20d vs 50d vs 7d

[jontmiller]

I would like some opinions as I am wrestling with a decision.

I am a current 20d owner who was in no market for a new camera, while I lusted after the 5D mk II I have always felt that I have not outgrown my 20d with my skills yet and therefore couldn't justify spending the money.

Last week the shutter failed on the 20d (seemed to stick open but havent gotten the postmortem from Canon yet) which got me looking at all the options.

First of all, money IS a factor, but at the same time I tend to keep things for a long while. I got the offer from Canon for a refurbed 50d for $629, I havent gotten the estimate on my 20d but expect it to be at least $300. If the 7d wasn't released its a no brainer.

Enter the 7d, wow what a great camera seemingly built for me.

If we take out the video availability, which I honestly think I would use but have not used our sony camcorder much more than the video capability on my G3, so I don't know. Is there enough there to justify the 7d?

The camera is mostly a family shooter, scout trips. But I have the opportunity to bring it with me at work (as an airline pilot) and use it for cityscapes, aviation and such. I am the guy who drags his tripod / flash and remote etc to an event everyone else brings their point and shoot. I have dreams of having the time for more dedictated shooting in the future. I borrowed a family members G10 on a recent vacation thinking I would enjoy having a smaller camera and it annoyed me to no end, and its a pretty capable camera.


I know these are pretty standard questions and thanks for reading, I am just looking for opinions or maybe a different way of looking at things. I am worried that I will regret every shot with a 50d knowing I should have sprung for the 7d.

[Sime]

Well, A place we all find ourselves!

I went from a 30D to a 5DMk2 and have to say that it was the best thing I ever did.

The 50D is a very worthy camera, and, if you don't need video (I didn't think I would use it, but have) then it may well be just fine.

The 7D sounds very nice, I've not used it personally... Dual Digic processors.. Better noise handling (The 50 is pretty good) Video and more cost.

I know that if I got the 50 when I was trying to get the 5DMk2 I would have rgretted it, but, if you're happy with the 20, which is still a nice camera, then I'd say the 50 would more than fill that space.

Hmm, tough one... Let me know what you decide.

Sime

[lputman]

Personally, I would go for the refurbished 50D. All of the type of shooting you describe can be accomplished extremely well with the 50D.

[Samanax]

At $1700, the 7D would be almost 3 times the cost of the refurbed 50D ($629). Since you mentioned that cost is a factor I think the 50D would be your best option if you choose to upgrade from the 20D.

The 7D has only just been released and not a known entity yet...once it's been in the hands of the public for awhile we may start hearing about bugs or issues that need to be corrected.

And $629 for a refurbed 50D is a good deal. Used 40Ds are going for about $700.

[jontmiller]

yea, my gut feeling is the 7d is more camera than I need at this time.

Video is the question mark, if I had it would I use it? I have no plans on making short movies but it could make for more interesting collections.

Still waiting for the word on the 20d Canon repair, I may just get it fixed and wait another year or three.

[inkista]

I went for the 50D when my XT died for the second time this year. That would have been $400 in repair bills this year, and more than the XT was worth on the used market.

If you go for the 50D, you can hang on to it for, say, six months, and then sell it for roughly what you paid for it, and at that point, the 7D will be readily available and might even have come down a little in price. Getting the 7D right now is to get it at its most expensive and difficult to find; it's the hot new toy. And the majority of the 7D features are geared for fast action shooters, which doesn't necessarily sound like something you need.

There's also the fact that a 60D is likely to be announced in March, at the ($500 lower) XXD price point, probably incorporating some of the 7D new features (my bet is the LCD overlay in the viewfinder and some form of HD video) and very likely the same sensor with some tweaks.

For me, I'm thinking of my refurb 50D more as a stop-gap, or a camera-on-trial rather than a permanent purchase. It's all going to depend on how much I like the interchangeable focus screen feature and whether it survives into the next generation of camera bodies.

[Saralonde]

I'm having similar feelings at the moment. I feel I've outgrown my XTi, but can't quite bring myself to spend the money on a 5DMk2. The new 7D sounds like it might be for me, but I need to wait and see what the early buyers think of it.

If I were you, I'd get the refurb. It's an updated version of a camera you already like, and like Inkista said, you probably could resell it for almost what you paid for it.

[lputman]

I have yet to do anything with video, except play with it momentarily, since I got my 5DII in April. I'm very interested in the 7D for sports shooting though.

[LoveDSLR]

I was thinking about the same thing to get a 7D for fast actions to complement my 5D Mk II. I would have bought one last week if I don't have a D300 already.

However, look out for its high ISO performance. Its ISO 3200 may not be as good as the 5D Mk II.

[jontmiller]

I thank everyone for your thoughts. The repair bill was (is) $324 to repair the 20d, I talked to a nice guy on the phone who said it was generally a flat $180 to repair (before I received the official email), but I suspect he may have been thinking of the powershots or something. For 180 I was going to get it fixed AND try and swag the 50d

Regardless, I am going to take the upgrade and save the money for a rainy day.