How I picked a back-up body

[john_doherty]

<p>Nguyen Son recently posted a question about picking a back-up camera for his 5D. He and I seem to be involved in different types of photography work, so rather than hijacking his thread, I'll tell my story here.<br>

I shoot for a small organization's magazine; photos are mostly posed or environmental portraits of individuals or small groups of people. ( I think you could categorize this work as events or environmental portraiture.) I need a body with sufficient pixels for the 8X10.5 covers at 300+ppi. I have been using a 5D for 4 years. I love it of course. It's perfect: beautiful files, good ergonomics, good functionality. However, it's more like a computer than a mechanical camera. It's not going to last the 15 years that I got from my AE-1. I was growing increasingly worried about not having a back-up body.<br>

When I started shopping, I had two goals: at least the pixels of the 5D and making some movement up the technology path. There were 4 bodies available to choose from.<br>

40D seemed to be highly regarded. From were I was starting, it was a move up the technology curve, but it was a step backwards in pixel count. My margin of error would be razor thin.<br>

5D MkII would be my first and obvious choice. It would be a massive gain in Canon technology, but it was beyond my budget.<br>

7D sounded fabulous, but it was barely out and little actual information was available about the new autofoucus system. 18 Megapixels and weather sealing would be nice, but not necessary. It came down to paying $600 more for video capability. I know that is a gross simplification, but that's how I evaluated the choice for my purposes.<br>

50D was the best choice for me: cost just over $900, improved technology with a new CPU/software, larger LCD screen, dust reduction, very familiar ergonomics, shared battery with 5D, 15 Megapixels. I bought it.<br>

I'm happy with the 50D. <br>

One problem area though is adding the 1.6 crop factor to my bag. I use the EF 35, 2.0, 50mm 1.4, and 85mm 1.8 lenses. The 50 and 85 make the transition to the crop camera nicely. The 50 is an excellent portrait lens; the 85 gives me a little more reach which is nice to have in the bag. Duplicating the moderate wide angle field of the 35mm is a problem. Canon's 24mm 2.8 is from the same 1990's time frame as the 35mm. Both could use an updating for USM and tweaks to the optics. I have temporarily solved the problem with an 18-55 IS 3.5. It's a cheap lens, but it seems very nice. Same Canon color temp, very good resolution and lack of distortion in the mid ranges. Seems to me there have been advances in Canon's zooms. Of course I haven't actually used one since 1985. The IS feature holds great promise for me since I'm a little older and my hands shake a bit more than in the good old days!<br>

Hope this is of some help to anyone trying to make a decision.</p>

[rocco1]

<p>There are many options. For me, the only option that seem to be perfect, was to get another camera body identical to what you have. When I started professional, I had a 20D. So I got another 20D as backup. Soon, there was a very good and acceptable reason for a second backup body. Management saw the light, and so I used three 20D bodies with my fellow photographer for almost 5 years. Yea - you don't always have the financial backup for something like that, but then you might consider a used 5D as an alternative. If something should go wrong, the backup body is there.<br>

Another note - it is also a good idea to service your camera at least once a year. I never had any of my 20D's fail on me. And they counted almost 150000 pictures total.</p>

[DickArnold]

<p>My backup body for my 5D is an XTi. You can get one for about five or six hundred bucks. I have an 18-55 IS for it which was $150. I have three L lenses for the full frame but I have used those lenses on the XTi and have gotten good 18x24 enlargements with it. I was teaching a class for beginners the other night demonstrating bounce flash with the XTi, the 18-55 IS and a 550 EX flash. I took a picture of one of the audience and was shocked at how good it was when I processed it. I am a former newspaper photographer and I think you can do magazine work at least with the picture I printed with it. I think anyone of the the X series would make a good backup. My sister uses a rebel XT and publishes in a state wildlife magazine regularly in color. She does have good lenses. After seeing what Monte Zucker did before he died with a 6 MP EOS 10d, large files from 20 megapixels don't impress me that much. You certainly see that with your at 12.8 MP with your 5D.</p>

[peter_j2]

<p>My first DSLR was the 5D. Then came the XT as the backup body. Eventually, the XT's 1.6x crop factor, autofocus and slow processing wasn't for me. I needed to replace the XT with something using the same battery, same charger, same button locations, same everything. In 2009, the price for used 5D's had dropped to more than half of what I had paid for new in 2007. It was an easy decision to buy two used 5D's for my 7 lenses. There are also countless of vendors on the likes of Craigslist selling BP-511A batteries for less than $40 making the choice of the 5D ideal rather than having to upgrade to a newer and more expensive model. Of course your budget, shooting style and location will determine your needs.</p>

[charles_wood]

<p>For general publication work, I would think the IQ of any of the Rebel bodies would be more than adequate. Likewise, the 18-55 IS lens is cheap and highly underrated. It's more than up to most publication requirements, perhaps architectural shots being an exception. Of course if you're shooting for National Geographic...that's another story.</p>

[john_doherty]

<p>Charles, I think you are right on both counts. I'm shocked with the 18-55 IS just as Dick was. It may not feel like much, but it takes very nice pix. The distortion at the 18mm setting is a bit much when I have groups near the edge of the frame. I also agree that the Rebel models (at least those over 10MPs)would make good back-ups. I didn't consider them long though because of the ergonomics issues. The 50D is almost identical to the 5D so I avoided some confusion with my choice.</p>

[anthony_johnson3]

<p>THANKS FOR WRITING THIS ARTICLE, I HAVE HAD MY 50D FOR A YEAR NOW AND LOVE IT. STILL HAVEN'T DECIDED IF THIS IS JUST GOING TO BE MY HOBBY OR NOT BUT IM DOING YTL FOOTBALL GAMES, SOME WEDDING AND PORTRAITS. I DO HAVE THAT 18-55 LENS, IT'S NICE. I HAVE A CANON 70 - 200 (2.8) WHICH IS GREAT. IM STILL LEARNING BUT I WANTED TO GET A BACK UP JUST IN CASE. AT THIS MOMENT I CANT AFFORD ANYTHING MORE EXPENSIVE THEN THE 50D FOR A BACK UP. I DONT KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT THE XTI BUT I'LL READ UP ON IT AND IF MY LENSES FIT ON IT THEN IT MAY BE MY CHOICE OR MAYBE A USED 50D. ANY MORE SUGGESTIONS WILL BE APPRECIATED. THANK YOU. </p>