30D vs my 300D

[safehaven]

Is the 30D leaps and bounds better than my 300D?

I have read a lot about the 30D and what I have read says that even at 1600 ISO, the pictures are still very managable. The specs say it is "expandable" to 3200 ISO. What does "expandable" mean and how managable are the photos using 3200 ISO?

I mainly am concerned about this because I am trying to shoot my kids' sporting events and I am really battling light issues with my 300D. I don't think a flash is an option for a number of reasons, most of all being that I don't have the patients for a prolonged trial and error process. I have already upgraded to a fast lense, so now I need to know whether it will be worth it to upgrade the camera itself. So, I though who better to ask than the tons of people on POTN that I see that already have, or are just getting there 30D's.

Besides the obvious, megapixels, frame rate, shutter life, bigger LCD, ect., are there any not so obvious features (the ones that are not boasted on the main advertising pages) that make the choice of the 30D over my 300D a no brainer? I am really trying to make educated and informative decisions instead of impusle buying when it comes to photography gear. So, any help you all can give me will be very much appreciated.

[infinite012]

Feels better, looks better, has a receptacle for studio flashes, much better AF system. Expandable is just Canon's way of saying that the camera has 3200 ISO as a selectable ISO, but only after you go through the C.Fn menu. I hear that the 3200 ISO on the 30D/20D is very good, similar to the Rebel XT/350D's 1600 ISO (which is not very noisy).

[safehaven]

I just read a bunch of the posts in the 20D reviews page. Everyone seems to rave about the lack of noise at high ISO. The 30D should be exactly the same as the 20D in regards to the amount of noise, shouldn't it?

[Evan Idler]

Having recently moved to a 30D from a 300D, all I can say is they are both nice cameras, but there is no comparison between them. The Auto Focus is quicker, sharper, and easier to control. The pictures are sharper, better color, and the camera is 10 times easier to control. I really like the picture quality at higher ISO's on the 30D than on the 300D. I never liked the pictures on the 300D above 400 ISO.

--Evan

[chucksberg]

ISO performance and focus speed and accuracy. You will get many more keepers with the 30D. My 300 got wet and I had to replace it. I'm glad I replaced it with the 30D.

[Curtis N]

Sport shooting is the where the differences between the 300D and the 30D are most pronounced. Besides the advantages previously mentioned, the 30D gives you the ability to select AI Servo focusing and the ability to control it with the * button. If you can afford the upgrade and are willing to learn the camera's capabilities, it will make your sport shooting experiences much more rewarding.

[canonloader]

I just got my 30D and was out for a couple hours today, shooting in cloudy weather. The top two and bottom two images are at ISO 800, #3 and 4 are at 1600, and #5 and 6 are at ISO 1000. No Photoshop other than resizing. I think they came out pretty good.

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/...d.php?t=229972

[TMR Design]

Originally Posted by chucksberg

ISO performance and focus speed and accuracy. You will get many more keepers with the 30D. My 300 got wet and I had to replace it. I'm glad I replaced it with the 30D.

I can vouch for that. I came from an A620 point and shoot and goodknowledge of cameras and photography but I am noticing right away that the keeper rate is very high and the pictures are beautiful. I am still learning the camera but it is so easy to use and control. The entry level DSLR's are excellent but it really is night and day when you compare them to a 20D or 30D.

[safehaven]

Hopefully these files are imbedded and formatted correctly... This is major problem and what I am aiming to fix.

Both pictures were taken at the same stadium with my 300D, Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 DG Macro, on a monopod.

First shot is in AV mode, f/2.8, 1/500, ISO 3200, 200mm

http://home.comcast.net/~safe.haven/...24_cropped.jpg

Second shot is in M mode, f/2.8, 1/250/ ISO 1600, 200mm, slightly underexposed

http://home.comcast.net/~safe.haven/CRW_1932-02.jpg

[Mark_Cohran]

In a word - yes!

Mark

[TMR Design]

Neither link worked for me.

[safehaven]

Both links are fixed.

I should also mention that both are 100% zoom.

[mfunnell]

I have both cameras and like them both. The 30D is a step up in image quality but IMO not a huge step. AI servo AF outside the "sport" scene mode was very important to me, as were the other AF advantages of the 30D. They're why I bought it. However, I've found the controls easier to use, 1/3-stop ISO increments to be great, the larger screen to be suprisingly useful etc. I'm very glad I went to the 30D but also glad to have kept the 300D, which I still use.

...Mike

[gsmx2]

I got the DigReb a few weeks after it came out and used it for three years (with the Russian hacks) and recently upgraded to the 30D. You have received a lot of information here so I won't ramble. I love the upgrade and thought it was worth it.

[safehaven]

Thanks for the great info.

What I need to know now is if the 30D will significantly help with my severe noise problem, as exampled in post #9. Both are unprocessed and are very very noisy. 3200 ISO is unmanageable with noise reduction software. 1600 is usable, but not great. Is the amount of noise reduction between the two cameras worth the $1100 dollars it cost to upgrade?

Looking at canonloaders sample photo's, I would say without a doubt, but I'd like to here difinitively from others.

Is the amout of noise identical when comparing the 20D and the 30D? Should be, shouldn't it?