Customer Reviews

Canon EOS 20D 8.2MP Digital SLR Camera with EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 Lens

5 star:		(89)
4 star:		(17)
3 star:		(2)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(4)

 

 

And that includes all the offerings from Nikon, Olympus, and Minolta/Konica. I LOVE this camera. The 10D was felt by many to have focusing issues and though I did not have any significant problem with my 10D in that regard the 20D represents a substantial improvement in this area. Canon still is not offering (in this price range) a camera with eye control or 45 focusing points, BUT the nine focusing points that ARE offered are well placed and the camera focuses quickly and surely resulting in tack sharp photos.

The pictures this camera takes are simply beyond belief. Beautifully saturated, tack sharp, NO, and I mean NO noise at 400 or below and barely discernible noise all the way up to 1600 ISO. For all practical purposes 1600 ISO is an entirely usable speed resulting in fantastic pictures. What Canon has accomplished in reducing noise and increasing pixel density proves that they are, for now, the technology leader.

Another big advantage over the 10D is the instant on feature which does not leave you sitting there helplessly until the camera turns on. That happens instantly! A new flash system, ETTL II is a vast improvement over the 10D. And, to my eye, there is an improved dynamic range with slightly less blown highlights.

The in camera processing results in far more pleasing pictures than the previous 10D or Digital Rebel. This camera has a greater burst (more pictures quicker) that the previous 10D.

Now there is currently an issue with mirror lockups reported by probably 10% - 20% of all owners. If you encounter this problem before you update the firmware then simply take the battery out of the camera, reinsert it, and you're good to go. Canon has issued a fix and it is available on their web site. It completely remedies the problem so, not to worry!

One of the greatest things about digital photography is the ability to build a digital dark room for next to nothing. With the included Photoshop Elements you are well on your way to producing pictures that you could only have imagined in the pre-digital days. I am able to recoup pictures that I never would have considered salvageable before this camera.

The other thing I like about Canon is the lens system which IMO is second to none. Also, Canon continues to innovate at a furious pace driving the price of these digital cameras relentlessly downward.

I sold my 10D to purchase this camera and for me it represented a significant improvement more than justifying the cost of the upgrade.

So, I LOVE the camera. LOVE Canon. And LOVE digital. All in all I'd say I'm a pretty happy camper!

This is my second digital camera. Previously I had used the Fuji Finepix s5000, but wanted to move up to an SLR system so that I could eventually use a variety of lenses.

I was very concerned at the beginning of my DSLR buying process- it seems to me that once a person buys a body and a few lenses, they are committed to that camera maker's "system" pretty much for life, so I wanted to be very certain that this was the right choice. If you purchase a 20d, you are not just buying a 20d, you are making (often) a pretty serious financial commitment to Canon technology.

I chose a canon 20d for a few reasons; I had decided early on in the process to stick to Nikon or Canon, as they are the clear leaders not only of Digital SLRs, but of Camera technology in general. Thus, though certain other SLRs like the Olympus E-Volt or the Pentax *istD are attractive, they simply do not have the range of accessories or the support community of either Canon or Nikon.

I ended up seriously considering three cameras; the Canon 350d (Digital Rebel), The Canon 20d, and the Nikon D70. From talking to other folks who were in the same situation as me, This seems to be a common range of choices people face
I ended up choosing Canon because it seems to me that they have a slightly better line of lenses than Nikon, particularly those available on the used market. This is important, because the more you use your DSLR, the more you will want that lens that is just a slightly wider angle, or just a slightly faster aperture, etc.

Once I decided to go for Canon, I chose the 20d over the 350d primarily due to size and toughness. The 350d is a great Camera, and its sensor is very similar to the 20d. However, the 20d's magnesium alloy chassis is much heavier than the 350d. It can certainly take a lot more abuse than the plastic 350d body- and I tend to take my camera on a lot of long trips. The 350d is a lot lighter, which is nice- but I frankly found its body too small to grip easily. As I have very large hands, this was a serious disadvantage to me. For someone with smaller hands the 350d probably feels fine. You will have to pick one up and judge this for yourself.

The layout of the camera itself is a lot easier to use than the 350d as well. The camera requires far less attention when shifting settings than the 350d, and thus frees up your "focus" for the subject you are shooting. I cannot stress how ergonomic and intuitive I find this camera to be.

Since I have purchased the 20d, I have not regretted it for a minute. This camera is a real joy to work with. The viewfinder is nice and bright (looking through glass again instead of an EVF is a pleasure, believe me). The range of ISO settings from 100-1600 is wonderful, particularly nice are long twilight/night shots at ISO 100 that give you some lovely colors. Shooting night and low light with the 20d will blow your mind. The CMOS sensor of the 20d produces almost noiseless images at high ISO settings.

The best feature of the camera is the quick start up time. It can go from dormant to actively autofocusing in 0.2 seconds. My previous camera took 2 seconds to "turn on." That may not sound like a great deal, but I lost countless shots due to that fact, and it is what pushed me most to upgrade my camera.

I tend to shoot on aperture priority or A-DEP (like auto, but with no flash), but there are a variety of "pre-set" modes for portraiture, sports, night shooting, and so on that are easy to use.

The megapixel count is nice, but not really that important. Comparing images made from the 6 megapixel Nikon D70 and 8 megapixel Canon 20d, one can't really notice any difference until you blow them up to ridiculous sizes. At this level of the MP game, the quality of the lens you use is far more important to final resolution than the sensors pixel count. If you compare the kit lens (18-55mm f3.5-5.6) at its wide focal lengths and lower apertures with the canon 50mm f1.8 prime lens at f8, It looks like you are shooting with 2 different cameras. The same holds for Nikon as well, so don't decide for the 20d simply because it has more megapixels than the D70. Of course, even the worst canon lens beats the hell out of my old digicam on its best day.

I have had a few problems with some older third party manufacturer lenses made for the Canon mount, Like Sigma and Tamron, not working with the new 20d body; but I have been told that if you ship off the lens to the manufacturer they will rechip it for free. All currently manufactured 3rd party lenses ought to work with this body. Keep in mind that the Canon digital sensor is smaller than 35mm film, so there is a "focal length multiplier" that makes your lenses "longer" than they would be on a regular film SLR. The focal length multiplier for the 20d is 1.6 . That means a 100mm lens on a film camera acts like a 160mm lens on a 20d. For those who like to focus close up with telephoto, that's great, because you can buy a relatively inexpensive 300mm lens, and it will shoot almost like a 500mm telephoto. I, however, usually shoot wide (more "peripheral vision") and prefer shorter lenses, so this is a pain. Of course, I would love to have a "full frame" camera like the Canon 5d, but the price is simply to much.

It has a number of strengths and weaknesses, which I will detail below:
Strengths:

The variety of lenses is excellent.
Lenses on second hand market are reasonably priced
Introductory high speed lens (less than f2) is inexpensive (canon 50mm f1.8)
Autofocus aquires targets quickly
Continuous shooting mode is quick- autofocus recalibrates for each shot.
Extremely high ISO capability (1600) for low light situations
Body is physically tough.
Very fast top shutter speed (1/8000) allows open apertures in well lit situations.
Manual focus easy to use
Pop up flash is very high above camera, and thus avoids casting shadows
Flash recycles quickly
CF card memory system is versatile and inexpensive
User interface is the best I have ever seen
Can be used as a blunt weapon if you are mugged

Weaknesses:
It ain't cheap
Very heavy, particularly with long lenses
You may end up spending money on glass that rivals a serious crack addiction
Longer focal length multiplier (1.6) than film, or than Nikon (1.5).
Doesn't work well with older 3rd party lenses without rechipping.
Mirror is very loud, particularly if you are used to a point and shoot.

Comparison with Nikon:
20d is better at telephoto (lenses have internal motors)
D70 is better at wide angle shots (focal length multiplier is lower)
20d is better at low light (lower noise, lower ISO setting).
Nikon fans believe that all Canon users are heretics, and vice versa, so why compare them you dirty heathen.

Update:
I just spent three weeks in Africa in a very desolate and harsh environment with this camera. I have to add - Don't overlook the construction on your dSLR. I had heavy long telephoto lenses on it and the performance of the magnesium case, metal mounts, weather proofing, battery grip all is just amazing. I hate to imagine how a lesser plastic frame might have performed. After traveling by rattling/vibration ridden truck for days, dugout canoes in the middle of swamps, airplanes, hiking -- I came to appreciate Canon's commitment to construction. This camera and and the entire EOS system held up superbly under extremely abusive circumstances and can understand why professional photographers prefer this brand. And the pictures? Oh My, the pictures are just simply the best pictures I have ever taken in my life. Not just because of the locations but because of this terriffic equipment. My friend who had another major brand of camera complained about a muddy ant inside his lens, imagine a muddy ant inside his other major brand lens while he was shooting -- not with my Canon equipment (the sealing held up great). Albeit - he's a better photographer so he probably got amazing shots I didn't -- I didn't worry about the equipment. A+++ to Canon for the camera, the lenses, the battery grip - everything.

On other news, I just read that canon is releasing the 5D so I guess my info from the original review was correct. Its definitely a bigger higher end camera and at $3,200 definitely in a different class. I think I'll keep my 20D for telephoto work and but with its full frame sensor, I might get a 5D for wide angle photography. Again, amazing equipment from Canon.

Original Review:
I'm a first time dSLR buyer (bought the 20D from Amazon -- great service). This was a big jump for me and I read and I read before I decided on this purchase and whether I should jump into the dSLR world. I'd outgrown point and shoot a while back.

On the 20D. I agonized over the 10D and the 6megapix Digital Rebel until the 20D came out and I quickly decided on the 20D. I picked the 20D because of solid magnesium case, 9point autofocus, 8.2megapix sensor and DIGIC II, and Instant On. So even after the Rebel XT came out -- the 20D is in a different class altogether. The 20D is a professional chassis and you can use it as a pro camera -- the Rebel is for world travelers (In my opinion).

My agony now is over what type of photography I want to do. I only have the kit lens and a $79 dollar 50mm f/1.8 II ... lenses are expensive especially the good ones as I'm learning:

Here is what I've learned (intended for the new people who are wondering if they want dSLR or not). dSLR is really about the lenses and the options that you can use on the camera. You need great lenses for great pictures. This is my gradeschool version on dSLRs and lenses and I hope it helps:

The setup -- Lets suppose you are standing next to your car and on your car's hood sits your girlfriend and on the hood unbeknownst to her sits a litle grasshopper. Behind your car is a lake and in the distance there's a huge snow capped mountain. This is the difference lenses make:

Prime Lenses: Would let you take wonderful facial shot of your girlfriend (boyfriend). If the lens has a good aperture, you might be able to blur the background so you only get her beautiful face and get rid of the annoying mountain and they tend to be light and small. (Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 is a prime lens -- $350)

Super Wide Angle Lenses: Expands the foreground and compresses the background. So you'd get a picture of your girlfriend on the car which would both be huge and a lake that would stretch to the horizon and the mountain would look tiny in the far off distance. (Canon EF 14mm f/2.8L is a super wide angle lens -- $1,800)

Telephoto Lenses: Compress the foreground and magnify the distant objects. You would wind up taking a picture that would magnify the mountain in the background but your girlfriend, car, and lake would either be very small and compressed in the foreground or they wouldn't even come out in extreme telephoto lenses as you'd only get the mountaintop and cut out the rest. Your girlfriend would also wonder about your relationship at the sight of the humongous lens: good telephotos can be HUGE and heavy! (Canon 400mm EF f/2.8L is a super telephoto lens $6,000)

Macro Lenses: Let you take pictures of very small things and they tend to allow you to focus quite close in on the subject. You'd walk up to your girlfriend and she'd wonder what you were doing so close to the hood. You'd give her a peck on the cheek and then you'd close in on the little grasshopper next to her. With a macro lens, you'd could take a great picture of the little grasshopper and it would fill my frame. If your girlfriend is like mine, she'd be off the car as soon as she caught glimpse of the bug. Old stereotype here no disrespect ladies - I know a few that would put me to shame. (Canon EFS 60mm f/2.8 is a macro lens -- $450)

Zoom Lenses: Are any lenses that allow you to shift the focal length. That is to say I can make it more wide angle or more telephoto. The 20D comes with a 18 to 55 zoom lens which gives you marginal wide angle and up to 3x telephoto. Not a bad kit lens but its not USM (Ultrasonic) so autofocus is not as fast and not as accurate and can fail to focus sometimes and its not IS (Image stabilized) which lets you take clearer pictures without a tripod. (Canon EFS 17-85mm IS USM is a zoom lens that covers some wide angle at 17mm and some telephoto at 85mm -- $600). You can turn the barrel and you can change focal length!! What a wonderful invention but they're more complex with more parts than primes and the extra parts add weight and they generally affect the amount of light they let in (aperture stuff) but you don't have to change lenses and they offer more flexibility.

Now bear in mind that if you're out there in the middle of a blooming field in Georgia and start changing lenses, you can get dirt or pollen in the sensor. I only change my lenses indoors in a non windy environment.

Exposure and Shutter Speed: Exposure is controlled by the ISO sensitivity of the sensor (ISO rating is another arcane film invention basically lower the ISO number the more sensitivity to light). One of the problems with smaller sensors was noise (graininess) on the pictures at high ISO numbers. Well not on the 20D the noise is imperceptible to me. Shutter speed is also controlled by your 20D...and the 20D has a great shutter 5frames per second, up to 1/8000 of a second. Wow! So you have two out of three big components taken care of here and the 20D is first rate on a ton of other things like custom White balance etc.

A note on Aperture. Its just how much light can come into the lens (the size of the hole). The lower the aperture number f/# on the lense the more light it allows. Aperture determines depth of field (how much of the foreground + background is in focus) and it constrains shutter speeds. Now aperture is a function of lens construction -- a 400mm f/2.8 lens is humongous and costs $6,000 while a 70-300mm telephoto f/4.5 to 5.6 is $1,200 but with the 400mm lens (get this)...you can use faster shutters and freeze the action of a quarterback spinning in midair across the field on a night game (or freeze your son as he's swinging a bat in little league: ball bat and son frozen in midair!). With the 70 to 300mm, you'd have to use a slower shutter and you'd get blurr and blurry does not make the cover of the USA Today nor brings a smile to grandpa. On another example, if you've been hiking for a month to take a picture of a sloth that moves at 1cm a year in some god forsaken South American jungle, the 70-300mm lens will weigh allot less and allow you to run faster than the 400mm white monster lens. If I'm a nature photographer, I'd rather come out with the picture than fall victim to some relocated pigmy tribe because I couldn't run fast enough and have someone years later find my bones still clutching my white 40lb $6,000 lens in the middle of Brazil still attached to my 20D with a flashcard full of razor sharp gorgeously blokehed* pigmy and sloth pictures, ala blair witch project. So get a lens for what you need -- I guess is what I recommend. (*Blokeh are those out of focus circles of light in the backgrounds of pictures taken with expensive good lenses)

A word on Nikon. There are two camps of photographers these days Canon and Nikon (well there are others like Leica - but if you own a Leica you're probably a pro, don't care about feature battles and are laughing at my gradeschool analysis). The 20D is more expensive and better chassis feature for feature than the D100 - go compare 8.2megapix vs 6.1 and the list goes from there. Nikon owners will tell you that their lenses have backwards compatibility 50 years...yes but you'll have to manually focus those lenses and on some of them you have to pay some guy to saw off some metal flaps to make them fit the D100. Canon EF has been around since 1986 and there are a ton of autofocus lenses out there. EF is the standard lens mount that fits the 20D and there is a newer mount called the EF-S Mount that also fits. Canon is very conservative in their advertisement as they aim for educated consumers: D100 claims a burst mode of 144 pictures -- yes but on the low quality setting, 20D can do the same if you cut the quality down...you'll hear spot metering, megapixels, focus speed --- you need to read to understand all of this and make a sound decision. Nikon makes great cameras and I don't want to get into a war. If you already own a bunch of recent Nikor lenses -- your mind is already made up. A good friend of mine owns the D70 and another the Digital Rebel and me with the 20D -- we're all happy. After much review and a ton of reading, I liked the 20D better for my purpose as a personal preference I bought it and am very happy.

On crop factors. Lenses are still stuck in the 35mm film focal length format world and 35mm film is bigger than the sensors on the 20D and this means simply that the EF and EFS lenses turn out more telephoto on the 20D. So a lens marked 10mm is actually a 16mm (multiply mm times 1.6 to get actual focal length) on a 20D and other small sensor cameras (Rebel and Rebel XT). The crop 1.6 crop is not extra zoom -- it only appears that way, its actual lost information. So, to telephoto photographers, this means you carry more weight than you need in physical glass and to wide angle photographers, it means its harder to find lenses that do true wide angle bc the sensor is too small to capture all the information. EFS was designed so they could make smaller lenses at least so don't lose information but they're still labeled "old school" and you still have to multiply. EFS was designed to take advantage of the smaller sensors on the 10D 20D Digital Rebel and Rebel XT. The higher end Canon cameras use a 35mm size sensor. People wonder if Canon will adopt bigger sensors for all lines and if they do, then EFS will probably go the way of the dodo. On the other hand, bigger sensors are expensive to make so who knows where it will go and the 20D has very low noise at higher ISOs (used to be one of the reasons they thought bigger sensors would prevail -- that and the 35mm mindset and large number of lenses out there for 35mm). I can't predict the future -- Canon seems to be still investing in both EF and EFS though and I think that for the next 3-6 years you're fine with either EF or EFS.

I heard a rumour that Canon is planning to release a new camera between the 20D and their higher end 1Ds around December? If you must have latest and greatest and have $4,000 to spend you might want to wait. If true, I'm sure the chassis will cost $2,500 - $3,000 -- just rumours here. I'm keeping my 20D until I can make money to justify more expensive than this extremely good camera. In my opinion, this new camera would not supplant the 20D as much as it would provide Canon a more complete EOS Digital line from Digital Rebel all the way up to the 16.7megapix 1Ds -- they'd provide an true entry level Pro Camera in the $2,000 to $3,000 range. Most interesting to me will be if it has 45pt autofocus and the size of the sensor. Also interesting, Canon is releasing a new 60mm EFS f/2.8 Macro lens. Good quality and interesting choice in focal length. Amazon carries it. I think Canon is telling us something with the type of EFS lenses they're releasing and the market they are targetting. Keep watching Canon.

Back to my 20D, I've only bought a 50mm f/1.8 lens for $79 and the kit lens and a tripod. I can't wait to get a USM (ultrasonic silent 0.5 second focusing lens) with IS (Image stabilization) -- if I can only decide what type of photography. But with what I have, I've taken pictures that have floored my friends and everyone who has seen them. Someone actually said, "I'll pay you for that picture." And that is a great complement to me and to the 20D and the complement goes to the 20D because my lenses are cheap! I am a huge Canon fan now and long and short of it, the 20D is an amazing camera and the best prosumer chassis out there (period!).

I purchased the Canon 20D package with the stock 18-55mm zoom lens about three weeks ago. Since then, I have taken several hundred pictures and am very happy with the camera - highly recommended if you can justify the price. I've broken this review up into sections due to its length.

1. Lens

a. 18-55 mm stock lens

The lens isn't great, but on the other hand, it's not bad. On the pro side, it's lightweight, cheap, small, and seems to focus fairly quickly. The only bad thing about the lens is that it produces slightly soft pictures, but if you won't be blowing the pictures up too large, you probably won't notice.

b. 17-85 mm USM IS lens

Being obsessed with quality, after having the camera for about a week, I purchased (also on Amazon) the Canon 17-85 mm USM IS (Image Stabilized) zoom lens. I've been very happy with this lens and would recommend it if you can afford it. The IS is quite impressive - it really works. This lens isn't perfect either, but it seems noticeably better than the 18-55 (and only six times as expensive!!).

2. Compact Flash

I'd recommend that you purchase a SanDisk Ultra II 1 GB compact flash card with it - these are sold here on Amazon. This card provides about 5 MB per second write speed which is significantly better than many of the cheaper cards - there are some websites on the net which review cards (and even one which has tested them all in a Canon 20D) - it's worth looking into.

3. Battery

The battery life has been very good for me so far - the specs say that you can take about 1000 pictures with flash on half of them, and I don't doubt that (although I haven't pushed it that far yet). The charger is also nice and compact (easy to travel with) and charges the batteries in about an hour and a half (fast!).

4. Design

This camera is fun to take pictures with! Through the lens composing allows precise control of depth of field, focus, and cropping - it's also much easier to use in full sunlight as compared to a point and shoot digicam. It operates much like a film SLR in that you set most of the settings on the top LCD panel, compose through the viewfinder, etc., but it also adds the color LCD screen to view the pictures you've just taken. The other thing I really like about this over a film SLR is the ability to set the ISO and white balance on the fly. With film, you'd have to load a different roll of film for different lighting conditions or ISO - now it's the simple twist of a dial. While these features are available on most consumer point and shoot digital cameras, they're generally much harder to get to through the menu system. One great advantage of this camera is that it has so *many* buttons and dials - it's very easy to get to most frequently used functions without wading through extensive menus. They're also very ergonomically placed so I can switch most settings I care about while looking through the viewfinder just by feel.

Another nice pro is the backlit top LCD panel which makes night shooting easy.

5. Bad Points

Hmm.. Not much I can think of that I don't like about it. My camera came with a 'starter quantity of dust' (quoted from some other website) on the imaging chip - but I was able to blast it off with a rubber bulb. Be aware that digital SLR's tend to gather dust on the chip - especially if you change lenses a lot - but this is nothing against Canon - it happens on them all.

It's a shame that it doesn't show you the current ISO setting in the viewfinder (or on the top panel unless you hit a button). Several times I've left it at ISO 1600 by accident when I didn't really need that speed.

It's a little heavy, but I find that I actually like the weight - makes it feel more solid.

I wish it had an IR receiver so you could use an infra-red remote with it - but alas - it doesn't (even though the Digital Rebel does!). I had to buy the Canon RS-80N3 wired remote (which works well).

7. Conclusion

An awesome camera overall - definitely go for it if you can afford it! I still kept my old compact digicam as a backup for cases when I don't want to carry an SLR, but in general, I'll use it 95% of the time. Much more enjoyable to take pictures with than a standard digicam - try it - you'll like it.

A year ago I sold my Digital Rebel on eBay and purchased the 20D. I have since not looked back. This camera has brought nothing but joy to myself and others. The sharpness and colors from the famed Canon sensor are true to their reputation. Friends and family all love the pictures that come out of this camera. I take it with me almost everywhere I go.

After selling my Rebel, I debated upgrading to the new Rebel XT or the 20D, which I'm sure many of you might be having right now before pulling the trigger. I held both in my hand and played with them at the PMA tradeshow where the XT was introduced. It was very light and felt very small in my hands. I don't have exceptionally large hands, but the XT felt like it was designed for smaller hands. That being said, it is a great travel partner to have being so compact and light-weight.

The other drawback, however, is that the user interface is quite different from the 20D. Although it may seem like a trivial feature, the dial navigation on the 20D has been immensely more convenient and practical when shooting compared to pressing the buttons on the Rebel or the XT. I didn't like having to navigate through the ISO or other changes to white balance via the LCD screen. I definitely think there's a reason why the 20D is more expensive beyond the fact that it has the solid magnesium alloy body. The user interface for me was worth the extra money as well. The more you take photos, the more you will realize the freedom that comes with controlling your aperture, shutter speed, white balance and more with the 20D interface versus the XT. That being said, it is still several hundred dollars more expensive and the XT has pretty much the same sensor (just 0.2 fewer megapixels) with the same results in a different body. So don't be concerned about getting inferior photos with the XT, because the differences are mostly all external.

I highly recommend getting the kit lens with either camera. For an additional $70-100 it is well worth it just for the range and it has pretty decent quality results. Bang for your buck it can't be beat. Make sure you pick up a EF 50mm f/1.8 II USM lens for another $70-80. This is a powerful little lens at a great price.

(...)

I've owned the 20D since November 2004, and I must have shot around 10,000 pictures with it. Before that, I had a Canon Powershot A80, which delivered consistently good pictures, but was slooooow to start up and had a big shutter lag. The 20D solves these problems with flying colors (no pun intended). Start up is instantaneous (you will spend much longer removing the lens cap!) and there's no shutter lag.

The other expectation that I had was to get shallow depth of field in my pictures (almost impossible with the A80). The problem was that I ordered the camera with the basic 18-55mm lens that comes with it. I shot with nothing but this lens during 6 months (I couldn't afford anything else), and was not very satisfied with the sharpness (even by changing the parameter in the custom functions), the vibrance of the colors, and the poor bokeh. I tried a demo version of DXO optics pro, which made me realize how soft my basic lens was. It's OK, I knew I shouldn't expect too much from that basic lens.

When I was able to afford a second lens, I realized how good the 20D could be. I got a Canon 70-200mm f4L telephoto lens, and man! does this make a difference! The pictures I get with that lens are awesome: crisp, sharp, vibrant, constrasty, and finally I got the bokeh I was expecting.

Then I got the Speedlite 420EX flash, and my pictures became just wonderful. It solves all the problems that people may experience with the built-in flash.

So, basically, try different lenses on this body, and you'll be surprised how much better your pictures can get with the right lens. Your pictures will only be as good as the weakest element of your system. Well, the weakest element won't be the 20D body!

The major complaint I have, though I know it's inherent to all digital SLR (except the Olympus), is the dust on the sensor. It's very disappointing to make 400 shots in a session and then find the same 3 ugly dust spots on every single picture, regardless of the aperture you shot at. I tried the sensor swabbing method to clean it, it worked fine, but it scares me too much to do it on a regular basis. Nothing that Photoshop couldn't fix, but still, it drives me crazy.

I also learned to live without the spot metering, but I still don't understand why they didn't include it. They can't expect you to buy the 1D Mark II instead, since only pros can afford to spend that much money on a body. And you don't need to be a pro to feel the need for a spot metering. Everything I learned about photography refered to the use of that spot metering (John Shaw, Bryan Peterson...).

Anyway, great camera body, very average lens. Expect to invest in a better lens and an external flash. I gave it four stars because of the dust on the sensor (not its fault, but still, it's frustrating).

I just got this 20D from Amazon last week. I ordered the body only and the EF-S 17-85 IS lens with it. Shipping was on-time. Regarding the camera - it takes great pictures but man is it heavy! With the EF-S 17-85 lens, it feels like it weighs 5 pounds when it is hanging from my neck or when I'm holding it. The build quality is excellent, though. However, I can't help but think I should have compromised for the new Digital Rebel XT. The XT and 20D have nearly the same image quality (8.2MP for the 20D and 8.0MP for the XT) and have the exact same processor (Digic II). However, the build quality of the XT is noticeably cheaper and flimsier than the 20D. But, at a savings of $500 dollars, I'd highly recommend taking a serious look at the XT. Its significantly lighter and will probably be around longer than the 20D (Web rumors suggest that Canon will replace the 20D around Christmas with a newer prosumer DSLR that will be rougly analogous to the Mark 1D (11.1MP, etc.). As it stands, Canon has released a new prosumer model almost annualy since 1999. And $500 dollars is still $500 dollars. I would suggest going to a local retailer (like Best Buy) to play with both models before you make a purchase. Either way, I would recommend buying from Amazon. I have used Amazon.com for 2 years now and have had no complaints with them thus far. Also, I would highly recommend checking out www.dpreview.com and www.bobatkins.com to read other reviews of these and other cameras. I found these sites to be helpful when I was preparing for my purchase.

The bottom line is that I am pleased with the 20D, the 17-85 lens, and the ordering/shipping process as well. I hope you find this review helpful.

If you want the full hard core review of this camera you need to be looking somewhere like [...] because there's far more to this camera than a normal user will ever meet.

Having said that we are left with just the little bits and pieces a normal user would use.

The camera is actually a little smaller than optimal for a person with average sized hands, the little finger of the right hand has nowhere to sit and the EOS10D actually feels better. But in normal use you won't notice this. The viewfinder is small, in many cases you just have to trust that it really has done a good job of focus because there isn't enough image for you to see for yourself. I find it quite difficult to be certain that I even have the camera level. It's also not the brightest viewfinder you ever saw.

Battery life is very good, even powering an image stabilized lens, I just filled a 1Gb card on a single battery, that's a few hundred images and the battery still isn't showing low.

Dust has been a small issue, there are cameras now that will clean their own sensor but this isn't one. I eventually found a good hand air blower. You can not use canned air or a brush to clean the sensor, either can damage the camera badly. Once I got the dust off, it was there from new, it has remained clean. So maybe it's not that much of an issue. I use Tokina 24-200, Canon 50mm and Sigma 80-400 OS EX lenses, so I do change the lens fairly often, so perhaps dust isn't that big an issue.

Switch on is unbelievably fast, slow switch on times have cost me numerous shots with other cameras, with the 20D the camera is on by the time you realize the switch has clicked into place. Speaking of which, on a camera with excellent ergonomics the on-off switch is about the only thing that doesn't come to hand well, but it's not a factor in normal use. Just not perfect.

Low light performance has been excellent, the camera will shoot at 800 or even 1600 ASA with no apparent noise. You can even configure it to use 3200ASA, but you get significant noise effects with some faint horizontal lines and grain like effects, though I was shooting under sodium light. Even at 3200ASA the pictures are better than with fast print film under similar conditions.

You do need to be mindful that the exposure controls on this camera really do do what they say, you need to keep your eye on the shutter speed and aperture to get the shot you think you want, this isn't an instant camera that will just make the most of it. Most of the time the idiot modes, sport or scenic or whatever, will actually do a good job of picking the right settings. If you are in a hurry then use the built in functions. For example, in sports mode it switches to predictive autofocus, shutter priority and continuous shooting, which are all good choices.

The autofocus is excellent, however in programmed modes you need to pay attention to which of the focus zones it has actually selected. If there is something closer to you than the subject you may need to select the correct focus point, fortunately this is very easy to do, you can hit the control and then select the focus point using the joystick, both with your right thumb.

Another minor irritation to me is that if you are using the fully auto mode, which does a very good job of most things, it will sometimes select the flash even though the autofocus should tell it that the subject is way out of range. Perhaps I expect too much?

Picture quality? Well, unless you have an absolutely perfect lens and need to make 36" wide posters you are unlikely to find that the camera is a limiting factor. I'm actually waiting to see an Epson R1800 because the current generation of printers can't reproduce the quality I have available with this camera and my lenses.

The built in flash is inadequate and the flash metering is soometimes poor, I was taking pictures near a road recently and whenever a reflective sign was in shot the picture was under exposed. Recharge times are pretty poor too, but I think the built in flash should be regarded as an emergency or backup method only, if you are serious then you need a serious flash. I'll be adding either the Speedlite 580EX or a Metz 54 flash in the near future.

I'll also be adding an L-series lens in place of the Tokina, the Tokina is OK, but not good enough for my brothers wedding.

Would I buy it again? Sure. Will I trade for the next great EOS digital to come on the scene? Unlikely. Maybe if it has a larger viewfinder and a 35mm sensor, but this camera already does way more than I need.

I don't think there is a camera out there that can compete with the Canon EOS 20d for the money. I am a semi professional photographer and I take images from high speed action to high def. macro. The range of features on this camera is amazing. The custom settings, the auto settings and the scenery settings are all perfect. The camera adjusts the white balance perfectly AND it lets you customize it if you want. It takes 8.2 mega pixels which will let you enlarge phots to as big as you can print them without losing quality. It has speed like no other digital camera. It says in its advertsing that it can take up to 23 shots at a time at 5 frames per second. The advertising is wrong. It can take well OVER 23 shots at a time at 5 frames a second. I have personaly take over 7 seconds of continuos shooting. 36 frames to be exact. And that is at 8.2 megapixels. It takes a high end memory card to do it, but it does it none the less. Image quality? Amazing. Ease of use? Phenominal. Those who say it is complicated probably can't set up their alarm clock either. Don't get me wrong, this camera is so feature rich that you will need to read the manual to get it all figured out. But out of the box without reading a thing I was taking advanced shots, setting my own shutter and or f-stop, changing ISO speeds, taking single and multi burts shots and more without reading the manaul. Now I've worked with digitals before but never a canon. The construction is top rate. It feels solid in your hand. It doesnt feel plasticky, or hollow. The controls are easy to reach, and it's comfortable to hold. Ive heard of people complain that it's to small. Well, I've got fairly large hands and I dont have any trouble holding it. One of the best features on this camera though is thenearly instant on. .2 seconds from flipping the switch to taking a picture. This has saved me a number of times. It also turns off after a minute of sitting idle to save battery life. Then you simply press the shutter button down and it's back on instantly. Oh ya..one of the best things about it for me...it records the photo settings along with the image. When I go back and review my images the camera can also tell me what the exact settings were for each shot so I know what to set them to for the best picture. The battery life is simply amazing as well. I have a 2 gig flash card in my camera. I took over 500 pictures at a mountain bike race last weekend, and I wasnt even close to the end of the power life. Canon says it will take over 700 pics per charge. I believe it! I honestly can't think of anything negative about this camera. Oh wait...the viewing screen is a bit small, and a bit hard to see in the sun. If they could make the viewing screen bigger, and more direct light viewing friendly, this camera would be perfect in my opinion. Don't get me wrong, its not TO small. Just smaller than I prefer. All in all though, I have looked at a LOT of cameras, and I have not found one that even comes close to this one. It has more features, and nicer features. More memory and a faster shooting speed. Easier operation, and better build than any of the cameras that compare in price. So unless you want to spend 3-4000 dollars...the 20d is the way to go.

Just a little over a year ago, I became fascinated with digital photography, but not for the reasons most amateur photographers cite. I was in the market for a new home and, as I was looking at one with my realtor one day, I ran across a home filled with pictures. These were all pictures taken by the owners with SLR and D-SLR cameras. The pictures were diverse, but they simply made the home quite warm and interesting (disclosure: I didn't buy the house, but I did take away a new passion!). As a result of this "warm, fuzzy" feeling of seeing a large volume of pictures embellishing the flavor of this home, I decided to jump into digital photography with both feet. I knew I wasn't ready for the "big cameras," so I bought the Canon A80 4MP digital. Since that time, I've taken hundreds of photos, some which I've blown up to 8 x 10s and are hanging in my office (the Continental Divide on a snowy day and Puerto Vallarta sunsets). This particular camera, which I reviewed previously, was a great starter camera, and one which I'll hang on to for future "snapshots." That said, this warm fuzzy feeling I had when looking at this home described above has turned into a heated passion. As a result, the "heat" quickly pushed me toward a more serious D-SLR.

When looking for a newer D-SLR, one with greater diversity, features, and higher-quality output, I did my due diligence like I do on most purchases. I did however, read one review that pretty much summed up the camera buying experience. This reviewer said there are three types of camera buyers: 1) those who only buy Nikon, 2) those who only buy Canon, and 3) those who can't decide between Nikon and Canon. Very astute and very true. After much consternation (and not wanting to get caught in #3), I decided on Canon, and purchased the 20D. I must tell you that I look looked at the camera superstores and boutiques, but found that Amazon had a very competitive price and besides, I'm an Amazon junkie. In any event, I purchased the 20D with the 18mm-55mm kit. That said, let me take a quick detour on to lens purchases.

Since my 20D purchase, I've quickly learned that, while the camera is the foundation for high quality pictures, and imagination is the fuel for creating beautiful shots, the lens is the bridge between the two. Honestly, if I had to do it over again, I would not have purchased the 18-55mm lens with the camera; rather, I would have made a body purchase only. This lens is good for "everyday" shooting, but I was looking for the greatest breadth of exposure in the least number of lenses. The 18mm-55mm lens fits the middle of the road in terms of macro/zoom parameters however, it did not fit the boundries I set for the lenses I wanted. Using Amazon customer reviews and several photography-based web sites, I began my search for lenses that would give me the broad range I sought. Although expensive, I believe I've found an excellent, albeit heavy duo: the Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM Standard Zoom Lens and the Canon EF 70mm-200mm f/2.8L IS USM Telephoto Zoom Lens. Add a 2x telephoto extender, and I effectively have from 24mm exposure to 400mm exposure (the 2x extender fits the 70mm-200mm lens and doubles its zoom capabilities). Yes, these two lenses (and the 2x extender) have run around $3K, but both are "L" lenses (top of Canon's line) and both should easily provide me with the depth and breadth of pictures I wish to take. (Warning: if you decide to purchase the extender, make sure you check the lens compatibility. The extender only fits certain lenses.) Back to the camera...

As an impassioned amateur, the 20D was easily the best purchase for me given its volume of features and photo quality. I doubt seriously I'll need to upgrade for years. I've taken a few hundred shots since the purchase, and the quality of the photos can only be described as smooth as butter. The color is brilliant, and exposure is top notch. There is no noticeable resolution distress (I believe the pros call it "noise") regardless my focal point. The camera has an instant startup, which is important to anyone needing a quick shot. And, the time differential between shots is immediate. Although this camera allows manual settings for specific shots, I find myself in automatic mode in most cases, both from an ease of use standpoint and allowances for my inexperience. I've read many reviews redressing the built-in flash and its inadequacies however; I've not yet had that problem. All shots I've taken, which have needed additional light, have been more than adequately handled with the built-in flash.

At this point, the absolute only downside I have found is the weight factor in terms of my combination of camera and chosen lenses. The camera body itself is not a weight factor however, add either one of the lenses I purchased and it becomes something of a different story (particularly with the 70mm-200mm lens). Now, this is not to say that I have any regrets relative to these purchases; rather, it is the only downside I've found. The camera body weighs only a 1.5 lbs however, the 70mm-200mm lens adds 2.9 lbs, which makes the total unit weight something over 4 lbs...not inconsequential when taking numerous photos.

All-in-all, this jazzed amateur gives the 20D two thumbs up for ease of use and incredible quality, particularly in the $2,000 and under D-SLR category. VERY highly recommended.