Rent a body for a trip?

I have a 40D now. As a general rule I don't think I am going to invest the money to upgrade it until it dies. (though if money allows I might change my mind on that).

However, I am going to Yellowstone this summer. Does it make sense to rent a 7D for that trip, so that I can maximize the photo opportunity?

Does it make sense to travel on such a trip (my second time to this once in a life time trip.. though my first in the digital camera era)... with a camera I have never used before? Is it close enough to the 40D that the learning curve won't effect the outcome?

Or... is it more work and money than its worth, ride to 40D and not worry about it.

My shooting style. I expect to be mostly on tripod for long shot wildlife. Birds in flight and action are what they are, I get them if I can. Not sure why I would desperatly need the high frame rate. Obvioulsy it will be all outdoors shooting, with the only high ISO needs are early morning sunrise (not very likely I would be out that early) and sunset.

Extremely unlikely that I would print anything at all, much less anything larger than 8x10, I don't sell (though I would be willing to take donations).

If I had a crop body and was going to a place such as Yellowstone while toying with the idea of renting a body, I'd go full frame. Crop+FF for maximum pleasure.

xinvisionx wrote in post #15661268
If I had a crop body and was going to a place such as Yellowstone while toying with the idea of renting a body, I'd go full frame. Crop+FF for maximum pleasure.

All but 1 of my lenses is crop only. The 1 that is not crop is the 150-500 and I don't think I would want to lose the 1.6x effect on the longest lens I have... which honestly could even be longer.

However, my thinking could be off on that..

I played with a 7D a couple years back and discovered there's a bit of a learning curve getting used to the AF system. I probably didn't give it enough of a chance before I got rid of it, but I just was not getting good results. I would suggest buying a used 7D a month before your trip and sell it after your trip for little to no money lost. Probably end up about the same as renting that way...assuming you have ~$850 you can spare for a little while.

With the complement of lenses that you have I would just go with the 40D. It should serve you quite well. If between now and then you have the means to upgrade, I still think I would recommend a cropped body just so you can utilize those lenses.

If you are going to Yellowstone I wonder if you are headed to the Jackson Hole area as well? If so I highly recommend Jackson Hole around July 4th, if that fits the schedule. It is a nice town at any time but around the 4th there is just so much to do of a patriotic nature. The Grand Tetons are just up the road as well. In this regard, check you PM.

I was going to recommend you rent a wider lens, but I see you already have a 10-20mm. I went to the Grand Canyon about two years ago and I only had a Rebel XT(350D) and all I did was rent a Canon 10-22 and I was happy with my photos.

I don't think you need to rent a body, maybe rent a Canon EF 8-15mm f/4L just to get a different look in your pictures.

I am older and my legs are not what they were so renting a body sounds like a great idea to me...oh, wait, you were asking about a camera body. Never mind.

I'm torn. Ultimatly I am likely to stick with the 40d. I thought it was getting old, and thought a replacement might be a good idea, but then I ran the eoscount.com thing on it and found it only had 26k shots on it, out of a potential 100k.

So i keep the body. Maybe for a few years longer. Thanks.

I can't think of a worse situation than having a new camera body and immediatly going out on a 'critical' shoot.

I moved from a 30D to a 60D and less than 24 hrs later, was shooting in a very low light situation Christmas festival of the trees (many decorated Christmas trees indoor display). I managed to figure out the menus and make the settings I was familiar with that were on the 30D, but there were some settings completely foreign to me, so I left them as is. The results were OK, but nothing that would have anyone saying WOW!

I vowed to have more practice time before I went out with a new camera again. Yup...upgraded to a 5D3 a year later...this past November. I had it a week before it was back to the next Christmas festival of the trees. At least I got comfortable with the somewhat different layout of the buttons, but the menus presented a whole new ballgame. So, I settled for making the settings I knew from the 60D, and let the rest stay at their factory settings. While the results were better than the prior year with the 60D, I'm sure I can do a lot better this year.

Bottom line, being very familiar with a camera as well as its abilities and limitations is a requirement to getting good results.

On the other side of the coin, perhaps renting a 7D for a month would work out OK. But I'm guessing the cost of renting it for a month ($250 incl shipping) plus, say, another $300-400 would be what would be needed if you bought a good condition used 7D ($900-1000) from a reputable source and sold the 40D ($250-300). Just an idea to consider...

You have plenty gear in your kit, just go with what you have and enjoy

boufa wrote in post #15661288
All but 1 of my lenses is crop only. The 1 that is not crop is the 150-500 and I don't think I would want to lose the 1.6x effect on the longest lens I have... which honestly could even be longer.

However, my thinking could be off on that..

You would not actually loose that much "reach" with the 5DIII over the 40D. The pixel density, which is all that matters in this situation is actually fairly close. The 5DIII works out to be about equivalent to the 8Mpx 20D in pixel density. The difference that the extra 2Mpx to the 40D will be marginal. The much better sensor would probably make up for that.

Of course the fact that you mostly only have crop only lenses makes the 5DIII a non starter. Of the current 18Mpx crop bodies the 7D has the closest control layout to the 40D, but by all accounts to get the best from the advanced AF features can take some practice, although I guess it would not be to hard to set it up to centre point and use it in the same way as you would one of the older XXD bodies.

Alan

BigAl007 wrote in post #15664385
You would not actually loose that much "reach" with the 5DIII over the 40D. The pixel density, which is all that matters in this situation is actually fairly close. The 5DIII works out to be about equivalent to the 8Mpx 20D in pixel density. The difference that the extra 2Mpx to the 40D will be marginal. The much better sensor would probably make up for that.

Most people define "reach" as what fills the viewfinder, not what they can crop and enlarge to. The pixel density argument is just twisted and wrong - in my opinion of course. It breaks my heart when I have to lose any of the pixels I've paid so much money for simply because I haven't framed the shot correctly in the first place.

Anyhoo, OP. I think your 40D will be perfectly fine for the trip, but would recommend having a point and shoot on standby.