Joshua,

First of all, a 6-8MPX dSLR does not demand or is advantaged particularly by top-line lenses. I learned this right off with Canons original Digital Rebel and its "kit" 18-55mm lens (inexpensive). I have used Canon 35mm SLR's as a pro for many years, and currently have a modest number of the Canon "L" lenses, including the 20-35 f/2.8 which remains one of the best performing wide angles, including many single focal length lenses, I have used. So I did a test photographing an interior on a tripod with the Rebel using both the 18-55mm kit lens and the 20-35mm L lens. Making a 13x19 print from each raw file made with each lens you could not see any difference whatsoever between them.

The Canon 20D is a very nice camera to use and produces exceptional quality digital photo files. And, it will do so with the Canon "kit" lens matched to the camera, and any decently sharp reasonably well corrected economy lens you might want to use with it.

Personally from the experience of using half a dozen different brand/model dSLR's I doubt seriously lenses are an issue until you get into the 13-16MPX range of much more expensive pro cameras.

BTW, I agree with you theoretically about the controls on the Minolta 7D. In practice however, carrying it in a shoulder bag and getting the camera in and out, the button/knob controls get knocked off their settings, so you have to check every time you use the camera that all the settings are the way you want them. Otherwise a really nice handling and fine performing dSLR.

The best buy in terms of image quality performance is a sleeper, the Sigma SD-10.

Thank you very much. One of the reasons I was looking at the higher end Canon lenses is because of the IS. There are only a few Canon IS lenses that are what I would call affordable.

I am currently using a G3 and I end up shooting alot in low light so I find myself needing to use the tripod most of the time I am shooting. Someone brought something to my attention that I had not thought about and probably should have. With my G3 anything over ISO 200 is basically unusable but he said with the 20D I could use a much higher ISO and still get better images than my G3 at ISO 100.

Is the high ISO low light performance really that good with the 20D? I have seen alot of high ISO samples but most are with decent light, high ISO with a decent amount of light on my G3 isn't too bad but in really low light it sucks.

IS and AS is still a big factor for me but if the low light/high ISO performance of the 20D is that good I will only need it on a long lens instead of all of them.

Thanks again for your help.

Joshua,

If I recall there is a Picture Setting or Custom setting that involves an internal noise filter. However, I would still not use any higher speed setting than you absolutely need. Better to opt for a wider lens aperture if shooting in low light. Shallow depth of field is a better compromise than shadow noise.

Sorry I cannot be that exact about the internal noise filter, I only had the 20D for a month and am now shooting a Canon EOS 5D.

And, I would not be inclined to consider IS except on a long lens. I did not find the body IS of the Minolta Maxxum 7D much advantage with short and normal length lenses.

The new Smart Sharpen in Photoshop CS 2 is sometimes a better fix than IS if the motion is slight.

David and Joshua,

The 20d's noise reduction function is toggled on/off as a custom funtion setting. It's only for long exposures, 1 second or more. I haven't had to use it yet, so I can't tell you more than that......