New range of Canon Cameras.

[glsammy]

Anyone seen the latest Canon cameras?
Supposed to be available mid March, the interesting one for me is the 30D.
Spec:
8.2 Megapixel CMOS sensor (same as on 20D)
2.5" LCD display (up from 1.8" on the 20D)
New and improved shutter will last for 100,000 cycles
Improved camera performance: larger buffer, faster startup and "wake from sleep" recovery times
New spot metering option
ISO can now be adjusted in 1/3-step increments
Same Picture Styles and automatic noise reduction feature as on the EOS-5D
Print/Share button added to back of camera
Improved folder management system
Everything else is the same as on the 20D

Theres also an updgrade to the Powershot S2, the S3.
Spec:
6.0 effective Megapixel CCD
F2.7-3.5, 12X optical zoom lens, equivalent to 36 - 432 mm
Optical image stabilization
2.0" LCD display (larger than on the S2) can flip to the side and rotate
AF-assist lamp
Full manual controls
ISO range of 80 - 800 (instead of 50 - 400 on the S2); Canon promises much lower noise than on previous models
New "Face Brightener" compensates for backlit images
Records movies at 640 x 480 (30 fps) with sound until 1GB file size is reached
Camera can take full resolution stills while recording a movie
Optional conversion lenses
Uses SD/MMC memory cards; 16MB card included
Uses four AA batteries; 550 shots per charge with NiMH batteries
USB 2.0 High Speed supported
Ships in May for $500

The 20D is still going to be available, at $100 less than the 30D.

I'm surprised by this, I was expecting the new camera to be much more than the 20D.

Worth waiting for the new ones???

[digi]

The UK 30D body will retail around £1079 thats £300 more than the 20D and its basically the same camera with a larger LCD a few more focus points and a bigger price tag.

[glsammy]

Originally Posted by digi

The UK 30D body will retail around £1079 thats £300 more than the 20D and its basically the same camera with a larger LCD a few more focus points and a bigger price tag.

Digi, Typical. In USA it's only $100 dollars more than the 20D, at todays rates it should only be £860. We get the rough end of it again. If it's really £300 more, then it's not worth it.

[nightshade]

Wait and see what the Sony/Minolta tie up will produce

[Fourwings]

To be honest it's just like Nikon did when they up-graded the D70 to the D70s
only Nikon didnt bump up the price!!
In my own personal opinion buy the EOS20D, it's a really smart semi-pro camera with a proven track record of excellence in all fields, just look at all the images on our WAB gallerys that are taken with them!
If you want to get a bit more technology then go for the Nikon D200, another excellent camera but much more money, around £1299.

[digi]

Originally Posted by Fourwings

To be honest it's just like Nikon did when they up-graded the D70 to the D70s
only Nikon didnt bump up the price!!
In my own personal opinion buy the EOS20D, it's a really smart semi-pro camera with a proven track record of excellence in all fields, just look at all the images on our WAB gallerys that are taken with them!
If you want to get a bit more technology then go for the Nikon D200, another excellent camera but much more money, around £1299.

Not quite true since Nikon took the rebate off when the D70S came out so the price went back up.

The 20D at £749 is a real bargin, so much so I have just bought another. Why pay £1079 (Purdy's discount price) for a 30D just to have a bigger screen and a few more ISO's to select.

Jessops have it to Pre-order for £1179 which is £100 more than the 20D was when that came out in September 2004.

[glsammy]

Originally Posted by digi

The 20D at £749 is a real bargin, so much so I have just bought another. Why pay £1079 (Purdy's discount price) for a 30D just to have a bigger screen and a few more ISO's to select.

I agree, I can't see the value in the 30D. The only real positive I can see is an increase in RAW buffer size to 11 from 6. If it was at the price it SHOULD have been, without the ridiculous USA/UK differerences, that would be another story.

[digi]

Originally Posted by glsammy

I agree, I can't see the value in the 30D. The only real positive I can see is an increase in RAW buffer size to 11 from 6. If it was at the price it SHOULD have been, without the ridiculous USA/UK differerences, that would be another story.

The rrp of the Canon 20D is £1079 the 30D is £1179 so there is a £100 difference but market forces have pushed the 20D to £749 (If you can get one) The 30D will remain high until the around the autumn when I expect to see it drop to £999. Canon will restrict stocks for a while to keep the price stable.

As for the RAW buffer I always shoot RAW and its never given me a problem on the 20D even when using rapid fire at an airshow.

I have two 20D's and think they are great. Better to spend money on the glass, thats what it's all about.

[glsammy]

The rip off is that the Canon US RRP is $1399 dollars, compared to a UK price of £1179. By my simple mind $1399 equates to £803.
Of course your quite right, I've never had the luxury of shooting a 20D! When I've got my finances ready, the glass will be all important, I'm leaning towards the 100-400L, rather than the sigma 50-500mm. (At least that's today's choice, probably change my mind 100 times before I actually buy!)

[digi]

Originally Posted by glsammy

The rip off is that the Canon US RRP is $1399 dollars, compared to a UK price of £1179. By my simple mind $1399 equates to £803.
Of course your quite right, I've never had the luxury of shooting a 20D! When I've got my finances ready, the glass will be all important, I'm leaning towards the 100-400L, rather than the sigma 50-500mm. (At least that's today's choice, probably change my mind 100 times before I actually buy!)

Its always been the case the the price in dollars equates to UK pounds, a fact of life I'm afraid.

I have had two Canon 100-400's but never liked all the dust they sucked in to the camera or the push pull zoom, the autofocus was not good for fast jet photography. Although I know others really like them especially the person that bought mine

BTW the extra 100mm of the 50-500 really makes a big difference.

[glsammy]

Originally Posted by digi

Its always been the case the the price in dollars equates to UK pounds, a fact of life I'm afraid.

I have had two Canon 100-400's but never liked all the dust they sucked in to the camera or the push pull zoom, the autofocus was not good for fast jet photography. Although I know others really like them especially the person that bought mine

BTW the extra 100mm of the 50-500 really makes a big difference.

Ah, yes the dust problem. I've spoken to two users now of these 100-400L and both have made the same comment. One even said he's got used to touching out the specks in photoshop. (Not what you really want to have to do when you've spent £1,000 on a lens.)
So far as the zoom is concerned, I was considering getting the 2X extender, which with the stabilized lens would be usable, even though you loose the auto focus. I could use one with the Sigma, but the two stop light loss on a non stabilized lens may be too restrictive? (At best an F12 or so?)

So you would recommend the 50-500mm over the 100-400L ?

[Helen]

Guess what, I've had no problems so far with dust.

[Helen]

I think it has something to do with not messing around with the zoom when I'm outside. I leave it at 400, and that's it! If, on the odd occasion I do shoot with a smaller zoom, I prepare the camera before going outside.

[glsammy]

Originally Posted by Helen

I think it has something to do with not messing around with the zoom when I'm outside. I leave it at 400, and that's it! If, on the odd occasion I do shoot with a smaller zoom, I prepare the camera before going outside.

A good point Helen.
Thinking of how I shoot now, I tend to go out with my 2x teleconverter on or off and leave it that way. For how I shoot, perhaps the dust may not be such a problem... decisions...decisions...!

[digi]

Originally Posted by glsammy

So far as the zoom is concerned, I was considering getting the 2X extender, which with the stabilized lens would be usable, even though you loose the auto focus.

So you would recommend the 50-500mm over the 100-400L ?

The IS does not operate correctly with the converter fitted I have tried the 1.4x and 2x, your better off digiscoping.

I have chosen the Sigma 50-500 over the 100-400L, its has a more versatile zoom and is very sharp.

I was told (Canon Technician) that due to compatibility problems with the newer Canon cameras they hope to replace the 100-400 in the next 18 months since it uses the old mode 1 IS they now use mode 3 in the newer lenses.

Take a look at the Canon 400L prime, now that is a stunner of a lens.

[digi]

My nickname for the 100-400 is the Dyson lens

and its that good Canon only give 12 months warranty, if the IS goes (don't look Helen) it will cost you about £400 to fix.

[Helen]

hahaha Digi!

I wouldn't mind taking a look at the Sigma one, too.

edit: falls off chair. hmm..

[digi]

Originally Posted by Helen

hahaha Digi!

I wouldn't mind taking a look at the Sigma one, too.

edit: falls off chair. hmm..

If you look around you may find some Sigma 170-500 lenses (Old none DG version) still available for £399!!

I asked a Sigma rep if I would notice the difference between DG and none DG and he said yes, with the DG you have less money in your pocket but the same picture

[Fourwings]

So is that it for the 20D?, I'd heard they were already in short supply!

[glsammy]

Originally Posted by digi

The IS does not operate correctly with the converter fitted I have tried the 1.4x and 2x, your better off digiscoping.

I have chosen the Sigma 50-500 over the 100-400L, its has a more versatile zoom and is very sharp.

I was told (Canon Technician) that due to compatibility problems with the newer Canon cameras they hope to replace the 100-400 in the next 18 months since it uses the old mode 1 IS they now use mode 3 in the newer lenses.

Take a look at the Canon 400L prime, now that is a stunner of a lens.

Now that's news to me Digi, thanks for that. I had assumed the IS would work. Puts a whole new perspective on it. The 50-500 comes back in front! (And it's cheaper ) I couldn't possibly stretch to the 400L 2.8, but could the 400 L F5.6, although its not image stabilized.

[digi]

Originally Posted by Fourwings

So is that it for the 20D?, I'd heard they were already in short supply!

Canon have reduced production of the 20D like they did with the 10D so if you want one get it whilst it's available and cheap.

[glsammy]

Looking at all these comments as well as elsewhere, I'm beginning to doubt whether I should upgrade at all. One very important point to me has to be the weight of the gear. I fantasize I can manage anything but realistically with my ******* back problem, I'm wondering if I could cope with the weight of the 50-500, or the 100-400L for that matter.
Any of you other bad back sufferers have any experience with this range of gear?
What I really need is try it out somehow, fat chance of that!

[digi]

Well I am disabled due to a severe back problem and I manage but then again I am on pain killers all the time

Thats why I go to Attenborough and Carsington because I cannot walk far.

Its not about weight its about balance.

[glsammy]

Originally Posted by digi

Well I am disabled due to a severe back problem and I manage but then again I am on pain killers all the time

Thats why I go to Attenborough and Carsington because I cannot walk far.

Same here Digi. I've been taking painkillers daily for over 15 years.. My other half always tries to protect me from myself, (hence the doubts) and sometimes I even listen..