Toronto Photography Meetup Group

Currently our 40D has over 60,000 shots. I am hoping to reserve the 40D for a backup camera down the road. However when this happens (maybe summer next year) I expect the 40D will be at the end of its shutter life i.e. 100,000. Thus the 40D is of little value as a backup camera. One option is to have the shutter replaced (approx $300) making it a decent backup camera. The question is it worth spending $300 to replace the shutter on this camera as it somewhat dated? I certainly would replace the shutter on a pro series camera such as the 1D mark III. On the other hand to Spend $1200+ on a new camera (I don

[quote="Bob"](I don

If I was in your shoes I would replace the shutter on the 40D rather than spend $1200+ on a backup camera. The 40D isn't too old tech wise, my backup to my 5D Mk2 is a 20D.

the 40D is only a little over a year old

I wouldn't buy a new camera.. the 40D has plenty of capability
and $300 is nothing compared to buying new

+1 on the shutter

personally, for a backup, I'd keep that since its better than other options for the same temporary investment.

Besides, you could probably sell it for more than the shutter replacement.

It sounds like you have some pretty high demands for a backup camera. My suggestion would be to keep the 40D as is for your day-to-day backup usages and replace the shutter when it goes.

For those photography vacations where you need the best and can't have a doubt on your backup, rent a pro body.

Sell the 40D now, buy your new main camera and when you go on a trip "rent" your backup by buying used before you leave and sell it again when you get back. You can have your cake and eat it! Craigs List is a wonderful tool!

It's a backup camera why replace the shutter unless it's showing signs of failure. The 100k is just an estimate it could fail today or go happily on and on into the future. My Xt is already at twice it's rated life.

+1 - this is akin to replacing your car engine at 300,000km just because that is the expected engine life, even though it may be working perfectly.

But at the same time throwing in a Type R or a HEMI or LS1 into that trusty corolla.

If you have the money to do that, you shouldn't be asking here for advice just do whatever you want

I agree with keeping 40d as it is until it fails, my grossly outdated XT is many times over its estimated number and works like a charm.

Also wouldn't lower end $600 dslr be sufficient for a back up?

You may be interested in this shutter life database from actual users:
http://www.olegkikin.com/shutterlife/sitemap.php

People have had the 40D die as low as 1400, and is still shooting with it over 250,000! Part of it is luck, part of it is how you care for your equipment; I used the same SLR for 20 years and never needed a repair.

The reason for asking advice is to get opinions on what I might be able to get away with or what other people would do; such as renting is an option I never considered. I already know the ultimate answer, which is a 7D. Considering the main cameras will be the 1D mark IV (myself) and the 1D mark III (my wife) and our photography is exclusively bird photography a 7D is a perfect choice because of a high frame rate, camera still retains the 1.6 crop and better high ISO capabilities. I am not prepared to spend $2000 for a camera just for backup purposes. However I know other people who have 2 identical camera bodies one being kept for backup (expensive especially if they are pro bodies).

I have no intention on replacing the shutter on the 40D (my wife

I don't think it would be hard to locate a backup body for purchase or rent in Florida should the worst happen.

It's not like you'd be in the Arctic, Africa, or Mars.

If the camera is rated at 100K actuations and you have 60K this means statistically you are at 60% which for a backup camera should be fine for a while. When you are at 90K or so just replace the shutter to be sure. Why spend money on nothing?

My 10D has about 1 billion actuations and is still going. Here's to hoping my 40D goes as well.

Worst case replace the shutter save your money for glass.

Another vote for keeping the 40D. It is a great camera. I think you should use the camera until failure. Although it is rated @ 100,000. I wonder how many more actuation it can handle.

I agree.... I've never had a back-up camera because I always put the extra $$$ into a lens, etc. If you have something important you need for (wedding, event, trip) then just pick up a used rebel xt for $300 or less.

My solution, considering I do the same kind of shooting that you do Bob, is that I got my wife a 7D.

When you spend thousands on a trip, a backup camera isn't optional. A crappy backup body for the type of shooting we do, really won't do.

I also keep a different lens on the backup body, so a backup body is never wasted. I get many good shots that otherwise would be missed.

I was thinking in the same line, have a 7D as a bakup - but is an expensive way to go and in my case the body would be waisted. I would love to have a 7D with a shorter lens on it as I agree as alot of good shots are missed becaue of along lens. But that will not happen, I simply can not carry anymore gear. Lugging the 800 around is all I can handle. If I get the mark IV xext week, the issue is resolved as the 40D should serve as a backup.

Did you get your Mark IV Bob? I'd be interested in hearing your thoughts on its performance compared to Mark III in real world shooting.

Yes I got the Mark IV. So far I am just blown away. With mk3 I was always waiting for the buffer to empty. I was concerned with the buffer size of the mk4, but with an extreme pro card I did not find myself with a stalled camera. Out of 2500 images I shot one day, I found few that were not in focus. A major upgrade form the mk3. Even got focused images when focusing using the ring of fire. However I was only out twice, one night shot and one afternoon shot. The ligh was not good for the afternoon shot. It is what the mk3 was to be and then some.