Discussion in 'Photography Board' started by wendyt_ca, Dec 21, 2012.
With all due respect, there's always another camera coming.
Log in or Sign up to hide this advert.
Sigh, remember when there really wasn't, at least not at the rate it is now?
I had an Olympus OM10 back in the day. It was purchased by my father is the late 70s and he handed it down to me and I used it well into the mid 90s. I have some fantastic pictures from it.
It died sometime after the year 2000 or I might still be using it!
That, and Canon's sensors have really fallen behind in dynamic range compared to the sensors most other dSLRs use (Sony). Canon's new process is likely to address the DR issue and may even provide a leap past Sony, maybe we will see the new sensors on the 70D. As for timing, the 60D is Canon's longest selling dSLR so its replacement is expected soon.
I hear you guys. But I'm a cheapskate and would probably be more likely to want to buy the older model to get the best deal.
I would love to have even better low ISO, but as I feared, the 60D has the same processor, so that wouldn't step things up. The T4i has my attention for that very reason. So maybe I just need to wait for the T5i so I can get a deal on the "old" model?
Plus some other things.
1) The articulating screen looks very useful.
2) I have yearned for a higher burst rate for a long time as well. I thought I would be fine when Timmy quit cross countr, but I still keep hitting my buffer. 3) I can see that extra dial being very handy.
I'm just not sure if any one of those things could justify the price of a new one. Perhaps I'm just getting ready for the T2i to die a natural death. I don't know how to find the number of actuations, but I'm sure mine is very high.
I got the 50D over the T2i because of the burst rate and larger buffer. My daughter dances and it seemed like a good idea. I've regretted it ever since. Don't get me wrong, I love my 50D. But I'd rather have had the slightly the better ISO performance of the T2i. My experience has been that the faster burst rate with the 50D really doesn't make a huge difference over what I had with my Rebel XT. I was already used to anticipating shot and working with the smaller buffer I had. Anyway, that's just my personal experience with that.
As far as justification for a new camera, I'm in the same boat. I'm getting the 5DmkIII with the income tax refund (provided we don't all fall off the fiscal cliff LOL) It's something that's been planned and my husband is totally on board with. But it's still hard to justify it to myself because my 50D really is perfectly fine. It's that whole want vs. need thing. I don't need it to do what I do but I sure do want it.
I would totally choose better ISO performance over the buffer. But I'd sure like to have both.
Full frame isn't in my future, and it's just seeming to me like the other options just aren't enough better the justify the outlay. So here I sit.
I can't wait to see what you do with your 5DmIII though. Fingers crossed that they work things out in DC so you have it sooner rather than later!
This is what my husband keeps saying. "I better see some totally awesome shots coming out of that camera". No pressure there. LOL
in the old film days a camera model stayed around much longer. I think camera manufacturers have discovered that a sizable number of consumers will buy the upgrades every year (or quarter)
It has more to do with the speed of changes.
In the 90s... if you didn't buy a new computer every 2 years, you would find yourself completely outdated. But the technology has now reached a point, where desktop/laptop advances are more incremental, so you can keep a computer around for a few years.
But smart phones and tablets are still advancing technologically so fast, that you will become outdated quickly if you don't upgrade.
For years, camera technology didn't change much. Even today, it's not like you are seeing revolutionary jumps in lenses. A 1997 SLR was not dramatically more advanced than a 1982 SLR. Image quality was generally very similar between the camera bodies, and more depending on the film, processing and lens.
But how would a 2005 dSLR compare to any 2012 dSLR? The technology is still new enough, that it is making revolutionary strides every couple of years... ISOs and noise levels are improving by a couple of f-stops every couple of years. Innovative features like GPS and tilting screens are being added in. For a few years, resolution was making big jumps... going from 2mp to 5mp, to the point now where 10mp cameras are standard and cheap. Larger sensors are being incorporated into smaller bodies.
Compare a Nikon D60 with the Nikon D3200-- The entry level Nikon dSLR, in 4 years went from: ISO1600 improved 2 stops to ISO6400.. Resolution more than doubled from 10mp to 24mp.. Phase detection autofocus was introduced, noise ratings improved by 1 f-stop, overall IQ rating jumped from 65 to 81.
Just as the need to upgrade computers slowed down, the pace of change in cameras will start to slow down as well.
With film you can drop a new roll of film in an old camera. So when ISO speeds got faster and grain got tighter you didn't have to replace your entire body. And that's not even considering the technology gains in processing. With digital you can't just drop a new sensor and image processor in. And the manufacturers do know we will keep on paying for the current technology. It just used to be that we'd pay more for higher quality film and processing rather than a new camera. It's why Kodak is dead.
Need to find the time to read through the manual and figure out all the cool features.
First of all, this is a great thread . . . Just what I was looking for. Does anyone have any experience with the 7D vs. the 60D? I have a Canon A2e from my newspaper days and have only had a point and shoot since leaving the business. I am looking to get back into photography with something comparable to what I had back in the film days. I have a nice Speedlite and a few EF lenses that appear to be compatible.
If you can swing it, I'd add the 6D to your consideration list.
60D, according to reports, is nearly extinct. I think they aren't making anymore. That is why there are good deals around. 60D and 7D are very similar with the exception of build, speed, and auto focus differences.
Supposedly a 70D is in the works as well as a 7D Mk II or something like that.
Even as a 40th birthday gift I think the 6D is going to be a stretch!
The 7D is still a better all around camera than the 60D in terms of features. dpreview.com has some great comparison tools if you want to look close at that. The sensor is nearly the same though, so image quality wise they're very close. Now... the T4i is a freaking awesome little camera. A lot of people shy away from the Rebels but if I were buying crop sensor right now I'd skip the 60D and the 7D for the T4i. While it doesn't quite have the 7D's zillion point auto focus system, it does have a newer sensor design and will auto focus with video using STM lenses. There's other features that to me make it a better camera to go with at this moment in time and again, dpreview.com has the rundown on that. But in the end it's you shopping and not me, so you have to weigh all the features/price/size yourself.
The EF lenses should work fine as long as they are Canon lenses. There are some issues with old third party lenses not working with newer cameras. There are voltage issues with older speedlites that can, over time, damage DSLR's. I'd research and make sure the particular speedlite you have is safe.
Great idea. I guess I have some more research ahead of me.
I love my 60d, it takes great pictures!
Separate names with a comma.