andrei_spirache Posted June 8, 2005 Share Posted June 8, 2005 After I compared images from the 2 (with the same lens, the sameexposure and the same parameters) I came to this conclusion - the 300dhas better, more saturated colours. Am I mistaking? (I heard that thisis the case for 10D and 20D also - the 10D has also better colors) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chiswick_john Posted June 8, 2005 Share Posted June 8, 2005 Parameter settings are not the same between cameras - shoot RAW and compare with the same settings in the RAW convertor and then decide. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ron c sunshine coast,qld,a Posted June 8, 2005 Share Posted June 8, 2005 It is quite likely they are slightly different ,mostly due to the digic II. <P>Both the 1D MkII and 20D both have cooler/slightly less saturated colour compared to the cameras they replace .I haven't taken notice of the 350D files yet Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
john_bacon_shone Posted June 8, 2005 Share Posted June 8, 2005 I shoot raw, and have not yet found the 350D optically inferior in any situation. The optical improvement is not that large, but the speed makes an enormous difference to me - no more waiting for the camera to wake up, hallelujah! John Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now