Steve'sDigicams

diamonddawg21 · Jul 30, 2006, 7:55 PM

I just sold my Canon EOS Elan 7E for a fraction of what I paid for it several years ago, and that encluded lenses. I am planning on picking up the Canon 30D to shoot mainly my sons basketball games and family stuff. Im a really excited about purchasing this camera but I am a tad bit worried about dropping 1400+ on a system that can possibly be out dated in less then two years. If I am being paranoid someone please let me know,but I had read severalarticles on how the mfg's mainly Canon keep tryingone up the other and it forces all the others to do the same, when yet in the 35MM world a body could go for years before a major over haul.

Jul 30, 2006, 8:18 PM

The camera body MIGHT be outdated in 2-3 years, but, the lenses should be good for decades.

mtclimber · Jul 30, 2006, 8:50 PM

I agree with John Bernabeau-

I attempt to turn over my DSLR's about every 14 to 16 months. The last one I sold, a Canon 20D, was sold at 70% of its purchase price, Which seem fair to me. The lenses will pretty much always keep about 70 to 80% of their purchase price as long as they are well taken care of all the time..

MT/Sarah

rjseeney · Jul 30, 2006, 9:12 PM

Sure the body may not be the latest greatest thing, but any DSLR purchased today will yield great images for many years to come. You don't have to upgrade every 18 months. There will always be something better than what you have, but that doesn't make what you have useless.

robbo · Jul 30, 2006, 10:19 PM

I agree with rjseeney - Something better and faster (and maybe cheaper) is coming out all the time. But if your camera can do what you want it to do, and it isn't broken, and doesn't use a memory card that has been discontinued, then why buy something to replace it? Unless you're a professional and the purchase price is offset by increased income due to the use of the new camera. It would seem to me that you could use a Canon 30D for at least 3 years and satisfy the needs of the average amateur photographer.

stowaway7 · Jul 31, 2006, 5:53 AM

While digital camera are not computers, if you purchased a computer 2 years ago it would certainly be outdated bytodays standards. It may still function just fine, but new models come out seemingly every month with more memory, speed, etc. The same is true of DVD players, ipods, ad nauseum. Such is the world of electronics, and digital cameras are no exception. Most cameras "life-cycle" is based on shutter life, with the most rugged being rated (but NOT limited to) 150,000 to 200,000 releases. That's a lot of photos. By then, you may be ready to upgrade.I have an old Olympus E-10 fixed-lens DSLR that I purchased in October of 2000 that's still going strong. Lost track of how many images I've taken. Sure, the save time is slower than my new equipment but all-in-all it works just fine.

mtclimber · Jul 31, 2006, 10:16 AM

Perhaps I should give you more detail and the reason for the more rapid turn over in my DSLR stable of cameras. I am a professional instructor. I conduct workshops all over the world. As you might expect, right now, the hotest course that I offer isthe "Introduction to DSLR Cameras."where the participants of the workshop get 10 hours on basic photography, and three, one hour, shooting sessions where they can actually shoot with every consumer DSLR on the market today as they complete their assignment.

Because a lot of the attendees are using the couse and the workshops to decide on which DSLR camera they will purchase, and because of what we offer, we have to turn over equipment fairly regularly.

MT/Sarah

diamonddawg21 · Jul 31, 2006, 11:05 AM

thanks for the feedback everyone, I guess my main problem was not looking at the camera as aelectronic device.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

Steve'sDigicams

Recent Camera Reviews

Most Active Forums

Most Popular Deals

Latest Feature Articles

Jul 30, 2006, 7:55 PM	#1
diamonddawg21 Junior Member Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 3	I just sold my Canon EOS Elan 7E for a fraction of what I paid for it several years ago, and that encluded lenses. I am planning on picking up the Canon 30D to shoot mainly my sons basketball games and family stuff. Im a really excited about purchasing this camera but I am a tad bit worried about dropping 1400+ on a system that can possibly be out dated in less then two years. If I am being paranoid someone please let me know,but I had read severalarticles on how the mfg's mainly Canon keep tryingone up the other and it forces all the others to do the same, when yet in the 35MM world a body could go for years before a major over haul.

Jul 30, 2006, 8:18 PM	#2
bernabeu Guest Posts: n/a	The camera body MIGHT be outdated in 2-3 years, but, the lenses should be good for decades.

Jul 30, 2006, 8:50 PM	#3
mtclimber Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: Oregon, USA Posts: 18,143	I agree with John Bernabeau- I attempt to turn over my DSLR's about every 14 to 16 months. The last one I sold, a Canon 20D, was sold at 70% of its purchase price, Which seem fair to me. The lenses will pretty much always keep about 70 to 80% of their purchase price as long as they are well taken care of all the time.. MT/Sarah

Jul 30, 2006, 9:12 PM	#4
rjseeney Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Taylor Mill, Kentucky Posts: 2,398	Sure the body may not be the latest greatest thing, but any DSLR purchased today will yield great images for many years to come. You don't have to upgrade every 18 months. There will always be something better than what you have, but that doesn't make what you have useless.

Jul 30, 2006, 10:19 PM	#5
robbo Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2003 Posts: 978	I agree with rjseeney - Something better and faster (and maybe cheaper) is coming out all the time. But if your camera can do what you want it to do, and it isn't broken, and doesn't use a memory card that has been discontinued, then why buy something to replace it? Unless you're a professional and the purchase price is offset by increased income due to the use of the new camera. It would seem to me that you could use a Canon 30D for at least 3 years and satisfy the needs of the average amateur photographer.

Jul 31, 2006, 5:53 AM	#6
stowaway7 Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 183	While digital camera are not computers, if you purchased a computer 2 years ago it would certainly be outdated bytodays standards. It may still function just fine, but new models come out seemingly every month with more memory, speed, etc. The same is true of DVD players, ipods, ad nauseum. Such is the world of electronics, and digital cameras are no exception. Most cameras "life-cycle" is based on shutter life, with the most rugged being rated (but NOT limited to) 150,000 to 200,000 releases. That's a lot of photos. By then, you may be ready to upgrade.I have an old Olympus E-10 fixed-lens DSLR that I purchased in October of 2000 that's still going strong. Lost track of how many images I've taken. Sure, the save time is slower than my new equipment but all-in-all it works just fine.

Jul 31, 2006, 10:16 AM	#7
mtclimber Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: Oregon, USA Posts: 18,143	Perhaps I should give you more detail and the reason for the more rapid turn over in my DSLR stable of cameras. I am a professional instructor. I conduct workshops all over the world. As you might expect, right now, the hotest course that I offer isthe "Introduction to DSLR Cameras."where the participants of the workshop get 10 hours on basic photography, and three, one hour, shooting sessions where they can actually shoot with every consumer DSLR on the market today as they complete their assignment. Because a lot of the attendees are using the couse and the workshops to decide on which DSLR camera they will purchase, and because of what we offer, we have to turn over equipment fairly regularly. MT/Sarah

Jul 31, 2006, 11:05 AM	#8
diamonddawg21 Junior Member Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 3	thanks for the feedback everyone, I guess my main problem was not looking at the camera as aelectronic device.