Pezza said:There's a few spec differences between the two, which may or may not affect you depending on what you intend to shoot. Things that are important for me after using the 20d for the past 8 months or so are the control dial at the back which enables you to change settings very quickly, the fact that it autofocuses in really rather low light, and the incredible battery life.
Killer factor for me at the time of purchase tho' was that the 350d was far too small for my hands. And my hands are far from big! Tried it in the shop with the 24-70 F2.8L series lens on it, which is a heavy lens, and it felt unbelieveably insecure, like I was about to drop it all the time. 20D provides a much better grip and feels all-round very solid. I now use it with the 24-105 F4L lens, which is again reasonably heavy, and it's fantastic.
Useful linky here http://bobatkins.photo.net/photography/digital/eos_digital_rebel_xt_vs_20d.html
senu said:Look Here and see what you think.
Handle both cameras and see which one you think youll not tire of easily . I was in exactly the same positon as you and bought the 350D + camera grip + extra battery and now going for some lenses.
The PQ is very similar. What you pay for ( apart from the Pose factor: My camera is bigger than yours: ) Is perhaps a percieved ruggedness, durability and a tangible responsiveness said to be better in the 20D.
With the benefit of hindsight ,I still feel happy that I did not buy the 20D( for the £400-500 difference then) because Im now looking at the 30D, 5D or even D200 Nikon as possible upgrade paths only 12- 14 months after!.
If the cost difference is less now you may be swayed
hmm.... or plugging an alba cd player into a Meridian Av system.. ( You s**b )Pezza said:..... A £50 lens on a £500/£750 body is, to use a hifi analogy, like plugging a Goodmans DVD player into a Linn AV system!
...