300D (Digital Rebel) or 20D ?

[DionM]

Hi all,

I was all set for a 20D, but now I am starting to think about a 300D.

My main uses of the camera will be landscape / travel snaps, some portrait work, and the odd sports event (motorsports).

Note that I do none of these professionally ...

I'm a long time Canon user, having a EOS300 (Rebel), 28-105 USM (1st generation), 100-300 USM, 50 f1.8, and a Tokina 19-35. Plus a 380EX.

My main thing is that I love wide-angles, when it comes to travel photos. Don't know why, but I find the wides addictive.

I had originally planned to get a 20D and something like the 24-85 USM, and keep my EOS300 (film) and keep the 19-35 on it; and shoot slides and scan them. But now I have my doubts as to whether that process would really work ...

So for the (approx) cost of getting a 20D + 24-85 USM (and trade my 28-105) I could get a 300D + EF-S 10-22.

Thoughts ... the main advantage I see of the 20D is the higher MP, and the higher fps. The higher MP I like, but the fps ... not so sure if I would use.

However I'm not all that keen on EF-S lenses ... so the 10-22 + 300D is really just a solution to the problem of how to do wide angles at a reasonable cost. I figure my next body upgrade may not be until full-frame sensors are a bit more affordable ... so with that comment, perhaps I should get a 20D and focus on upgrading my other, higher zoom lenses ... and leave wide-angle alone for the time being (and keep it in the film/digital area ...).

[phili1]

One feature you forgot is that it has less noise at the higher ISO's. Its metereing and focusing system is markII quality. it has a pc syc. and it has nine focus points. you can't shoot fast enough to fill the buffer, and the 8 meg pixels will allow you to crop to a 4 mega pixels size and still get 13 x 19 out of it.

I opted for that and love it to death.

[Cobra351]

I can only comment on the 300d as it's what I have. So far I thoroughly like it. There are only a few issues I have, the biggest being a lack of exposure control for the flash (like the G3 has). Oh well. Otherwise it's served me very well.

I made the upgrade from the G3 to this and love it in comparison (awesome picture quality, FAST focusing, more manual controls, the optional lenses). I mostly take pictures of what you mentioned, maybe even more nature stuff. For this purpose I'm quite happy with it, especially for the money. Of course if I were to get the money I'd run to get the 20d! For now though I'm quite content.

[pcasciola]

With the great rebates Canon is having now, especially on the Digital Rebel, it's a tough choice. I just got the 20D, but I'm mainly going to be shooting sports and for sports the 20D is the clear choice. No comparison there unless the sport you are shooting is croquet.

However, since you said sports would be the odd occasion, with the great rebates Canon is having now you could get over $400 in rebates if you were to buy a 300D w/18-55mm kit lens, 70-200 f/4L and 28-135mm IS. Add on the thrifty-fifty 50mm f/1.8, and the whole package would end up being about the same price as a 20D w/18-55mm kit lens ($1600), and you are getting an L lens, an IS lens, an EF-S lens, and an awesome portrait lens.

[drisley]

Both are fine cameras.
Really, the 300D was perfect for me in every way, except when it came to sports because there was no selectable focus modes (ie, AI SERVO).
Also, the 300D (and 10D) cant write to the CF card while you are focusing on another object to take another picture. This can cause bottlenecks sometimes (the 20D can write while you focus on other objects, and is the fastest camera available when it comes to CF speed).
As far as noise is concerned, I notice a slight improvement, but even the 300D supplies noise free (http://www.mts.net/~lftbrain/iso1600crop2.jpg) images at ISO800, and very clean images at ISO1600.
The noise is really just different.

[DionM]

Thanks for the replies guys.

Phili1 - I think I would rarely use the higher ISOs ... but then again, the option has never been there to me in the past (I have shot some dragracing at 1600 film, but that was a specific application). I could envisage having some fun with night time ambient stuff in the city, with my 50 f1.8 strapped on ...

Cobra351 - Thanks for the tip about lack of exposure control on the flash. This is a big bugbear of mine with the EOS300 (Rebel) film camera I have. I just presumed the 300D would have it. I shoot flash a lot.

pcasciola - I'm located in Australia, and we don't have the rebates. My main type of motorsport photography is offroad and street circuit racing, where high FPS and long zooms aren't really needed. But they would come in handy, for sure ...

drisley - Thanks for the tip about writing to CF cards. In some of the motorsport (esp offroading) while there is not a need for super high FPS (the Rebels 2.5fps would suffice); the inability to setup for the next shot while it is writing would be frustrating.

Thanks for the tips - its these little differences that I was wondering about, that you don't get from just looking at the spec sheets. Sounds more and more like a 20D is what I need.

[drisley]

You know what?
The 10D might actually be a great middle-ground choice.
If you could get a 10D there, that might be the way to go.

[DionM]

You know what?
The 10D might actually be a great middle-ground choice.
If you could get a 10D there, that might be the way to go.

Yeah, I've looked at the option of a used 10D.

They are still fetching good prices - as it would happen, about halfway between the cost of an EOS300D and a 20D! To me I'd rather spend the extra and jump to a 20D.

[phili1]

B & H has a new one for $1149.95

[Whaler]

Dion,

As you can see below I've got both cameras. The Rebel is a great little camera but, it doesn't hold a candle to the 20D. If you've got the money go with the 20D. You'll be very very happy.

[msvadi]

I have a 300D and it's an excellent camera. Still, I say get a 20D, unless, of course, you want to ask yourself every day "why-oh-why I did not buy a better camera?" ;)