300d -vs- 20d

[RASphoto]

Hello All,
I have had my 300d for a year now. Very satisfied with it. I picked up the new Canon - EF-S 17-85MM F/4-5.6 IS USM Lens for the 300d and 20d only, very satisfied.I have a Quantaray 75-300 and a Tamaron 200-400 meter lense. I also picked up the I9900 canon printer for large prints ( I reccomend this printer, fantastic results so far). I will be shooting to make large prints. I am very satisfied with the 300d results, but think I could get better with the 20D. Would the 20d be worth the upgrade from 300? If there is a thread on this please direct me or any advice would be great. I do take alot of wildlife stuff and some need for the quick shutter speed.

thanks

[lkorell]

There's really not a comparison. The Digital Rebel is a really nice camera. The 20D is a great camera. If you are only going to take family pictures or travel for yourself the Digital Rebel is a terrific deal. If you are going to sell what you shoot, there is no question but to get the 20D. It has features that professionals need. I use both with the 300D as a backup, but I don't put down the 20D once I get going.

[jaypie77]

I think that the most important thing to ask yourself is whether or not you need more. Have you run up against the limits of your 300D and feel that you need a camera with more advanced abilities? You say that you're pleased with your results so far, but that you think you could do better with a 20D - what are you trying to do better with it?

[intechpcx]

Any chance you guys could elaborate a little more on what features the 20D has over the 300D that you consider necessity for a professional? I'm just curious what things I haven't run into yet that my 300D can't do.

[Zamora3]

what is the maximum flash-sync speed for the 20D ?

[Jon]

Max. sync (with EX flashes) 1/250.
Features:
Buffer size and burst rate (20 JPEG at 5 fps vs 4 frames @ 2.5 fps)
Better noise reduction at high speeds
AI-Servo, if your work requires it
More AF sensor locations, and easier active sensor selection (via joystick)
Support for digital photo authentication (if you need it)
Extra 1.9 MP for slight improvement in resolution
Faster AF (if you need it) at slightly better light levels
USB 2.0 support
Writes to card faster
"Instant-On" and minimal shutter lag.

[intechpcx]

Thanks for the list Jon, that does make me feel better about my purchase. I can see down the road where I may want/need to upgrade. Right now I've got to hone my skills. I'm confident that the difference between good and bad shots for me will be my technique and not the camera. Afterall, that's why I'm here, to learn from all of your experience.

Thanks again for the insight.

[phili1]

Here is yout answer. It depends on what your needs are. If you need faster start up and faster focusing and 8 mega pixels, then the 20D is the Camera. If you do not need that then stay with the 300D. All the pictures I haver seen withe the Rebel with the same lens the quality knocks your socks off.

[S230]

Thought I give my input. not sure if you thought about replacing the firmware with a hacked version. This will give you more features to work with. Besides the speed (fps & startup) and slight resolution (1.9mp) the 300D should be pretty good with a good lens.

I currently hacked my camera to become the new "9.8D" (Almost like the 10D), and so far so good. I really like the option to be able to include a large,fine image embedded to the RAW file.

[RASphoto]

Thank you all very much. You have added some good questions to ask myself and provided technical info which helps. I would love to sell some of my stuff if I I had the buyers. Still learning, were always learning.

If you would like like to see some of my photos please visit:

www.rasimages.com

thanks again I really appreciate taking the time to post.

Bob

[AzzKicker]

A lot of people always want whats cool and what everyone else has. I've seen n00bs buy 20D's just because people tell them its better than the rebel yet they dont know how to use it worth a damn.

Buy what you think your gonna need and know that you'll actually use the features.


For example I love to shoot sports and Nature. Which is why I picked the 20D. I could have purchased the MKII but for walking around I didnt want the heavier weight so I got the 20D, which has all the pro features really, in a smaller package.

It all boils down to the features you need and how often you need them.

[Thats A Winner]

Hey guys, thanks for the thread. I, like many others on here are debating over whether to buy the 300D, 20D, or wait to see what is coming out. Currently, I have a p&S digital and Elan7 film camera and desperately want a DSLR.

Here is my question: When comparing these two cameras, the increase in megapixels is hardly ever mentioned. While I like the art of photography, I'm also kind of a computer geek. I like to see how far I can zoom in to a picture without seening horrible pixilation. Is there much of a difference on heavily cropped or zoomed in pictures between the two? I mean, my p&S is 6 megapixels. If I am going to pay a large sum of money I want to make sure I am happy with what I get.

Thanks

[AzzKicker]

Hey guys, thanks for the thread. I, like many others on here are debating over whether to buy the 300D, 20D, or wait to see what is coming out. Currently, I have a p&S digital and Elan7 film camera and desperately want a DSLR.

Here is my question: When comparing these two cameras, the increase in megapixels is hardly ever mentioned. While I like the art of photography, I'm also kind of a computer geek. I like to see how far I can zoom in to a picture without seening horrible pixilation. Is there much of a difference on heavily cropped or zoomed in pictures between the two? I mean, my p&S is 6 megapixels. If I am going to pay a large sum of money I want to make sure I am happy with what I get.

Thanks


Megapixels are really not important. I will take a 4 megapixel dSRL or Canon D30 over a 8 megapixel Sony, Fuji, whatever P&S ANY DAY.


It's all about the censor. To me, I dont really notice any difference between my Rebels 6 to my 20D's 8

[Citizensmith]

I'm just curious what things I haven't run into yet that my 300D can't do.

I think you kind of answered your own question. If you are not yet running into limitations you don't need a new camera. Maybe in another year you'll be having the same thoughts, but then the 20D will be old and there will be a better something there to replace your 300D with.

As for a comment about professionals having to have a 20D. What a load of crap. Being a professional photographer is 50% skill, 49% marketing, and 1% equipment. There is a well respected pro in my area I often work with. My Rebel D and lenses are better than the digital stuff he currently uses. Doesn't alter the fact he's making a living from photography and I'm just a wannabe.

[cactusclay]

Well, here's my two cents. I started buying digital stuff back when the Canon A50, I think it was called. I can't remember but I think it was 1.3 megs or something, but I remeber wishing I could afford a dslr, but they were around 15-20 k back then. I kept up grading over the years always wishing they would come out with a camera that didn't have that Gawd Dang shutter lag. Well, when the Rebel came out I bought one and the shutter lag was pretty much gone, but then I had to deal with the three second delay from start up to ready or when it went to sleep. That was really the only reason I bought the 20D. To tell you the truth I think the grip on the reble is more comfortable than the 20D although the plastic battery cover feels sort of cheap. There are a lot of upgrades on the 20D, but frankly I still use the Rebel as my backup and I usually keep my secondary lens mounted on it so I can just grab it and not have to change lenses. I have found myself using the in camera black and white mode although it can be done in the software. If Canon was to do away with the three second start up, I would buy another Rebel if this one took a crap on me.

[phili1]

I agree that the sensor is very importan but most prosumer cameras have quality sensors and SLR are equal in quality just different aplications to the
end result. NOw you have to decide which options that each offer suites your needs. I am sure that if I bought a NIkon, AF Fugi, Olympus or Minolta I would be happy with the pictures I get.

Well mega pixels is important and here is why.

a 4 mega pixel camera will prodcue a 13 x 19 print that is awsome, I have done it with my G3.
a 6 mega pixel will allow you to crop it 25% ands still get 13 x 19
An 8 mega pixel will allow you to crop it 50% amd still get a 13 x 19 print.
That is a simple explination of mega pixels and what they can do for you.

NOw the big question is why buy the 20D over the 10D not the 300D, because they are of the same family.

The 300D does as good of a job as the 20 D but is slower and has 40% less features then the 20D. The sensor will take picture in my opinion as good as the 20D it just wont funcation as well.

The 10 D images are kick butt Images and the 20D is not capable of takng pictures any better then the 10D but it will do it easier and faster then the 10D.

It is a features game and the ball is in your court as to which one. ASk yourself this what am I going to use it for and how much am I willing to spend and that is the Camera for you.

I have the 20D and I will tell you this, I love it! But I am haveing problems with telephoto picture quailty and I can blame the camera but in the end it is your tech on taking pictures. I have seen some awsome results with the 20D 100-400 combo and I amhaveing a hard time getting it on a consistent bases. So I investigate what makes there pictures better then mine and I adjust me not the Camera and guess what I got better at it.It isyou who will take good pictures and the Camera is only an extension of you.

[planesh00ter]

I'v had my drebel for a year and just added a 20D, for the detail at range with the 100-400. I shoot airline pics and sell to pilots. The drebel and 70-200 f4 totally knocks their socks off on 13x19 closeups, off the i9900. I have yet to do as well with the 20D and 100-400 ,at range, but I'm trying
fwiw

[jaypie77]

I wouldn't get bogged down in comparing megapixels, but...

The 300D does as good of a job as the 20 D but is slower and has 40% less features then the 20D.

What?