ISO 800 on a MKII v 20d

I am looking to upgrade from my 20d to a MkII, not an "n". I am curious as to the amount of noise on the mkII at ISO 800 vs the same on the 20d. I can't yet afford to trade my 400L f5.6 for a 300 f2.8 and i find that i need to bump up to ISO 800 a lot of the time when i out shooting wildlife. i will be purchasing some noise reduction software soon as well. I am sure that i will get amazing IQ with the upgrade, and that the noise will be easily handled in noise ninja or neat image, but i just alway like to hear what other people have experienced.

thanks in advance,
Dustin

I had the 20D. Noise on the MKII looks pretty similar, maybe a tiny bit better, but not by any significant or noticeable amount. Both are pretty good, and I wouldn't hesitate to use ISO800 on either.

perryge wrote in post #7032495
I had the 20D. Noise on the MKII looks pretty similar, maybe a tiny bit better, but not by any significant or noticeable amount. Both are pretty good, and I wouldn't hesitate to use ISO800 on either.

+1, it's a wash

My old 1D2 was slightly less forgiving for underexposing and was a slight touch noisier at 1600 and 3200 (in the shadows) than my old 30D. However, I don't know of any recent Canon DSLR that, if properly exposed, looks much different from any other at ISO800. Canon's have notoriously had a "sweet spot" at ISO800 going at least as far back as the release of the XT/20D.

I have used both and find the Mkii to be a bit better.

So not a huge improvement, by main reason for the upgrade is the AF system. I just was just curious what to expect from a mkII until i can justify a mkIII. thank you all for you comments.