as a nikon shooter this is a nice camera for the price. Nikon better step up and replace the d90
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
60D announced, along with some new L lenses.
- Thread starter HBOC
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I think this is where Canon has got themselves in a bit of jam in the eyes of some out there (myself included). I believe the 7D should have been an APS-H camera-- I mean sheesh they've only got ONE in their entire lineup. Their lineup is dominated by APS-C bodies.
If the 7D was APS-H, then a 60D could have been implemented sharing many of the same features of the 7D (slower burst and maintaining metal frame) without people going "well wait why should I buy the 7D now?" The difference between the two would be clear. They even could have bumped the 7D price up to around 2300 if that were the case, because it would still be miles lower than what the 1DMKIV would have cost.
As DPReview said, the 60D is less of a 50D successor and more of a Super Rebel. I'm not angry though, new technology is always a good thing, can't wait to go to the Canon EXPO next week.
If the 7D was APS-H, then a 60D could have been implemented sharing many of the same features of the 7D (slower burst and maintaining metal frame) without people going "well wait why should I buy the 7D now?" The difference between the two would be clear. They even could have bumped the 7D price up to around 2300 if that were the case, because it would still be miles lower than what the 1DMKIV would have cost.
As DPReview said, the 60D is less of a 50D successor and more of a Super Rebel. I'm not angry though, new technology is always a good thing, can't wait to go to the Canon EXPO next week.
new 70-300L
I was really hoping for a something-300 f/4L, which would have made sense as a replacement for the aging 300 f/4L IS (which, optically, is actually pretty nice).
I've been unable to determine if the new 70-300L can physically accept a teleconverter. If it does then I might get one if it will still AF half-decently on my 40D without too much trouble with my 1.4x with some tape on the right pins. If not maybe a 7D would work better...
I was really hoping for a something-300 f/4L, which would have made sense as a replacement for the aging 300 f/4L IS (which, optically, is actually pretty nice).
I've been unable to determine if the new 70-300L can physically accept a teleconverter. If it does then I might get one if it will still AF half-decently on my 40D without too much trouble with my 1.4x with some tape on the right pins. If not maybe a 7D would work better...
I think Canon just created a hole in their lineup rather than fill or maintain it.
The 60D moves it closer to the 550D end of things, and does nothing to help those APS-C shooting 40D shooters to upgrade to a 60D. Sure, it means people will be more enticed to spend even MORE money to upgrade to a 7D, but like OreoCookie, I don't like this type of strategy. The 50D was a good 'enthusiast' camera, while the 7D was like the professional grade APS-C camera. Now there is no good enthusiast camera, because they replaced it with a 550D Xtreme.
The 60D moves it closer to the 550D end of things, and does nothing to help those APS-C shooting 40D shooters to upgrade to a 60D. Sure, it means people will be more enticed to spend even MORE money to upgrade to a 7D, but like OreoCookie, I don't like this type of strategy. The 50D was a good 'enthusiast' camera, while the 7D was like the professional grade APS-C camera. Now there is no good enthusiast camera, because they replaced it with a 550D Xtreme.
I guess what I don't get is the mentality that an owner of a 40D or a 50D should need to upgrade at all--that there should be some camera that is simply the latest model in a direct line from what they have and that they should go out and buy it. Anyone looking to upgrade their camera body really ought to do so because they need a certain feature that their current camera lacks, and from that point of view, Canon has lots of options for them.
If video is most important, then the swivel screen and manual audio control of the 60D will be very appealing. If better AF tracking and burst rate are crucial, then the 7D is the obvious choice. Of course people would love a made-to-order option that would provide a camera with exactly their dream combination of features (and at their dream price), but at least now there is a camera at nearly every price point, and each model leans toward a certain specialty.
Sometimes cameras break or people simply wish to upgrade their equipment for whatever reason. I don't think people will be happy to be forced to either pay substantially more than what they did for their x0D to really get an upgrade or get less for the same price.
Agreed, it would have been a non-issue if the 7D had an APS-H-sized sensor or even a full frame sensor.
Sorry, but Canon's current L-series lenses aren't trash - several have been updated over the last few years (the 24, 35, 50, 16-35 amongst others) and wouldn't be due a refresh for quite a while yet anyway. The only lens people keep banging on about is the mystical 24-70 f/2.8L IS USM.
Secondly, what is the obsession with putting IS in everything, particularly in wides? IS is really designed for the telephoto lenses, and loses some function when shoved in to a wide lens just to make it new and shiny.
As I said above, Canon are pushing out new telephotos (70-200 II, now the long primes) for the 2012 Olympics - giving pros time to buy them before the event and be comfortable in using them. Once they've dealt with this priority, they'll then shift back down to the "standard" range. There's only a handful of lenses crying out for an update anyway.
If a company keeps their product lines simply marching along in lockstep, they'll soon find themselves out of touch with current market trends. Canon's retooling makes perfect sense to me. Those people who have broken cameras and undefined needs will just have to do some soul searching and figure out which current model is best for them.
It is definitely a niche need. I have to do a lot of photography in places where tripods and strobes are forbidden and the available light is low. In order to get these images past QC checks, they need to be 'tripod sharp' without a tripod when viewed at 100%. Having stabilization really ups the keeper rate for me a lot. I often use my 7D instead of my 5D2 simply because of the 17-55mm f/2.8 IS. It's that important for me.
I can also see wider lenses with IS being very useful to event photographers in certain situations (emphasizing motion blur with static backgrounds for contrast, for example). But even your average enthusiast photographer can have a lot of fun with IS in situations where tripods are merely inconvenient, hence all of the clamor for more lenses with IS.
Maybe it's a way to counter the Sony/Pentax/Olympus argument that all their lenses are IS because of in body stabilisation (I think those 3 had inbody IS). The EF-S range is pretty much all IS now (apart from a few early models).
Agreed... In my case, a palatable price point for the new 70-300L would have been $1K as well. I have the $500 non-L version and I guess I'm going to stick with that... it surprises me with its performance most of the time and you can't beat the price.
I tend to agree... I'm not sure who I would recommend the 60D to. If someone wants a great consumer DSLR that also does video, I would probably steer them towards the T2i... if they don't need video, the T1i, and if they want to get serious about still photography either the 7D or 5DII. The 60D doesn't appear to bring a lot to the table.
I shoot Nikon so I don't know but can you use a EF-S lens on an APS-H sensor? If you made the 7D APS-H and you couldn't keep using EF-S lenses, it would make upgrading from anything 50D and below to a 7D very expensive because you'd likely also have to replace many/all of your lenses for FF versions. And after all that's said and done, it may be the better strategy just to go one better and get a 5DMk2 at that point.
Who has a large collection of EF-S lenses though? I mean seriously the 10-22 and the 17-55 are like the only popular ones. I think that's a small issue in the scheme of things.
No
Has said above, the EF-s 10-22 and the EF-s 17-55 2.8 IS are the only EF-s lens that are L quality, and selling them is easy.
Here in Canada, the price difference is $700.00, quite substantial if you ask me
. Besides, the 7D and 5DII are different beasts for different type of photogs.
24-70mm f/2.8L USM is definitely one of the most obvious examples, but it isn't the only one that has fallen behind Nikon's. Take 35mm f/1.4L USM, for instance. While it is still a wonderful lens, it came out almost 12 years ago, lacking many of the refinements newer II-series L primes have, such as UD elements (lower CA), weather proofing, SWC coating (lower flare and ghosting), and faster CPU for faster and quieter autofocusing.
IS isn't as critical on wide angle to be sure. But it can still be useful in lower max aperture lenses (e.g., 17-40mm f/4L).
*which is exactly what has happened in my opinion: you sound as if Canon has made the design decisions regarding the 60D this after listening to its customers!
The 60D is a camera I don't know who I would recommend it to: the biggest advantage compared to the 550D is the larger pentaprism viewfinder and it being slightly faster. (I always thought this was a humongous oversight of Canon: Nikon's D80 and D90 have a much, much better viewfinder -- reason enough for me to sell a perfectly fine D70 after one week in exchange for a D80. For the record: I've always envied Canon shooters for being able to pick up a x0D for considerably less than a Nikon D200/D300.)
What annoys the crap out of me. The new one I need a new battery grip, new batteries and no more compact flash( I have the 40D). I love compact flash the abuse these cards can take and still work is amazing. Now Im thinking of sucking it up and going with the 7d. I dont know what they are thinking. I will wait for the reviews once its out to finalize my choice.
Canon's decision doesn't seem so outrageous; they're simply mirroring Nikon's product lineup, from entry-level to pro:
Canon
(1) xx0D (2) x0D (3) 7D (4) 5D (5) 1D
Nikon
(1) Dxx00 (2) Dx0 (3) D300 (4) D700 (5) Dx
Makes sense to me.
First of all, I've already said that the gap between the D80/D90-class and the Dx00 cameras is too big and Canon's x0D family fit right in in terms of price. I thought this was actually a good thing about Canon's line-up and they've killed this advantage.
Second of all, there is no clear progression between 7D and 5D: you can't really compare the two cameras.
First:
Canon has been losing DSLR market share. They've recalibrated their lineup to better reflect that of their biggest competitor, which has been gaining market share. Obviously, the company did not think that having a model at a price point between the Dx0 and D300/s was still an advantage, despite the opinions of their existing customers; the release of the 7D was a clear indicator of that.
Second:
My numerical progression (or price-focused delineation, if you prefer) simply points out the similarity between the product lines. The 5D is ~$1000 more expensive than the 7D, despite being a year older. Comparison over.
Of course, the 5D is more expensive, I did not argue otherwise. But in terms of customers and applications, it's a very different camera than the 7D: If you want high performance, but you cannot afford a 1D, then you will probably buy the 7D even though you may be able to afford a 5D.
Are you/he serious? The 5DmkII was new and improved in practically every regard, lets not forget that it was the first DSLR to shoot gorgeous HD video we have come to expect in any modern DSLR. (Even if you would NEVER shoot video you still have to admit that it's a major feature enhancement)
It's like saying, "oh I CANNOT upgrade my macbook pro because it still has the same keyboard/trackpad my old one has." Well that keyboard/trackpad (read focusing sensor) worked for you on your current macbook pro (read 5D) so what is the huge problem?
As far as the 60D goes, I personally feel that if anything Canon is being too generous in the low consumer level 550D area. If the 550D was released without so much of the 7D's feature set, the 60D would make much more sense. As it is, I personally have a 550D (well my wife does) almost strictly to shoot video. In this regard, the 60D would make a lot of sense as an upgrade for it (though we wouldn't do that because there is no truly good reason to do so)