Picture Quality 10D vs 20D

Anyone does the comparison between 10D and 20D?
At high ISO, 20D noise is lesser than 10D, is this true?
Is 20D worth the upgrade from 300D?

Are you happy with the pictures you get from the 300D? If you are happy, there's no need to upgrade -- put that money into better lenses, or different lenses to get better pictures or different pictures than you can get now.

If you find the quality of the pictures from your 300D leaves you wishing for better, then you should upgrade.

If you are going to upgrade, I would bypass the 10D and go to the 20D or even one of the more expensive models. But there is always that cost/benefit point where we each need to decide where the point is that we wouldn't need the extra features/quality that comes with the huge jump in price from the 20D up to the next level.

I do not consider Image quality to be a good reason to upgrade to the 20D from either 10D or 300D (or D60 for that matter)

The Rebel/300D image quality is quite comparable.As you mention.. the biggest difference is the ISO capabilites.. but even then.. the 10D/300D were both very good at low noise High ISO...


No,.. IMHO.. the reasons to upgrade to a 20D have a lot more to do with spped and functionality.

Hope this helps.

Ditto.

You should ask yourself if the 300D is fast enough for you.

Recently upgraded

Best move I ever made (upgrading from 300D to 20D). I found that I was constantly hitting the max shot capacity of my buffer with the 300D. The 20D is fast, really fast. What I love the most is that the 20D will continue to record to the flash card even while depressing the shutter button. The 300D would not record at the same time thereby stopping you from shooting when you reached the end of the buffer.

I shoot everything from portraits to weddings, wildlife to landscape, and I had to have a faster camera. Picture quality for both the 300D and the 20D are about the same up to the size of 20 in x 24 in print. At that size and up I have noticed a great deal of improvement in the 20D.

I went from 300D to 20D but my reasons were not of dissatisfaction. I absolutely LOVED my rebel to no end, it met all my needs and had superb image quality. The only thing I missed was no pure AI servo (hacked 300D has AI servo but you need to get used to how it works) and the frame buffer which I found myself hitting a couple times but got around it.

The reason I upgraded to the 20D was because it was an opportunity to upgrade to the fastest camera in the world (now second fastest) and to help a fabulous photographer friend own her first DSLR who couldnt buy one right out at the moment. So I did it and I dont regret it.

The 20D and the 300D (as well as the 10D) use the DiGIC series processors for image processing, and they are top notch. The 20D, however, uses the brand new only found in the 1Ds, DiGIC II processor. Generally the quality at ISO 100 and 200 are identical with the DII having (supposedly) better color representation (though they look identical to me). The banger comes from the speed of the processor and its ability to process ISO 400-3200 images with much lower noise than the previous DiGIC processor (and for that, pretty much any other processor from any other DSLR).

The 20D improves over the 300D and 10D in its featureset, do NOT upgrade to a 10D or 20D because you want better image quality. For that comes up to the photographer and his/her lenses.

functions/controls

I too just recently went from the DRebel to the 20D (it just came in today!). Like CDS and others, I would say that image quality is quite good on the DRebel and it's not the principal barrier to usefulness of that camera. For me, I found it frustrating in a couple of other respects: Buffer is small & slow; no AI Servo (even with the hack), slow to re-select focus points when the camera selects the wrong subject (I'm trying to break the habit of focus-lock-recompose), inability to select metering mode, and occasionally slow AF response. All of those barriers (and a few others less important to me) are overcome in the 20D, so I went for it. I can't say yet whether the image quality is any different, but I don't expect it to be, based on what I've seen in the reviews. Good luck in your decision!

Topm

Basically no.

that said i think the 20d gives you the speed/funcitons and larger files to play with.

It is not that much better that the 300d in the noise/pic quality arena alone to warrant change (IMO).

Regards.

Picture Quality 10D vs 20D

Norman Koren has a quantitave comparison on his 10D site:

http://www.normankoren​.com/EOS-10D.html

Define image quality.

It might mean sharpness, but that is more a function of the lens.

It might mean lack of color noise.

It might mean the level of detail. That is where more megapixels might pay off. Or not.

---Bob Gross---

I find my photo's on my 20D are much shaper than the 10D. I always questioned the 10D's focusing, but the 20D is sharp as a tack and I am shooting the same stuff, the same way. VERY glad I picked up the 20D, I was getting discouraged with the soft images on the 10.

I find my photo's on my 20D are much shaper than the 10D. I always questioned the 10D's focusing, but the 20D is sharp as a tack and I am shooting the same stuff, the same way. VERY glad I picked up the 20D, I was getting discouraged with the soft images on the 10.

I find my photo's on my 20D are much shaper than the 10D. I always questioned the 10D's focusing, but the 20D is sharp as a tack and I am shooting the same stuff, the same way. VERY glad I picked up the 20D, I was getting discouraged with the soft images on the 10.