Professional Web Applications Themes

Canon 10D vs 20D? - Photography

Hi all, Can anyone here who's upgraded from the 10D to the 20D comment on the improvement (if any) in AF speed / accuracy & RAW buffering? -- W . | ,. w , "Some people are alive only because \|/ \|/ it is illegal to kill them." Perna condita delenda est ---^----^---------------------------------------------------------------...

  1. #1

    Default Canon 10D vs 20D?

    Hi all,

    Can anyone here who's upgraded from the 10D to the 20D comment on the
    improvement (if any) in AF speed / accuracy & RAW buffering?

    --
    W
    . | ,. w , "Some people are alive only because
    \|/ \|/ it is illegal to kill them." Perna condita delenda est
    ---^----^---------------------------------------------------------------
    Lionel Guest

  2. #2

    Default Re: Canon 10D vs 20D?

    I only owned my 10D for 4 months and I owned the 20D for two of those
    months. The 10D is a very capable camera but the thing that made me
    change was the startup time as I shoot mostly wildlife. The delay at
    startup once the camera went to sleep didn't work for me with the 10D.
    I feel the 20D has slightly better color accuracy and contrast, less
    noise at all ISO speeds but really noticable above 400 ISO.
    I don't find the AF speed to be much different and the buffer and write
    speed are better with the 20D. I also like the overall look of my
    images with the 20D better but I did take some excellent images with
    the 10D. There are people with more experience with both bodies but
    these are my observations.

    Art Salmons

    Fyimo Guest

  3. #3

    Default Re: Canon 10D vs 20D?

    I bought my 10D in August 2003 and my 20D in late December 2004. Since
    getting the 20D my 10D has not been used and I haven't regretted making the
    upgrade.

    AF speed is good and I haven't had any accuracy problems. RAW buffering
    hasn't been a problem to me as I rarely shoot fast sequences, though it
    would seem that with the 20D's vastly improved writing speed it must be
    better than the 10D even if the actual buffer is supposedly smaller.

    The main improvements as far as I'm concerned are instant on and instant
    playback. Instant on is just that, which certainly beats having to wait for
    the 10D to turn on every time the meter times out. Instant playback is
    virtually always instant (at least with a fast card), which is a great help
    because it means that even with action shots it's possible to check the
    histogram and tweak the exposure while shooting without too much fear of
    losing a shot.

    The larger image file does add some extra detail and while it's not a huge
    difference it's enough to be worth having.

    The new battery certainly has greater capacity and adds considerably to the
    number of shots between charges.

    I really prefer noise-free images but sometimes the conditions mean that
    ISO100 isn't practical. With the 20D I'm reasonably happy to shoot at 400,
    whereas with the 10D I was always a little doubtful. I know some insist on
    shooting at 3200 and then moan about banding, but if you're conservative
    with the ISO I doubt that you would be disappointed with 400 and may even
    find 800 quite acceptable.

    The CR2 RAW format does seem to provide a bit more latitude and brighter
    colours than CRW, but that's pretty subjective.

    Geoff Bryant
    www.cfgphoto.com

    "Lionel" <net> wrote in message
    news:com... 


    Geoff Guest

  4. #4

    Default Re: Canon 10D vs 20D?

    Art & Geoff, thanks for the info, it's been very helpful. :)

    --
    W
    . | ,. w , "Some people are alive only because
    \|/ \|/ it is illegal to kill them." Perna condita delenda est
    ---^----^---------------------------------------------------------------
    Lionel Guest

  5. #5

    Default Re: Canon 10D vs 20D?

    One last thing. I shoot wildlife and mostly birds. I do shoot rapid
    sequences of pictures and with the 20D I never have had the camera stop
    in mid sequence. Unlike with sports where your subject may be capable
    of being photographed for a long series of rapid exposures with birds
    the longest burst is usually 5 to 6 images and then it's gone. Both the
    10D and 20D will do this but the 20D is just more capable and is rated
    higher in write and buffer speed and it's true.
    I've taken images with the 20D regularly at ISO 800 and I get get
    terrific pictures. At 1600 ISO I still get decent pictures. With the
    10D ISO 400 was used often but I rarely used 800 and never 1600.

    Art

    Fyimo Guest

  6. #6

    Default Re: Canon 10D vs 20D?


    "Fyimo" <netcom.com> wrote in message
    news:googlegroups.com... 

    Are you shooting JPG or RAW? With my 10D I can shoot 9 RAW images at 3
    images per second or so and then I have to wait for some of the buffer to be
    written to the card before I can take another shot. I thought the 20D could
    only take 5 RAW images before the buffer was full, but it is supposed to
    write faster than the 10D.

    Ron


    Ron Guest

  7. #7

    Default Re: Canon 10D vs 20D?

    I just started shootng raw recently so most of my experience is with
    the highest level Jpeg.

    Art

    Fyimo Guest

  8. #8

    Default Re: Canon 10D vs 20D?

    "Ron Recer" <com> wrote in
    news:net:
     

    Actually the 20D is 5FPS with a 25 frame/image buffer whereas the 10D
    is 3FPS wiht a 9 frame/image buffer.
    Nunnya Guest

  9. #9

    Default Re: Canon 10D vs 20D?

    Nunnya Bizniss <com> wrote in
    news:196.97.131:
     
    >
    > Actually the 20D is 5FPS with a 25 frame/image buffer whereas the 10D
    > is 3FPS wiht a 9 frame/image buffer.[/ref]

    According to Canon the 20D only has a 6 frame buffer on the 20D for RAW
    images, are you sure that you are not confusing RAW with JPG?


    --
    Mark Heyes (New Zealand)
    See my pics at www.gigatech.co.nz (last updated 20-Jan-05)
    "There are 10 types of people, those that
    understand binary and those that don't"

    MarkH Guest

  10. #10

    Default Re: Canon 10D vs 20D?


    "MarkH" <dot.dot> wrote in message
    news:klOUd.3384325$easynews.com... 
    > >
    > > Actually the 20D is 5FPS with a 25 frame/image buffer whereas the 10D
    > > is 3FPS wiht a 9 frame/image buffer.[/ref]
    >
    > According to Canon the 20D only has a 6 frame buffer on the 20D for RAW
    > images, are you sure that you are not confusing RAW with JPG?
    >[/ref]

    That is what I recalled, that the 20D's buffer held fewer RAW frames than
    the 10D's buffer. What I haven't heard is whether the 20D's faster write
    rate makes up for the difference. I have heard people say they can take
    40-45 JPG files before having to wait for a file to be written from buffer
    to card, but haven't heard much about the RAW.

    Ron


    Ron Guest

  11. #11

    Default Re: Canon 10D vs 20D?

    Lionel wrote: 
    The 10D is a "better" camera. Somehow Canon have managed to produce an
    upgrade which is actually worse than it's predecessor in far too many
    ways. Shutter shudder is the most noticeable worsening. I guess that's
    why they provided better high ISO performance - you have to use higher
    shutter speeds!

    There's more but I can't be bothered whining to this bunch of Canonites.

    GH
    Graham Guest

  12. #12

    Default Re: Canon 10D vs 20D?

    In article <42242335$tpgi.com.au>, Graham Hunt
    <com> wrote:
     

    "Shutter shudder" - now there's a new one.

    Have fun with your Sigma.
    Randall Guest

  13. #13

    Default Re: Canon 10D vs 20D?

    Graham Hunt wrote:

     

    Speaking from experience?
    leo Guest

  14. #14

    Default Re: Canon 10D vs 20D?

    I owned both and you are dead wrong. The Canon 20D is slighly better in
    most all areas and the instant on feature is light years better.

    Art

    Fyimo Guest

  15. #15

    Default Re: Canon 10D vs 20D?

    In message <net>,
    "Ron Recer" <com> wrote:
     

    The 10D buffers 9 images vs the 20D's 9, but it takes forever to empty
    the buffer and make room for more, especially if the card is almost
    full. In practice, the 20D is much more responsive to rapid shooting.

    I missed many shots with the 10D because it wasn't ready; this hasn't
    happened to me with the 20D yet. The 20D can write to a fast card
    several times faster than the 10D can.
    --

    <>>< ><<> ><<> <>>< ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<>
    John P Sheehy <komm> 
    JPS@no.komm Guest

  16. #16

    Default Re: Canon 10D vs 20D?

    In message <klOUd.3384325$easynews.com>,
    MarkH <dot.dot> wrote:
     

    I'm sure every shot goes into the buffer as a RAW; the difference
    between RAW and various JPEG file sizes is in the write to the card.
    With small, co JPEGs I think you can pretty much fill a fast card
    machine-gun style.
    --

    <>>< ><<> ><<> <>>< ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<>
    John P Sheehy <komm> 
    JPS@no.komm Guest

  17. #17

    Default Re: Canon 10D vs 20D?

    komm wrote:
     

    I'm still recovering from the shock at just how wickedly fast the
    1DMkII is. I mean, the "review" image comes up almost immediately and
    there is barely a blip on the "busy" LED for JPEG images. RAW image
    times are faster on this than a JPEG recording on the 10D. But the
    review/selection user-interface is ghastly (the 10D is much nicer); is
    the 20D like the 10D or something completely different?

    eawckyegcy@yahoo.com Guest

  18. #18

    Default Re: Canon 10D vs 20D?

    In message <googlegroups.com>,
    "com" <com> wrote:
     
    >
    >I'm still recovering from the shock at just how wickedly fast the
    >1DMkII is. I mean, the "review" image comes up almost immediately and
    >there is barely a blip on the "busy" LED for JPEG images. RAW image
    >times are faster on this than a JPEG recording on the 10D. But the
    >review/selection user-interface is ghastly (the 10D is much nicer); is
    >the 20D like the 10D or something completely different?[/ref]

    Similar, except that you use a nine-position controller to scroll
    through the image when you zoom in. Speedwise, the 20D is much faster
    than the 10D showing the review. The wait is only about 1/2 second in
    the worst of conditions, IME.
    --

    <>>< ><<> ><<> <>>< ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<>
    John P Sheehy <komm> 
    JPS@no.komm Guest

  19. #19

    Default Re: Canon 10D vs 20D?

    <komm> wrote in message
    news:com... 
    >
    > I'm sure every shot goes into the buffer as a RAW; the difference
    > between RAW and various JPEG file sizes is in the write to the card.
    > With small, co JPEGs I think you can pretty much fill a fast card
    > machine-gun style.
    > --
    >
    > <>>< ><<> ><<> <>>< ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<>
    > John P Sheehy <komm> [/ref]

    Nope, they're correct, the JPEG buffer is approx. 23 frames, the RAW buffer
    is 6 on the 20D. The RAW buffer on the 10D is 9

    --
    Skip Middleton
    http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com


    Skip Guest

  20. #20

    Default Re: Canon 10D vs 20D?

    "Graham Hunt" <com> wrote in message
    news:42242335$tpgi.com.au... 
    > The 10D is a "better" camera. Somehow Canon have managed to produce an
    > upgrade which is actually worse than it's predecessor in far too many
    > ways. Shutter shudder is the most noticeable worsening. I guess that's why
    > they provided better high ISO performance - you have to use higher shutter
    > speeds!
    >
    > There's more but I can't be bothered whining to this bunch of Canonites.
    >
    > GH[/ref]

    Wow, that's succinct. But wrong. We owned a 10D, and have two 20Ds, and
    the only thing the 10D had an edge on was RAW buffer (why Canon reduced that
    is a mystery), a Custom Function that cancels Fill Flash Reduction
    (considering the vagaries of the "new and improved" ETT-L II metering,
    that's really a mystery why Canon removed that one!) and a very slightly
    quieter shutter. In fact, I'm taking peoples word for this, I never noticed
    a difference. On the other hand, focus is faster, more accurate, in both
    normal and low light, frame rate is significantly faster, JPEG buffer is
    significantly larger, automatic white balance more accurate, and several
    other minor improvements.

    --
    Skip Middleton
    http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com


    Skip Guest

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Canon 1Ds Mark-II + Canon 70-200mm f2.8 L IS lens
    By Siddhartha in forum Photography
    Replies: 24
    Last Post: February 5th, 11:43 PM
  2. Zoom lens for Canon 300D - Tamron/Canon
    By Siddhartha in forum Photography
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: January 16th, 04:35 PM
  3. Replies: 2
    Last Post: July 16th, 01:56 PM
  4. Canon 10D - Canon i850 mismatch?
    By Stephen C. Smith in forum Adobe Photoshop Elements
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: July 10th, 02:19 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139