the 60D body is awesome !!

Started Nov 18, 2010 | Discussions
Howzit
Regular MemberPosts: 468
Like?
Re: the plastic is good
In reply to Boissez, Nov 18, 2010

Boissez wrote:

I think you're being a bit overenthusiastic about this camera's plastic. It's most likely Canon chose plastic over metal as a cost saving feature... not for it's 'superior' characteristics - or do you really believe it is so superior that they should incorporate it in higher level bodies? Lol - I can only imagine the outcry if the 1Ds MkIV would be all plastic fantastic

Just looking at how the articulated screen fits into the body of the 60D it would be quite difficult to press the shape out of magnesium alloy.

...if the 60D proves to be better weather-sealed and bump resistant why would there be an outcry if higher bodies adopted the ploycarbonate/fibreglass on aluminum chassis construction?

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
ZAnton
Contributing MemberPosts: 569Gear list
Like?
Examples are here
In reply to pev70, Nov 18, 2010
 ZAnton's gear list:ZAnton's gear list
Nikon D600 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 50mm f/1.8G Nikon AF-S Nikkor 85mm f/1.8G Tamron SP 24-70mm F/2.8 Di VC USD
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
skanter
Veteran MemberPosts: 6,214Gear list
Like?
Re: the plastic is good
In reply to Howzit, Nov 18, 2010

It is very possible that all future high-end Canon cameras will have polycarbonate bodies and articulated screens.

It was not long a go that many were complaining that video and live view were "gimmicks" that did not belong on higher-end cameras. Some people just do not adapt well to change.

Howzit wrote:

Boissez wrote:

I think you're being a bit overenthusiastic about this camera's plastic. It's most likely Canon chose plastic over metal as a cost saving feature... not for it's 'superior' characteristics - or do you really believe it is so superior that they should incorporate it in higher level bodies? Lol - I can only imagine the outcry if the 1Ds MkIV would be all plastic fantastic

Just looking at how the articulated screen fits into the body of the 60D it would be quite difficult to press the shape out of magnesium alloy.

...if the 60D proves to be better weather-sealed and bump resistant why would there be an outcry if higher bodies adopted the ploycarbonate/fibreglass on aluminum chassis construction?

-- hide signature --

Sam K., NYC

 skanter's gear list:skanter's gear list
Canon EOS 60D Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II Canon EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM Sigma 18-200mm F3.5-6.3 DC OS HSM +4 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
mugupo
Contributing MemberPosts: 608Gear list
Like?
60D is made in Japan !
In reply to padang, Nov 18, 2010

t2i is made in china and d7000 is made in thailand.

padang wrote:

Not sure why people are complaining about it..

I've had a 5Dii for 18 months - and taking at least 2000 pictures a month with it.

The 60D body felt really great, more designed and perfect size and weight even compared to 7D.

Plastic ? You meant that super modern polycarbonate that bounces instead of scratching and leaves no marks ? Perfect - exactly what I wanted.

As for the T&S screen... what a pleasure. It moves very smoothly, and I love the click it does when you secure back in its position.

Good job Canon !!

 mugupo's gear list:mugupo's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ200 Canon PowerShot SX50 HS Canon PowerShot S110 Panasonic Lumix DMC-LF1 Sony Cyber-shot DSC-HX50V +6 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
jdmax
Junior MemberPosts: 27
Like?
Re: the plastic is good
In reply to T3, Nov 18, 2010

I can't comment on the advantages/disadvantages of polycarbonate over metal, but I've dropped a couple of camera's and they always seems to land lens first (not sure why because gravity pulls at the same rate).

The lense hood seems to be the first point of impact, the next weakest point seems to be the the mirror mechanism.

T3 wrote:

I also think plastic should do a better job of dissipating impact shock if I dropped the camera, versus metal.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
T3
T3
Forum ProPosts: 17,477
Like?
mainly an issue of perception
In reply to Boissez, Nov 19, 2010

Boissez wrote:
chip or scratch off.

I think you're being a bit overenthusiastic about this camera's plastic. It's most likely Canon chose plastic over metal as a cost saving feature... not for it's 'superior' characteristics - or do you really believe it is so superior that they should incorporate it in higher level bodies? Lol - I can only imagine the outcry if the 1Ds MkIV would be all plastic fantastic

It's a fact that modern plastics have better shock-handling qualities than metals. But the resistance from users of "higher level bodies" would primarily be an issue of perception...the same ill-informed perception that caused many people to initially rail against the 60D for using plastic. A higher level body can certainly be made of high quality plastic, resulting in a lighter, more shock-resistant body that won't scratch or chip or ding...but many users would still cling to the notion that plastic had somehow 'cheapened' the body. Again, it's an issue of perception.

But some high-end camera manufacturers have no problem embracing plastics for their higher level bodies, like Hasselblad with their high end H-series cameras.

Also keep in mind that the latest, most high tech assault rifles and weapons use modern plastics because they offer desirable qualities like lighter weight, corrosion resistance, temperature stability, etc.

Israeli Tavor TAR-21:

Glock 23:

MagPul Masada:

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
T3
T3
Forum ProPosts: 17,477
Like?
Re: the plastic is good
In reply to jdmax, Nov 19, 2010

jdmax wrote:

the next weakest point seems to be the the mirror mechanism.

which is why it's good to have a body shell that can absorb and dissipate the force of an impact. Modern high quality plastics do this better than metal.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Kabe Luna
Veteran MemberPosts: 9,259Gear list
Like?
Surely you mean the best bang for the buck in the Canon system...
In reply to pev70, Nov 19, 2010

...because considering the overall DSLR market, the Nikon D7000 offers far superior bang for the buck with more flexible and sophisticated AF, better construction, longer shutter-life rating, 100% viewfinder, greater user configurability, better noise control, greater dynamic range...all for just $200 more.

pev70 wrote:

I would say, the Canon 60D is the best bang/performance for the buck currently available. I currently have a 5DII and 40D, thinking of upgrading 40D to 60D.

-- hide signature --
 Kabe Luna's gear list:Kabe Luna's gear list
Nikon D800 Nikon Df Nikon AF-S Nikkor 16-35mm f/4G ED VR Sigma 50mm F1.4 EX DG HSM Nikon AF-S Nikkor 85mm f/1.8G +7 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
T3
T3
Forum ProPosts: 17,477
Like?
Re: Surely you mean the best bang for the buck in the Canon system...
In reply to Kabe Luna, Nov 19, 2010

Kabe Luna wrote:

...because considering the overall DSLR market, the Nikon D7000 offers far superior bang for the buck with more flexible and sophisticated AF, better construction, longer shutter-life rating, 100% viewfinder, greater user configurability, better noise control, greater dynamic range...all for just $200 more.

For many people, these are minor or inconsequential differences that you have to pay more for. On paper, yeah, sure a photography forum nut might think that these things are a big deal, but in reality they aren't that big a deal. Heck, I still have a Rebel XT that still takes great pictures, it's shutter is still going strong after all these years, and its construction has held up just fine in spite of being made of lower quality plastic. I think there are plenty of people who would rather take that "$200 more" and put it towards some Christmas gifts or something.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
David Hull
Veteran MemberPosts: 5,228Gear list
Like?
Re: Surely you mean the best bang for the buck in the Canon system...
In reply to T3, Nov 19, 2010

T3 wrote:

Kabe Luna wrote:

...because considering the overall DSLR market, the Nikon D7000 offers far superior bang for the buck with more flexible and sophisticated AF, better construction, longer shutter-life rating, 100% viewfinder, greater user configurability, better noise control, greater dynamic range...all for just $200 more.

For many people, these are minor or inconsequential differences that you have to pay more for. On paper, yeah, sure a photography forum nut might think that these things are a big deal, but in reality they aren't that big a deal. Heck, I still have a Rebel XT that still takes great pictures, it's shutter is still going strong after all these years, and its construction has held up just fine in spite of being made of lower quality plastic. I think there are plenty of people who would rather take that "$200 more" and put it towards some Christmas gifts or something.

And... if the time ever comes that Nikon makes that camera with a Canon lens mount, this will be worth discussing.
--
Flickr: http://www.flickr.com/photos/26158506@N07/

 David Hull's gear list:David Hull's gear list
Adobe Photoshop CS6
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Boissez
Contributing MemberPosts: 577
Like?
Re: mainly an issue of perception
In reply to T3, Nov 21, 2010

It's a fact that modern plastics have better shock-handling qualities than metals. But the resistance from users of "higher level bodies" would primarily be an issue of perception...the same ill-informed perception that caused many people to initially rail against the 60D for using plastic. A higher level body can certainly be made of high quality plastic, resulting in a lighter, more shock-resistant body that won't scratch or chip or ding...but many users would still cling to the notion that plastic had somehow 'cheapened' the body. Again, it's an issue of perception.

I know there are high performance plastics out there - but there isn't a single hint anywhere that this is what's actually used in the 60D. All I've seen is post from people saying that the 60D is not as a tough as the 7D or 50D.

But some high-end camera manufacturers have no problem embracing plastics for their higher level bodies, like Hasselblad with their high end H-series cameras.

Not true the H-series are all metal.

...picture of guns...

How is this relevant? We're talking about cameras - different purposes and thus different materials are needed.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Howzit
Regular MemberPosts: 468
Like?
Re: Surely you mean the best bang for the buck in the Canon system...
In reply to Kabe Luna, Nov 21, 2010

Kabe Luna wrote:

...because considering the overall DSLR market, the Nikon D7000 offers far superior bang for the buck with more flexible and sophisticated AF, better construction, longer shutter-life rating, 100% viewfinder, greater user configurability, better noise control, greater dynamic range...all for just $200 more.

D7000 is pretty usless without a 17-55 f2.8 IS & 70-200 f4 IS lenses. The Nikkor 17-55 f2.8 non VR is at least $300 more at B&H.

...best bang for the buck is relative to your lenses.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
archiebald
Senior MemberPosts: 1,496
Like?
Re: mainly an issue of perception
In reply to Boissez, Nov 21, 2010

Boissez wrote:

It's a fact that modern plastics have better shock-handling qualities than metals. But the resistance from users of "higher level bodies" would primarily be an issue of perception...the same ill-informed perception that caused many people to initially rail against the 60D for using plastic. A higher level body can certainly be made of high quality plastic, resulting in a lighter, more shock-resistant body that won't scratch or chip or ding...but many users would still cling to the notion that plastic had somehow 'cheapened' the body. Again, it's an issue of perception.

I know there are high performance plastics out there - but there isn't a single hint anywhere that this is what's actually used in the 60D. All I've seen is post from people saying that the 60D is not as a tough as the 7D or 50D.

Um, well there is actually....of course Canon were being sneaky (sarcasm) and hid this in the name...... "glass fiber filled polycarbonate" is a VERY high performance plastic resin.

...picture of guns...

How is this relevant? We're talking about cameras - different purposes and thus different materials are needed.

Only in as far as those guns (having a far higher requirement of durability than an imaging device) also use various plastic resins in their construction.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
RedFox88
Forum ProPosts: 21,191
Like?
Re: the plastic is good
In reply to Boissez, Nov 21, 2010

Boissez wrote:

T3 wrote:

I like the plastic on my 60D. It's solid. And when handling the 60D along with my 40D in the dark, you would be hard pressed to tell which one was plastic and which one was magnesium. Both feel very solid and of high quality.

I also think plastic should do a better job of dissipating impact shock if I dropped the camera, versus metal. Just imagine if your car interior surfaces were all metal instead of plastics. If you slammed your head or limbs against these metal surface during a car accident, you'll cause more damage to your flesh and bones. The Dell business laptop I'm typing on also has a high quality modern plastic shell, which (from personal experience) has done a great job of dissipating impact shock and protecting the device.

Also, on previous magnesium bodies, I've had areas where the paint chipped or scratched off the body due to knocks or dings, revealing the greyish metal body below. That's probably not going to happen with my 60D since there's no paint to chip or scratch off.

I think you're being a bit overenthusiastic about this camera's plastic. It's most likely Canon chose plastic over metal as a cost saving feature... not for it's 'superior' characteristics

I had a Saturn car with fiberglass body shell (most of it) and it never got a scratch nor a dent in 6 years. But my 4 year old toyota has a dented door and scratched fender. Yes plastic is a superior design for durability. My Saturn was red and the color was good and rich even when the car was 10 years old (bought used).

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
AJMJ
Senior MemberPosts: 1,132
Like?
Re: 60D is made in Japan !
In reply to mugupo, Nov 21, 2010

mugupo wrote:

t2i is made in china and d7000 is made in thailand.

As far as I know all of the Canon DSLR's are " Made in Japan ", I know all of them that I have ever owned, i.e. 20D, 40D, XSi, 50D were.

Here is a photo of the bottom of a 550D/T2i.

This one at least was "Made in Japan",
When did they change the T2i to "Made in China"?
Joe

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
skanter
Veteran MemberPosts: 6,214Gear list
Like?
Re: mainly an issue of perception
In reply to archiebald, Nov 21, 2010

archiebald wrote:
.

Um, well there is actually....of course Canon were being sneaky (sarcasm) and hid this in the name...... "glass fiber filled polycarbonate" is a VERY high performance plastic resin.

http://www.nytefplastics.com/html/high-perfs.html

-- hide signature --

Sam K., NYC

 skanter's gear list:skanter's gear list
Canon EOS 60D Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II Canon EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM Sigma 18-200mm F3.5-6.3 DC OS HSM +4 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
AJMJ
Senior MemberPosts: 1,132
Like?
The 60D plastic...
In reply to Boissez, Nov 21, 2010

Boissez wrote:

T3 wrote:

I like the plastic on my 60D. It's solid. And when handling the 60D along with my 40D in the dark, you would be hard pressed to tell which one was plastic and which one was magnesium. Both feel very solid and of high quality.

I also think plastic should do a better job of dissipating impact shock if I dropped the camera, versus metal. Just imagine if your car interior surfaces were all metal instead of plastics. If you slammed your head or limbs against these metal surface during a car accident, you'll cause more damage to your flesh and bones. The Dell business laptop I'm typing on also has a high quality modern plastic shell, which (from personal experience) has done a great job of dissipating impact shock and protecting the device.

Also, on previous magnesium bodies, I've had areas where the paint chipped or scratched off the body due to knocks or dings, revealing the greyish metal body below. That's probably not going to happen with my 60D since there's no paint to chip or scratch off.

I think you're being a bit overenthusiastic about this camera's plastic. It's most likely Canon chose plastic over metal as a cost saving feature... not for it's 'superior' characteristics - or do you really believe it is so superior that they should incorporate it in higher level bodies? Lol - I can only imagine the outcry if the 1Ds MkIV would be all plastic fantastic

"The body is made of a mixture of ABS resin, polycarbonate resin, and polycarbonate resin with a special conductive fiber, presumably for EMI (electromagnetic interference) shielding. The frame is aluminum and polycarbonate enhanced with glass fiber."

Yes, I believe there most likely is a cost saving factor with plastic materials, but most likely it for the weight savings and for an increase in production speed due to not having to add corrosion protection and the aesthetic coatings (paint) to the Mg.

As to the advantages, for the cost of either material, well that’s not so clear.
Please read this Magnesium vs. Polymer comparison.
http://www.magnesium.com/w3/data-bank/article.php?mgw=173&magnesium=204

Joe

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Glenn_Sydney
Senior MemberPosts: 1,449
Like?
Re: the plastic is good
In reply to Boissez, Nov 21, 2010

Boissez wrote:

T3 wrote:

I like the plastic on my 60D. It's solid. And when handling the 60D along with my 40D in the dark, you would be hard pressed to tell which one was plastic and which one was magnesium. Both feel very solid and of high quality.

I also think plastic should do a better job of dissipating impact shock if I dropped the camera, versus metal. Just imagine if your car interior surfaces were all metal instead of plastics. If you slammed your head or limbs against these metal surface during a car accident, you'll cause more damage to your flesh and bones. The Dell business laptop I'm typing on also has a high quality modern plastic shell, which (from personal experience) has done a great job of dissipating impact shock and protecting the device.

Also, on previous magnesium bodies, I've had areas where the paint chipped or scratched off the body due to knocks or dings, revealing the greyish metal body below. That's probably not going to happen with my 60D since there's no paint to chip or scratch off.

I think you're being a bit overenthusiastic about this camera's plastic. It's most likely Canon chose plastic over metal as a cost saving feature... not for it's 'superior' characteristics - or do you really believe it is so superior that they should incorporate it in higher level bodies? Lol - I can only imagine the outcry if the 1Ds MkIV would be all plastic fantastic

Agreed!!. There was a post recently about how one of the forum members dropped his 60D and caused it severe damage. Another one of how another member dropped a 7D off a motorbike...and it survived without a hitch !!!. Plastic is weaker. Lets not kid ourselves!!!

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
skanter
Veteran MemberPosts: 6,214Gear list
Like?
Re: the plastic is good
In reply to Glenn_Sydney, Nov 21, 2010

Glenn_Sydney wrote:

There was a post recently about how one of the forum members dropped his 60D and caused it severe damage. Another one of how another member dropped a 7D off a motorbike...and it survived without a hitch !!!. Plastic is weaker. Lets not kid ourselves!!!

I glad this issue is finally settled with this report of comprehensive, comparative scientific testing and analysis.

-- hide signature --

Sam K., NYC

 skanter's gear list:skanter's gear list
Canon EOS 60D Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II Canon EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM Sigma 18-200mm F3.5-6.3 DC OS HSM +4 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
archiebald
Senior MemberPosts: 1,496
Like?
Re: the plastic is good
In reply to Glenn_Sydney, Nov 21, 2010

Glenn_Sydney wrote:

Boissez wrote:

T3 wrote:

I like the plastic on my 60D. It's solid. And when handling the 60D along with my 40D in the dark, you would be hard pressed to tell which one was plastic and which one was magnesium. Both feel very solid and of high quality.

I also think plastic should do a better job of dissipating impact shock if I dropped the camera, versus metal. Just imagine if your car interior surfaces were all metal instead of plastics. If you slammed your head or limbs against these metal surface during a car accident, you'll cause more damage to your flesh and bones. The Dell business laptop I'm typing on also has a high quality modern plastic shell, which (from personal experience) has done a great job of dissipating impact shock and protecting the device.

Also, on previous magnesium bodies, I've had areas where the paint chipped or scratched off the body due to knocks or dings, revealing the greyish metal body below. That's probably not going to happen with my 60D since there's no paint to chip or scratch off.

I think you're being a bit overenthusiastic about this camera's plastic. It's most likely Canon chose plastic over metal as a cost saving feature... not for it's 'superior' characteristics - or do you really believe it is so superior that they should incorporate it in higher level bodies? Lol - I can only imagine the outcry if the 1Ds MkIV would be all plastic fantastic

Agreed!!. There was a post recently about how one of the forum members dropped his 60D and caused it severe damage. Another one of how another member dropped a 7D off a motorbike...and it survived without a hitch !!!. Plastic is weaker. Lets not kid ourselves!!!

Riiiiiggght.. (in a sarcastic tone)

And this was a "plastic" car that saved the driver's life

And this is a "plastic" camera that fell to earth

This is a "plastic" aeroplane

Bullet Proof Vest - Material.....plastics

"plastic" spaceship

And this is a metal 5DMkII dropped from the hand

Shall we post more

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads