2 350 D bodies

Not wanting to repeat myself until death, but I understand the OP's plan is to buy good glass, and while s/he's waiting for the funds to afford better bodies *too*, s/he knows that it's important to have a second body for backup purpouses (heck I have three and sometimes feel nervous!).

I find the plan great, and it's the plan I had - and I'm proud of it! I'm still not totally there as in waiting to buy either my 2nd 30D or my first 40D. But I do have the funds coming in shortly, so I'll soon own 4 cameras (actually thinking of making one 350D an infra red cam!)

amironsi wrote in post #4169018
I have a 350D body with the lens kit. and everyone keeps recommanding me to get another body with me if i am going to into wedding photography.
Now i have the chance to buy another 350D body for a good price and i don't know should i get another body as the one i have or wait and save more and get a better one...Or take the money and get some lenses??

Can any one help me with this Delimina....

amonline wrote in post #4177741
My main concern of owning anything below the XXD line besides the obvious image quality difference is the lack of incredibly longer battery time. Grips are a God-Send. I agree with most of what's been said in the thread as well.

amonline wrote in post #4188099
However, I've been talking about the 40D the entire thread with you and THAT DOES make a significant difference.

Re-read your posts again, i've provided them for you above.

amonline wrote in post #4188099
I agree on the importance of glass at this stage in a beginner's career. This thread was about a second camera, not glass.

Re-read his original post at the top of this post. It's about both actually.

amonline wrote in post #4189308
Honestly, there's a lot of directions one should pursue with $450 when they only own a 350 body and kit lens. A second camera is probably not the smartest choice anyway.

He will need another body for weddings, that's a given.

So we agree that better glass and the 350d is the way to go then??

CyberPet wrote in post #4190567
Not wanting to repeat myself until death, but I understand the OP's plan is to buy good glass, and while s/he's waiting for the funds to afford better bodies *too*, s/he knows that it's important to have a second body for backup purpouses (heck I have three and sometimes feel nervous!).

I find the plan great, and it's the plan I had - and I'm proud of it! I'm still not totally there as in waiting to buy either my 2nd 30D or my first 40D. But I do have the funds coming in shortly, so I'll soon own 4 cameras (actually thinking of making one 350D an infra red cam!)

I'm glad someone else thinks the way I and many other's do. Maybe its because both you and I have actually had to do it this way that we can relate to the OP's concerns.

I have a XT, XTi, and a 40D. The XT's images are not as good as the 40Ds, but I have to admit, its difficult to tell. I think the XTis images are better than the XT, but again its not easy to tell. I can't really tell a difference between the XTis images and the 40Ds. Maybe its because they use the same sensor, or maybe its because I haven't shot with the 40D for long enough yet. It does take awhile looking at quite a few photos to start being able to tell the difference.

The biggest difference is that the 40D gets MORE good images rather than actually producing significantly better IQ. The autofocus in low light is the biggest difference I notice between my 40D and the XTi or XT. The focus is much faster and quieter in low light and you can capture more of those fleeting moments.

I've heard that the 40D's AF system is improved over the 30D's... so I don't know if a 30D would be that much improvement over the XTi, but the 40D's AF system is the BIGGEST difference especially for wedding photography. We probably get 20-30 more quality images per wedding than we did before.

Do you ever get frustrated when you see a great smile or laugh and you press the shutter but the thing won't focus quickly enough because its low light or some other reason? If you do, you'll have less of that with a 40D.

Considering the price difference of $900 dollars or so between a 40D and a 350D, I'd probably recommend getting the 350D and getting a nice lens, because the lens will probably get you a lot MORE images per wedding than the 40D would. The 17-55mm 2.8 goes for about $900 dollars. That will give you 200 more images than a kit lens.

I've owned a Digital Rebel, XT, XTi and now a 40D. I can say that without a doubt I get many, MANY more good pictures (Keepers) with my 40D than all three of the others combined. The 40D gets better pictures in difficult situations that the other three would not have been as good.

I think what some are saying is that when the couple happens to be in the darkest part of the reception hall and you need to capture that moment, the camera body you have will make a difference, the lens will definitely help, but that's where you will see a difference between a rebel series and a xxD series camera.

It's much easier, and less expensive to rent pro level lenses than bodies, so...I decided to spend money on the body and rent the lenses I need until I have the money to buy the lenses.

So...my two cents on the original question...save the money you have to put towards a new body, like a 40D or 5D, rent the lenses you need. At some point you can buy a new body and use your 350D as a backup.

brenno wrote in post #4192127
So we agree that better glass and the 350d is the way to go then??

Not really. He needs much more than that. The best advice is that the OP consider they have a long road of equipment to purchase. A lens or two and another body are not going to cut it anyway.

I also like how you took my first quote out of context and deleted the rest of what I said. You did the same thing with the next two quotes after a page and a half of further discussion where I started to talk about the 40D. But hey, congrats - you can have the last word here. C'mon... I know you want it.