20D technical question

winger

Ok so anyone that knows me knows I shoot alot.

So I was noticing that the 20d shutter is said to have a life of approx 100,000 shots.

so what does that mean when you reach 100,000 (yes I realise at 100,000 it will not magically disappear).

is it the kind of thing where you could send the camera in for a new shutter, maybe a little tune up and then you are good to go, or when the camera calls it quits are we talking a whole new body.

Im just trying to figure out what to expect.

DoctorIt

You can get a new shutter. I would think that with the amount you shoot, a good Canon tune-up is in order soon. New shutter isn't cheap, unfortunately, but less than a new 20D.

cmason

winger wrote:

Ok so anyone that knows me knows I shoot alot.

So I was noticing that the 20d shutter is said to have a life of approx 100,000 shots.

so what does that mean when you reach 100,000 (yes I realise at 100,000 it will not magically disappear).

is it the kind of thing where you could send the camera in for a new shutter, maybe a little tune up and then you are good to go, or when the camera calls it quits are we talking a whole new body.

Im just trying to figure out what to expect.

I would imagine a new body. I have never heard of a shutter-ectomy before. But unless you take an enourmous number of pictures in a short time span, other bits of the camera will be in need of repair too.

If you take 60 pics a week, that will be 32 yrs before you need to replace it. Using the camera weekly for 32 years will add a bit of wear. Even if you take 100 pics a day, in the three year life span of the shutter, that is alot of handling, in and out of bags, etc.

So I suspect, you would not be interested in simply replacing the shutter, even if it could be done.

DoctorIt

cmason wrote:

I have never heard of a shutter-ectomy before.

Doesn't mean they don't exist. Very, very common.

100 shots a week? Are you kidding? That's 1 HOUR for Winger!

DoctorIt

BTW, Winger, I did some searching FOR you. Check out this thread:

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1019&message=17306396

In summary (I know reading is hard):

• -100,000 clicks life
• -$150-250 to replace shutter
• -but at that point, it could be a sensor issue as well
• -sensor is $800 = so get a new body!

winger

hmmm yeah I have been thinking about the new body issue too. But I bought the 20d right when it came out. I dont want to buy another 20d if its going to be come obsolute (and well since I am trying to actually have the money to pay for all my toys now rather than charging it would be at least a month or too before I could purchase anything).

If I could I would love to get another Mark II but I cant really afford those......

I also think the upgrades on the 5D arent really what I need, since I do sports and honestly the 1.6 crop factor is working in my favor in terms of getting more distance out of my lenses.

In terms of what I shoot....I shoot proably about 150-250 shots per game, average of 5 games a week. I have owned the 20d since sept 04, plus when I first got it I proably shot 400-500 shots a games but I have gotten alot smarter about shooting and now I get a higher yield, better shots off of less shots.

So I am certain my shutter has proably already seen close to 100,000 accuations.

What also brings up this question is my custom white balance is freaking out (yes yes I know learn how to process raw....but in all honest I am already looking into classes for the summer because i will be done with this silly masters) so anyways typically I have custome white blanace hockey off the home jerseys. But lately when I do what I have always been doing, the photos that come up after I custom white balance come up blue......

So I have (well hockey home games are over) I instead went and custom balanced off an older image. I dunno it seemed to work and hoops I have been just using the auto and being forced to deal with the "hot" tones.

I tried reseting the camera....didnt seem to do much (and totally threw me off next game because i forgot to fix all my settins back)

The other thing is my photos just dont seem as sharp as they should be/ used to be. I am all ready to blame the lenses, but does the sensor degrade over time.
I have been shooting hoops with my 50 because the lack of sharp photos was driving me insane. It was never really a problem before.

Outside it doesnt seem to be as much of a problem....but I am still not getting the sharp photos that I got before my brief adventure with the Mark II or even this fall.

So is my 20D dying????
Would a tune up help or is it simply not cost effective overall?

Im going to read eriks link now so he doesnt think I dont love him.

jimf

cmason wrote:

I would imagine a new body. I have never heard of a shutter-ectomy before.

Well, if you do consumer-level shooting you would probably never need one but prolific photographers can easily break 10k frames per year -- and pros will probably not be making much money if they don't exceed that by quite a bit.

Higher end cameras are designed with serviceability of moving parts like the shutter in mind, but a lot of consumer equipment is not and tends to have less reliable components to boot.

Even so, it may be possible to service even supposedly "un-serviceable" shutters. The EOS-300D's shutter, for instance, is not supposed to be a serviceable part but actually you can have it replaced for about $300. Whether or not it's worth doing is debatable on a $600 body, but it's a no-brainer on a $6000 body.

jim

wxwax

I'd be astonished if your 20D upped and died at 100K. I have a feeling it will live a long and happy life well past that milestone.

DoctorIt

winger wrote:

I am all ready to blame the lenses, but does the sensor degrade over time.

Sensors, no pun intended, are definitely the most sensitive part of your dslr. I'm no sensor expert, but I know enough about electronics and semiconductor fab/design to know that a CMOS chip does indeed have a finite lifespan. Your L lenses will outlive you.

Im going to read eriks link now so he doesnt think I dont love him.

you're such a sweetheart

winger

jimf wrote:

Well, if you do consumer-level shooting you would probably never need one but prolific photographers can easily break 10k frames per year -- and pros will probably not be making much money if they don't exceed that by quite a bit.

Higher end cameras are designed with serviceability of moving parts like the shutter in mind, but a lot of consumer equipment is not and tends to have less reliable components to boot.

Even so, it may be possible to service even supposedly "un-serviceable" shutters. The EOS-300D's shutter, for instance, is not supposed to be a serviceable part but actually you can have it replaced for about $300. Whether or not it's worth doing is debatable on a $600 body, but it's a no-brainer on a $6000 body.

jim

Yeah I am kind of the land inbetween....I shoot ALOT...Doc can vouch. But I dont make the income (because i exist in the land between pro and semi pro and I shoot for the student paper, make some money but only really enough to pay for equipment) to pay for the higher end bodies. I had a Mark II but sold it to a friend who not only shot for his athletics department but also for USA Hockey and occassionaly he gets a shot in SI.

So I use my 20d and expect it to perform like the MARK II's, ID level type camera do.
For the most part it does the job.

Now that I think of it I had the shutter replaced last year, having the evil 99 error and *someone* talked me into buying a Mark II, (which is a marvelous camera but a little too much for me right now.....) which filled in great over the 2 months it took canon to get my camera fixed right (took two trys)

So I guess back to the question at hand? Is my 20d going to live a long and wonderful life? Is this lack of sharpness issue a camera issue, a lens issue or an operator error (and I proably should find some other lenses and camera to test my equipment with, but doc went to the other side).

winger

DoctorIt wrote:

Sensors, no pun intended, are definitely the most sensitive part of your dslr. I'm no sensor expert, but I know enough about electronics and semiconductor fab/design to know that a CMOS chip does indeed have a finite lifespan. Your L lenses will outlive you.

you're such a sweetheart

I read your link.


You think cleaning the sensor, that scares me!!!!
Maybe the people at hunts will help me if i bat some eyelashes, now that they arent mean to me anymore......

mercphoto

winger wrote:

If I could I would love to get another Mark II but I cant really afford those......

I know the feeling. But I saw on the Canon web the 1D shutter life-span is 200k acutations. So only twice the life of a 20D? For all the heralded durability of the 1-series I would have expected more. What am I missing?

I also think the upgrades on the 5D arent really what I need, since I do sports and honestly the 1.6 crop factor is working in my favor in terms of getting more distance out of my lenses.

I like the 1.6 crop factor for exactly the same reason. I think full-frame would be problematic for you. 30D perhaps? I'm cursious is to what exactly Canon has improved with the auto-focus algorithms on that camera.

DoctorIt

winger wrote:

You think cleaning the sensor, that scares me!!!!

Clean sensor has nothing to do with sharpness or failing color rendition. You only need to clean your sensor if you can actually see dust motts on your images.

winger

mercphoto wrote:

I know the feeling. But I saw on the Canon web the 1D shutter life-span is 200k acutations. So only twice the life of a 20D? For all the heralded durability of the 1-series I would have expected more. What am I missing?


I like the 1.6 crop factor for exactly the same reason. I think full-frame would be problematic for you. 30D perhaps? I'm cursious is to what exactly Canon has improved with the auto-focus algorithms on that camera.

yeah that is hte biggest thing I missed with the 1d MarkII is the autofocus ablity, I saw with the 30d the fps is bumped up....but really not worth the difference for me to buy that camera again. (If i was making more money sure, but again i stradle the line between working pro and joe with a camera).

MY longest lens as it is, is the 70-200 L 2.8....which is short of lax, baseball, soccer and football but i make due.

What do people think about my sharpness issue? Is it a sign the camera is going?

winger

DoctorIt wrote:

Clean sensor has nothing to do with sharpness or failing color rendition. You only need to clean your sensor if you can actually see dust motts on your images.

Ahhh well that elimnates that as a possibly reason for my image degradation......

DoctorIt

winger wrote:

What do people think about my sharpness issue? Is it a sign the camera is going?

That's a tough one.

Do you have any old shots you could replicate? Like something you set up at home (still life)? You unfortunately will have a hard time quantifying this. Those lax shots look pretty sharp to me.

wxwax

Tha's what I thought. I read your concerns about sharpness and went back to look at the lacrosse shots. They look fine to me. You have some examples of softness?

jimf

mercphoto wrote:

I know the feeling. But I saw on the Canon web the 1D shutter life-span is 200k acutations. So only twice the life of a 20D? For all the heralded durability of the 1-series I would have expected more. What am I missing?

You also get weather sealing (the 20D has none; for that matter, neither does the 5D), better viewfinder coverage (which means bigger, brighter image), much improved autofocus, higher resolution, speed speed speed, and of course a full-frame sensor (which could be a plus or a minus, depending on what you do).

Whether or not any of that is worth the price difference is debatable, it will depend on how you use the camera.

wxwax

jimf wrote:

You also get weather sealing (the 20D has none; for that matter, neither does the 5D), better viewfinder coverage (which means bigger, brighter image), much improved autofocus, higher resolution, speed speed speed, and of course a full-frame sensor (which could be a plus or a minus, depending on what you do).

Whether or not any of that is worth the price difference is debatable, it will depend on how you use the camera.

Not a full frame sensor, a 1.3 crop.

jimf

wxwax wrote:

Not a full frame sensor, a 1.3 crop.

Oops, I hadn't realized that not all of the 1D series were full frame. Out of my price range anyway :-).

wxwax

jimf wrote:

Oops, I hadn't realized that not all of the 1D series were full frame. Out of my price range anyway :-).

Yeah, they're pricey. But I see that $1200 1D cameras aren't moving on Fred Miranda, which probably means they'll move at one grand or slightly more.

binghott

in just over a year, i took over 60,000 shots on my digital rebel before it died. i believe the shutter was rated for 50,000 actuations. i got the shutter replaced, it's good as new.

had the shutter died in less than one year it would've been covered canon. luckily the american express card i purchased the camera with doubles your warranty. my 1 year canon warranty turned into a 2-year warranty. american express wound up paying for the $250 repair.

now i use the rebel as a backup to my 20d which already has over 10,000 acuations since the beginning of the year.

hope this helps!

Bob Bell

The 20D only has 1 significant AF issue and that can be overcome. It does not AF correctly on objects moving directly towards the camera in anymode. But if you tap the shutter release and are quick at it, it works almost as well as a 1DmkII. This is really bad with football and bird photography. Drove me crazy until I saw someone mention it.

Cmason, I take a 100 an hour when shooting birds if not more. I think I took 220 or so in 2 hours early saturday morning. Sports fills up cards fast. Only thing that is slow for me is product / advertising shoots which I can get away with 20 or less usuall.

Its pretty easy to put 10,000 images on a body as year. I know a few people that go well over 25,000 but they shoot games 2-4 days a week. 200 a week is over 10,000. Say a 20% keeper rate across the board, thats 2000 images a year to store plus RAW's. If a consumer shutter is good for 50k, you got 10,000 good shots out of it. Thats easily worth $250-300 for a new shutter.

winger

Bob Bell wrote:

The 20D only has 1 significant AF issue and that can be overcome. It does not AF correctly on objects moving directly towards the camera in anymode. But if you tap the shutter release and are quick at it, it works almost as well as a 1DmkII. This is really bad with football and bird photography. Drove me crazy until I saw someone mention it..

Yeah pretty much any action moving toward me its sort of ok, that is the one I want shoot.......

Because the AF just doesnt like that sort of motion, but the media guides and papers do (single isolated action shots) but yeah that is sort of the process I have been working through......its really hard in terms of hockey, that sport just moves too fast for the AF to work with out you giving it all the tools it can use to be great.

So .......
I will try to find some photos to compare today between studying on my sharpness degradation issue..........

I really like my 20d and since I can really afford a MKII again, if I am going to replace the 20D i would love for canon to come out with a sweet upgrade.....

sigh.....

DoctorIt

winger wrote:

I really like my 20d and since I can really afford a MKII again, if I am going to replace the 20D i would love for canon to come out with a sweet upgrade.....

sigh.....

Patch and I were just talking about this last night. I think for the first time, Canon has failed to really "wow" us with their new stuff for this year. Yeah, the 30D is nice, but it doesn't have the impact factor the 20D did over the 10D. A few FPS, yeah, bigger LCD, yeah, but worth dumping a good 20D and spending way more $$$ for? Nope.

Anyway, I'll be looking for those sharpness samples.

jimf

DoctorIt wrote:

Patch and I were just talking about this last night. I think for the first time, Canon has failed to really "wow" us with their new stuff for this year. Yeah, the 30D is nice, but it doesn't have the impact factor the 20D did over the 10D. A few FPS, yeah, bigger LCD, yeah, but worth dumping a good 20D and spending way more $$$ for? Nope.

I don't think the 30D is really aimed at the 20D user base -- those purchases were too recent. It's probably aimed more solidly at people (like, say, me) who bought Rebels and are now thinking it's time to step up, or film holdouts.

Heck, if it weren't for the fact that they shrunk the battery on the XT I might just get one of those. The only really nasty problem I have with the Rebel is the write rate is so slow that I am constantly looking at "busy" in the viewfinder.

ginger_55

Tapping the shutter for shots coming at you?
What do you mean to tap the shutter? To hold it what?

How would you have time to do that as the "bird", I shoot birds, it would just be closer before you actually "shot" it?

I figure that the problem is that there is a slight time lag in the shutter, between the AF and the time the shutter actually takes the photo. I just figured that since I couldn't trade up financially, that I was stuck with a time lag. ???

I have gotten good focus on exactly one shot of a bird coming at me, and I shoot a bunch.

Also, how do you check the number of actuations your 20D has on it?

(If this post should be moved to somewhere, like a how to place, please move it. I would really like to know the answer, especially important to the first question.)

ginger

mercphoto

jimf wrote:

I don't think the 30D is really aimed at the 20D user base -- those purchases were too recent. It's probably aimed more solidly at people (like, say, me) who bought Rebels and are now thinking it's time to step up, or film holdouts.

I agree with that assessment (not aimed at 20D owners, aimed at Rebel owners), and is probably why 20D owners are not all that thrilled with the 30D. Its not enough for them to dish out the bucks and buy a new camera. Me, I'm glad, as its saving me $$$. I also think that's why many people think this should have been a 20D-N, not a 30D. The feature set improvement is rather nice, but doesn't seem large enough to warrant a new model name.

winger

ok this is how I would like them all to look.....and it seems like I am getting less of these shots than before. Then again I could be getting more picky.....
This one shot with a 50mm


But I get more of these.....


Am I being insane about quality?
Let me go look for stuff from last year.....

winger

Stuff from last year






Ok now that I am looking at alot of my shots this year a consistant with the shots that I am not happy with the sharpness....so maybe its just I have impoved as a photograhper and I am expecting more out of my equipment than maybe possible on a regular basis.......

Maybe I will go look at some outdoor stuff....

winger

ok some soccer...which is hard to compare because I feel composition wise I am shooting better....but now I am starting to realise maybe I didnt notice the difference before ( I mean there is OOF photos then simple soft photos....so maybe I should be happy with the not as sharp photos....)

because looking at last years gallery I found this one:

Nice and sharp
But most look like this....


This year:

eh...its ok.

sharp



Ok now that I am looking through.....maybe its I just didnt notice the differences before......I never said I wasnt insane.

So I guess that just leaves me to my custom white balance question, why when I balance of white home jerseys (or snow) does it go to blue?????