Backup camera - 10D or 350D?

I need to get myself a backup camera for wedding work, and it'd be very handy to have a 2nd camera for theatre work - but the theatre work doesn't make me much money. Theatre is almost all at ISO1600, maybe a little at 800 and 3200. at I can get a 2nd hand 10D in good condition for about NZ$1000, or a new 350D for NZ$1400. I'm not sure what to get right now.

The 350D has the advantage of being much better at high ISO, which is great for theatre. The downside is it's a bit small, not a huge problem, but also that to access some functions you have to go into a menu to use it. Since i've never used one i'm not sure how important that would be.

The 10D has the advantage of having a very similar control layout to my 20D, which would be handy. The downside is it's used, older, and the high ISO performance isn't so good - i'm not sure if ISO 1600 is usable.

Any thoughts or suggestions, especially from people using the 350D for theatre or low light work?

Tim, I can't speak to the 350D as I haven't used one but when I had my 10D the high ISO shots were pretty noisey. Most of them were recoverable with a noise removal program but that was just another step in the workflow.

Having two bodies with different menu systems is not that undaunting as it may seem. I moved from the 10D to the 1DMKII and then added a 20D and its amazing at how the human mind (even mine) can adapt to whatever body you happen to pick up.

If it were me making the choice and the difference in cost is not a huge issue I would go with the 350D just to have the newer technology and the lower noise rate at high ISO.

Another issue is that the 350D is a bottom of the range SLR, even though it's a very good camera there's the image thing to worry about with weddings. If it's just my backup body I don't think it's as important, especially if I have two cameras around my neck.

The 10D being used you really have no idea how many shutter operations it may have or other problems pending due to normal wear and tear that could result in a hefty repair bill and down time. I've never had the 350D in my hands to get an idea of the size and feel, but this to me would be a better direction to go for a backup where it would new with warranty. The only downside for the 350D for me would be that batteries and chargers 20D to 350D are not interchangable - extra stuff to carry or keep track of. Maybe you could also consider the 300D for use as a backup. Not quite what a 20D or 350D are, but it does a pretty good job for 6 MP. B&H here in the US still lists them at $659.95 (US), so they appear to be available. The 300D is what I use for backup and as of yet haven't had to use it for that. I've been trying to somewhat perserve my 20D for important events, particularly those that pay and I've been using the 300D sort of as the bang around camera for other shooting that may not need the resolution.


"Another issue is that the 350D is a bottom of the range SLR, even though it's a very good camera there's the image thing to worry about with weddings. If it's just my backup body I don't think it's as important, especially if I have two cameras around my neck."
300D was available with a black body that didn't look bad. My backup stays close at hand in a bag. If the 20D went belly up, I would worry about "image" to much.

For a wedding any of the EOS digital cameras would do, since i'm unlikely to use it much. The 10D/20D would be better here as they look more professional, though a black 350D with the sticker covered would probably be fine too. Theatre is less important since it brings in less money, that's what'd need the high ISO performance.

The 10D i'm looking at is from a friend, it has a low shutter count as it was a backup camera that was replaced under warranty.

The 10D is a work horse. Since you have a 20D, the controls don't vary much. The ISO at 800 and 1600 is useable on the 10D. And I guess with software, its even more useable.

You'll like the 10, it'll remind you of the 20, just without those improvements.

You really can't go too wrong with either in my opinion. I kept my 10D, and am glad I did. If I didn't have another camera and my budger was $700 or less, I would tempted by the 350. As far as weddings are concerned... are you serious? They are going to choose you based on your work - not what camera is around your neck. Last two weddings I went to the photog had ancient equipement... and no one seemed to know the difference. I like the idea of a small bodied camera to take on trips.... there are times the 20D or 10D are needlessly big and heavy to carry around. I like the idea of something a little different so you will use it in different circumstances rather then just hanging around your neck as extra bling-bling. cheers!

A black 350D might be quite good then.

Has anyone done low light action photography with one? Is the lack of external controls much of a problem?

I'd sooner have the camera that does the job than one that looks the part but doesn't do the job I need from it. I can't really comment on the 10D as I never used one, I've never shot indoors much with the 350D either so I don't know if it does what you want. I do shoot at ISO 1600 a great deal and have very little noise problems. Each to their own, I know there is something to be said for looking professional, but I would work out which camera will do the job best and go for that myself.

I've had alot of people ask me for help or my opinion when out shooting with my 350D (both my black and my silver one also) thinking I was a professional even though I'm pretty much a newbie. So I wonder how many people out there really do notice or know the difference ? I can't really offer much other than get the unit which will do what you want best, if both do it just as well for your needs get the better, more professional looking unit I guess.

I'll look for some of my low light stuff(from the 10D-no noise reduction in any of them) and post it up soon, Tim.

Thanks grego.

First off, this is my first SLR camera, but here is my 2 cents on this camera. This might be a small thing, or it might be a big thing, its something to consider though since you mentioned having to access some of the functions through the settings. Well, the basic functions, ISO, AF, WB, and metering mode are on the 4 arrows. If you are in a dark theatre or even outside at night, sometimes its very hard to see, so unless you memorized them, you wont know which one is which until you press something. Also, if its dark, you wont be able to see jack from the top window that tells you the shutter speed and the aperature until you hit the light button. Sure you can always look through the view finder to see what those numbers are, since they light up, but I just feel retarded doing that for some reason.

Im not sure how the 10D or the 20D work, since they both have that little window on the top.

As far as snapping actual pictures in low light, even at 1600iso ive gotten some good pictures. I dont think the noise level is a problem on this camera.

Here you go Tim. All of them shot RAW. All 70-200 f/2.8. No noise reduction.

With the Sigma 70-200 2.8 at 1600
http://img383.imagesha​ck.us …/football1600no​ise2dq.jpg

With the Canon 70-200 IS at 800
http://img383.imagesha​ck.us …ce800noise2crw7​0475sj.jpg

http://img383.imagesha​ck.us …1694/dance800no​ise1af.jpg

70-200 IS at 1600
http://img383.imagesha​ck.us …089/bball1600no​ise9tn.jpg

Thanks MegaTron. Noise on the 350D and the 20D are pretty much identical. Having markings on the buttons is fine, I can use my 20D in the dark, and i'll be able to do the same with the 350D if I get one. I have no problem looking at the aperture/shutter speed in the viewfinder, there's no other option in dark theatres sometimes.

350D is probably the front runner right now.

Thanks Grego. The 10D doesn't look so hot - it looks like the 20D is better at ISO1600 than the 10D at ISO800. Look like the 350D is the better option.