10D vs 20D for 1st DLSR

I'm looking for a used DSLR body to get into digital. I have very limited funds, and and have found lots of Canon 10D and 20D bodies that are within my budget. I can't figure out if there is a big enough difference between he two to justify a 50% (or more) price difference for the 20D. I have EF lenses, so I definitely want to stay Canon.

The major differences from what I can tell are

8.2mp v 6.3mp
.2 sec v 2+ sec startup time
2.5" v 1.8" lcd
DIGIC II v DIGIC processor (this seems like the most significant?)
1/8000 v 1/4000 shutter

I'm using 35mm currently, and it seems with either I'll be light years ahead of where I am. I'm really stumped on where to go with this. Thanks!

I've had my 20d almost 7 years now, and recently tried a 10d for comparison
I couldn't believe how slow the 10d was
IMO, the 20d is in a whole different ballpark, not that the 10d is bad, just that Canon really did push the boat out for the 20d

What is your budget? Really, with the current prices for used EOS bodies, unless you are REALLY strapped, I would recommend saving just a tiny bit longer and looking for a deal on a 40D (easily available for around $400). GREAT cameras and still producing images that rival some of the newest releases. They also have some of the more desireable features like live view, auto sensor cleaning, three user programmable custom settings and others. I strongly suggest that you give this some consideration. You won't be sorry with a 40D. If you really just can't make that work for your budget, I would recommend the 20D over the 10D though. At those pixel counts, I think you would benefit from every extra pixel that you can get plus the larger display is MUCH easier to see.

Edit: I just looked at some classifieds and found several 40Ds for under $400, one was $355 shipped, one in absolute mint 100% condition listed at $415. The 40D might be currently the very best bang for the buck out there.

jabtas wrote in post #14348526
I've had my 20d almost 7 years now, and recently tried a 10d for comparison
I couldn't believe how slow the 10d was
IMO, the 20d is in a whole different ballpark, not that the 10d is bad, just that Canon really did push the boat out for the 20d

Totally agree...had both and 20D was more than just an incremental upgrade.

Usually each model was better than the last, so go for the most recent you can afford.

In the Canon DSLR range there is not a bad camera I think.

So it seems that even though the 10D is a fine camera, the 20D will be able to take me further into the future. FYI, I'll be jumping up from a AE-1 and an EOS 620. Talk about ancient!

The budget was set in a pow-wow with the wife. It's set in stone, and she has the chisel on this one.

Nice and robust in my experience too
My 20D gets almost daily, if not weekly, use and has around 35k clicks on it, still looks brand new

20D all the way. No real sense in buying a 10D at this point.

10D would drive anyone nuts these days with its slow operation. I don't mean just a little slow - A LOT slow. Turn it on and wait for it to "boot up" and see for yourself....

You only realise how dated an older camera is after handling a more uptodate model.

I went from a 620 to a 10D and the 10D left me not wanting for anything.

But the 10D will seem less next to a latter Digi SLR.

Unless you make that comparison you will feel great with whatever you decide to get.

10d was a backup to my 50d for one shoot... I sold the 10d shortly after that, it was annoyingly slow to write to the card. No experience with the 20 though i would consoder that as an inexpensive keep in the car cam for me in the future.

There's another HUGE difference between the 10D and the 20D. The 10D cannot accept any of the EF-S lenses made by Canon. For so-called "crop" lenses, you'd be limited to third-party lenses with a 10D.

I've just retired (more or less) my 20D because of power issues. Especially with the grip on the 20D, I've only been able to get a few shots with a freshly charged battery. I have five or six batteries for the 20D and it happens with all of them. Without the grip, I get more performance out of a battery, but I'm still not happy with it except as a last-ditch backup. My new camera is a 7D with a grip.

Yupe, from standby sleep mode to awake, 10D takes a long time. And shooting burst mode, after perhaps 3 RAW or so, the buffer fills up quickly and will take a min or two to clear. Many photo opportunities could be wasted as a result.
20D is by far the biggest upgrade from the predecessor in the xxD line.

Doesn't mount EF-S lenses, slow as molasses with RAW, miniscule LCD, 3 second boot up time (10D)

The 20D is a big upgrade, the 30D bigger still. If you've got other options and the 10D is just something to play with, it's fine. I'm told some people love the colors from it.

The ability to mount EF-S lenses it a huge upgrade in the 20D. The LCD on the 30D is practically life sized compared to the 10D and 20D. The 20 thru 40D share the same battery grip, easier to find aftermarket.

I have a 10D, had ot for 9 years now, still use it all the time. Slow start up? Yes but seriously, if you are out shooting why would your camera be off? I was riding along one day, saw some deer on the side of the road, turned the 10D on and stopped, camera was ready to go as soon as I stopped!

Never used a 20D as having the 10D it didn't make much sense spending the money and went for a 5D next. Still use the 10D along side the 7D (7D is fast at everything) and I have no problem using them side by side (don't do it often but have no problems when i do.

Save some money and put it toward better lenses. It'll be money well spent!

edit: As mentioned ... 10D does not take EF-S lenses, but then again, neither do some of the higher end Canon cameras. Plenty to choose from in the EF lens line!