Suprised at the lack of 20D talk.

mdude85 said:
the 300d already gives the d70 a run for its money, that's why so many more 300ds sold this year than d70s.
Click to expand...


Actually, the D70 gives the 300D a run for it's money as it is a newer camera. Which is also a large reason why more 300D's sold, that and it is marketed more towards the "best buy-er"
 
[TQ] said:
Actually, the D70 gives the 300D a run for it's money as it is a newer camera. Which is also a large reason why more 300D's sold, that and it is marketed more towards the "best buy-er"
Click to expand...

Actually its all about price. The masses just care about price, thats why ebay and others can scam you out of money. They give supposed great prices, then send you the camera minus everything, or don't send you anything. Price is what made the rebel great (and its also simple yet advanced enough to make people 'feel' like 'pros' "

The D70 is similar, except that its a little more expensive, and more geared for the advanced amature. I doubt that the D70 will out sell the 300D, take a look at the most 'watched/viewed' camera on DPREVIEW its still the 300D.

Cheers,
 
[TQ] said:
Actually, the D70 gives the 300D a run for it's money as it is a newer camera. Which is also a large reason why more 300D's sold, that and it is marketed more towards the "best buy-er"
Click to expand...

more 300ds have been sold not because they've been out longer -- they are sold at a higher frequency than the D70s.
 
mdude85 said:
more 300ds have been sold not because they've been out longer -- they are sold at a higher frequency than the D70s.
Click to expand...

Thats not waht i was getting at.
 
i think tq is indicating the 300d is a better bang for your buck, at $450 less then the d70, and that has a good deal to do with why so many have sold.
 
esr2 said:
i think tq is indicating the 300d is a better bang for your buck, at $450 less then the d70, and that has a good deal to do with why so many have sold.
Click to expand...


Actually, i'm just annoyed when people say things like the 300D gives the D70 a run for its money...as if canon made this camera to better nikon.

The reason more canons sold is because it is a cheaper camera made by a company with a higher profile name who put themselves in the spotlight more often.

Obviously nikon and canon are the two powerhouses in this industry (35mm SLR's) but your average consumer is going to have canon in their house more often then they are going to have nikon. I'd be willing to bet that started with cameras like the AE-1. It's not a secret...canon does this on purpose; they are trying to make money.

What is the average soccer mom who likes to take pictures going to buy first.

The silver 300D for $1000 or the black nikon for $1300.

This is what i'm getting at, this is what i mean by "best buyers".

Not to mention, i haven’t seen one TV add about the D70...yet when the 300D came out it was plastered all over TV, just like the rebels before it.

I guess, it is a market that nikon has no interest in...which doesnt make sense to me.

The 300D is like the gateway drug of cameras. You get your average shmo to buy this camera because it takes a lot of lenses and is impressive to show off to his friends. Soon something comes up so he gets online to search for some help, he comes across photography-on-the.net or maybe the DPforums, for the FM forums...regardless, within weeks he's questioning his lens quality, perhaps he feels he needs a better flash, and then it's a new canon 20D, and then more lenses...MORE MONEY in canons pocket.

The reason more canons sell is because the public knows about them. I dont know who Nikon has in their marketing Dept. But they ought to get a better group of people.

In ever photography magazine i see canon ads out-number nikons by at least 2 to 1. In my last issue i recall seeing two adds for the i9900, one for the MKII and one for the 300D. The only thing in there for nikon was the D70. You do the math.
 
NEED MARKII... :eek:

anywho...
 
After reading the previews and seeing some of the samples posted today, I'm suprised Canon put this camera out. Seeing some comparison shots between the 20D and the 1DmkII, IMO the 20D looks better. The 20D's images appear sharper and crisper. Looks like this camera will hurt the sales of the 1DmkII, unless they plan to drop the price on the 1DmkII (I wish).

The 1DmkII still has some advantages over the 20D, but are those worth the extra $4000?

I wonder why they didn't call it the 10DmkII?
 
I agree about the shots. The 20D seems to be a tad shaper, however the MKII and the 20D are two differnt beasts, i'll most likely be getting a 20D but if i could afford it i would get the MKII.

Crop factor
Better focus
8fps
weather sealing
etc
 
Well, I've seen enough to convince me so ya know, buy my 10D before I leave the country on Sep. 4..... pretty please? 2 mo. old, $975 shipped, you know you wanna. ;)
 
HaRdLiNe said:
Well, I've seen enough to convince me so ya know, buy my 10D before I leave the country on Sep. 4..... pretty please? 2 mo. old, $975 shipped, you know you wanna. ;)
Click to expand...

I think you'll have a pretty hard time getting a grand out of that camera anytime soon.
 
jimnms said:
After reading the previews and seeing some of the samples posted today, I'm suprised Canon put this camera out. Seeing some comparison shots between the 20D and the 1DmkII, IMO the 20D looks better. The 20D's images appear sharper and crisper. Looks like this camera will hurt the sales of the 1DmkII, unless they plan to drop the price on the 1DmkII (I wish).

The 1DmkII still has some advantages over the 20D, but are those worth the extra $4000?

I wonder why they didn't call it the 10DmkII?
Click to expand...

unless you have seen those shots at the highest resolution from both cameras (RAW), no resize, there's really no way to tell which one is sharper than the other.
 
mdude85 said:
unless you have seen those shots at the highest resolution from both cameras (RAW), no resize, there's really no way to tell which one is sharper than the other.
Click to expand...

Do you even read reviews...or is this just something you pulled out of your butt?

I dont care of the worst jpeg compression known to human is used, if both cameras get treated the same and one comes out on top, then that one is better.

The photos speak for themselves
http://www.dpreview.com/articles/canoneos20d/page16.asp
 
looks a lot darker....10D isn't far behind. however, iso performance is nice. 10d iso 800 is about the same as 20d iso 1600.
 
here is my plan:

step 1: buy the digital rebel cause it has the same features as the D70, is 450 bucks cheaper, and most importantly, you can buy a vertical shutter release/battery grip for it
step 2: make a tshirt showing my love for the Digital Rebel over the D70 (link: http://mywebpages.comcast.net/shoelessone/newshirt1.jpg and http://mywebpages.comcast.net/shoelessone/newshirt2.jpg)
step 3: read a bunch of crap about new cameras comming out, that are really expensive for somebody like me (in college, take photos for a small news paper for money, and as hobby, but thats about it)
step 4: realize taht i dont need 2 more megapixels cause 6 is great for the 30x50" prints i have done before, and i dont do much cropping (i just frame well/take lots of pictures in the first place ;) jk)
step 5: buy a Sigma 105mm instead of even considering upgrading bodies (i figure the generation after the 20D, maybe the 30D i'll start thinking about upgrading)
step 6: take more pictures, like this
asdf1.jpg

step 7: take more pictures, that suck to experiment with my new len, like
macroeyesmall.JPG

step 8: read threads like these, and post responses like these, to tell everybody that the new body would be kool as hell. if you want to buy it for me (along with the battery grip, cause its a must have for all SLRs IMO), then great. if you have the money, it would be an awesome camera to start out in the dSLR world with. but, if you are like me and already have a DR or similar dSLR (D70 included), then dont worry about it!
 
If i had a 10D i would not be buying the 20D, but since the 300D does not do the things i'd like it to do to make sports photography a little easier, i'm getting the 20D. It has nothing to do with image quality, at least not for me.
 
The focused subject in the photo is the photographer in the eye. I like it
 
jimnms said:
This from a guy IIRC has a 1D mkII and a 10D. :D

The only thing that worries me is that being 8.2MP on the same size sensor it might be noisy.

After I see some sample shots, if I like what I see I'll put my 10D and the two lenses I don't use much up for sale and preorder one. I'll have my trusty old G3 to hold me over until I get it. I just hope the BiGED grip extender will fit the 20D.
Click to expand...
err that would be me


this cam sure looks nice though, the high iso samples seem to be on par with my mark 2
 
esr2 said:
10) post a pic of the eye that's i focus :rolleyes: .

-esr
Click to expand...


i certainly was NOT trying to impress anybody with that picture, nor was it even the point. i suppose i probably shouldnt have even posted it. the point was:

1. that the digital rebel takes pretty nice pictures, as does the D70
2. (here is a little qoute, perhaps you missed it?) "step 7: take more pictures, that suck to experiment with my new lens, like"
3. thats about it :). i have said it before here, and other places, i happen to enjoy taking photos, sometimes i get luckey and take a good photo. BUT, i dont have a wonderful tallent like some, and i'll never claim to be a great photographer. i am proud of certain photos, but, once again, i'm not trying to prove i know anything. i do feel strongly that i dont want to buy a new camera body... yet :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top