Paul Simon wrote:
Great review...and fantastic shot of Connie Nielsen.
What lens did you shoot that with? What iso?
70-200mm f/2.8L IS @ ISO 400, then pushed up another 2/3 stop in DPP.
Natron wrote:
Hey what lens is that in the top photo?
It's the Canon 85mm f/1.8. I would have borrowed dcsang's 85mm f/1.2L, except the front of that lens would have blocked out the rest of the camera.
Kenergy_007 wrote:
great review Brian! makes me want to buy one... but I can't keep up with the new model every year that Canon is coming up with!
Having wandered down the D60 -> 10D -> 20D path myself, I can honestly say that the 20D is the first truly worthwhile upgrade in this series of cameras. D30->D60 gave you more pixels but noisier photos (some have said) plus a drop in the maximum ISO and not much better AF. D60->10D improved the AF a bit and gave us ISO 3200 again, plus one extra shot in the buffer. The 300D was just a dumbed down version of the 10D. But the 20D... wow. Really, the only thing that is a small step backwards is the 6-shot raw buffer. Everything else that I can think of (and I mean everything) is an improvement over the 10D. And all for less than what the 10D cost when it was introduced.
Anyone who has been holding out for an upgrade to their D30/D60/10D/300D and is in the market for a new camera in that price range... wait no longer: the 20D is the one.
Smaller raw buffer, no spot meter, almost as if Canon had to leave out certain features to protect sales of the Mk ll.
taob wrote:
But the 20D... wow. Really, the only thing that is a small step backwards is the 6-shot raw buffer. Everything else that I can think of (and I mean everything) is an improvement over the 10D.
rjk55425 wrote:
Smaller raw buffer, no spot meter, almost as if Canon had to leave out certain features to protect sales of the Mk ll.
Well, there is no spot meter in any of the 10-series cameras anyway, so it isn't really a step backwards there. And do you really blame Canon? I think they are already in danger of cannibalizing some of their 1D Mk2 sales with the 20D, it's that good.
I also own both, and in some circumstances perfer the 20D due to its lighter weight and 1.6 FOV crop making my tele lens seem longer. The biggest downfalls of the 20D you mentioned, the lack of an ISO readout in the viewfinder and no spot meter. Another serious 20D downfall is the inability to adjust ISO in less than full stop increments.
rico wrote:
Brian, are you a professional writer? That review is both lucid and precise. Wow.
Heh, thanks for the compliment, Rico! No, I am not a trained technical writer. However, I do work in an area of IT (information security and business continuity) that relies heavily on concise documentation and presentation material, so I guess that's where my practical experience comes from. Plus I was a science geek when I was in school... no shortage of practice writing up lab reports and papers there.
Leo Reinhard wrote:
I wish you still had you 10D to shoot identical shots in bright sunny high contrast for me to see if the 20D will give enough improvement for me to upgrade.
I had lunch with my friend who bought my 10D, and I did get a chance to take one comparative shot between the 10D and 20D. I'll post the results later, once I've had a chance to look at both of them.
rjk55425 wrote:
You must have a big nose to touch the LCD screen of the MK II! Mine doesn't come close on the 1D and I remember how annoying LCD contact was on the 10D previously.
If I angle the 1D Mk2 down a bit, then the tip of my nose will touch the back of the camera. But on the 20D, my nose is always smushed up against the LCD. It really would not have been difficult for Canon to have added another centimeter to the eyepiece...
Mine arrives tomorrow and I have been experiencing a bit of buyer's remorse since some of the recent opinions I have read indicate the camera falls far short of 1 series performance, in the area of auto focus in servo mode.
I have not tried the 20D in a fast moving sports situation yet, but perhaps I can get out to one of my company's softball league games this week and give the 20D a whirl. I suspect that the 1-series will yield a higher percentage of keepers than the 20D, but that the 20D will be miles ahead of the 10D. And of course the AF behaviour on the 1D is configurable, whereas you have to live with whatever the defaults are on the 20D. But if you're a concert shooter or a wedding pro or a studio photographer, and can't afford the 1Ds, the 20D is a very capable beast and will leave you with enough money for a couple more "L" lenses.
great review, really! could you tell me, how to get such well lightened pictures? they all look like taken in a studio but as you said, theire shot in the field!
do i have to use a flash, or is it just the knowledge and use of internal illumination at the right moment?
It really would not have been difficult for Canon to have added another centimeter to the eyepiece...