SFConnected Photography wrote:
Man if ya put 30K images on it in a year and a half wouldnt it make a little sense to upgrade to a 20D forget the repair and get twice the life out of it? I dunno just a thought

Yup, but repair is covered by the extended warranty so now I will have two rebels!

Brian Diaz wrote:
I don't know about the Rebel, but the 10D is rated at 50,000 shots.  Now, that means the shutter might fail at 20,000 or 100,000, but the average expectation is 50,000.

(I slipped by 50,000 about a month ago, so I'm expecting it to go any day now...but hoping it doesn't.)

where did you get that value for the 10D?  Just called canon tech support and they have no data on the 300D, 350D, or 20D on lifespan.  Only data is for the new 5D, and the Mark I and II, but I did not ask what that life span was.

Jerrold wrote:
BTW, how do you even access the counter on Canon cameras???

The way I figure it out is to set the counter for continous numbering.  On the digital rebel 300D when you reach 10,000 it resets and starts at 1.  So in my case you keep track if you will, everytime it turns over.

Craig Thomson wrote:
Wow...my 10D passed 90,000

Wow Craig,

you're as prolific as I am. I've had my 10D for a little over 2 years and I zeroed continuous numbering out 9 times - and still kicking. Haven't had a single problem with it.

Mark

Jerrold wrote:
Any guess-timates on the cost to replace a 10D shutter? Of course, I'm assuming that this 50,000 capture figure represent the shutter-life and not the sensor-life. Right?

I still have the 10D, and the shutter crapped out at about 112k shots.  Right in the middle of a dance routine I was being paid to shoot.  I had to run back to the office borrow my boss's S2 and go back and shoot the rest.

I have since purchased a 1dmkii.  The 10D is my backup camera.  The fleet of 10Ds out there should either start being discarded en-mass, or else repaired.  Mine cost $300 roughly.  Seems Canon uses a "shutter assembly" for the shutter in the 10D that came from a less expensive film camera.

Anyway, the 1series, film or digital, have shutters built to withstand many more uses.

Ben Allen wrote:
I still have the 10D, and the shutter crapped out at about 112k shots.  Right in the middle of a dance routine I was being paid to shoot.  I had to run back to the office borrow my boss's S2 and go back and shoot the rest.

I have since purchased a 1dmkii.  The 10D is my backup camera.  The fleet of 10Ds out there should either start being discarded en-mass, or else repaired.  Mine cost $300 roughly.  Seems Canon uses a "shutter assembly" for the shutter in the 10D that came from a less expensive film camera.

Anyway, the 1series, film or digital, have shutters built to withstand many more uses.

Ben,

I would have upgraded my 10D a few months ago but since MkII was introduced in Feb 2004 I though I will give it a little wait believing Canon will sure come with new version of their flagship. Well, they introduced 5D which doesn't seem like the way to go for me. I've heard there is a new MkII also with some minor mods. Anyway, my question is, since you have gone from 10D to MkII, have you noticed improvement in picture? 10D is known for its occasional softness. How would you describe the change?

Thanks a lot,

Mark

MarkMarek wrote:

Ben,

I would have upgraded my 10D a few months ago but since MkII was introduced in Feb 2004 I though I will give it a little wait believing Canon will sure come with new version of their flagship. Well, they introduced 5D which doesn't seem like the way to go for me. I've heard there is a new MkII also with some minor mods. Anyway, my question is, since you have gone from 10D to MkII, have you noticed improvement in picture? 10D is known for its occasional softness. How would you describe the change?

Thanks a lot,

Mark

Actually, the 1dmkii is softer out of camera than the 10D.  Very noticable.  Now everyone don't come and pour your prune juice on me...  Yes, you can enhance the image with in-camera sharpening.  Of course you can do that. 

So is there a terrific improvement in image quality?  Not that I noticed.  but that's not why I bought the 1dmkii.  If you want a huge improvement in image quality, diffuse your light, add fill-in, and expose for the highlights.  Get a meter. 

I do appreciate having a larger RAW file to process, not that I shoot RAW all that often.  Storing gobs and gobs of RAW files can be a headache.  I mainly bought the 1dmkii because it has an enormous buffer, is heavier, built stronger.  I have the 1Vhs, and I love the way it feels and responds.  It was a no-brainer for me to get another 1series camera. 

That said, if you go from a 10 or 20D to a 1dmkii, you'll probably experience quite a bit of let-down with the menus of the 1series cameras.  You can't just push one button, let go and spin knobs and dials.  You have to keep buttons held down.  The most annoying is when you're shooting using a Kelvin temperature for your temperature.  It requires you to reach over with the thumb on your left hand and push a button nearly in the middle of the camera, while turning the switch with your pointer finger of your right hand.  That's a bit of a stretch for me.

But I DO find the camera extremely well suited for how much work I give it.  Hope that wasn't too much to read.

Luis Solorzano wrote:

Yup, but repair is covered by the extended warranty so now I will have two rebels!

And what is wrong with having two cameras? i cannot imagine shooting without a backup
Bob

Craig Thomson wrote:
Wow...my 10D passed 90,000

My rebel did as well and it just died bout a week ago. I had actually given it to the wife and was keeping it as a back up cam. We're going to ship it off to canon tomorrow, if it's more then 200.00 to repair, we're just gonna get her the xt and I'm going to upgrade from 20d to 5d and keep the 20d as my working spare, as I really don't like the 20d

Dave Mullins wrote:
How come we have never had to ask how many frames have been shot with  a film Camera? But now with a used digital camera, you have to ask it.

I think it is planned failure to get you to buy a new camera every few years or to get the repair revenue.

Dave

Digital shooters normally shoot at much higher rates than a film shooter because they don't have those pesky film and processing costs to deal with. A typical small-scale film shoot might be 36 or 72 frames; digital could easily be several hundred.

I am sure that if anyone managed to hit those six-figure values with a film camera, the same thing could happen. I recently lost the shutter in a 25-year Minolta XG-7. In all that time, it only saw about 6 years of regular use. I would estimate no more than 10,000 shutter cycles in its lifetime. It is possible that long idle periods were a contributing factor.

Keep this in mind when describing digital as being "free" when compared to film.

rp_photo wrote:

Digital shooters normally shoot at much higher rates than a film shooter because they don't have those pesky film and processing costs to deal with. A typical small-scale film shoot might be 36 or 72 frames; digital could easily be several hundred.

I am sure that if anyone managed to hit those six-figure values with a film camera, the same thing could happen. I recently lost the shutter in a 25-year Minolta XG-7. In all that time, it only saw about 6 years of regular use. I would estimate no more than 10,000 shutter cycles in its lifetime. It is possible that long idle periods were a contributing factor.

Keep this in mind when describing digital as being "free" when compared to film.

good point but i have no idea how many rolls my canon ae1 has seen. its never been in a shop and im pretty sure its about as old as me. i know that when i first started out with that cam it saw about 40 rolls per months for atleast 3years straight.