I currently have a 10D and 580EX II+420EX, a 24-85 3.5-4.5, 50MM 1.8II and a 70-200 f/4 L.
Background: I enjoy photography as a hobby and I am the "official photographer" for my extended family and am the unofficial photographer for my church and kids' school. I've been digital since my Olympus D-620 (1999). Since that I owned (and still own) an Olympus C-3040Z. As you can tell, I don't swap equipment every year.
I am tempted to go for the 50D, but wonder if I should go for a 24-105 f/4L and wait for a body. I can't go wrong either way, because sooner or later I'll end up with both (or a 60D, instead?). I am mostly happy with my lenses, very happy with my flash setup, as well as my software (PSE7, Lightroom 2). The 24-85 is my least favorite lens in terms of image quality, but is the one i use the most for convenience of range.
"Gripes" with the 10D are autofocus is a little slow and sometimes sloppy (One-Shot with rear focus button helps). This makes it challenging for photographing any kinds of action. I am quite pleased with noise levels at 400 ISO and below and the resolution is fine for most things (except getting around 8x10 and larger). 10D body has about 40K shots on it. I use it atleast every week.
My gut says go for the body and do the 24-105 next year.
Why not a used 5d..... That's perfect for low lite like church, and for portrait.... And for school, it is perfect... I used to take pictures of my jumping little girls.... Going FF will be an opportunity for you, for the price of the 50D...
I agree with Gary - a lot of good things have happened since the 10D. Maybe go with a 40D and used 24-105mm. The 40D AF is much improved over the 20D and a lot of times I shoot ISO 1000 and up.
Why 50D? I see no compelling reason to go with it over a 40D. For what you would put into the 50D you can buy a used 40D and some glass. Based on your description of the 24-85 a tremendous combination would be a 40D and a Tamron 28-75 F/2.8. The little Tammy is very sharp and works great for portraits and in low light.
40D's are currently going in the B&S forum for $700 and the Tamron for around $300.
Andre Goli mentioned a used 5D. This also makes sense. It will cost more than the used 40D so you may need to wait on the lens. So you need to determine your priorities.
Since you are shooting non pro you really probably don't need a back up. You should also be able to get a couple hundred bucks for your 10D to apply towards the budget and $? for your 24-85.
I have to vote for the 40D and used 24-105. This would give you such a step up from the "walk-around" combo you have right now you'll think you've died and gone to heaven! You don't need the 50D, get the 40D-it's SUCH a bargain right now.
Use it properly and the 10D is a star performer and particularly well built. I can easily get sharp A3 prints...or when I need to really crop...sharp A4...
What transformed the camera was when I invested in two L lenses and two top primes.....the images just 'popped'........
There are a few things that are lacking obviously...fast write speed bugs me.....so I'm looking out for a mint copy on ebay and will use two with different lenses. I mainly work in a studio.
So..invest in a quality lens...why not just take your camera to a dealers and pretend you want a new L lens and do some trial shots with one on your camera....you will be pleasantly surprised!
Get the 50d, take care of it and it should last as long as the 10d has for you. I bought the 40d right before the 50d came out and I regret it. The 40d is great, but the 50d apparently has much better AF capabilities.
Personally, I'd get a 40d and a lens, or a used 1d2 before I got a 50d. Really, even a 20d/30d is quite an upgrade from the 10d in terms of sensor and AF performance. The power-on speed is much better, too.
Keh.com usually has used 1d2 for about the same as a 50d, and its in a different league in all categories.
Iuse the Tamron 28-75 on my 20D and it is a very nice lens. The AF is not as fast as Canon's USM, but it is plenty fast if you are not shooting action. When my combo focuses correctly the results are outstanding. Focus is not 100% acurate though. I am not sure if it is my fault or the camera/lens when it misses though. I don't want to give the impression that it mis-focues often, but it does happen. It happens with my 50 1.8 from time to time as well, so it's probably not totally a lens issue.
This is an example of what I get out of that combo.
For church use do NOT get a 20D the acoustic noise from it is horrible compared to the 10D, the 5D is pretty quiet not as quiet as the 10D but close. I opted for the 5D (used) when I traded up. Note the pixel density on the 5D is the same as the 10D so you shouldn't lose any reach.
Gerry Szarek wrote:
For church use do NOT get a 20D the acoustic noise from it is horrible compared to the 10D, the 5D is pretty quiet not as quiet as the 10D but close. I opted for the 5D (used) when I traded up. Note the pixel density on the 5D is the same as the 10D so you shouldn't lose any reach.
Acoustic noise with regard to images? Can you tell me what this is? Google only shows me audio links.
