1D or 20D?

[jordi]

Hey folks. Here's my problem, I hope you guys can shed some light. I apologize in

advance, this is a tad long.

 

I have a 300D. I've been slowly learning more and more how to use it, and I'm starting to

bump into its limitations. Now I want a better camera.

 

The 6 megapixels are enough for me. It would not hurt to have 2 more, but I can live with

6 just fine. What I want, is a better photographic tool. Something that handles better in the

field, faster frames per second, heavier to balance with heavy lenses, MLU, more focus

points, 1/16000, etc. All that fun stuff.

 

So it turns out I can't decide between a used 1D, or a new 20D. both are similar in price,

the 1D seems a much better tool than the 20D, but it is only 4 megapixels.

 

I've read the reviews. But they're old. People's standards were different.

 

So, to cut to the chase: How are the noise levels, compared to the 300D/10D? And 20D?

Say, at ISO 400, 800 and 1600? Realistically, how big can I print with 4 megapixels,

without any upsampling? One last thing: Is the 4 megapixels enough to make justice to the

L series of lenses? Or I need better CMOS resolution for that?

 

If you're still reading, thanks a bunch. Now please reply! ;)

[markus_myllym_ki]

Hi,

 

I faced the same problem some 3 months ago. I had to decide between a mint 1D and a new 20D. Since I didn't know what to do, I got both for a weekend of intensive testing.

 

The 1D's build quality is clearly awesome! But darn was that thing heavy :) Focus and general speed of the 1D left nothing to wish for, whereas ISO performance (terrible above 800) and white balance left much to hope for.

 

For me the drop in Mpix and the poor ISO performance of the 1D sealed the deal for the 20D. The 20D is a very good camera (teamed up with a battery grip) and I haven't thought about the 1D since.

 

... However the 1D II... sweet :)

 

As always, you must decide what YOU need! If you want high frame rates, 1/16000 and a heavy body, then, you are really somewhat out of options!

 

Remember to check the 1D for dead/hot pixels! Mine had about 40 and that was rather discouraging.

 

Get what ever makes you happy and meets your needs!

 

Cheers,

Markus, Finland

 

PS. The battery performance of the 1D is poor, at best!

[yakim_peled1]

>> the 1D seems a much better tool than the 20D, but it is only 4 megapixels.

 

That's basically the whole story. The 1D is much better unless heavy cropping and/or very large prints are involved. BTW, I am trying to find a 1D myself.

 

Happy shooting,

Yakim.

[audun_sjoeseth1]

I argee with Marcus. First I had a 1D, great camera, but only 4MP. I'm used to Hasselblad, so I wanted better image quality. I tried a 20D before I changed my 1D in a 20D. So far I'm satisfied, but I'd like to have a 1DsMkII or a camera as good as that in some years. ;-)

 

I'll vote for a 20D, also a great camera for the money it costs.

[Rob_L1664876404]

This is the first time I have EVER disagreed with something Yakim has said - he's always right on the mark and I hold him in high regard. However, the poor signal-to-noise at higher ISO's and the color/white balance issues would clearly be detractors for me and, as such, would make the 1D a less useful tool than the 20D.

[KenPapai]

Of all of Canon's most recent DSLRs -- the 1D, 10D, 300D, 20D, 350D, 1DMkII, 1Ds, and 1DsMkII -- the 1D is easily the one that was most quickly obsoleted by better technology. Get the 20D or something better.

[phule]

You could get MLU with your 300D if you installed the firmware hack.

[jordi]

Thanks a bunch, everybody. Seriously.

 

I now have MLU and ISO 3200 on the 300D, thanks to the hack suggestion. White balance

issues are not a problem to me, I don't mind fixing it on RAW later.

 

But due to the 4 megapixel chip and the banding problems, I'll choose the 20D. I might as

well accept the fact that I cannot afford the 1D MkII, which is more like the camera I

would've been dreaming of having while using the 1D.

 

Now that I have the hack, though, I might suck some more life out of the 300D. Three or

so more months. :)

[mike t.]

The 1D obsolete? As far as sports shooting is concerned, there are a lot of photographers out there still using them and producing great work. If I had to track athletes in a fast-moving, unpredictable sport like soccer or hockey, I'd opt for the 1D. Is there better autofocus in a digital camera for the price of a used 1D? I don't think so. Can you fix white balance problems post-shoot? Sure. Can you fix OOF conditions post-shoot? Don't think so.

 

Jordi, you said you wanted better field handling, better AF, faster frame rates, faster exposures, rugged body. No question the 1D is all of those compared to the 20D.

 

It depends what you intend to shoot, really. The 20D is a great prosumer compromise camera that does lots of things well, but specializes in nothing. The 1D is a pro's sport, PJ, and even wedding camera. Different tools.