I bought my 10D in January 2004 and it has been serving me faithfully since. I have always wanted a second body, and with the prices I see 10Ds for on the buy and sell board I almost can not pass one up. It doesn't have all the resoultion, and bells and whistles as newer series' do, but it gets the job done.
So, here is my question: Who shoots mainly with a 10D still, and either has a second 10D, or is soon to have a second?
I still have my 10D. Skipped the 20D, and when I bought a 30D I decided the 10D wasn't worth enough to sell. Now I've got a 40D, but the 10D is my spare.
The image quality of the 10D is great. If you shoot landscapes or macro there may not be a big advantage to a newer body. Just don't use a newer camera. I recently had to use the 10D when my 30D shutter failed. Man, that thing is slow. Slow to start up, slow to preview images on the LCD, and a slow 3 fps. It drove me crazy.
I won't get rid of the 10D, and if the shutter went (it's at 35K now) I'd probably get it fixed. But if it failed and couldn't be repaired, I would replace it with a 20D if I was convinced I needed a cheap backup.
So if I were you, I would get a 20D (they aren't that much more than the 10D), and take advantage of the speed, better high ISO, better flash exposure with ETTL II, better built-in flash, more focus points, etc, etc.
purchased the 40D a couple of months ago and am in the process of getting my 10D converted to IR. I can't wait to get it back since the majority of shots in my portfolio were taken with the 10D and I am still satisfied with it. The color ir shots should keep me shooting with it for years to come. I won't part with it especially since it was my first DSLR.
My primary camera continues to be my 10D that I purchased in December 2004. The resolution on my 10D is GREAT when the best lenses are being used. I have made perfect 16x20 enlargements with only the slightest amount of Photoshop re-sizing and sharpening. Still, it is not a 'fast' camera by today's standards and the 10mp resolution of the 40D will allow you to crop-in alot more than you could with the 10D's 6mp. However, if you are not shooting professionally, I think the 10D is a GREAT back-up and can still hold it's own as a primary camera for single shot shooting at upto ISO 400. I just completed a transaction for a 5D but I'm not planning on getting rid of my 10D...I will continue to use it as a back-up and as a 2nd lens set-up.
What do you shoot? I just downgraded my 20d to second body with a 40d as main. I took the 20d out yesterday for fun and wished I had the 40d. Under extreme lighting/shooting conditions my keeper rate is higher with the 40d.
I still use only a 10D (used to have, mainly, a 1Ds [sold just before the 5D was released] and a D30).
When the price of the D700 goes down following the release of the 5/3/7/? D [mk2], it'll become a fair replacement option...
I shoot mainly "interesting situations" in Japan, in the hope of using all of that in a web site, later (using a PP soft I'll develop specifically).
My main 10D criticisms
1. unstable autofocus
2. five secs wake-up time (laughable nowadays)
3. twelve bits dynamic range "depth" per color channel
4. image processing time
Besides, I'm happy with the resolution of 6 MP, even with A3 prints, that allows fast PP / low space storage / etc...
I bought a 10D recently as a poor student's backup to my 20D and have been really happy with it. Its a lot less forgiving in regards to noise if the exposure isn't nailed (compared to my 20D), but at its price point used its an excellent bargain at less than $300. If I really needed a 2nd camera rather than just a backup, I'd probably spend the extra couple hundred dollars to get another used 20D instead.
I use the 10D as a backup to my 30D. It doesn't get used all that often, but it's still a good camera. I do notice the high ISO noise increase when I have to shoot at ISO 800 or higher. I also notice that the AF isn't quite as quick and accurate as my 30D, but aside from those two things, it's still a very nice camera. I prefer the 10D's hand grip (has the notch that reappeared on the 40D) and I like the quiet shutter, but my 30D gets the vast majority of my snaps.
I would never buy a second 10D nor recommend anyone purchase one nowadays (i owned for a few years).
It has too many quirks and deficiencies relative to bodies available. WAAY too slow image review is a complete killer. Plus the non-EFs cripples the body as you just won't find a proper "walkaround" zoom that is wide enough (24-x is less than ideal on a 1.6x body).
Even if you shot primes only the AF selection and AF overall on the 10D is tiresome vs the Rebels and obviously 20D and up.The XTi is a great baragain now and much better body in all honesty.
Purchasing a 2nd 10D makes no sense to me but YMMV
supermarvin76 wrote:
I bought my 10D in January 2004 and it has been serving me faithfully since. I have always wanted a second body, and with the prices I see 10Ds for on the buy and sell board I almost can not pass one up. It doesn't have all the resoultion, and bells and whistles as newer series' do, but it gets the job done.
So, here is my question: Who shoots mainly with a 10D still, and either has a second 10D, or is soon to have a second?
Glen_C wrote:
I would never buy a second 10D nor recommend anyone purchase one nowadays (i owned for a few years).
It has too many quirks and deficiencies relative to bodies available. WAAY too slow image review is a complete killer. Plus the non-EFs cripples the body as you just won't find a proper "walkaround" zoom that is wide enough (24-x is less than ideal on a 1.6x body).
Even if you shot primes only the AF selection and AF overall on the 10D is tiresome vs the Rebels and obviously 20D and up.The XTi is a great baragain now and much better body in all honesty.
Purchasing a 2nd 10D makes no sense to me but YMMV
I agree that the XTi is a better body, but I wanted identical control layout on my backup as my primary (minus the focus point selector). It was worth it, in my opinion. Also, non-EFs isn't much of a big deal to me, as my crop only lenses (Tokina 10-17, Tokina 12-24, and Tamron 17-50) all fit and work just fine on the 10D. Only Canon's crop lenses are affected...all the other MFGs work just fine.
The 10d is capable of supurb imaging. The rear LCD is small, takes a while to power up, has a limited buffer, and is a bit heavier than the 20,30,40D - more like a 5d.
If none of that bothers you now with your current 10d, and you want to keep the budget in tact, then buy a good one (no focusing issues). It is a rugged, reliable workhorse (as you already know...)
greggn wrote:
After purchasing two 20D's my 10D sat unused. I recently had it converted to IR-only and I've been using it regularly ever since.
I sold all my older bodies (D30, D60, 20D) and chose to keep the 10D when I bought the 5D over 2.5+ years ago. It really did sit unused so I had it converted to IR also in February. Its getting much more use---and is a nice handling camera--and I enjoy handling it, though the longer write to card and no immediate histo unless review frustrates me just a bit. It certainly could continue for anyone as their only camera body. One just gets spoiled as you upgrade to newer bodies, but what you don't know can't hurt you LOL.
Upgraded my 10D last year to a 5D, skipped the 20D (it's loud), 30D was skipped, then bought the 5D same pixel density as 10D. The 10D is very useful when you need to be quiet ie a church, concert, ....
On my 10D I always used the center point for AF, set the timeout to always ON, eliminated the wake up time.
I still have my 10D, I bought it in early April of 2003. The camera has been my secondary camera since I bought my 20D in Sept of '04. Skipped the 30D - I still don't see the point of the 30D. A few months ago I bought a 40D.
With all of this I still have my 10D and continue to use the camera. I had the shutter replaced last summer. Yes the camera is slow, painful at times. The 20D answered many of the complaints I had with the 10D. Still I find the image quality of the 10D at ISO 100 and 200 to be outstanding. I still like the output of the camera and will continue to use my 10D. Plus - why sell it - the used prices make the camera more valuable to me.
That said, if I needed a back up right now, I would not buy a used 10D - the camera is over 5.5 years old. You can't really tell the history of the camera and you can't get a shutter count usage. Good chance you could buy the camera and have the shutter go in 30 days. I agree with the others - if you need a lower cost backup get an XTi.
I loved my 10D back in the day and, like others, it was that camera that swayed me to digital. With today's technology, the 10D is a dinosaur compared to the well oiled machine of the 40D.
When I look back on the photos from my 10D days, they still look very good. The 1D2 I have now delivers a bit better files, but often, at least for me, the difference is not crucial.
BUT, there is one thing that would stop ME from getting a 10D as a backup and that is the buffer size and (even more so) the writing speed (and general memory handling). This makes the camera to unresponsive. The other quirks I could live with, but that unresponsiveness would mean I would pretty much never use the camera (as a backup) unless my no1 body died. As I see it the big + with a "backup" is using it as a second body.
If you can live with the glacier slow speed and terribly slow AF the 10D is still giving lots of EOSfun. But if you are like me you don't want to go back to that generation of cameras with the terrible AF performance. A 20D or above is really a quantum leap forward in speed. But the creamy magentaish looks of a 10D file makes it still a fine body for portraiture and other subjects that don't need the speed but where the warm pastel colours add something that even a 1D series can't give.
