I love Phil's review with only one problem. It doesn't mention AF speed or shutter lag which I think its quite important for a camera. I don't need a scienctic measurement but a relative comparison will be good, say like compare to a 20D. Hope somebody can tell me how fast is the 350D AF compare to a 20D.
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
350D review and AF Speed
- Thread starter jcsw
- Start date
Stefan Bruckel
Senior Member
Agree. I recently spent the extra $500 or so for the 20D in the possibly mistaken belief that the 20D AF is faster and more accurate for action shots.
AF speed would be a nice comparison for Phil to include regularly.
AF speed would be a nice comparison for Phil to include regularly.
AF speed is so lens dependent it is almost impossible to include a valid test.
All tests come down to subjectivity between brands as you don't have common lenses. You could compare for an individual brand.
Generalities yes, like the XT is faster normally than the DS but not specifics.
All tests come down to subjectivity between brands as you don't have common lenses. You could compare for an individual brand.
Generalities yes, like the XT is faster normally than the DS but not specifics.
River Side
Senior Member
- Messages
- 2,068
- Reaction score
- 0
just use the same lens and give us figures.. we'll estimate if it's going to be slower with a different lens.. at least we'll get to know the ballpark estimates..
imagingresource gives these timing figures.
--
* * * * * * * * * * * * * *
3 0 0 D + 1 8 - 5 5 m m
5 0 m m f / 1 . 4 U S M
7 5 - 3 0 0 m m U S M I S
* * * * * * * * * * * * * *
imagingresource gives these timing figures.
--
* * * * * * * * * * * * * *
3 0 0 D + 1 8 - 5 5 m m
5 0 m m f / 1 . 4 U S M
7 5 - 3 0 0 m m U S M I S
* * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Yes its lens dependent but if Phil can use a same lens for all Canon test, we can get a feeling of each one. I think he always a 50mm 1.4 Lens for his resolution charts.
If AF is lens dependent, then Phil should compare the kit lens on each camera, with a caveat that performance might be different with a different lens. He could then use the same lens and compare different Canon models (say the XT and 20D) so that those deciding between the two could factor this in.
And not to include shutter lag is disappointing (if he didn't, I haven't read it thoroughly yet). The lack of mention of shutter lag in Phil's dSLRs' reviews in general is frustrating because I was shocked to find out that a thousand dollar dSLR (the 300d) has the same shutter lag (one tenth of a second) as sub-$500 point and shoot piece of junk cameras.
And not to include shutter lag is disappointing (if he didn't, I haven't read it thoroughly yet). The lack of mention of shutter lag in Phil's dSLRs' reviews in general is frustrating because I was shocked to find out that a thousand dollar dSLR (the 300d) has the same shutter lag (one tenth of a second) as sub-$500 point and shoot piece of junk cameras.
HappySnappy
Senior Member
But it's already been said that the only way you wil see a difference is with a 20D AND a lens at F2.8 or better.
While shutter lag has been improved over the 300D I don't think 20ms (ish) is really even worth mentioning. If ppl genuinely notice lag on a 300D then the only next option is the 20D (though god knows how they coped with cameras in the past).
While shutter lag has been improved over the 300D I don't think 20ms (ish) is really even worth mentioning. If ppl genuinely notice lag on a 300D then the only next option is the 20D (though god knows how they coped with cameras in the past).
R11
Active member
Perhaps it's because when shutter "lag" time gets down to the 1/10 sec level it's basically instantaneous, no longer an issue and therefore moot? I would have to say that any point and shoot with a lag time that low has some pretty impressive shutter performance (for a POS anyway ;-) ). FWIW, the lag time on the 300 was 120 milliseconds and the 350 dropped down to 100 milliseconds according to the XT white paper.
ron
As far as AF speed and accuracy are concerned, the two cameras feel just about as close as they can be to me. I was thrilled with how fast I could lock onto flying birds and how well the tracking kept them in focus on the XT.
As far as shutter lag, however much there is, it isn’t enough for me to detect its presence.
Greg
--
http://www.pbase.com/dadas115/
As far as shutter lag, however much there is, it isn’t enough for me to detect its presence.
Greg
--
http://www.pbase.com/dadas115/
Sal Baker
Forum Pro
I was ready to buy the 20D when the 350D came out, so I tested both, side by side, many times over a couple of weeks. I wanted the 20D to be miles ahead of the 350D to make my decision easier. The 3 things that mattered to me operationally where view finder brightness, AF in low light, and AF/shutter speed. I found the 350D viewfinder to be a bit smaller (no problem for me) but just as bright and easy to use manual focus as the 20D. With the kit lens on both, I could not find any difference in AF speed shutter lag or accuracy in low light. I was really surprised, both cameras were great in this regard Go to a store and try both side by side.
As to timings, another test site's tests were this:
20D full auto focus and shutter lag: 0.15
350D full auto focus and shutter lag: 0.20
20D shutter lag after pre-focus (after pressing shutter button half way): 0.077
350D shutter lag after pre-focus (after pressing shutter button half way): 0.095
If anyone can discern even a hint of a difference between the 2 cameras, they should rent themselves out to Phil as a piece of lab test equipment.
As to low light accuracy, I have used my 50mm f1.4 prime at f1.4 and f2 extensively over the past 3 weeks and have had excellent results in very low light. Maybe the 20D is better, but the difference must be very small.
Sal
karbert
Well-known member
Phil's review is fine, but my biggest gripe: no comparison was done with the nikon D70...for potential XT buyers, that is possibly the most important perspective! fortunately, i have done my own - XT wins, comfortably!
Kartik
--
'Shoot first, ask questions later' - the novice photographer's philosophy.
Kartik
--
'Shoot first, ask questions later' - the novice photographer's philosophy.
River Side
Senior Member
- Messages
- 2,068
- Reaction score
- 0
use images from the D70 comparison samples in the 20D review.. or better still just use the 20D review .. cuz the XT is more or less the same except at ISO1600 and above
--
* * * * * * * * * * * * * *
3 0 0 D + 1 8 - 5 5 m m
5 0 m m f / 1 . 4 U S M
7 5 - 3 0 0 m m U S M I S
* * * * * * * * * * * * * *
--
* * * * * * * * * * * * * *
3 0 0 D + 1 8 - 5 5 m m
5 0 m m f / 1 . 4 U S M
7 5 - 3 0 0 m m U S M I S
* * * * * * * * * * * * * *
psychmike
Leading Member
If I were you, I would be happy to have such a nice camera!!! I have the XT, and after settling some minor problems, it's a fine camera but it definitely doesn't have the build quality or quality control of the 20D! Not everything good about a camera is so easily labelled on the box.
Michael
snout
Member
Ive just taken some pictures of my girls dancing with the kit lens, indoors using a flash. All are in perfect focus and none missed/blurred. So to answer your question, the XT is very fast.
Settings: ISO 800, App, 8, Speed 60.
Ps Im very drunk and still got good results!!!
have fun....
Settings: ISO 800, App, 8, Speed 60.
Ps Im very drunk and still got good results!!!
have fun....
Svein Eriksen
Senior Member
Agree that AF speed is important. One of the most important reasons to get a dslr. Only comment I found in the review was on the conclusion page, listed as one of the positive properties.
AF speed is extremely difficult to quantify, I've read two tests that list try to test, Imaging Resource found that 20D was slightly faster, a Norwegian site listed them as equal. And even with the numbers there they don't say much. How can I interpret them?
Also posted questions similar to this one on several forums, some useful info, but no definite answers. Best yet is this thread from Canon talk forum about a week ago. http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1010&message=12787553
He posted several series where he had tried tracking with a 300mm + TC.
And that's really an interesting test. Listing AF speed in good light with a 50mm 1.4 or a kit lens doesn't really say much. Not for a dslr anyway. It might be better than nothing, but it would be much more useful to test fast moving objects. And with a tele 200mm (equivalent) or more.
So, what's really needed is a repeatable test. The chance of getting a bird to agree to perform a standard test is slim. And even if it did you it would be difficult to get the same light on two different times of the year.
Canon actually list tracking speed for the 350 in a white paper available at their site (don't have a link). They even refer to a standard measuring method, but since I don't have the number for other cameras that doesn't help much either. Could go on and on with more of this, but won't. I'll get on with my conclusion.
After reading several reviews, Canon's info, forum threads and trying 20D and 350D in a store with a 35-350 lens at 350mm my conclusion was that I can't measure the difference. Both seemed to focus at about the same speed if the focus points had something to work with. However, since 20D has more focus points it has a better chance of finding a good contrasty point and therefore was more consistent.
Btw, got a 20D yesterday. Was undecided until I got to the store. Wanted either a 350 w 17-85 or a 20D w 18-55 (comes out to about the same price). The guy in the store reccomended 20D because I'm interested in long tele. Better build quality for heavy lenses. So now I've got to save for a 18-55 replacement.
AF speed is extremely difficult to quantify, I've read two tests that list try to test, Imaging Resource found that 20D was slightly faster, a Norwegian site listed them as equal. And even with the numbers there they don't say much. How can I interpret them?
Also posted questions similar to this one on several forums, some useful info, but no definite answers. Best yet is this thread from Canon talk forum about a week ago. http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1010&message=12787553
He posted several series where he had tried tracking with a 300mm + TC.
And that's really an interesting test. Listing AF speed in good light with a 50mm 1.4 or a kit lens doesn't really say much. Not for a dslr anyway. It might be better than nothing, but it would be much more useful to test fast moving objects. And with a tele 200mm (equivalent) or more.
So, what's really needed is a repeatable test. The chance of getting a bird to agree to perform a standard test is slim. And even if it did you it would be difficult to get the same light on two different times of the year.
Canon actually list tracking speed for the 350 in a white paper available at their site (don't have a link). They even refer to a standard measuring method, but since I don't have the number for other cameras that doesn't help much either. Could go on and on with more of this, but won't. I'll get on with my conclusion.
After reading several reviews, Canon's info, forum threads and trying 20D and 350D in a store with a 35-350 lens at 350mm my conclusion was that I can't measure the difference. Both seemed to focus at about the same speed if the focus points had something to work with. However, since 20D has more focus points it has a better chance of finding a good contrasty point and therefore was more consistent.
Btw, got a 20D yesterday. Was undecided until I got to the store. Wanted either a 350 w 17-85 or a 20D w 18-55 (comes out to about the same price). The guy in the store reccomended 20D because I'm interested in long tele. Better build quality for heavy lenses. So now I've got to save for a 18-55 replacement.
Sal Baker
Forum Pro
The quality control is the same in the 20D as the XT. Search the 20D forum going back 5-months and you will see as many problems, actually more, than with the XT.
For example, the XT has not needed a firmware upgrade to keep new cameras from locking up like the 20D did. Unfortunately, Canon does need to improve quality control across the board. Of the tens of thousands of XT's that have shipped, there have only been a handful of problematic XT's reported, and for some strange reason, the problems seem to keep happening to the same few people.
As to build quality, other than shutter actuation predictions, there is no proof that the 20D is any tougher than the XT. Drop both cameras from 5 feet and see what breaks. It won't be the body on either camera, although polycarbonate resin is what they make crash helmets out of, so the XT body may have the edge on surviving a fall.
And neither camera is weather-proofed. But if someone just likes metal better, then the 20D is there for them.Sal
Timjon
Member
Not necessarily - my first XT (well, 350D here in the UK) back focussed appallingly at 18mm (and was out of focus at anything wider than 35mm). Verified independently by two camera shops, with several lenses of different types. I returned it and my new one is perfect (well, aside from a slightly "sticky" battery door, but I can live with that).
Got the 28-135 IS USM on it now and I love it. So not everyone is having repeated problems with multiple cameras!
Cheers,
Tim.
It is my understanding that when using Ai-Servo mode with all focus points active the initial lock is done with the center AF point and then that lock is tracked by any of the AF points that it might drift into. I don’t see how 9 af points would give you any advantage for locking onto a target.
I do a lot of shooting of flying birds and whatnot and even sometimes in pretty crummy light.
These shots were taken using the XT and a 500mm f/4 with 1.4x II TC hand held in pretty low light.
ISO 400, f/5.6, 1/160 sec hand held
ISO 400, f/5.6, 1/200 sec hand held
I also did a lot of shooting around that same time with my 20D and 400mm f/5.6L and found that I got similar results between the two setups. I can’t really see any advantage to either camera as I couldn’t do any better with the 20D than I could do with the XT.
Finally, the XT is plenty sturdy to handle any EF lens you would want to mount on it.
That is a 500mm f/4 with 1.4x TC but I have used my XT plenty with the 400mm f/2.8 and 600mm f/4 with no problems. I frequently pick up the rig by the camera handle with no ill effect.
Here’s a shot of the old 300D with EF 400mm f/2.8L IS and EF 1.4x II TC attached:
The outer shell on these cameras may be plastic but they are plenty tough.
Greg
--
http://www.pbase.com/dadas115/
I do a lot of shooting of flying birds and whatnot and even sometimes in pretty crummy light.
These shots were taken using the XT and a 500mm f/4 with 1.4x II TC hand held in pretty low light.
ISO 400, f/5.6, 1/160 sec hand held
ISO 400, f/5.6, 1/200 sec hand held
I also did a lot of shooting around that same time with my 20D and 400mm f/5.6L and found that I got similar results between the two setups. I can’t really see any advantage to either camera as I couldn’t do any better with the 20D than I could do with the XT.
Finally, the XT is plenty sturdy to handle any EF lens you would want to mount on it.
That is a 500mm f/4 with 1.4x TC but I have used my XT plenty with the 400mm f/2.8 and 600mm f/4 with no problems. I frequently pick up the rig by the camera handle with no ill effect.
Here’s a shot of the old 300D with EF 400mm f/2.8L IS and EF 1.4x II TC attached:
The outer shell on these cameras may be plastic but they are plenty tough.
Greg
--
http://www.pbase.com/dadas115/
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum