Used Canon camera question

mrcoons

Today my primary camera is a Canon 40D and I am extremely happy with it. My back up is a Canon 350D (XT) which I am not as happy with. The smallish size of the camera was never a problem until I got the 40D, now I feel odd holding it and forget putting a long zoom on it now! :huh Plus the view finder size and slower AF speed are problems.

So I am considering a used 30D (8.2 megapixel) or a used 1D (4.1 megapixel).

The 30D is going to be similar in size and weight to the 40D so it will be familiar feeling and require less consious thought - or that is my hope anyway. The 1D would be larger and heavier but I don't think that will be an issue for me. The up size of the 1D is the larger sensor (1.3). I could see using the 1D to do the bilk of my portrait shots with.

I guess my major issue with the 1D is the megapixel size. I've never printed anything larger than 8x10 and certainly never sold anything bigger than that either. So will I even notice the difference?

Any reason to go with the 30D over the 1D? :scratch

NikonsandVstroms

I don't have much experience with Canon but in general, especially when talking about their early digital SLR there were many huge leaps in technology. So I would definitely advise for the 30D for that reason, and also a 4.2 megapixel sensor is really small no matter how nice of the body it is in limiting the size of prints and even at 8 x 10 the 30 D will be much more forgiving in how you shoot (you'll be able to crop and/or use higher ISO settings)

20DNoob

From what I've seen regarding 1D prints you'll have zero issues knocking out 8x10 pints all day long.

I've even seen people saying they're getting 20x30 poster prints from it, although it's suggested to send them out to one of the print labs(@300dpi/ppi) if your looking to print big as their software is better suited for such things as opposed to PS.

I wish I had picked one up by now as I had to shoot a Rugby game this past Sat. to finish a project and it rained the entire day. Instead I had to be bothered using one of those stupid rain sleeves.

ziggy53

I hate to bring it up, but the best backup for the Canon 40D, ... is a Canon 40D.

While the 30D is still a very viable camera, as is the 20D for that matter, the 40D includes enough additional features that I really think it deserves consideration.

The Canon 1D is still an amazing camera in a number of ways, but it's getting long in the years. Yes, the 4 MP can be observed as less detail in an 8 x 10, cropping compounds the issue. The CCD imager of the 1D can produce banding under certain circumstances. The ISO 100 is not calibrated and may (probably) result in less dynamic range.

A 1D MKII/MKIII or a 5D would be a much better choice for portraiture. (I'm assuming that the 1Ds MKII/MKIII are out of the question.)

rpcrowe

Refurbished 30D
If cost is a factor; a refurbished 30D ($640 from Adorama including free shipping) is a pretty darn good back-up. The fact that both the 40D and 30D use the same batteries is a major plus. I am seriously contemplating selling my XT and geting another refurb 30D.

Strick

I guess I am the desenting opinion here. Having both the 30D and 1D I would say the 1D...........if you need the AF speed and other 1 series features. 8x10 is absolutely no problem, I have even cropped a good bit and still got really good 8x10 prints. The AF on the 30D is no comparison to the 1D. Plus the colors that the CD in the 1D produces is different, in a good way.

I think it really comes down to what the use will be.

mrcoons

ziggy53 wrote:

I hate to bring it up, but the best backup for the Canon 40D, ... is a Canon 40D.

While the 30D is still a very viable camera, as is the 20D for that matter, the 40D includes enough additional features that I really think it deserves consideration.

The Canon 1D is still an amazing camera in a number of ways, but it's getting long in the years. Yes, the 4 MP can be observed as less detail in an 8 x 10, cropping compounds the issue. The CCD imager of the 1D can produce banding under certain circumstances. The ISO 100 is not calibrated and may (probably) result in less dynamic range.

A 1D MKII/MKIII or a 5D would be a much better choice for portraiture. (I'm assuming that the 1Ds MKII/MKIII are out of the question.)

You are right Ziggy and I'd love to have another 40D but it's outside my budget, even a used one is. My budget also eliminates a 5D :cry or anything over the 1D. I am leaning towards rpcrowe's suggestion on the refurbished 30D from Adorama (I saw this the other day and thought it was a great idea). Using the same battery is going to be a factor in this decision too.

Budget is the biggest factor at this point as this is just a hobby for me, not a business. The refurb 30D probably gets me as close as I can afford to what I'd like to accomplish.

Thanks to everyone for their assistance.

Shima

rpcrowe wrote:

If cost is a factor; a refurbished 30D ($640 from Adorama including free shipping) is a pretty darn good back-up. The fact that both the 40D and 30D use the same batteries is a major plus. I am seriously contemplating selling my XT and geting another refurb 30D.

I'm selling my XTi to get the 30D as my backup for my new 40D. (I just bought a 30D used on the forums here and it will be here tomorrow!!) Before I went the DSLR road, I used to shoot with a Canon Powershot Pro1 which uses the same battery as the 20/30/40D family... I remember being very upset when I got my Rebel and found out it didn't have the same battery, so I'm thrilled to go back to the BP-511 family of batteries and have one battery type for all the cameras.

Plus the other part of my plan is that my husband wanted to start playing with DSLR's once we were able to afford 2, so this way he has to learn on the 30D not the XTi and will therefore be more comfortable picking up my 40D if I ever let it out of my hands, lol.

There's my 2 cents.

GJMPhoto

Shima - I got here too late to weigh in on your decision process...but I'd like to say I think you made the right choice. I bought my son a 30D to bring him into the digital / photoshop age and use it to back up my 5D, should I ever need a backup...(now that's REALLY not a back up since the 1.6 factor of the 30D changes the usage of my lenses...but the backup is there for emergencies and I have enough range of lenses to cover...but I digress...)

ANYWAY...the 30D is a reasonably priced, excellent camera...and a backup is a backup!

BTW: My understanding (and I'm not an expert on this, so someone feel free to correct me), is that the Rebel mount is not as strong as the 20,30,40,5,1 D mounts and that putting a long telephoto (like the 70-200 2.8L or heavier) is a bad idea, as the mount weakens over time. Just something that came to mind reading your post.

- Gary.

cmason

mrcoons wrote:

Budget is the biggest factor at this point as this is just a hobby for me, not a business. The refurb 30D probably gets me as close as I can afford to what I'd like to accomplish.

Maybe it isn't my place to ask this, but I frequently see this "backup issue" discussed on the boards. For a pro making their living, a backup is logical and rarely is budget an issue if one's living is at stake.

So if it is just a hobby, why do you need a backup? Am I missing something here?

GJMPhoto

Backups...

cmason wrote:

Maybe it isn't my place to ask this, but I frequently see this "backup issue" discussed on the boards. For a pro making their living, a backup is logical and rarely is budget an issue if one's living is at stake.

So if it is just a hobby, why do you need a backup? Am I missing something here?

I don't think a back up is in question...it's pretty much a necessity - Even if you're a serious amateur, carry duplicates of everything or else you're destined end up the next victim of 'Murphy' and will lose the shot. May not be so important if no one else relies on you.

The budget question is really, how much of a match to my primary do I need. In my opinion, your backup doesn't have to match...as long as you are equally fluent with the camera operations and it uses the same lenses and accessories. A 30D backing up a 40D clearly matches that (my backup is not as good a match...but I can work with it).

If you're a true amateur, it still would give peace of mind to carry a backup...even if it's a small point and shoot in your pocket...or dare I say, cell phone of the future?

- Gary.

ziggy53

GJMPhoto wrote:

...

BTW: My understanding (and I'm not an expert on this, so someone feel free to correct me), is that the Rebel mount is not as strong as the 20,30,40,5,1 D mounts and that putting a long telephoto (like the 70-200 2.8L or heavier) is a bad idea, as the mount weakens over time. Just something that came to mind reading your post.

- Gary.

The Rebel series bodies uses a stainless steel chassis covered in a structural fiber filled body and the metal lens mount is attached to a reinforced section of the mirror box.

I have 2 Rebel XT/350D bodies and I have used lenses up to the Canon 70-200mm, f2.8L, an older (very heavy) Sigma 70-200mm, f2.8 and even a very old 500mm, f4.5 monster. The Sigma doesn't have a tripod ring, so it has to be mounted to the camera and a tripod has to be attached via the camera body. I used it this way for much of a football season.

I have not detected any flexing at all, even with the longest lenses.

I suspect the camera would not sustain as much shock or drop as the better bodies, but I haven't babied either body and I haven't had any problems.

I still use both camera bodies for travel and backup.

mrcoons

cmason wrote:

Maybe it isn't my place to ask this, but I frequently see this "backup issue" discussed on the boards. For a pro making their living, a backup is logical and rarely is budget an issue if one's living is at stake.

So if it is just a hobby, why do you need a backup? Am I missing something here?

Perhaps 'backup' is not the correct term in my case. Let me describe my usage of a 'second' camera:

One of the things I like to photograph is marching band competitions. To get adequate coverage of formations I need to sit up as high as I can get so that I can 'see' the formations. What sells are the individual shots of band members. So I put a telephoto lens on the 40D and a wide angle lens on my second camera (currently a Rebel XT). A bands performance is generally around 8 minutes long and switching lenses is just out of the question as I'd miss too much. (I'd dearly like to own the Canon 28-300 IS lens for this type of work but its priced out of my range.)

When I shoot a concert or play I also used two cameras in a similar setup as above so that I am not fumbling in the dark trying to change lenses.

For these reasons to get the 30D as a 'second' camera makes more sense to me because it will be more like the 40D than the 1D. I guess I was just curious as to whether or not the 1D would offer me something that the 30D didn't and my research wasn't really telling me anything.

Plus if something did happen to my 40D I'd like to feel that my second camera could get done what I want done and right now the XT doesn't make me feel that way. Maybe I am just being paranoid but when I do use the XT now it's just not a comfortable experience.

dlplumer

mrcoons wrote:

Today my primary camera is a Canon 40D and I am extremely happy with it. My back up is a Canon 350D (XT) which I am not as happy with. The smallish size of the camera was never a problem until I got the 40D, now I feel odd holding it and forget putting a long zoom on it now! Plus the view finder size and slower AF speed are problems.

So I am considering a used 30D (8.2 megapixel) or a used 1D (4.1 megapixel).

The 30D is going to be similar in size and weight to the 40D so it will be familiar feeling and require less consious thought - or that is my hope anyway. The 1D would be larger and heavier but I don't think that will be an issue for me. The up size of the 1D is the larger sensor (1.3). I could see using the 1D to do the bilk of my portrait shots with.

I guess my major issue with the 1D is the megapixel size. I've never printed anything larger than 8x10 and certainly never sold anything bigger than that either. So will I even notice the difference?

Any reason to go with the 30D over the 1D?

Have you checked out the new XSi?

mrcoons

dlplumer wrote:

Have you checked out the new XSi?

Even that's probably over my budget! Things are getting tight.

tooltime47

I have a 30D and I just sold my 1D. As others have said, 8x10's from the 1D are not an issue and the speed and autofocus are outstanding. I did not mind the size of the 1D at first but I found myself using the 30D most of the time because it was lighter and easier to use. The 1D is a battery hog and you always need to carry a spare. I also prefer the quick control dial to change settings on the 30D vs the two button system used on the 1D.

Dave

mrcoons

tooltime47 wrote:

I have a 30D and I just sold my 1D. As others have said, 8x10's from the 1D are not an issue and the speed and autofocus are outstanding. I did not mind the size of the 1D at first but I found myself using the 30D most of the time because it was lighter and easier to use. The 1D is a battery hog and you always need to carry a spare. I also prefer the quick control dial to change settings on the 30D vs the two button system used on the 1D.

Dave

Thanks Dave!

mrcoons

To folllow up: I found a 30D in my price range at Adorama and it will be delivered today. My daughter will be taking photography in school so the XT will get passed along to her to start her down the road.

Thanks to everyone for their input.