20D vrs. 1DMark II

Started Oct 25, 2005 | Discussions thread
FTW
FTW
Forum MemberPosts: 66
Like?
Re: Canon 5d
In reply to FTW, Jan 1, 2006

Also, performance of a 5D is a disaster compared to a 20D. Yes, you can make this camera performant and write 5 pics per second, but then, only at the price of a 1DSmk2. It is not the 17 mpix that make the price of the 1DS and 1D bodies, but the buffering technology and this is true as well on a D2X.

A camera that causes a surprise is here the D200. That much advanced technology at this price with 5.5 pics secd in raw at 42 frames and all that amazing features. One asks how it is possible to offer that much at this price except if one imagines that Nikon will trie to sell this in amazing quantities. But all in all, the 20D stays in performance and in resolution a short step in front of the D200 and 20D cameras sell today at dumped prices that are more affordable then a D200 anyway.

So, for those who want to outperform just anything in the dark and do not need speed, also those who think that it pays to say "I ow a full sized", go for a 5D. If, on the other side you look for an allround camera that performs in just any conditions and is fast for sports, stick to a 20D or D200.

Hope that this informations will help you all to get a better view of what digital to go for. I got a D70 2 years ago when it came out and this because I had a Nikon lens park with my F100. I was looking close at the 20D but on the end, rumours about a D90 or D200 made me wait and this waiting will be fruity since I will get my D200 mid January and still be able to use some of my good old lenses.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow