10D vs 300D Differences?

[Bsmooth]

I am thinking of getting a DSLR for my wife and was wondering the best way to go.She mainly likes to shoot in auto mode and doesn't really like playing with all the various settings.She likes to do Landscape,flowers and general shots of family and friends. Which of the above cameras would be best and what would i expect to pay for either one in excellent condition? Thanks

[tim]

For that usage i'd probably get a good point and shoot, not a digital SLR. A DSLR needs a lot of knowledge of cameras and some of post processing to get great images, and P&S will give good images with a lot less effort. Also, once you add in the cost of lenses and accessories DLSRs are a *lot* more expensive. If you dedicate a lot of time and energy into them they'll give you better quality pictures.

If you're set on the DSLR route i'd get the 300D and shoot on JPG mode. The 10D has more features and is a bit easier to control, none of which are important if you shoot on auto modes.

[Bsmooth]

I've also thought of this too as far as the point and shoot.However,we had just go out recently and I was going to use my 100mm 2.8 macro for the first time and she asked If she could use it for a few shots.An hour later I got my camera back and she said I want one of those. We have both used SLR film cameras in the past and have both used olympus digital point and shoots for the past year or so and I just recently got my 20D and can't use it enough.

I'm hoping to graduate her also to a DSLR and thats what I was hoping to get for her.The nice part also would be I could go out shooting say macro shots while she could take a telephoto lens and shoot wildlife or vice-versa.
Will there be a great difference in image quality between my 20d and the other cameras I mentioned?

[lordjim]

As someone mentioned in this forum before, the 300D is the Model T of the digital camera world. It is a great camera and can now be found new at incredibly low price.

It is lighter than the 10D, accept EF-S lenses (as the 20D but not the 10D) and is built solid (although not as solid as the 10D). The other differences are software differences that can be arranged with some hack programs.

I found that one of the problem with digital point and shoot was the sutter delay. Also it is great to have a SLR to see what you shoot in the viewfinder. Hope that helps.

You may also want to consider the 350D.

[tim]

The difference in photo quality between the 10D/300D and the 20D will be negligable in most cases. IMHO where the 20D is better is control for shots with high dynamic range (use partial meter), low light (better high iso), and enlargements (marginally).

[bauerman]

With picture quality really being a total wash among these models - and your wife not really wanting "total" control over the equipment - I think that the 300D would be perfect. They are really affordable right now as well.

[twalker294]

The 300D definitely. When you can get one with the kit lens for less than $750, why would anyone buy a Pro1, 8080, F828, etc?

[Bsmooth]

Ok sounds like the 300d is the way to go.I got a fairly fast memory card for my 20D(Lexar1GB 80x),however does the 300D nd such a fast card and what would you recommend?

[Jon]

The 300D doesn't write to cards terribly fast (http://www.robgalbraith.com/bins/multi_page.asp?cid=6007-6425), but it'll write to a fast card faster than it will to a slow card (almost twice as fast for the fastest as the slowest). Granted, even a fast card in the DR isn't as good as a slow card in the 20D, but the difference can be significant.

For brands, SanDisk is generally good; probably their Ultra IIs, the boost an Extreme will give you over an Ultra II isn't that great. The other advantage of getting a fast card is that when you upgrade the camera, you won't be hampering the new system with an old, slow card.