Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Canon EOS dSLR

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Jan 5, 2006, 6:41 PM   #21
Senior Member
minutephotos.com's Avatar
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 344

I'm sold. Count me in for 2 - 20D's please. :-)

I shoot with a Digital Rebel and can get what ever I need done with this camera. The only complaint I have is the buffer not being deep enough and the slow speed of writing images to the card. The 20D, is a MUCH faster camera all around.

The only way I can get the Digital Rebel to keep up while shooting runway fashion shows is if I reduce the image size to medium. When the camera is set to large it just takes too long to writhe the images to CF and free up the buffer.

I am upgrading to the 20D solely for this reason alone. However, I have also invested in all F2.8 lenses and the Canon 580EX so I am curious to see how the faster focusing and the ETTL Version 2 will work.

Personally, I think with the right lens I could get the same wildlife shot with any camera. The key would probably be focusing speed and tracking.
minutephotos.com is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 5, 2006, 7:23 PM   #22
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 1,105


i would suggest u to wait for another 2-3 months before u want to go for ur upgrade. If its ur first camera i wouldnt stop u from buying the 20D. But since u are trying to upgrade, i would ask u to wait for some more time.

Lot of things are coming in the next two three months based on whatever i have read in these forums as well as rumors.

so waittt

nymphetamine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 5, 2006, 8:11 PM   #23
Senior Member
minutephotos.com's Avatar
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 344

Thank you for the suggestion.

I had been holding off on 20D until my sales went up and 20D price went down. It is definately not urgent but desirable. I didn't think anything new in same price range was comming out soon.

The 5D was a welcomed surprise, but still too costly. The 20D is definately a bettter camera than 300D but not essential for portrait work. I will upgrade on some of my glass and wait to see what Canon comes out with next. I have until summer to make a decision....


shot live at fashion show in dark club.
minutephotos.com is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 6, 2006, 11:11 AM   #24
Junior Member
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 2

Eric S, Thanks for the info and example. That is what I was thinking but thought I would stir the "pot" to see what reply I would get. The best thing to do if you have a 5D and taking pictures of wildlife is to get as close as you can so you don't have to crop to the same image size as the 20D.Did I make sense? Then if you don't have to crop then the 5D would be better, right?
Tucker97 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 6, 2006, 12:54 PM   #25
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 5,803

Yes, I agree if you could produce exactly the same image with both cameras (ie move closer, use a more powerful lens, magic, whatever) then the 5D should produce a better image.

Not necessarily because it will resolve more detail (I'm still unconvinced about this, although I've read reportes that size of the sensor can cause an image to have more detail... eventhough there is fewer photosites per millimeter.)

But the reality is that you can't get that close. Really, I often shoot at 30-40 feet away. If I could get 40% closer (to make up for the sensor size difference the results would be:
-I'd have to walk on water.
-I'd have to fly.
-I'd have to leave the tail or go on private property.
-I'd have to leave the bird blind that is hiding me.
-I'd scare the animal

So while it can be the answer in theory, in practice I'm sure it is absolutely NOT the answer.

All that being said, the 5D is a very good camera. It just isn't aimed at that market. This is why you don't see wildlife photographers using the 1Ds MkII, although its a great (even better) camera than the 1D MkII N. And visa-versa.

eric s is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 6, 2006, 9:27 PM   #26
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 577

eric s wrote:
To get the same framing of the image between the 5D and the 20D, I need to take the center 60% of the 5D's image. If I did that, I would only get an image that was 2620.8 x 1747.2. That size an image will certainly *NOT* have the same amount of detail visible in it compared to the same image taken with 3504 x 2336 pixels.
Right, and that still holds true if you crop the size of the image produced by the 1Ds Mark II by 60%. 4992 x 3328 reduced by 60% is about 2995 x 1997.

barthold is offline   Reply With Quote

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 6:56 PM.