Get a used 10D or buy a new Rebel XT?

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Tony, Sep 25, 2005.

  1. Tony

    Tony Guest

    I'm not too concerned about the megapixel race, but I am ready to move
    beyond my 3 MP compact. My film gear has been Canon for many years, so I
    have many lenses and familiarity with how Canons operate (my compact is also
    a Canon). I know that I can get a pre-owned 10D for a decent price if I
    spend a little time looking, and it is built more to the size of my Elan
    IIe. I hear some say that it still has better noise characteristics than
    either the 20D or the Rebel XT. That would be important to me. The XT is
    faster, though. I haven't actually handled a XT yet, but I'm concerned about
    the small size of the body and the cramped controls. Having said all that,
    is the 10D still a viable alternative to the newer, faster XT?

    For my purposes here's how it breaks down:

    10D Pros-
    Built like a tank
    Better noise characteristics (maybe?)
    Able to set Kelvin temp
    Will fit my hands better
    Can be used to ISO3200
    Can probably find one for less than the price of a XT

    10D Cons-
    Heavier
    Slower in both shot speed and autofocus
    Fewer frames in burst mode

    XT Pros-
    Faster
    Lighter
    More frames in burst mode
    A few more pixels (although I don't consider the difference from 6 to 8 all
    that much)

    XT Cons-
    Way tiny
    Cramped controls
    More money than a used 10D

    If anyone has experience with both I'd like to hear from you.
    Tony, Sep 25, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Tony

    Bill Guest

    Tony wrote:

    >I'm not too concerned about the megapixel race, but I am ready to move
    >beyond my 3 MP compact. My film gear has been Canon for many years, so I
    >have many lenses and familiarity with how Canons operate (my compact is also
    >a Canon). I know that I can get a pre-owned 10D for a decent price if I
    >spend a little time looking, and it is built more to the size of my Elan
    >IIe. I hear some say that it still has better noise characteristics than
    >either the 20D or the Rebel XT.


    I don't know who said that, but they were probably on medication at the
    time.

    :)

    The 20D and 350D/XT have VERY low noise. The older 10D is about equal at
    ISO 100/200 if I remember correctly, but it starts to suffer from noise
    issues as the ISO increases, while the 20D and 350D/XT are virtually
    noise-free up to about 400 ISO, and quite useable at 800 and 1600.

    I may be wrong on this, but generally speaking, the newer cameras handle
    noise much better.

    >That would be important to me. The XT is
    >faster, though. I haven't actually handled a XT yet, but I'm concerned about
    >the small size of the body and the cramped controls. Having said all that,
    >is the 10D still a viable alternative to the newer, faster XT?


    Yes and no.

    The 10D is viable if you need specific features that it has over the XT.
    But beyond that, the XT is the way to go.

    I agree that the 350D/XT is very small, perhaps even cramped to the
    large-handed amongst us. But myself, being of medium sized hand, find it
    somewhat small too but practical none-the-less. It's small, light, and
    fully featured, which means it has most of the functionality of the 20D,
    but in a smaller, lighter package, which is something I wanted.

    The glass that's mounted on the body is more important to me than the
    body, within practical limits of functionality of course, and that's why
    I chose the XT over the more expensive 20D.

    >For my purposes here's how it breaks down:
    >
    >10D Pros-
    >Built like a tank
    >Better noise characteristics (maybe?)
    >Able to set Kelvin temp
    >Will fit my hands better
    >Can be used to ISO3200


    Most of the pros/cons are meaningless.

    The ability to set Kelvin temperature and reaching ISO 3200 may be of
    some benefit under special circumstances, but for most people I doubt it
    really means much.

    So I'd say go for the XT, unless the size is a serious issue for you.

    Something I noticed, people with smaller hands find that using the XT
    without the vertical grip is actually a benefit. I like the grip, but I
    don't have small hands...not big either, but my girlfriend doesn't like
    the grip as it cramps her "pinky finger".

    >Can probably find one for less than the price of a XT


    Performance is the main issue as far as I'm concerned. The 8mp to 6mp
    difference is negligible, so I'd concentrate on features and usability
    over most other things.
    Bill, Sep 25, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. In article <>, Tony <>
    wrote:


    > 10D Pros-
    > Built like a tank

    Yep
    > Better noise characteristics (maybe?)

    No complaints here
    > Able to set Kelvin temp

    Don't care - shoor RAW
    > Will fit my hands better
    > Can be used to ISO3200

    Yeah, but it's not a pretty sight
    > Can probably find one for less than the price of a XT
    >
    > 10D Cons-
    > Heavier
    > Slower in both shot speed and autofocus

    Jeez...think before you press the button
    > Fewer frames in burst mode

    Again...think before you press the button

    It's been a little over 2 years since I bought my 10D and I have no
    complaints. Yeah, I'd like a few more MP, but the 16x20s on my wall
    attest to the quality of the 10D.
    Randall Ainsworth, Sep 25, 2005
    #3
  4. Tony

    Tony Guest

    "Bill" <> wrote in message news:...
    > Tony wrote:
    >
    >>I'm not too concerned about the megapixel race, but I am ready to move
    >>beyond my 3 MP compact. My film gear has been Canon for many years, so I
    >>have many lenses and familiarity with how Canons operate (my compact is
    >>also
    >>a Canon). I know that I can get a pre-owned 10D for a decent price if I
    >>spend a little time looking, and it is built more to the size of my Elan
    >>IIe. I hear some say that it still has better noise characteristics than
    >>either the 20D or the Rebel XT.

    >
    > I don't know who said that, but they were probably on medication at the
    > time.
    >
    > :)


    Hmm, I've done a bit more looking and I see much more info indicating the
    20D noise characteristics are either indistinguishable from the 10D or
    slightly better, so I stand corrected.


    >
    > The 20D and 350D/XT have VERY low noise. The older 10D is about equal at
    > ISO 100/200 if I remember correctly, but it starts to suffer from noise
    > issues as the ISO increases, while the 20D and 350D/XT are virtually
    > noise-free up to about 400 ISO, and quite useable at 800 and 1600.
    >
    > I may be wrong on this, but generally speaking, the newer cameras handle
    > noise much better.
    >
    >>That would be important to me. The XT is
    >>faster, though. I haven't actually handled a XT yet, but I'm concerned
    >>about
    >>the small size of the body and the cramped controls. Having said all that,
    >>is the 10D still a viable alternative to the newer, faster XT?

    >
    > Yes and no.
    >
    > The 10D is viable if you need specific features that it has over the XT.
    > But beyond that, the XT is the way to go.
    >
    > I agree that the 350D/XT is very small, perhaps even cramped to the
    > large-handed amongst us. But myself, being of medium sized hand, find it
    > somewhat small too but practical none-the-less. It's small, light, and
    > fully featured, which means it has most of the functionality of the 20D,
    > but in a smaller, lighter package, which is something I wanted.
    >


    I have handled a 10D and like the way it feels, but have not yet played with
    a XT. I have used a Canon S1 quite a bit (it's the camera we use at work).
    Have you used the S1 at all? If so how does the XT compare in terms of "hand
    usability"?


    > The glass that's mounted on the body is more important to me than the
    > body, within practical limits of functionality of course, and that's why
    > I chose the XT over the more expensive 20D.
    >


    ....remainder snipped...
    Tony, Sep 25, 2005
    #4
  5. Tony

    Mark² Guest

    Tony wrote:

    > I have handled a 10D and like the way it feels, but have not yet
    > played with a XT.


    -Then I'd wager you won't like the way the XT feels.
    It is much smaller and lighter, with a distinctly flimsy,
    less-secure-in-your-hands feel (at least to me...).
    I'm sure it produces fine images, but with regard to "feel"...it's not
    right/ready for my hands.
    Mark², Sep 25, 2005
    #5
  6. "A disturbing new study finds that studies are disturbing"
    "Mark²" <mjmorgan(lowest even number here)@cox..net> wrote in message
    news:5DBZe.31070$sx2.22463@fed1read02...
    > Tony wrote:
    >
    >> I have handled a 10D and like the way it feels, but have not yet
    >> played with a XT.

    >
    > -Then I'd wager you won't like the way the XT feels.
    > It is much smaller and lighter, with a distinctly flimsy,
    > less-secure-in-your-hands feel (at least to me...).
    > I'm sure it produces fine images, but with regard to "feel"...it's not
    > right/ready for my hands.



    Got to agree w/ you here Mark. Tried it out when they first came out and
    now my sister has one so I've had plenty of time to play with her's w/ my
    lenses and I just don't like it. I put on my EF 28-135 and even that lens
    dwarfs the body making it feel very unbalanced. It may feel better with the
    vertical grip attached (a must have for any body IMHO) but out of the box it
    just felt way tooo small.

    My advice to the OP is the same I give every time this comes up. Go to the
    local camera store and try out the different choices. Buy what you are most
    comfortable with and nothing less even if that means saving a few more
    bucks. I was all ready to buy when the XT came out but after holding it I
    decided to wait for the money to buy a 20D. I've very glad I did.

    --

    Rob
    Robert R Kircher, Jr., Sep 25, 2005
    #6
  7. Tony

    Bill Guest

    Tony wrote:

    >> I agree that the 350D/XT is very small, perhaps even cramped to the
    >> large-handed amongst us. But myself, being of medium sized hand, find it
    >> somewhat small too but practical none-the-less. It's small, light, and
    >> fully featured, which means it has most of the functionality of the 20D,
    >> but in a smaller, lighter package, which is something I wanted.

    >
    >I have handled a 10D and like the way it feels, but have not yet played with
    >a XT.


    The XT is quite small and if you've used a film SLR, then initial
    handling is definitely going to be negative.

    I thought the XT was way too small at first as well when handling one in
    the store. But I also had a chance to borrow one from a friend and shoot
    with it all day long. Oddly enough, my opinion changed as I began to
    become accustomed to the size, weight, and operational control of the
    XT. By the end of the day, the small size wasn't really a factor.

    Now after using the XT for a while, I can't stand my film body as it
    seems like a massive hulk compared to the XT. As with all things,
    regular use allows you to adjust to the size of the XT. Everything is
    relative I guess.

    :)

    > I have used a Canon S1 quite a bit (it's the camera we use at work).
    >Have you used the S1 at all? If so how does the XT compare in terms of "hand
    >usability"?


    Sorry, I haven't used the S1 so I can't offer any insight.
    Bill, Sep 26, 2005
    #7
  8. Tony

    Bruce Graham Guest

    [This followup was posted to rec.photo.digital and a copy was sent to the
    cited author.]

    In article <>,
    says...
    > I was all ready to buy when the XT came out but after holding it I
    > decided to wait for the money to buy a 20D. I've very glad I did.
    >

    I had the same negative reaction when I first held the 350D/XT just after
    its release, but I bought one a few months later and quickly got used to
    the feel. For me, the change came when I realised I could use the right
    side of the end of my index finger on the shutter.

    I now appreciate the small size and weight and I'll put the money I saved
    towards a second full frame body when they become less expensive.
    Bruce Graham, Sep 26, 2005
    #8
  9. Tony

    Bill Guest

    Robert R Kircher, Jr. wrote:

    >>> I have handled a 10D and like the way it feels, but have not yet
    >>> played with a XT.

    >>
    >> -Then I'd wager you won't like the way the XT feels.
    >> It is much smaller and lighter,


    Everyone has their own preferences. Personally, I now like the smaller
    size of the XT with almost all lenses, except the tiny 50mm f/1.8. In
    which case it's difficult to hold the combo by the lense, which is what
    I do with most of my other lenses when not on a tripod.

    The small size and weight is an advantage for me as I have enough weight
    in lenses to haul around with me.

    I will admit I didn't like the size at first either since I was moving
    from a medium sized film body with grip to the little XT. But after
    using it for a day, my opinion changed.

    Now I find handling a 20D is too big and I don't like it. It feels
    "bloated and heavy" by comparison. It's all relative.

    >now my sister has one so I've had plenty of time to play with her's w/ my
    >lenses and I just don't like it. I put on my EF 28-135 and even that lens
    >dwarfs the body making it feel very unbalanced.


    "Dwarfs the body"?

    I'm sorry, but that just doesn't make much sense...what would you say if
    you had a bigger lense like the 70-200 f/2.8 on it? Of course it will
    dwarf the body, but it does that with almost any camera body, including
    the 20D.

    My point is, who cares what the combo looks like. Functionality is the
    primary concern. If the XT was another 25% smaller with tiny buttons and
    controls, then it might be difficult to operate and become an issue. But
    from a usability point of view, it's not too small.

    Of course, opinions vary.

    :)
    Bill, Sep 26, 2005
    #9
  10. "A disturbing new study finds that studies are disturbing"
    "Bill" <> wrote in message news:...
    > Robert R Kircher, Jr. wrote:
    >
    >>>> I have handled a 10D and like the way it feels, but have not yet
    >>>> played with a XT.
    >>>
    >>> -Then I'd wager you won't like the way the XT feels.
    >>> It is much smaller and lighter,

    >
    > Everyone has their own preferences. Personally, I now like the smaller
    > size of the XT with almost all lenses, except the tiny 50mm f/1.8. In
    > which case it's difficult to hold the combo by the lense, which is what
    > I do with most of my other lenses when not on a tripod.
    >
    > The small size and weight is an advantage for me as I have enough weight
    > in lenses to haul around with me.
    >
    > I will admit I didn't like the size at first either since I was moving
    > from a medium sized film body with grip to the little XT. But after
    > using it for a day, my opinion changed.
    >
    > Now I find handling a 20D is too big and I don't like it. It feels
    > "bloated and heavy" by comparison. It's all relative.
    >
    >>now my sister has one so I've had plenty of time to play with her's w/ my
    >>lenses and I just don't like it. I put on my EF 28-135 and even that lens
    >>dwarfs the body making it feel very unbalanced.

    >
    > "Dwarfs the body"?
    >
    > I'm sorry, but that just doesn't make much sense...what would you say if
    > you had a bigger lense like the 70-200 f/2.8 on it? Of course it will
    > dwarf the body, but it does that with almost any camera body, including
    > the 20D.
    >
    > My point is, who cares what the combo looks like. Functionality is the
    > primary concern. If the XT was another 25% smaller with tiny buttons and
    > controls, then it might be difficult to operate and become an issue. But
    > from a usability point of view, it's not too small.
    >
    > Of course, opinions vary.



    Well as you've said to each their own. Just as you don't like to work with
    the 20D I simply don't like to work with the 350D which was quite a
    disappointment to me because the feature/dollar is very attractive.

    As to use of the term I don't mean to indicate the look of the combination,
    I'm referring the physical mass of the two in comparison to what I'm used
    to. I found my hands hit each other and I found the grip to be too narrow
    to get a good one hand grip on the camera.

    In regards to adding a larger zoom or telephoto, this is where I think the
    350D could shine. The lens is heavy enough why add a heavy body, but again
    I found the balance off at least from what I'm used to using.

    Don't get me wrong, I think the body is packed with great feature for it's
    price. I just wanted to caution that before anyone lay out $800 + dollars
    they should try any possible body on for sizes. I've had enough occasion to
    use my sisters 350D to know I wouldn't like it. Others. like yourself, may
    very well find the body to your liking. I would suggest to the OP that if
    he tries it out and likes it, it can be a great choice because the $400
    difference between the 350D and the 20D could net him a good lens.

    --

    Rob
    Robert R Kircher, Jr., Sep 26, 2005
    #10
    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.

Share This Page