Canon 60D: Homerun or Disappointment?

[icelava]

There is also another angle. People who are serious about their cameras fall into two camps.... those that have a love for photography and those who have a love for gear.

that threw me off my chair.....

I've never seen/heard anybody start off by "serious about their cameras" as a concept of origin.

Maybe it's just me, but i thought the logical path is for ppl to get serious about doing something, some activity, before thinking about the equipment to satisfy that activity.

Because, y'know, i just buy fishing rods and hooks without considering that I even want to go fishing....

Those who love photography are those who are in love with their pictures, not gear.

 

[Anthony Lee]

that threw me off my chair.....

I've never seen/heard anybody start off by "serious about their cameras" as a concept of origin.

Maybe it's just me, but i thought the logical path is for ppl to get serious about doing something, some activity, before thinking about the equipment to satisfy that activity.

Because, y'know, i just buy fishing rods and hooks without considering that I even want to go fishing....

Those who love photography are those who are in love with their pictures, not gear.

Yes and no. Without a well looked after camera, you may not get a good photo. Gear needs to be good but not necessarily expensive. I always believe in a good worksman is also one who loves his tools and take care of them. I have custom build hundreds of fishing rods for all applications and they are necessary not only to win competition but also enjoy good fishing. And I also enjoy taking good photos of my fishing rods with a reasonably good camera that I love and look after them, both camera and fishing rods well.

 

[manveer]

exactly. the equipment need not be expensive, or high end. like for myself, i bought a canon G9 several years back. i wanted a camera which allowed me to play with all the manual settings, and over time, i understood what everything meant before finally upgrading to a dslr. with my G9, i think i was one of the few who was lucky enough to manage to get the most out of its performance, and my pictures surprised many.. but i guess it was just a combination of experience and sheer understanding of the camera, and some luck.

 

[TheStig]

exactly. the equipment need not be expensive, or high end. like for myself, i bought a canon G9 several years back. i wanted a camera which allowed me to play with all the manual settings, and over time, i understood what everything meant before finally upgrading to a dslr. with my G9, i think i was one of the few who was lucky enough to manage to get the most out of its performance, and my pictures surprised many.. but i guess it was just a combination of experience and sheer understanding of the camera, and some luck.

The G9 was one of the most expensive small-sensor digital cameras on the market when it was launched. It is a great little camera. I had a G6 ;p and that was the camera that made me decide to upgrade to DSLR.

 

[icelava]

Yes and no. Without a well looked after camera, you may not get a good photo. Gear needs to be good but not necessarily expensive. I always believe in a good worksman is also one who loves his tools and take care of them.

i do not think the context of his "seriousness" with cameras pertained to the passion of taking care of the equipment. It seemed more to me about the "decision-making" process of buying equipment.

 

[raydio]

i do not think the context of his "seriousness" with cameras pertained to the passion of taking care of the equipment. It seemed more to me about the "decision-making" process of buying equipment.

Kind of... Actually what I really meant was....

I think that everyone has an initial intention of buying a camera for the purpose of taking photographs. This is a good intention.

However, as some individuals become aware of the "marketplace".... in other words, increasingly aware of the gear that is available coupled with an awareness of what is owned by friends/family and colleagues (from ClubSnap and others) in relation to their camera.... they may feel from a competitive spirit, that their camera is not good enough. So to stand out, they will buy the most expensive camera that they can afford... even if they don't really need all the bells and whistles of the new and improved camera.

These individuals become increasingly interested and aware of every single feature of every camera. They will compare features like (among many others) the pixel density of sensors and the strength of low-pass filters from the lowly 1000D to the mightly 1Ds MkIII! These people are known as "gear heads" and seem to be uniquely male. In comparison, people who have a genuine passion for photography, couldn't care less about every feature, advantage and benefit of their camera. They just want to pursue the perfect photograph!

The decision making process of the gear head is not entirely based on "what I truly need", it is based on "what will make me stand out"! A revealing symptom of this kind of behaviour, is one who spends more time on a forum about cameras than the time spent actually taking photographs.

(Note: I am not in any way pointing fingers but rather expressing an opinion based on experience... my experience.... which I hope has changed for the better).

 

[icelava]

So to stand out, they will buy the most expensive camera that they can afford... even if they don't really need all the bells and whistles of the new and improved camera.

I think that is a very sad mental state to be in. I believe in buying stuff one intends to use to fulfill one's requirements. Like in anything in life, lay down and be clear about your requirements first, then match the tool to the requirements. You don't need a chainsaw to cut a few sheets of paper.

There is no point in showing off camera gear. There is only value in showing off pictures.

 

[suicyde240]

erm... wasnt this thread supposed to be about the 60D?;p

 

[raydio]

erm... wasnt this thread supposed to be about the 60D?;p

How right you are!.... Back to the 60D....

 

[Wurdelak]

going back to 60D... it will be eaten alive by the D7000, hands down!:cry:

 

[raydio]

going back to 60D... it will be eaten alive by the D7000, hands down!:cry:

You may be right. The saving grace in favour of the 60D may be the fact that it has an articulating screen and is less expensive. Whether those two factors are enough to save the 60D is another thing.

If I were a betting man, I would probably agree with you; sigh....

 

[lightning]

going back to 60D... it will be eaten alive by the D7000, hands down!:cry:

Why are you bothered by it?

 

[hotchoco1ate]

going back to 60D... it will be eaten alive by the D7000, hands down!:cry:

Why are you so sure? It looks good on paper yes, but the price is also higher than the 60D. Its just that nikon chose to bridge the gap from their d90(4.5 (d90) to 6(d7000) to 8(d300s)) to the d300/d300s. On the other hand, the canon already has a camera equivalent to the d7000, which is the 50D, shooting at 6.3FPS.

Other than a 100% live view and a dual SD card slots, which are basically cosmetic differences to me at least, they are about the same specs wise. Any higher than 50D would be the 7D already.

If the implemented the 60D with 100% VF and dual SD card slots, 6.x FPS and whatnot, the 50D will be crushed entirely. And there will be a hell lot of overlap in specs, which is honestly, a bad idea.

 

[icelava]

If the implemented the 60D with 100% VF and dual SD card slots, 6.x FPS and whatnot, the 50D will be crushed entirely. And there will be a hell lot of overlap in specs, which is honestly, a bad idea.

But the 50D has gone out of production hasn't it?

 

[hotchoco1ate]

But the 50D has gone out of production hasn't it?

Has it? I seriously hope not as the 50D and the 60D are different cameras to some extent, mainly the FPS and the joystick, not to mention the usage of CF cards on the 50D. Actually there is not much difference is there?

 

[dliem]

On the other hand, the canon already has a camera equivalent to the d7000, which is the 50D, shooting at 6.3FPS.

But 39 AF points vs 9? Oh come on...
I'm not shooting sport, for me AF points more important than fps.
Currently I'm maintaining 2 system
Canon, since it's easy to buy any'thing' (will reduce some lens soon)
Sony, since the lens is amazing (sold some old minolta lens, but will never sell anymore)
But now a bit tempted by Nikon...
But hell, just wait for A77 (Canon 7D is too overpriced for me...)

 

[postal]

But 39 AF points vs 9? Oh come on...
I'm not shooting sport, for me AF points more important than fps.
Currently I'm maintaining 2 system
Canon, since it's easy to buy any'thing' (will reduce some lens soon)
Sony, since the lens is amazing (sold some old minolta lens, but will never sell anymore)
But now a bit tempted by Nikon...
But hell, just wait for A77 (Canon 7D is too overpriced for me...)

FYI not all 39 AF points point are cross type while canon 60D is all cross type... 7D is 19 cross type...

Seriously... most of us use AF at the center bah... does it seriously matters if u have 100 AF points?

 

[hotchoco1ate]

FYI not all 39 AF points point are cross type while canon 60D is all cross type... 7D is 19 cross type...

Seriously... most of us use AF at the center bah... does it seriously matters if u have 100 AF points?

Exactly. You have 39 AF points no doubt, but your cross type is all in the centre, which i believe is less spread out than the 60D 9 points. And besides, if AF point 38 is only 0.2mm beside AF point 39, whats the difference? machiam using same point.

Compare AF points for what really? Its just a trivial matter if you are not shooting action...

 

[hotchoco1ate]

But 39 AF points vs 9? Oh come on...
I'm not shooting sport, for me AF points more important than fps.
Currently I'm maintaining 2 system
Canon, since it's easy to buy any'thing' (will reduce some lens soon)
Sony, since the lens is amazing (sold some old minolta lens, but will never sell anymore)
But now a bit tempted by Nikon...
But hell, just wait for A77 (Canon 7D is too overpriced for me...)

Oh and btw, just one reply of yours tell me you are going after specs and not for the love for photography. You are comtemplating 3 systems altogether just because Nikon came up with something better this once. You are going after specs and gear, which i find really pointless.

 

[dliem]

Oh and btw, just one reply of yours tell me you are going after specs and not for the love for photography. You are comtemplating 3 systems altogether just because Nikon came up with something better this once. You are going after specs and gear, which i find really pointless.

Different people different needs, and I has my own point.
I comes from minolta user, and switch to Canon after I lost my gear during a trip (and that time, minolta gears suddenly dissapear from market or the price sky rocketing since take over by sony).
My Sony gear is mainly used for walkaround purpose.
My Canon gear is mainly used for potrait and candid. And for this potrait and candid, I need to create 'greater effect' by maximize using of different AF points (it's all about composition).
I seldom PP, the most is change WB, change contrast/sharpness a bit, and sure sometimes cropping. Never touch PS.
I can see 39 AF points is arguable here, but it's a potential for me to make my composition better.
I'm not loyal to a brand, I only care which brand offer tech (or thing) that can help me better.