Stupid question, but not so stupid. (300D vs. 20D)

[trevor51590]

I am torn between keeping my 300D or upgrading to the 20D. I am deiciding whether or not to get better glass instead. Im shooting with a 28-105. I was wondering if anyone could give some comparison shots between the 20D and 300D? If you have a cheaper lens to use to aid, that would be wonderful. I was looking to start shooting aircraft as I am a pilot and the 105 doesnt seem to have enough reach, but AI servo would be a tremendous help. I like the feel of the 20D and what it offers.

[cgratti]

Upgrade! The 300D is like a toy compared to the 20D. Trust me....

[Sam]

I have a 28-105 somewhere. What do you want pictures of? I can take some.

I have a 300d and a 20d as well.

[trevor51590]

Thanks matt.

solinger: Awesome, thanks for the offer, anything that can show a comparison. Im open to options. The more the better. What im really trying to do is have someone justify the upgrade. Then maybe if you can throw some nice glass on the 300D and compare that to the 20D with the 28-105?

Sorry if thats asking a lot

[Sam]

Originally Posted by trevor51590

Thanks matt.

solinger: Awesome, thanks for the offer, anything that can show a comparison. Im open to options. The more the better. What im really trying to do is have someone justify the upgrade. Then maybe if you can throw some nice glass on the 300D and compare that to the 20D with the 28-105?

Sorry if thats asking a lot

No problem at all. Do you just want IQ tests? Or background blur? Honestly, in my opinion it's all the glass. I really don't see much of an improvement from the 300d to the 20 in regards to IQ. I'll take a few and see if it's what you need.

[Ronald S. Jr.]

You get build, shutter durability, fps, tons better ISO performance, 2 more mp, quick control dial, better function accessibility, bigger body (better ergonomics), more custom functions, etc. It's a lot better. Glass will help, but only to an extent.

[grego]

The 20D is also a newer generation sensor. You will get improved AF, even with that lens, but you also need to work on glass, if you are looking for a lens to capture action stuff, like sports for instance.

[Sam]

Here are two shot with the 28-105. I thought they were both at 70mm but it looks like I took the 20d shot at 55mm.

Both shot in AV @f/5.6

20d


300d


Both shot RAW then converted with camera defaults. No PP except for the conversion and resize. I always sharpen when I resize though.

Not my greatest work, but my daughter really wasn't in the mood to sit outside and pose

Hope it helps. If I can do something more specific for you let me know.

Fill flash used on both.

[trevor51590]

Thanks so much! The 20D shot deff. looks a lot "cleaner" while the 300d seems much softer. What do you think?

[Sam]

There might be a little camera shake in the 300d shot. I think they are pretty similar in sharpness. Sounds to me like you really need to buy a 20d

Just do it. You won't regret it!

[trevor51590]

Yup! Now the only thing standing in my way is my 300D and a 20D at just the right price....

[cataclysmcow]

Beautiful daughter solinger. She seems very happy outdoors and by the looks of it that's where she spends most of her time.

Is it just me or does the second shot look like it has a lot more saturation? I'm sure a lot of that has to do with the lighting and possibly the metering with the longer focal length, but to my eyes there's a notable difference that wouldn't be explained by just switching bodies.

[edit: dismissing the variables here (and the bokeh on shot 2) I think the 20D shot is more true. The 300D shot looks over processed. Both seem equally sharp to me at first glance. While the 300D shot has the first look appeal, I quickly lean to the 20D shot - dismissing focal length]

[braduardo]

I have a 300D, and I get some really high IQ shots with it. There are a lot of extra features (especially noise reduction) in the 20D, and they might be perfect for your use... Or they may be useless. It really depends what you need. Good glass will make a huge difference.

My gallery is still under construction right now, but all the images on there are taken with the 300D. Take a look if you like.

http://www.clikpic.com/BradNybergphotos/

They aren't all the best, but they will give you a decent idea.

[Sam]

Originally Posted by cataclysmcow

Is it just me or does the second shot look like it has a lot more saturation?

It does look that way. She is leaning forward so it put her in a shadow. Leaning back allowed more light to hit her and the flash added to that. This was not scientific at all so I wouldn't base any purchases on it

For the record, they were processed exactly the same.

[SkipD]

My son has the 300D and I have a 20D. He takes fine quality photos with the 300D, but I feel that the 20D is made a lot better, and it surely has a better control set and better features than the 300D. The 300D has firmware that essentially was borrowed from the 10D, but with a number of valuable features such as Exposure Compensation trimmed out.