Canon EOS 20D (LEAKED PHOTOS backups)

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Richard Cockburn, Aug 18, 2004.

  1. I already posted this in another thread. Sorry if you already saw this. The
    people at Canon USA seem to have discovered the leak and pulled the page.
    Here are some backups I made of the leaked 8 Megapixel EOS 20D images.

    http://www.picgoo.com/uploads7/20d_angle.jpg

    http://www.picgoo.com/uploads7/20d_headon.jpg

    http://www.picgoo.com/uploads7/20d_back.jpg

    Specs again:

    EOS-20D
    8.2 MegaPixels
    DIGIC II
    1:1.6x Crop
    9 Point focusing
    1/8000s Max Shutter speed
    5fps Continuous speed
    25 frame buffer
    EF-s support
    E-TTL II support
    0.2sec shorter startup time than 10D
    50g lighter than 10D

    Two new lenses

    EF-S 10-22 mm f3.5 - 4.5
    EF-S 17-85 IS f4-5.6



    --
    "We are twice armed if we fight with faith." (Plato)

    -Richard Cockburn
     
    Richard Cockburn, Aug 18, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. So how much you think? I wouldn't be surpised if they ask US $2000 bundled
    with a EF-S lens because I think they could get it.
     
    this old user, Aug 18, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. "this old user" <> wrote in message
    news:eek:yLUc.8399$...
    > So how much you think? I wouldn't be surpised if they ask US $2000

    bundled
    > with a EF-S lens because I think they could get it.


    You price guess is just a touch higher than mine.

    Nice camera but not earthshaking from my point of view.
     
    Charles Schuler, Aug 18, 2004
    #3
  4. "Charles Schuler" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    >
    > "this old user" <> wrote in message
    > news:eek:yLUc.8399$...
    > > So how much you think? I wouldn't be surpised if they ask US $2000

    > bundled
    > > with a EF-S lens because I think they could get it.

    >
    > You price guess is just a touch higher than mine.
    >
    > Nice camera but not earthshaking from my point of view.


    Agreed. But you know they could get it if they asked because it's got 8MP,
    like that is really a big deal compared to 6MP.

    I saw here and elsewhere the list price is supposed to be $1600. I'm
    surprised it's priced lower than the 10D was originally and with a kit lens
    apparently.
     
    this old user, Aug 19, 2004
    #4
  5. Richard Cockburn

    Bill Hilton Guest

    >> Nice camera but not earthshaking from my point of view.

    I doubt that many 10D users will trade up to this right away, BUT think about
    the choice it offers to the people deciding between Canon and, say, the new
    Minolta 6 Mpix dSLR, or those who are undecided between Nikon and Canon?
    Especially if the price is close enough to what the 10D sold for ...

    Will be interesting to see what Nikon and Minolta announce in response.

    Bill
     
    Bill Hilton, Aug 19, 2004
    #5
  6. Richard Cockburn

    PlaneGuy Guest

    I don't know why that price would be surprising - compare the price of the
    D30 to its replacement, the D60, and in turn to its replacement the 10D -
    each time a significant price reduction. (Although my reading was that a
    Canadian store was selling for the USD equivelant of USD1600, which means US
    stores like B&H would probably be 10-20% cheaper or, 1400-1500 USD.

    "this old user" <> wrote in message
    news:MQSUc.8484$...
    > I saw here and elsewhere the list price is supposed to be $1600. I'm
    > surprised it's priced lower than the 10D was originally and with a kit

    lens
    > apparently.
    >
    >
     
    PlaneGuy, Aug 19, 2004
    #6
  7. Richard Cockburn

    Mark B. Guest

    "PlaneGuy" <> wrote in message
    news:412453c5$...
    > I don't know why that price would be surprising - compare the price of the
    > D30 to its replacement, the D60, and in turn to its replacement the 10D -
    > each time a significant price reduction. (Although my reading was that a
    > Canadian store was selling for the USD equivelant of USD1600, which means

    US
    > stores like B&H would probably be 10-20% cheaper or, 1400-1500 USD.


    On the forums at dpreview, someone reported that onecall.com gave a price of
    $1700 MSRP. The street price should be a few hundred less than that.

    Mark
     
    Mark B., Aug 19, 2004
    #7
  8. Richard Cockburn

    James Fisher Guest

    Nice photoshop job..


    Richard Cockburn wrote:

    > I already posted this in another thread. Sorry if you already saw this. The
    > people at Canon USA seem to have discovered the leak and pulled the page.
    > Here are some backups I made of the leaked 8 Megapixel EOS 20D images.
    >
    > http://www.picgoo.com/uploads7/20d_angle.jpg
    >
    > http://www.picgoo.com/uploads7/20d_headon.jpg
    >
    > http://www.picgoo.com/uploads7/20d_back.jpg
    >
    > Specs again:
    >
    > EOS-20D
    > 8.2 MegaPixels
    > DIGIC II
    > 1:1.6x Crop
    > 9 Point focusing
    > 1/8000s Max Shutter speed
    > 5fps Continuous speed
    > 25 frame buffer
    > EF-s support
    > E-TTL II support
    > 0.2sec shorter startup time than 10D
    > 50g lighter than 10D
    >
    > Two new lenses
    >
    > EF-S 10-22 mm f3.5 - 4.5
    > EF-S 17-85 IS f4-5.6
    >
    >
    >
     
    James Fisher, Aug 19, 2004
    #8
  9. "James Fisher" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    >
    > Nice photoshop job..
    >

    Not Photoshop, the Canon 8 MP 20D will be released. Iam not convinced that
    the other specs are accurate.


    > Richard Cockburn wrote:
    >
    > > I already posted this in another thread. Sorry if you already saw this.

    The
    > > people at Canon USA seem to have discovered the leak and pulled the

    page.
    > > Here are some backups I made of the leaked 8 Megapixel EOS 20D images.
    > >
    > > http://www.picgoo.com/uploads7/20d_angle.jpg
    > >
    > > http://www.picgoo.com/uploads7/20d_headon.jpg
    > >
    > > http://www.picgoo.com/uploads7/20d_back.jpg
    > >
    > > Specs again:
    > >
    > > EOS-20D
    > > 8.2 MegaPixels
    > > DIGIC II
    > > 1:1.6x Crop
    > > 9 Point focusing
    > > 1/8000s Max Shutter speed
    > > 5fps Continuous speed
    > > 25 frame buffer
    > > EF-s support
    > > E-TTL II support
    > > 0.2sec shorter startup time than 10D
    > > 50g lighter than 10D
    > >
    > > Two new lenses
    > >
    > > EF-S 10-22 mm f3.5 - 4.5
    > > EF-S 17-85 IS f4-5.6
    > >
    > >
    > >
     
    Darrell Larose, Aug 19, 2004
    #9
  10. Richard Cockburn

    Ron Recer Guest

    >From: "this old user"
    >Date: 8/18/2004 7:51 PM Central Standard Time


    >Agreed. But you know they could get it if they asked because it's got 8MP,
    >like that is really a big deal compared to 6MP.


    The 8Mp is NOT a big deal especially when one of the sites that supposedly
    showed the 20D said that the RAW file size was "8.2 MP (3072x2048 pixels)".
    Several other places referred to the camera as "10D" instead of "20D" and the
    buffer size was shown as 25 frames in one place and 9 frames in another. To
    many errors in the text for it to have been a real Canon site IMO.

    Ron
     
    Ron Recer, Aug 19, 2004
    #10
  11. Richard Cockburn

    leo Guest

    "Ron Recer" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > >From: "this old user"
    >>Date: 8/18/2004 7:51 PM Central Standard Time

    >
    >>Agreed. But you know they could get it if they asked because it's got 8MP,
    >>like that is really a big deal compared to 6MP.

    >
    > The 8Mp is NOT a big deal especially when one of the sites that supposedly
    > showed the 20D said that the RAW file size was "8.2 MP (3072x2048
    > pixels)".
    > Several other places referred to the camera as "10D" instead of "20D" and
    > the
    > buffer size was shown as 25 frames in one place and 9 frames in another.
    > To
    > many errors in the text for it to have been a real Canon site IMO.
    >
    > Ron



    Why not?

    These kinds of web pages are done way ahead of time and a link was made from
    the main site when time is ripe. Someone can easily sneak out the URL to the
    public.

    And the URL address with "temeplatedata" clearly indicates that they were
    testing the page.

    Neverthless, the specification is pretty close to what I expected and I
    predicted the the 10D replacement would have EF-S mount. ...But how come
    there's no spot metering? Not that 20D would cannibalize any 1D MK II sales.
     
    leo, Aug 19, 2004
    #11
  12. Ron Recer wrote:
    >..... To
    > many errors in the text for it to have been a real Canon site IMO.
    >
    > Ron


    I saw the "20D" images on the Canon USA website before they were
    pulled. I didn't see any specs tho...

    -Dave
     
    Dave Herzstein, Aug 19, 2004
    #12
  13. Peter Rongsted, Aug 19, 2004
    #13
  14. Richard Cockburn

    Mark B. Guest

    Mark B., Aug 20, 2004
    #14
  15. Darrell Larose, Aug 20, 2004
    #15
  16. Richard Cockburn

    Eric Gill Guest

    dy (Bill Hilton) wrote in
    news::

    >>> Nice camera but not earthshaking from my point of view.

    >
    > I doubt that many 10D users will trade up to this right away,


    I dunno. If the claim of 1600 ISO having the same noise as 400 ISO does on
    the 10D is accurate, they'll get my money.

    The 10Ds ISO 400 has saved the day on many occasions for me, trading lovely
    colors and decent shooting speeds for a bit less detail. ISO 1600 shooting
    speed with that quality makes me pay attention like a heroin addict,
    especially if other settings show a comparable increase.

    If it isn't marketing hype. Apparently reviewers won't be able to answer
    that question till the 23rd.

    <snip>
     
    Eric Gill, Aug 20, 2004
    #16
  17. Richard Cockburn

    Phil Wheeler Guest

    Eric Gill wrote:
    > dy (Bill Hilton) wrote in
    > news::
    >
    >
    >>>>Nice camera but not earthshaking from my point of view.

    >>
    >>I doubt that many 10D users will trade up to this right away,

    >
    >
    > I dunno. If the claim of 1600 ISO having the same noise as 400 ISO does on
    > the 10D is accurate, they'll get my money.


    They will have mine as soon as my 20D arrives (been on a list since last
    Sunday). 300D will then be my wife's. Good thing: most say her shots
    are better than mine, using a refined P&S; giving her a dSLR is a good idea.

    Phil

    Phil
     
    Phil Wheeler, Aug 20, 2004
    #17
  18. Bart van der Wolf, Aug 20, 2004
    #18
  19. In article <Xns954AE638FCCAericvgillyahoocom@24.93.44.119>,
    says...
    > I dunno. If the claim of 1600 ISO having the same noise as 400 ISO does on
    > the 10D is accurate, they'll get my money.


    Ditto. I shoot a lot of available light and have shaky hands.
    Virtually no noise at ISO 1600 would be a godsend.

    > The 10Ds ISO 400 has saved the day on many occasions for me, trading lovely
    > colors and decent shooting speeds for a bit less detail. ISO 1600 shooting
    > speed with that quality makes me pay attention like a heroin addict,
    > especially if other settings show a comparable increase.
    >
    > If it isn't marketing hype. Apparently reviewers won't be able to answer
    > that question till the 23rd.


    Well, Canon has some sample images up - dunno if any are low-light.
    --
    http://www.pbase.com/bcbaird/
     
    Brian C. Baird, Aug 20, 2004
    #19
  20. Richard Cockburn

    Eric Gill Guest

    Brian C. Baird <> wrote in
    news::

    > In article <Xns954AE638FCCAericvgillyahoocom@24.93.44.119>,
    > says...
    >> I dunno. If the claim of 1600 ISO having the same noise as 400 ISO
    >> does on the 10D is accurate, they'll get my money.

    >
    > Ditto. I shoot a lot of available light and have shaky hands.
    > Virtually no noise at ISO 1600 would be a godsend.
    >
    >> The 10Ds ISO 400 has saved the day on many occasions for me, trading
    >> lovely colors and decent shooting speeds for a bit less detail. ISO
    >> 1600 shooting speed with that quality makes me pay attention like a
    >> heroin addict, especially if other settings show a comparable
    >> increase.
    >>
    >> If it isn't marketing hype. Apparently reviewers won't be able to
    >> answer that question till the 23rd.

    >
    > Well, Canon has some sample images up - dunno if any are low-light.


    The Canon Japan site had shot info - all are at 100 ISO, using the 50mm
    f/1.4 prime. Two are in studio. The tower shot is certainly low light,
    but towers usually don't move very quickly and they almost certainly used
    a tripod.

    IOW, nothing useful on the subject we're discussing, damnit!

    Truthfully, though, the more information we're getting, the more I like
    the new body. For example, write speed to Compact Flash tests to
    something like 3 times faster (!), and you can preview while it's still
    writing. I've always envied this of competing rigs.

    And the faster, better focus. Just these three features alone would have
    saved me considerable headache yesterday, shooting dancers in a studio.

    Let's hope the reviewers have some good news Monday...
     
    Eric Gill, Aug 20, 2004
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Software Mania

    BACKUPS, BACKUPS, & BACKUPS.

    Software Mania, Sep 3, 2003, in forum: MCSE
    Replies:
    10
    Views:
    1,148
    John Agosta
    Nov 11, 2003
  2. Drazen Stojcic / BUNTOVNIK

    Canon 20D leaked offical photos!

    Drazen Stojcic / BUNTOVNIK, Aug 18, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    77
    Views:
    2,145
  3. Richard Cockburn

    Canon G6 (LEAKED PHOTOS)

    Richard Cockburn, Aug 18, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    389
    Drazen Stojcic / BUNTOVNIK
    Aug 18, 2004
  4. hawridger

    Olympus E-P1 - Leaked Info and Photos

    hawridger, Jun 29, 2007, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    386
    =?iso-8859-1?B?SvNuUg==?=
    Jun 29, 2007
  5. Db
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    335
    Mark B.
    Aug 21, 2007
Loading...

Share This Page