60D announced, along with some new L lenses.

[ProwlingTiger]

You could argue that the 7D is a glorified 60D, and that the 5DMk2 is a glorified 7D, and that the 1D series is just a glorified 5DMk2...

I'm not 100% familiar with either the T2i or 60D but looking at them both there still seem to be some pretty significant differences.

Most significantly is the top LCD and additional hardware buttons for photographic control. While the same sorts photographic controls exist on both cameras, do not underestimate this difference, it is HUGE and makes control of photographic parameters in the field MUCH faster. After you get a feel for the camera in your hands, you can probably make virtually any needed adjustment to the camera without even looking away from the viewfinder. With the T2i you have to enter the menu a lot to make a change, which is slow and you lose your framing because you're taking your eyes away from the viewfinder. After owning a D80 for over 3 years now, and using others' lower end cameras, I feel these extra hardware buttons and top LCD really step up DSLRs into an entirely new level of ability. It's huge. Almost what separates the camera being a toy/gadget and being a tool. I cannot imagine using a DSLR where you have to go into the menu on a regular basis to make changes.

Next is the "dual wheel" control setup. The 60D has two wheels, one for the thumb and one for the index finger- this allows aperture adjustment to map to one wheel and shutter speed to the other- and you can change both simultaneously. With the T2i I think you have to either press a 2nd button (like pressing shift) to get the change. Again the 60D is providing an increase in usability/speed.

I'm not 100% sure but the 60D probably has a superior viewfinder. Given that the viewfinder is one of the most used pieces of the DSLR, again this is pretty significant.

I'm willing to guess that there are other further features within the firmware that are on the 60D but not the T2i. Things like bracketing range, flash compensation, etc. might be expanded on the 60D.

Viewed this way, it has always been the philosophy of the 20/30/40/50/60D's design to incorporate additional usability (hardware buttons, top LCD, etc) but not to make a high end camera at the level of say the 5D series because it is too expensive. This probably still exists with the 60D in that it gives you a big step up in some core usability features, but not so large a jump as to the 7D. And I agree with the opinion that the 5DMk2 was never designed to be a high speed shooter. They put the best consumer grade AF system they had at the time in it, short of stepping it up to the full 1D series AF system which would have likely upped the price significantly.

In a way this makes it very similar to the Nikon lineup. Photographically they are all pretty similar but the usability controls consistently scale up as you increase in model level. The D3100 and D5000 lack the top LCD, as well as a number of hardware buttons. The D90 adds quite a bit in terms of viewfinder quality, hardware buttons, top LCD, and others like the ability to use the built-in flash as a commander. The D300s is beyond that with enhanced build quality and further hardware buttons/features (for example built-in intervalometer and expanded bracketing options, etc). You see the same sorts of gains as you move up the Canon line.

Re: the D90 replacement- those specs are all rumors but even if true there is no way Nikon is merging the D90 and D300 into one body. If anything, a really strong D90 successor will only mean the D400 is going to be that much better. And again while the cameras may end up looking more similar on paper, the ramifications of what has changed will really be noticed in end users of the cameras (i.e. the D90 replacement will still probably not get enhanced bracketing, shooting banks, built in intervalometer, etc).

It's one thing to compare megapixels and AF point counts but you are ignoring the entire rest of the camera. It's like comparing a Camry and a Lexus. They have basically the same engines and chassis but the Lexus has significantly more fit and finish and features, which elevate it beyond the Camry.

Again, totally missing the point. Not mirroring in terms of specs (refreshing that no one cares about megapixels anymore, btw), but in terms of product classes.

As far as specs, I'm not sure that Canon and Nikon share information about impending product releases with one another so that they can give each other a leg up on their major competitors (Nikon and Canon, respectively), nor do I think that Canon based the 60D on the rumored specs (which NikonRumors deemed unfit for a plausibility rating when they were reported earlier this week) of a camera rumored to be announced a few weeks from now at Photokina (not that I spend any time on any rumor sites, or anything).





AF system is not a price.

Anyway, I'm waiting for a D700 replacement. Maybe they'll use a 9-point AF system just for laughs.

I'm not missing your point, I'm disagreeing with it: I don't think Canon is mirroring Nikon's setup, if it were, the 5D had an AF system equivalent or better than that of the 7D, for instance. Nikon isn't crippling it's more expensive half of its line-up. Neither the 5D nor the 7D nor the 60D would be limited by factors set in Canon's marketing department.*

Besides, if the rumors regarding the D90's successor are to be believed, it seems it will replace both, the D300 and the D90. Depending on the price, it may be bad news for Canon, this puppy (if the purported specs are real) seems more like a competitor to the 7D.

I don't think Canon's moves are incomprehensible to me, I understand their motives quite well: it's marchitecture. I just happen to strongly dislike them.

And I happen to think Canon is shooting itself in the foot here. The best thing that can happen to both Canon and Nikon shooters is strong competition. I'm not married to a company, if they are under pressure by competition, they'll release better and cheaper products. If the get complacent (which I think Canon is), everybody suffers eventually. I may end up buying the successor to the D90 (or a used D700), so it better be cheap


* If Canon is trying to mirror Nikon, they're doing a pretty lousy job

Nikon D7000
100% viewfinder
dual memory cards
6-8fps
39 AF points
magnesium alloy body

I wouldn't say Canon is doing a good job at mirroring Nikon.

Honestly, I don't see the advantage of the 60D over the T2i. No point in buying the 60D, IMHO.

It happened folks. The D7000 is here. 60D = FAIL.

 

[miloblithe]

It happened folks. The D7000 is here. 60D = FAIL.

From your point of view.

Me, I'd rather have the D7000's specs too, but plenty of people out there will be attracted to the 60D's advantages over the Nikon: for example, articulated screen, higher megapixels (most people don't understand why that can be a disadvantage), and better video capabilities (higher frame rates).

 

[ProwlingTiger]

From your point of view.

Me, I'd rather have the D7000's specs too, but plenty of people out there will be attracted to the 60D's advantages over the Nikon: for example, articulated screen, higher megapixels (most people don't understand why that can be a disadvantage), and better video capabilities (higher frame rates).

Regardless, on paper the 60D does a horrible job of matching the D7000. About the only advantage of the 60D is the articulating screen. And even that can be a disadvantage for many (less durability and weather sealing). Granted we don't know yet how the D7000 performs. But if it performs as good as the 60D, well...Nikon did good.

It should also be noted that the D7000 also offers a few frame rates that the 60D does not. In video, faster frame rates are not necessarily better. It all depends on the scenario.

While the different video frame rates and megapixels of the 60D may win over some misguided, I believe the articulating screen would be a bigger selling factor. Just my opinion though. Another likely scenario, I suppose, is a consumer looking at the articulating screen and video capabilities as a bundle of sorts.

 

[OreoCookie]

Regardless, on paper the 60D does a horrible job of matching the D7000. About the only advantage of the 60D is the articulating screen.
[snip]
Another likely scenario, I suppose, is a consumer looking at the articulating screen and video capabilities as a bundle of sorts.

How useful is a screen that swivels if you use a dslr as a slr? Not all that much.

I just hope Canon rectifies some of its mistakes when it releases the 70D -- or just makes the 60D even cheaper. On paper, some of the specs of the D7000 are a lot closer to the 7D (I'm thinking of the AF system in particular*) than to the 60D.


* Whether 9 cross-type and 30 standard AF points are better than 18 cross-type remains to be seen from field tests.

 

[ProwlingTiger]

How useful is a screen that swivels if you use a dslr as a slr? Not all that much.

I just hope Canon rectifies some of its mistakes when it releases the 70D -- or just makes the 60D even cheaper. On paper, some of the specs of the D7000 are a lot closer to the 7D (I'm thinking of the AF system in particular*) than to the 60D.


* Whether 9 cross-type and 30 standard AF points are better than 18 cross-type remains to be seen from field tests.

I agree. The swivel screen is not that useful in most dslr applications. But many inexperienced consumers new to the dslr won't understand that. The swivel screen is a great marketing tactic.

The D700 does indeed seem a lot like the 7D. A 39 point AF system for $1199?! If I didn't have a Canon setup today and was looking at getting a 7D, I'd be real tempted to wait for D7000 reviews.

I find it humorous that many people didn't think Nikon would combine the D90 and D300s to make a super product. Well, Nikon now has a camera that can directly compete with both the 60D and 7D.

 

[miloblithe]

It's worth pointing out that the list price of the D7000 is $100 more than that of the 60D. $100 is a considerable amount of money to most people.

 

[ProwlingTiger]

It's worth pointing out that the list price of the D7000 is $100 more than that of the 60D. $100 is a considerable amount of money to most people.

If $100 is a considerable amount of money to someone in the realm of DSLR photography, they need a new hobby.

Sorry, but you're already spending $1100 on a body,...that doesn't even include the cost of glass, batteries, memory, accessories, etc.

I'm not saying I toss Ben Franklins out the window for the fun of it, but when you're buying thousands of dollars of equipment and getting serious about photography, you make calculated decisions. If for $100 more I can get x amount of more features or better quality, etc, it's definitely worth considering.

For people who $100 will make or break them, they should consider saving $300 and going with a Rebel.

 

[OreoCookie]

It's worth pointing out that the list price of the D7000 is $100 more than that of the 60D. $100 is a considerable amount of money to most people.

I don't think so, especially given the fact that the D7000 has some extra features the 60D doesn't. Even if both were equal, if you are going to spend that type of money on a new body, a difference of ~10 % in price won't be a deal breaker.

 

[miloblithe]

I'm not saying it's a deal breaker, and as I said I'd chose the D7000. But it's certainly an amount of money work considering. Very few people make purchases with no consideration as to price.

Say a person decides on a $2000 budget or $1500 or $2500. If they buy the D7000 over the 60D, they then have only $800 or $300 or $1300 left instead of $900, $400, 0r $1400.

 

[AlaskaMoose]

The Rebel series has been a best seller for years now, so enticing Rebel users with the 60D is a good strategy. However, downgrading the XXD series with the new offering won't make a lot of 40-50D users. But the more I think about this (I use a 40D) the more I realize that desiring to upgrade from my 40D to another xxD body never entered my mind once the 7D was introduced to the market. In fact I had been thinking of upgrading to either a 5DII or the 7D in a year or two, but then I realized that since most of my photos are of wildlife the 7D would be a better choice.

That said, I base a body's purchase on features that make taking pictures easier and that allow for better IQ, not bells and whistles. The reason why I do this is because I have realized that a good photographer with a camera that may be considered "mediocre" by another person, often takes better photos than a bad photographer with the "best camera" around. While we argue about this and that feature, digital noise, and so forth, there are professional photographers and "picture takers" like some of us, taking amazing photos using point-n-shoot and pinhole cameras. How did photographers do so well with the first "crappy" digital cameras produced by Canon and Nikon? Something to think about

 

[El Cabong]

The Rebel series has been a best seller for years now, so enticing Rebel users with the 60D is a good strategy.
[...]
How did photographers do so well with the first "crappy" digital cameras produced by Canon and Nikon? Something to think about

Yeah, the 60D seems to be aimed squarely at 500D and older Rebel owners rather than 550D/recent x0D owners looking to upgrade (with the 7D being the obvious choice).

Pretty sure all photographers without 51-point autofocus are living on the street, now

 

[fiercetiger224]

Looks like Canon is splitting the lineup as follows:

Consumer: xxxxD/xxxD/xxD
Pro: xD

Simple enough right? It does narrow their offerings down quite a bit, but it's also easier to distinguish the consumer line-up to the pro line-up, like their lens line-ups. They've effectively killed off their "prosumer" line-up (unless you still consider the 60D prosumer), but who knows, Canon might have something else up their sleeves.

The D7000 looks to be the midrange camera for Nikon, above the 60D, and below the 7D. Pretty logical decision for Nikon to target.

 

[funkboy]

It seems to me that Canon's consumer camera positioning & strategy looks something like the following these days:

xxxxD:

• first-time DSLR buyer, extremely cost-sensitive market
• primary goal: be cheaper than the competition
• target, wal-mart, etc are primary sales channel, not camera/electronics shops or online
• amortized design, won't get updated until sales numbers start dropping

xxxD:

• mainstream camera, needs to compete on features
• primary goal: be better than the competition in similar price range
• needs to be updated yearly to try to keep features ahead of the competition

xxD:

• affordable upgrade path for people that already have EOS cameras
• primary goal: be close enough in price to xxxD that upgraders will look to this camera instead
• secondary goal: entice the newfound video-geek DSLR market
• probably will return to an 18-month update cycle, though given the target market they may have set precedent for a 2-year update cycle...

Basically, I think the primary competition for the 60D isn't the D7000 (which blows it out of the water), it's the 550D. Clearly though, the marketdroids are still firmly in Canon's driver's seat. For them, the megapixel war is still on. I guess they must still think more MP sells more cameras...

With the D7k, Nikon engineering seems to have sat down & said "let's cram this camera full of as many low-cost or easily-amortizable features as possible, and then add just enough expensive nice ones (like good VF etc) to make the camera really interesting to serious photographers". Canon's marketing, OTOH, seems to think that zero-cost features like AF calibration cannibalize sales from higher up their own product line or something, rather than just trying to make the best camera for the money like Nikon...

 

[AlaskaMoose]

It seems to me that Canon's consumer camera positioning & strategy looks something like the following these days:

xxxxD:

• first-time DSLR buyer, extremely cost-sensitive market
• primary goal: be cheaper than the competition
• target, wal-mart, etc are primary sales channel, not camera/electronics shops or online
• amortized design, won't get updated until sales numbers start dropping

xxxD:

• mainstream camera, needs to compete on features
• primary goal: be better than the competition in similar price range
• needs to be updated yearly to try to keep features ahead of the competition

xxD:

• affordable upgrade path for people that already have EOS cameras
• primary goal: be close enough in price to xxxD that upgraders will look to this camera instead
• secondary goal: entice the newfound video-geek DSLR market
• probably will return to an 18-month update cycle, though given the target market they may have set precedent for a 2-year update cycle...

Basically, I think the primary competition for the 60D isn't the D7000 (which blows it out of the water), it's the 550D. Clearly though, the marketdroids are still firmly in Canon's driver's seat. For them, the megapixel war is still on. I guess they must still think more MP sells more cameras...

With the D7k, Nikon engineering seems to have sat down & said "let's cram this camera full of as many low-cost or easily-amortizable features as possible, and then add just enough expensive nice ones (like good VF etc) to make the camera really interesting to serious photographers". Canon's marketing, OTOH, seems to think that zero-cost features like AF calibration cannibalize sales from higher up their own product line or something, rather than just trying to make the best camera for the money like Nikon...

hmmm...you come across as being a Nikon user, not canon's But it's OK to express yourself that way, since it's a very normal and human emotion. Some like Canon, and some like Nikon. The rest are somewhere in the middle.

 

[emeraldringer]

The D7000 looks nice, but I'm getting the 60D. I'm looking to do more video w/ my next DSLR and the swivel screen, 60 FPS, and audio controls are big factors for me.

 

[MattSepeta]

Rant

I have been getting pretty bothered by some of canons moves. First of all, I see absolutely no appeal to the 60D. I have a 50D and would not consider moving to the 60D an upgrade, I would consider it a pretty serious downgrade. Losing the magnesium body alone is a deal-killer. Going to SD cards is just icing on the proverbial crap-cake.

I am planning on getting a 5DMKII very soon, and the more I read on Nikon's d700, the angrier I get. Canon could have made an AWESOME camera with the 5DMKII, but they didnt. They kept the same archaic AF system which is absolutely dwarfed by Nikons, they jammed more mega pixels in (WHY?????), and countless other blunders. I have no idea why canon does what it does sometimes...

 

[Apple Corps]

Another Rant...

I have shot with both Nikon and Canon (as well as Rollei, Pentax, Contax, and some others) and am not a fanboy either way.

Currently I am using Canon but find myself soooooo disappointed with Canon's Photokina lineup.

In a word - pathetic.

Even the new 300mm f 2.8 L prime was missing in action.

One has to wonder if Canon is experiencing some design / engineering flaws.

 

[AlaskaMoose]

I have been getting pretty bothered by some of canons moves. First of all, I see absolutely no appeal to the 60D. I have a 50D and would not consider moving to the 60D an upgrade, I would consider it a pretty serious downgrade. Losing the magnesium body alone is a deal-killer. Going to SD cards is just icing on the proverbial crap-cake.

I am planning on getting a 5DMKII very soon, and the more I read on Nikon's d700, the angrier I get. Canon could have made an AWESOME camera with the 5DMKII, but they didnt. They kept the same archaic AF system which is absolutely dwarfed by Nikons, they jammed more mega pixels in (WHY?????), and countless other blunders. I have no idea why canon does what it does sometimes...

I imagine that Canon should have an upgrade for the 5D II in the very near future. I would wait a little before buying a 5D II.

 

[Ruahrc]

I am planning on getting a 5DMKII very soon, and the more I read on Nikon's d700, the angrier I get. Canon could have made an AWESOME camera with the 5DMKII, but they didnt. They kept the same archaic AF system which is absolutely dwarfed by Nikons, they jammed more mega pixels in (WHY?????), and countless other blunders. I have no idea why canon does what it does sometimes...

I guess you can't win. You complain that the 5DMk2 has too many pixels, whereas the main complaint against the D700 is that it has too few.

The 5DMk2 is not, and never was meant to be a fast-action camera. It's really more the "landscaper's special" with high MP and FF view, with less bulk than a 1D series body. For this application a fast AF is not necessary. I would garner that if the 5DMk2 had a better AF system, people would complain that it was too expensive...

P.S. at the frame rates that the 60D can shoot at, is there really a functional difference between CF and SD? I truly fail to understand the reasoning behind adhering to CF other than elitism.

 

[OreoCookie]

The 5DMk2 is not, and never was meant to be a fast-action camera. It's really more the "landscaper's special" with high MP and FF view, with less bulk than a 1D series body. For this application a fast AF is not necessary. I would garner that if the 5DMk2 had a better AF system, people would complain that it was too expensive...

I don't buy that: Canon is fully able to put in a better AF system (see 7D for proof) and even if you're taking pictures of landscapes, you may need a good and accurate AF system. If you take pictures in the evening/late evening and you have a high-aperture lens with a small depth of field, then you need an accurate AF system. From what I've seen, the 5D and 5D Mark II do fall short here.

The other short-coming is that all AF sensors are bunched in the center. This is also something that is of interest to photographers -- especially those doing portraits and portraits in low light (wedding photographers, for instance). If they use fast glass with small depth of field, you cannot use focus and recompose since that `shifts' your focal plane behind the subject. And you need an AF that is all the more sensitive.

In my opinion, this is a decision made in the marketing department to the detriment of Canon photographers. Make no mistake, I've heard several Canon shooters complain about Canon's product strategy. (Although I'm not sure why: Nikon happily sells the D3 and D700 alongside and at least I haven't heard of massive cannibalization.)

Other `slow' cameras are not crippled: the 1 Ds Mark III's AF system is not crippled even though the camera is `slow' (personally, I don't regard 5 fps as slow, I don't need that much anyway, but I mean slow as compared to the 1 D Mark IV). Ditto for the D3x which uses the same AF system as the D3s. Even Nikon's D300(s) uses a variant of the pro-grade AF module.

P.S. at the frame rates that the 60D can shoot at, is there really a functional difference between CF and SD? I truly fail to understand the reasoning behind adhering to CF other than elitism.

I agree, as long as it works, I don't care if it is saved on floppy disks, SD or CF cards. As a matter of fact, if you own a recent Mac, you may find SD cards more convenient since they come with an SD card reader. The one built into my ProBook is very speedy and it's certainly more convenient and faster than juggling with cables and using USB to transfer the images.

@Alaska Moose
Canon has released the 5D Mark II in 2009, what makes you think we'll see a successor soon? You think they're under that much pressure from competition?

 

[Ruahrc]

Its also good to remember that when the 5dm2 was released, the AF system in the 7D didn't exist.

 

[Edge100]

I am planning on getting a 5DMKII very soon, and the more I read on Nikon's d700, the angrier I get. Canon could have made an AWESOME camera with the 5DMKII, but they didnt. They kept the same archaic AF system which is absolutely dwarfed by Nikons, they jammed more mega pixels in (WHY?????), and countless other blunders. I have no idea why canon does what it does sometimes...

The 5DmkII offers incredible resolution and performance in good light and under conditions when one AF point is sufficient (though the outer points are just fine in good light). To get equivalent resolution in a Nikon body, you have to buy a D3x for three times the price. So, if you're looking for a camera that will give you top-notch resolution, and don't care too much about top-notch AF performance, then the 5DmkII IS an awesome camera, especially for the price.

The D700 obviously has a better AF system than the 5DmkII, but if you NEED 21MP (either for huge high-rez prints or for cropping), the D700 is not going to help you; for that you'll need the D3x (and a whole lot more money). Canon made a choice with the 5DmkII; they decided that the target market was going to be people who needed resolution over everything else, and also managed to give the camera pretty good high ISO performance to boot.

My point here is merely that the 5DmkII does what it says on the tin, and does it well. I would have preferred a better AF system, of course, especially considering one was available in the 40D long before the 5DmkII was released. But you can't blame the 5DmkII for not being something it has never claimed to be. It's a tremendous tool for many, many working pros.

If you need great AF first and foremost, the 5DmkII is not your camera. I don't think Canon has ever said otherwise. What we'd all like to see is a FF Canon that does BOTH high-resolution and has a great AF system. But remember, even the D700 can't make that claim. Every camera is a trade-off; you ALWAYS sacrifice something, be it AF, resolution, high ISO performance, or price. Both Canon and Nikon make bodies that have various trade-offs:

D3x or 1DsmkIII if you need resolution above all else and price is not an issue
D3s if you want the absolute best high-ISO performance but dont need top notch resolution (this is the missing link for Canon)
5DmkII if you want FF, resolution, and good high-ISO
D700 if you want FF, good high-ISO, and top-notch AF
1DmkIV if you need good resolution coupled with excellent AF, and price is not an issue

And so forth. You always compromise somewhere, even if it's only on price.

 

[Edge100]

Its also good to remember that when the 5dm2 was released, the AF system in the 7D didn't exist.

But the system in the 40D did; 9 cross-type sensors vs. the 5DmkII's one.

 

[MattSepeta]

But the system in the 40D did; 9 cross-type sensors vs. the 5DmkII's one.

Exactly. I am upgrading from a 50D to a 5DMKII and am none-too-pleased to be downgrading my AF. Oh well! High ISO is more important at this point, so I suppose I can handle it

RUARC: I only mention it because it makes no sense....
xSi-SD Cards
T1i-SD Cards
T2i- SD Cards
xTi- CF Cards
40D- CF Cards
50D- CF Cards
60D- SD Cards
7D- CF Cards
5DII- CF Cards

I just don't know why they would take the 60D, which is implied as being a notch above the 50D, then switch it to SD cards...


Alaska Moose: I have considered that, but I would rather be out shooting than waiting. I would have no problem selling it and upgrading if and when a successor is released.

 

[Edge100]

Exactly. I am upgrading from a 50D to a 5DMKII and am none-too-pleased to be downgrading my AF. Oh well! High ISO is more important at this point, so I suppose I can handle it

To be honest, I've never found the 5D's AF system to be *that* bad. In good light, the outer points are perfectly fine. In low light, you either use the centre point and focus/recompose, or use some kind of focus aid, like an ST-E2 or a Speedlite.

Like I said, it would have been nice for Canon to at least use the 40D/50D AF system in the 5DmkII, but the existing system isn't that bad (and the rest of the camera is terrific).