Reading mode: Light Dark

Sell my 20D and buy a 400D?

Go to last post
I think you have more money than sense but okay. What about just taking pictures and adding glass then upgrading the body every 6 mos.
 
audiohound said:
I like the idea of a larger screen, a dust-buster, more megapix,
etc. This is the kind of feedback I need. Keep it comin.
Click to expand...
So far you're been focused on the physical attributes but I think you missed one critical aspect: usability. From the day I brought home the 300D I struggled with it for almost a year until I switched to the 20D and never looked back. On paper, I see the 400D is a direct replacement of the 300D/350D so everything that I found inconvenient is still the same. Obviously it's not the same for everyone so I strongly suggest you give the 400D a go if you haven't to see if you could live with the way the 400D is designed before you make what could possibly be a very big mistake!

--
Jan Shim
http://www.janshim.com
 
Jan, I think your right about that. I love the way the 20D feels and I am so used to the controls that every adjustment is so quick and intuitive. You guys have really got me thinking about holding off a while before I sell.

Great imput everyone. Any more?
 
audiohound said:
Jan, I think your right about that. I love the way the 20D feels
and I am so used to the controls that every adjustment is so quick
and intuitive. You guys have really got me thinking about holding
off a while before I sell.

Great imput everyone. Any more?
Click to expand...
If that's not convincing enough, I have a 1DMkII and given a choice of body to pick up for an event that doesn't require the MkII's high FPS, I would take the 20D. If there was one body that has 8-10 FPS and more accurate AF in the form factor of the 20D (oh an integrated grip), that would make an ideal body for me. Smaller 1-series, NO but lighter YES.

--
Jan Shim
http://www.janshim.com
 
For the record - your move is stupid "photographic wise" as 20D is still a better camera than the 400d [5fps, PRISM viewfinder, etc...]

However, if DEPRECIATION is your #1 Concern. You have a valid point.

YOUR 20D WILL BE NEAR-WORTHLESS WHEN 40D IS INTRODUCED. Just look @ how 30D ravaged the 10D used priced - it struggle to sell for $500.
Here ar the current prices

$1200 New Price of Canon 30D Body in USA
$1000 Slightly used Canon 30D
$700-800 used 20D
-------------------------------------[ assume 40D introduce, expect -$250 hit]
$1299 New Canon 40D
$950 New Canon 30D
$700-$800 Used Canon 30D
$450-$550 used Canon 20D

Let face it, SLR camera is becoming like computer with rapid Depreciation. 3 months ago, I made a conscious decision paying more for the 30D over the cheaper (but still wonderful) 20D due to the much bigger 2.5" LCD. This 2.5" LCD is the bare-minimum for most consumer now, and will ensure better resell price used. 400D has the same 2.5" LCD, and will have a better resale value than the 20D/350D with 1.8" LCD.
--------------
..FANBOY(i)sm is a NEUROSIS, Get Help!

 
This is exactly what I have been wrestling with. I can still get about $1000 CDN for the 20D here in Alberta. When I bought the 20D it was 14 months after it was initially released. From a depreciation point of view it is better to buy at the beginning of the sales cycle rather than the end. Next time I buy early.
 
been there, done that BIG mistake. Nothing wrong with 400 but the 20D is much nicer. My big issue is one dial for aperature and shutter, I couldnt gte used to that even after a year. 5FPS verus 3FPS is a big difference. Mag alloy compared to plastic is also very different. I tried going the cheaper, lighter entry level route but wont do that again. The extra cost of the 20D and high end features put it leagues above any entry level body.
 
The 20D was a great camera when it came out - is still a great camera and will be for years to come. I'm more than satisfied with mine and see no real advantage in upgrading or switching to anything else in it's class in the near future.
 
Many cite the 20/30D's heavier magnesium body as an advantage. IMO, this is really a moot point - How many have actually exposed their bodies to conditions that have required such build quality for survival? Is this a functional requirement or just a psychological one?

I've just shot approx 6000 shots with my 20D in the last two weeks. Given the 400D now has the same AF system (and presumably accuracy) as the 20/30D I can see how it's smaller and lighter form factor, combined with a quieter shutter can have practical advantages for the picture taking process, ignoring all other aspects such as image quality etc. After playing with a 400D in the store, it seems that setting critical parms such as ISO is actually quite quick even when compared to the 20D thumbwheel. In fact, having the ISO setting displayed on the back LCD is better because it doesn't force you to tilt the camera up just to check ISO on the top LCD.
 
That I do encounter people who cosnider the xxD series a more professionnal system, and us xxxD users amatures.
Some even say the shutter sounds less professionnal :)

I only know one guy who said he preferred the xxxD sound, cause it's less noisy.

I think it's just some peopel want something big in there hand.

My father used to evaluate recordplayers by lifting and weighing them ...

--
I decided to do photography as a hobby cause it's cheaper then golf
 
Hompie said:
That I do encounter people who cosnider the xxD series a more
professionnal system, and us xxxD users amatures.
Some even say the shutter sounds less professionnal :)

I only know one guy who said he preferred the xxxD sound, cause
it's less noisy.
Click to expand...
I think many people overlook the practical aspects of photography. Sometimes having a small, quite camera with a black lens gets you shots that you'd be too obtrusive taking with a big, loud clacking camera with a long white tube lens.
Hompie said:
I think it's just some peopel want something big in there hand.
Click to expand...
The greatest physical weakness of the 400D would be the grip and whether it is too thin (as opposed to to small). I've had smaller grips which were way more comfortable.
Hompie said:
My father used to evaluate recordplayers by lifting and weighing
them ...
Click to expand...
Might work for amps/receivers but I've seen dead weight embedded into products to impart a sense of quality. People do fall for it.
 
I have the 20D but bought the 400D and just went on a holiday with it. For me being old and a small woman, lighter is better but the main reason is the ISO which now I can never forget as it screams at me from the LCD screen. I don't take sports so the buffer is just fine. If the dust cleaner works that is a big plus. So far I really like it but haven't yet sold my 20D as it seems I will lose a lot and not sure what to ask for it.
--
fredyr
 
Don;t have to convince me ... I use the 350D, and got the kitlens, cause it's light. As a beginner i didn't want to be turned off by to much weight, and I'm happy with it. A great first camera
--
I decided to do photography as a hobby cause it's cheaper then golf
 
I would expect that a heavier turntable would possibly maintain a more constant table speed if the weight is in the table.

--



No, that's not my middle finger....
 
What? If you get into the MP chase your in for a long run. The 20D is a better camera. However, even if it was not I would ask have you done everything you can with your current body. Within the next 12 months there is going to be another xxD out. It will probably have a higher MP count and improved features. Are you going to buy it?

Moores law predicts that technology will double every 18 months. Take pictures...don't chase technology. You will go broke trying.
 
I still love 20 D and use it proffessionally(although i cant spell)

I will keep with 20 and wait for 40 it will come,and im in no hurry,

400 D no good for me,plastic body,etc,i use very heavy sports lenses,and need a strong body to support.

dont get sucked in by 10 mp,40 D will be a strong build with at least 10mp probably 12.

Nick.
 
I really loved the 2.5" screen on the 400D - but there's another camera that has it: the 30D.

Sold my 20D, found a gently used 30D for sale on a local forum, coughed up the approx US$ 250 difference, and now I can sit back and wait (until they put a 3.5" LCD on the back... ).

This approach also reduces the depreciation knock you'll take in the future (well, perhaps it only splits the knock into 2 parts, but what the hey, pschologically it's easier...)

Cheers,
  • V.
audiohound said:
I am thinking about selling my year old 20D and getting the new
400D/XTi. Is this a good idea?
Click to expand...
--
-------
Varun Arora, Singapore
I wish I had some talent...
 
007peter said:
However, if DEPRECIATION is your #1 Concern. You have a valid point.
YOUR 20D WILL BE NEAR-WORTHLESS WHEN 40D IS INTRODUCED.
Just look @ how 30D ravaged the 10D used priced - it struggle
to sell for$500.
Click to expand...
Not certain that this comparion is completely vaild for the future price fate of the 20D, though. The 20D was a major upgrade from the 10D, particularly in terms of what everyone was complaining about those days - shutter lag. (We tend to forget quickly, don't we?) Plus higher resolution, plus several other things.

In contrast, the 30D is a minor upgrade of the 20D, essentially a 20D with spot metering and better buffer capcity. While spot metering might be a deal breaker for some - it was for me, actually - the 20D is still much closer in specs to the 30D than the 10D is/was to the 20D.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top