>>4340383>How bad exactly is the low light performance of those older cameras?Here's the 1D at ISO 1600.
I think it looks decent and it should as long as you have an interesting subject.
I also prefer its colours to those of my 350D; although, it could have been partially due to the settings I was using on the Rebel at the time.
Keep in mind that it's an APS-H sensor and it'll have better noise performance than the higher resolution APS-C sensors of the same vintage.
From what I recall, while using a 10D, the Digic 1 processor would choke on 6MP files.
I imagine the 300D wouldn't be much different.
The other Anon is being overly critical; even the D30 is good enough to start out with (not for handheld macro though).
He is right about the 40D being one of the best deals currently, it and the 50D.
The 50D is the better camera, but you lose a custom mode (3 to 2).
Don't get a 30D if you're on a budget; it's identical to the 20D, aside from the screen size, and it costs more only as a consequence of it being newer.
