i pray that you do not go the nikon route. if you really want to know, just ask.

go with the XT or 350D as its known to me

great camera its teaching me all the basics at the same time its giving me great help to get some good shots by only allowing you change one variable. Pretty sure that the 20D is like that but hey am as happy as a pig in muck!