Canon 20d or 10d

[rookie1]

Ok, I was not going to bother this forum because there has already been much debate on this subject and I did want to bring this topic back up again but I need to make a decision. I have very little experience in this area but like to learn more but I need some help.



I like to take pictures of the daughter’s sports and her friends. These range from soccer fields to basketball dimmed lit courts. From softball diamonds with the dust to volleyball courts. I like taking pictures as a hobby and giving them away to the parents. I like doing the pictures in 8 X 10’s. I am not in this to make money but to ease the stress. I have been using a point and shoot and I am not getting good pictures. Please don’t go there! Folks have been pointing me towards the Nikon d70 but I will not go there! I like the Canon 20d but the price of the Canon 10d keeps me up at night, as the prices fall. If I can get by and learn on the 10d maybe that is the way to go! I have no lens at all so I am starting from scratch there and the boss at home is watching every penny.



I have been watching and reading on this forum and have gotten excellent ideas and links to go to. Would anyone like to share their thoughts with a rookie to help me decide?



Again, Thanks for this forum, as I have learn more from you pro’s than any book I have ever read!

[Halliday]

If you do not plan on making money, I'd go with the 10D and a good lens.

[the.digital.guy]

You'll LOVE the 5 FPS with the 20D !
Especially shooting sports.

[blue_max]

I would stay away from the cutting edge (20d) and look for a good second hand 10d for perhaps half the price. When everyone dives into it's successor, the 20d will be up for grabs at a cheap price. Buy good quality lenses that will retain their value (particularly if bought second hand).

The good thing is that you could probably sell the lot and not lose too much money. If you buy the 20d, you can expect to lose a substantial amount in the body alone.

This will give you a great set of kit to try and see if you get on with it.

The 20d is a better camera in many respects, but the differences are not that significant in the real world unless you need a particular feature.

This approach has worked for me, but it's very personal, so good luck and hope the arguments for and against will help you choose.

Graham

[cmM]

The 20d is a better camera in many respects, but the differences are not that significant in the real world unless you need a particular feature.
Actually, some of them are. The 20D starts up almost instantly while the 10D takes a little while (can turn out quite crucial in sports)
The DigicII processor, low noise (compared to the 10D), that can proove quite usefull in those dimly lit gyms.
And then of course, 5fps, and the rest of the things I'm forgetting right now.

rookie1, don't get me wrong, the 10D is MORE than a capable camera, those are just a couple things that the 20D does better than the 10D. I have a 20D, but I also have a digital rebel, and even the rebel is a superb camera IMO. But I think both the 10D and the 20D are better than the D70.

Good luck with your decision ;)

[Tom W]

If your wallet says "10D", then that's what you should get. It's an exceptional camera. Yes, the 20D is an improvement over the 10D, but the 10D is a well-built, fully-functional camera. I've been watching the prices on them as well - I had one for about a year, and may consider picking one up again for the right price. Its a handy size.

[Tom W]

Actually, having re-read your post, I'm thinking that you might find the improved AF system of the 20D better for the dimly-lit indoor sports action shots. You might consider that. Have you read Phil's review on www.dpreview.com for the 20D? I think it illustrates the various improvements. Some are worthwhile, while others aren't so important, but that depends on your needs.

[Hol6039]

My wife and I have the 10D and the 20D. Both are great cameras, and at this point the 10D is a good buy for the buck. As previously stated, the 10D does have a slow start up when it goes to sleep, so you will have to compensate when you are shooting sports and not let it enter the sleep mode at critical points when you want to shoot fast. For kids games, I don't think 3 fps vs. 5 fps will make that much difference.

I suggest the 10D and a good piece of glass such as the 70-200 f2.8L. The non-IS version can be had for a much better price than the IS version, so the wife will appreciate when you say "look how much money we are saving"! I have the 70-200 f4, and it is a wonderful lens. You may consider going that route since you can simply use a higher ISO setting to compensate for the loss of the f-stop. This would really save some bucks!

[MackRoe]

Wading right into this mini-debate....I went with a "very-clean" low mileage 10D without a scratch on it (this after much soul searching and web surfing) and bought 2 Canon lenses, the 70-200mm 4.0 "L" zoom, and the 100mm 2.8 macro, and I could not be happier. For me, buying the extremely capable 10D and then outfitting it with some top quality glass was a no brainer, I super dig that Canon L glass and the images it captures...it makes "me" look good, which I need very badly. By the way, Canon's 100mm macro is a sweet piece of glass, also, but I lust after the 180mm macroid...so I can sit 50feet from a dragonfly and read his lips. But for right now, I'm good to go !!!!!!!!!!!!

[tim]

What's your budget?

The "budget" choice is the 10D with the Sigma 70-200 F2.8. The "great" choice is a 20D with a 70-200 F2.8 IS. In between i'd get the nice lens with the 10D.

[Kennymc]

I use both cameras and IMHO the 20D is better for sports as it takes more continuous frames per second, it has a faster start up time, it has an extra 2 million pixels which come in handy if you need to crop heavily and it also has less noise than the 10D... Both cameras will produce excellent images upto A3 even with a standard quality lens... If you don't need larger prints than 10X8 the 10D will do just fine coupled witha a f/2.8 70-200 lens (you need the f/2.8 for indoors)...

[robertwgross]

Since the sensor on a 20D captures a bigger image (in terms of megapixels) as compared to a 10D, then the images should be slightly better for large printing. However, since most people never print anything larger than 8x10, this should not matter much. If you print large, then consider more megapixels.

---Bob Gross---

[pcasciola]

However, since most people never print anything larger than 8x10, this should not matter much.Unless you crop before you print the 8x10. That's where the higher megapixels comes in handy.

[robertwgross]

Unless you crop before you print the 8x10. That's where the higher megapixels comes in handy.

Exactly.

---Bob Gross---

[Cadwell]

Get the 10D and use the money to buy a good lens. It will more than compensate for the whiz-bang features of the 20D.

I shoot a 1D Mark II and a 10D side by side at sports events. I get a surprisingly large number of keepers with the 10D, even in that company.

[roanjohn]

IF you're on a budget.........the 10D would good glass should be many times better than your P&S.

OTOH.........what about the XT??!!!??? Similarly specs with the 10D, faster, 8 mpx..etc.....

...........just a suggestion.

Ro1

[Anders Östberg]

I have both and must say the difference is bigger than I expected, in favour of the 20D. Primarily it's the responsiveness and speed that makes the 20D much nicer to work with. It wakes up quicker, feels snappier when taking the shot, and the image review is faster. The autofocus also feels quicker and more precise.

The 10D shutter is quiet compared to the 20D, which can be important. I also like the size of the 10D, it fits my hands better. The 20D is OK but on the small side, the XT way too small for me.

Image wise, the 20D does have an edge, but it's not a huge difference. On a budget I would have a hard time choosing, but a 10D with great glass will be better in most respects than a 20D with average glass.

EDIT: Forgot one important difference; ISO noise. If you shoot a lot in low light the 20D is clearly better than the 10D, with very useable ISO 800 and 1600.

[blue_max]

Actually, some of them are. The 20D starts up almost instantly while the 10D takes a little while (can turn out quite crucial in sports)
The DigicII processor, low noise (compared to the 10D), that can proove quite usefull in those dimly lit gyms.
And then of course, 5fps, and the rest of the things I'm forgetting right now.

rookie1, don't get me wrong, the 10D is MORE than a capable camera, those are just a couple things that the 20D does better than the 10D. I have a 20D, but I also have a digital rebel, and even the rebel is a superb camera IMO. But I think both the 10D and the 20D are better than the D70.

Good luck with your decision ;)

I did qualify my statement to include "unless you need a particular feature", which if those few seconds mean that much to you, would render the 10d a poor choice. For me, it is not an issue as I can give the shutter a tap before I put it to my eye and when I am personally focussed, the camera is ready for me. I do try never to state a personal opinion as fact.

The 20d is an improvement and the difference may or may not be important to you. For aroud £700 saved for me, I personally thought I would try and live with the 10d and I may not be a great photographer, but it's not the camera that is letting me down!

I now have a second hand 10d, 70-200f4 and 85 1.8 and still haven't spent as much as a 20d would cost new. I am not a pro and cannot justify the cost of the latest kit, but am very satisfied with my second hand, second best.

Graham

[Bytes U]

I also vote 10D and use the saved $'s on great glass. Don't go cheap on the lens!

[RJSorensen]

Twenty-D . . .

[markubig]

10D cannot fit Canon's EF-S lineup of lenses...could be an issue if you ever want the focal ranges of the 10-22, 17-85, or 60mm macro.

[Perfect_10]

10D cannot fit Canon's EF-S lineup of lenses...could be an issue if you ever want the focal ranges of the 10-22, 17-85, or 60mm macro.

but then again you're gonna want better lenses anyway ..

[MarkH]

I have a 10D and my friend has a 10D, my cousin has a 20D. I like my 10D and it does a good job. However, it I were buying a D-SLR today then it would definately be the 20D.

If you can't afford a 20D then you would find that you can get good photos with a 10D and it will beat any compact P&S camera on the market for high iso/low noise.

If you can afford a 20D then that is the one to get. There have been many improvements since the 10D - some minor like the move to 8MPix, some major like the upgrade to the Digic 2 controller (around 3x the write speed to CF, faster startup, E-TTL2, new menu options), 5fps instead of 3fps with the ability to take over 20 shots continuously with best quality jpg, better AF, lower noise at high iso, longer life shutter, EF-S compatible.

[Todd Jacobsen]

I purchased the 20D for one reason only - 5fps.

I do not plan on getting rid of the 10D.

Either choice is a good choice.

[Perfect_10]

... There have been many improvements since the 10D - some minor like the move to 8MPix, some major like the upgrade to the Digic 2 controller (around 3x the write speed to CF, faster startup, E-TTL2, new menu options), 5fps instead of 3fps with the ability to take over 20 shots continuously with best quality jpg, better AF, lower noise at high iso, longer life shutter, EF-S compatible.

I would consider the move to 8mp a major not minor improvement.. and I don't consider the EF-S compatibility an improvement at all.

[johneo]

I've got a 10D. Even with all the upgrades that came with the 20D, I saw no reason (for me) to chuck the 10D and upgrade. I still think it's the right choice.

If I did not have the 10D, I likely would have gone for the 20D but only because it was the latest and greatest.

10D is really a great camera. Only you can decide if the upgrades are worth the extra cost. Personally, I'd get a 10D at a good price, spend the money saved on a GOOD "L" lens and wear that 10D into the ground with plans of upgrade to a future camera (30D when they come out with a 40D or a 40D???)

If you are like most people, though, you'll get the 10D and always question ... "Should I have gone for the 20D?"

[Perfect_10]

.... If you are like most people, though, you'll get the 10D and always question ... "Should I have gone for the 20D?"
And if you're smart you won't actually care .. :)

[awp]

I am new to the 20d, I have had it for 2 months. I am shooting baseball action shots. I am using my 20d along with 70-200mm 2.8L IS. I LOVE IT! Personally, I would (and did) make the bigger investment instead of trading up. Why learn one camera then try to adjust to a new one shortly thereafter? You should also consider the difference in the price of the larger purchase as compared to what you would lose when TRYING to sell the lesser camera. THE ONLY PROBLEM I HAVE WITH MY 20D IS THE BATTERY GRIP!

[blue_max]

My last thought on the subject (if you are interested!)

The 20d is better than the 10d. Buy the 20d if you have the money. Then wonder why you didn't buy the 1ds mkII (or whatever it is now).

Nobody has actually tried to say the 10d is better than the 20d. The arguement is whether buying a good quality second hand 10d is a good buy. The answer has to be yes.

The only decision to be made is how much difference in cost would sway you to go for the older model. The 20d is not the ultimate camera either, so don't lose any sleep on it.

Graham

[Perfect_10]

.... . The 20d is not the ultimate camera either, so don't lose any sleep on it.

Graham

because if you're chasing the "ultimate camera" then you'll be upgrading everytime a new one hits the streets.
Buy what you need .. not what you think you need

[roanjohn]

Hmmm..........wonder if the original poster went with a Nikon D70!!! YIKES!!!

Ro1

[RichardtheSane]

I would consider the move to 8mp a major not minor improvement..

I wouldn't, and I've made that move.

[Perfect_10]

I wouldn't, and I've made that move.

why not :confused:

[MarkH]

I would consider the move to 8mp a major not minor improvement.. and I don't consider the EF-S compatibility an improvement at all.

EF-S compatibility allows the use of current and future EF-S lenses, if you never buy one of those lenses then you have lost nothing, but at least you have the option. To the wide angle fans the EF-S 10-22 allows wider angle than any other readily available lens.

6 => 8 MPix gives a 33% increase in total pixels, which gives a 15% improvement in linear resolution. If 6MPix is not enough res for someones needs then 8MPix probably isn't either. Most people don't print larger than 8x10, 6MPix is more than enough for 8x10.

[Perfect_10]

... 6 => 8 MPix gives a 33% increase in total pixels, .. .

if you look at it from the 8MPix end you've gained 25% .. ;)

[dsze]

10D. Personally, the improvements to the 20D do not justify the extra cost. You can get a barely used 10D for $700 or less. People will strongly disagree with me here and have in the past. In fact, recently I told one guy that if money weren't an issue whatsoever, I'd still buy a 10D over a 20D or an XT . He didn't believe me ;) but, a couple week's ago I contracted another wedding and decided to use the profit to buy another camera body. Honestly, I had enough to get the 20D body, but I purchased a 2nd 10D body and spent the rest on another flash and more CF memory. Sure, there are some benefits of the 20 over the 10...but keep in mind that the 10 has been around and proven itself over time, and it feels better (to me) than the 20.

You need to decide whether or not compatibility with the EF/S lenses is important to you, its not to me.

You need to decide if you need the 5fps vs. 3fps ....I can't justify it for what I do

You need to decide if you'd rather (or need to) put the extra money into other components, like lenses, flashes, memory, bags, etc.

....and maybe most importantly, you need to decide whether you are one of those people who need the latest/greatest on the market OR you are confident that you can make great images with any camera.

-daniel

[Todd Jacobsen]

I will point out a "flaw" in the 20D that was not noticeable in the 10D - STANDBY...

20D can be "powered" down where the remote cable becomes useless and a re-power-on has been my only way of getting it out.

I never noticed this on the 10D.

I utilize my cameras in skydiving which require me to don a helmet with the camera attached. Usually, the cameras are set prior to donning the helmet (cause it ain't always comfortable).

With the 20D, I need to be cautious of the STANDBY period and take shots in the plane to note whether or not it's still active. I know you can change the standby time to greater lengths but initially, this was a pain in the "a$$". I've also noted it when utilizing PocketWizards.

[MarkH]

if you look at it from the 8MPix end you've gained 25% .. ;)

No, you've still gained 33%. Maybe you mean that the 10D has 25% less pixels - this means that the 10D has 11.8% less linnear resolution than the 20D.

i.e. The correct differences are:
The 20D has 33% more pixels than the 10D.
The 10D has 25% less pixels than the 20D.

If you take an image from the 20D and crop 6% of the total frame from the each of the 4 sides (losing 12% of the width and 12% of the height) than you are left with 6MPix. This does not seem like a huge gain in cropping ability to me, though it is still a gain.

[RichardtheSane]

No, you've still gained 33%. Maybe you mean that the 10D has 25% less pixels - this means that the 10D has 11.8% less linnear resolution than the 20D.

i.e. The correct differences are:
The 20D has 33% more pixels than the 10D.
The 10D has 25% less pixels than the 20D.

If you take an image from the 20D and crop 6% of the total frame from the each of the 4 sides (losing 12% of the width and 12% of the height) than you are left with 6MPix. This does not seem like a huge gain in cropping ability to me, though it is still a gain.

Mark, you have put what I was thinking into words far better than I could have done :)

[rg-tom]

the high iso performance of the 20D is invaluable for dim gyms, that alone is enough reason to choose the 20D for sports ;)

[BigRed450]

First of all let me say that I shoot with both a 10D and 1DmkII side by side. I will not upgrade the 10D to a 20D because to me there is just not that great a difference, if anything the 10D may get upgraded to another 1DmkII (now thats an upgrade).
At your stage of the camera game there is just not enough difference between 6 and 8MP to worry about either, not even at 20x30" prints unless maybe you delve into the world of RAW. Lets put it this way, at 8x10 no one will be able to tell the difference, so don't get hung up in the MegaPixel trap. As far as High ISO noise, there again just not that much difference. I have shot at ISO 1600 and 3200 with the 10D with great results. Real world results will atest to that...

IMHO you are just starting out so buy the 10D and save the money for good "L" glass. If in the future you are still as interested you can upgrade to the current model then. Right now you need to focus more on photography and what the camera you choose can do rather then all the bells and whistles (they'll just confuse the issue). If you learn to use your equipment effectively you will be able to start making money with it, hence, you'll be able to afford better equipment. But if its a passing fancy and you want to sell later, good quality lenses retain their value and you won't loss on a used 10D body.