Canon 20D

chris_arnet · Sep 22, 2007

Well, right now i shoot a Canon 300D Rebel. I have the money to upgrade to a 20D, im buying used, but i have heard some mixed reviews on it. on www.dpreview.com alot of people are satisfied with it, but alot of people also have reported problems. Im not som much worried about the "Error 99" thing, as i am about image quality. Alot of people have reported that the colors are not as vivid as they should be, and they get unuassually high noise at ISO 100-400, while 1600 is lower than most cameras. I shoot at ISO 100 or 200 most of the time, so this concerns me. I have seen some reveiws talking about vertical lines in their photograph about 1 pixel thick. Could any of you help me with this? Is it just user error? And if i could get reviews from those of you with 20Ds, that would be awesome too. I've always shot Canon SLRs (film and digital alike), and never had problems like that with any of them.

Any help appreciated, Thanks.:hail:

elsaspet · Sep 22, 2007

Pfft to the reviews you've read. I shot the 20D for the first two years as a pro wedding photog. I know others who still do.
It's a step up from what you have (which isn't a bad camera either). Yeah, you will have people who say that the Mark D3 is the only way to go, but one step at a time is a smart way not to get all tripped up.

chris_arnet · Sep 22, 2007

yeah, no way i would be able to pay 8000 for a camera body right now. although, i do dream of it :lol:

you know, the Mark 3 surpasses most film quality, in fact there is only one other film more fine than its sensor. made by tokina i think...

elsaspet · Sep 22, 2007

chris_arnet said:
yeah, no way i would be able to pay 8000 for a camera body right now. although, i do dream of it

you know, the Mark 3 surpasses most film quality, in fact there is only one other film more fine than its sensor. made by tokina i think...

Yeah, I know. Killer Camera! (You can actually find one for the bargain price of 5600).

I was reading about one that was reading about a Phase One Camera Back (Hassleblad I think) that's 39 metapixels.
Next time I have an extra $30,000 something to spend on a camera, I'll be the first in line. Hahahaha.

chris_arnet · Sep 22, 2007

^^^ wow, thats paying $22,000 dolars extra for 18 more megapixels. how much you wanna bet the people who own those no longer have wives. lol.

elsaspet · Sep 22, 2007

Or homes, or cars.............
Crap, I guess someone is buying them, but I can't even image. After a while, I wonder how much those extra mp even matter. Maybe if you are printing mega billboards or something.........
LOL

chris_arnet · Sep 22, 2007

lol, if i can ever afford it... 22.1 would be enough for me.

Garbz · Sep 23, 2007

Ummm megapixels have little to do with it really, but that's a different can of worms.

The vertical striation issue is a problem, but it's an isolated manufacturing fault. The early D200s had it too.

As for the noise the problem is reviewers. Most reviewers care more about looking at a 100% crop of a poorly lit object with no dynamic range, and then graphing results. Yes noisy as heck. Fortunately I don't take photos of poorly underexposed green purple and grey squares so noise figures rarely worry me.

Put it in perspective. Is the 300D's Noise at ISO100 worrying you? Well the 20D has lower noise than that.