D60 AF Problems I don't want to buy.

[Steven]

If there is an AF fix firmware update imminent that will make the
D60 focus at least as well as a 1999 Nikon CP950 or a C2100UZ then
it's back in the ballgame for me otherwise I may as well find a
secondhand 30 as I don't fancy the D60-league Nikon or Fuji options.

As good as a 950 or a 2100. Shutter lag is terrible on these cameras how can you even make this statement. 950 has to be one of the worst including the the 990 and 995. The best consumer autofocus I have seen is the Sony 707 and that is still no match for the D30/D60.

--
Steven
D30
22-55
24-85
28-80 L
80-200L
100-300L
50 1.8
2x Tamron
420ex

 

[Adam-T]

As good as a 950 or a 2100. Shutter lag is terrible on these
cameras how can you even make this statement.

Who mentioned anything about shutter lag? - the subject was low light focussing, the UZI will focus in pitch dark let alone normal house lighting and the 950 reliably in live theatre every time..

autofocus I have seen is the Sony 707 and that is still no match
for the D30/D60.

So what you are saying is that the D60 will focus in low light better than a laser equipped Sony 707 !! Well they MUST have improved it from the D30 then by a massive amount and all the posts I've been reading about problems are all total balderdash and they're all in comparison to a 1D.. I'm pretty good at finding contrasty bits half pressing and re-framing if that is all it takes, though with the D30 most of the time in these situations I couldmn't get a lock at all.

If this is the case, EXCELLENT! what is everyone whining about - the D60 is going to be my next camera ASAP

 

[hokie]

The point has been made time and again...a $2,000 camera body should have auto focus as its main criteria.

The image quality of a G2 coupled with an extremely nice all light auto focus interchangeable lens system is all most people ask for.

We don't necessarily need 6 mp or the build quality of a 1D and multitudes of pro features.

And it has been said before as well..You can't manual focus as easily as a camera designed for manual focus..the tools aren't provided to you to accomplish a manual focus.

I love Canon and really wanted the D60 but Canon knew of this AF problem with the D30 and still went and produced the D60. In my opinion that is irritating. And every time someone disputes this AF problem with photos it is always with perfectly lit shots like the Rotterdam dance parade shots in sunlight.

I think you folks are just reading the exasperation of folks like me who have been waiting since the D30 for a AF fix and are disappointied. Now I got to break open my piggy bank for a 1D........

 

[Adam-T]

but in most conditions it's absolutely no contest, and by a huge
margin, so to suggest the d60 AF needs to catch up with a 950 (i
have not used the uzi, can't say) is very unfair and deceptive.

It must be the comparisons people are making here which are deceptive, I'm just going by those! (doing my homework so to speak as I can't lay my hands ON a D60 at the moment because Canon won't get off their arses and SELL the things to the damn dealers! -- Chester UK) the EOS10 has superb focussing, maybe that is too much to expect from a £2000 camera but if it focussed in low light as well as the 950 does in live theatre or other low light situations (in other words far better than a pro-90, E100RS with early firmware, half the Fuji range) then it's good enough for me.. the D30 I used didn't pull it off, they say that the D60 has vastly improved low light capability, I damn well hope so.

If like the other guy said it's better than the laser equipped Sony 707 (which I can't believe) in this field - what is everyone whingeing about?.

For the record, I've yet to find a situation where an UZI won't focus reliably, my E10 is another matter but it's still pretty good.

 

[Tom Melanson]

for over 25years, before autofocus, andI could take as good
pictures as I was understanding photography. Many people are
novices and do not understand how their gear work and pass the buck
on the camera

Cameras had bright viewfinders, Fresnel dots and split screens back
then, you can manually focus AF cameras (I've done it with my E10
and the D30 I've used) but it's not anything like as easy.. If
£2000 digital cameras have autofocus it ought to do the job at
least as reliably as something like a EOS-100 or 10QD - The D30 is
a lovely camera which takes superb smooth pictures but the AF is a
joke in low light situations such as theatres, museums and even
pointing it at ya missus indoors.

I thought that they'd improved the AF on the D60 over the 30 but
from the research I've been doing on this forum it would seem not,
a 6Mp D30 with fixed AF is a dream come true to me, in fact a D30
with fixed AF would be - OF course if they'd bothered to fit a
split screen viewfinder I wouldn't care and run it on manual.

If there is an AF fix firmware update imminent that will make the
D60 focus at least as well as a 1999 Nikon CP950 or a C2100UZ then
it's back in the ballgame for me otherwise I may as well find a
secondhand 30 as I don't fancy the D60-league Nikon or Fuji options.

provide the kind of MF assists that were commonplace on lower level cameras 25 years ago.
Tom
--
D60, Sigma 14/2.8, Canon 16-35/2.8L, 50.1.4,
28-70/2.8L, 85/1.2L, 70-200 IS USM

 

[Lee Rothman]

Having used both and currently having the 1D I can say with some certainty that if you need a camera that will in NO way limit you there is NO substitute. Only the 1D will do. For ANYTHING less the D60 remains (IMHO) the leader in overall feature set and performance. Even the new venerable Fuji S2, with it's wonderfully high resolution has some achilles heels. If I was getting a second camera for just still landscape and portrait use there would be no other current choice than the D60. It at least offers access to the wonderful EF line of lenses. That is where I also strongly feel that Canon is ahead of the pack.....

 

[Steven]

Who mentioned anything about shutter lag? - the subject was low
light focussing, the UZI will focus in pitch dark let alone normal
house lighting and the 950 reliably in live theatre every time..

You cant be serious. I had the 950 and the 2100 the 2100 uses a focus assist light. The 950 was one of the worst for lowlight and slow autofocus.

No I wasnt talking about lowlight but if I use my 420ex I do have the same results.
--
Steven
D30
22-55
24-85
28-80 L
80-200L
100-300L
50 1.8
2x Tamron
420ex

 

[Robert P Miller]

If the D60 is not equipped with decent manual focusing aids (a decent screen) and one needs to manually focus with it, I can see the frustration that many are talking about. I will try one for myself and see.

I have been disappointed with the low light abilities I have with my E-20, so I went back to my 707. Nether of these cameras have anything close to decent manual focus aids. Give me a split screen for manual focus!

Ok, I know I need a 1D, I am waiting for the next rev and wanting to get into Canon. I must try a D60 with decent lens and see where it leads me.
Best,
Robert

 

[Tom O'Neil]

What I find difficult to accept about the D60 focusing "situation" is Canon does not have to reinvent the wheel in regard to autofocus. Roll out a 3D based on the EOS3, sell it for $2,699, and many of the people who had been on waiting lists for the D60 would switch over to be on waiting lists for that.

After reading this forum and hearing the problems with the AF
working only 10% of the time makes me rethink wanting to buy this
camera. Even if is not true with all of the D60's, it sounds like
it's enough not to take a chance. Some people are reporting that
they are not getting AF at all. Other complain about its speed and
low light problems. Maybe Canon hurried to release this camera
without much quality control.

I think I willo pass and wait for the D90 or whatever.

 

[Tom Melanson]

The point has been made time and again...a $2,000 camera body
should have auto focus as its main criteria.

The image quality of a G2 coupled with an extremely nice all light
auto focus interchangeable lens system is all most people ask for.

We don't necessarily need 6 mp or the build quality of a 1D and
multitudes of pro features.

And it has been said before as well..You can't manual focus as
easily as a camera designed for manual focus..the tools aren't
provided to you to accomplish a manual focus.

I love Canon and really wanted the D60 but Canon knew of this AF
problem with the D30 and still went and produced the D60. In my
opinion that is irritating. And every time someone disputes this
AF problem with photos it is always with perfectly lit shots like
the Rotterdam dance parade shots in sunlight.

I think you folks are just reading the exasperation of folks like
me who have been waiting since the D30 for a AF fix and are
disappointied. Now I got to break open my piggy bank for a
1D........

The D60 provides neither a good auto focus system, nor the tools to properly focus manually. Under the right circumstances will it capture fabulous pictures? Of course it will.

Now, if you've never used a split screen or fresnel dots, etc then you won't know what's being complained about. If you have, then you know that trying to focus a D30/60 type camera manually is much more difficult.

Canon's "red dot" approach is better than nothing, but not as good as older tried and true systems.

We've taken four steps forward in convenience and image quality and two steps backward in focusing abilities. Problem is, there is nothing out there at a comparable price that is better. But that doesn't make it right or the people who are understandably annoyed, wrong.

I have the camera, use it a lot and have captured some images I'll treasure forever. But I swear everytime the light starts to dim.
And I suspect I am not alone.
Tom
--
D60, Sigma 14/2.8, Canon 16-35/2.8L, 50.1.4,
28-70/2.8L, 85/1.2L, 70-200 IS USM

 

[Jay Bean]

Many of the "problems" with the D30 AF are due to lack of understanding of how AF works as well as the tendency to put lower end small aperature lens on the camera.

On the other hand it is clear that the D60 has an AF system that is inferior to even Canon's mid-range film SLRs.

Looking over at the Nikon DSLR forum it is very hard to find any reports of AF problems with the D100. Nikon put its 5 point dynamic AF system into the D100, the same they use in their mid-range SLRs.

It is clear that Canon will be forced to introduce a successor to the D60 that has competitive AF with the D100. But for those hoping for a firmware upgrade, sorry. It will require changing out the AF sensor array to one of the mid-range units. It can't be done just with firmware.

After reading this forum and hearing the problems with the AF
working only 10% of the time makes me rethink wanting to buy this
camera. Even if is not true with all of the D60's, it sounds like
it's enough not to take a chance. Some people are reporting that
they are not getting AF at all. Other complain about its speed and
low light problems. Maybe Canon hurried to release this camera
without much quality control.

I think I willo pass and wait for the D90 or whatever.

 

[Steven]

and that is what I am waiting for. So for now I am staying with the wonderful D30.
--
Steven
D30
22-55
24-85
28-80 L
80-200L
100-300L
50 1.8
2x Tamron
420ex

 

[Brent Simcosky]

After reading this forum and hearing the problems with the AF
working only 10% of the time makes me rethink wanting to buy this
camera. Even if is not true with all of the D60's, it sounds like
it's enough not to take a chance. Some people are reporting that
they are not getting AF at all. Other complain about its speed and
low light problems. Maybe Canon hurried to release this camera
without much quality control.

I think I willo pass and wait for the D90 or whatever.

Sometimes I wonder what is being posted when a whole series of threads start blasting one feature of a camera, maybe trolls???

Anyway, as I posted in another thread (on the same subject) I received a new D60 last week. I was very concerned the AF would s*ck. However, I have been more than pleasantly surprised. It has not hestitated on me yet. Just tried another set of tests with 28-70L lens. My living room with a sliding glass door (cloudy outside, curtains open) on one side and a window on the other side with curtains closed. I focused on everything and moved it around. Aimed into dark part of room, etc and instantaneous focus. I checked it against MF and it was the correct focus. The only time the AF light came on was when I aimed at an all-white cabinet in a darker part of the room.

Haven't tried moving kids yet, that is next, but this AF stuff is way overblown IMO!!!!

brentski

 

[Larry H. Smith]

........ Those folks either have totally unrealistic
expectations or, unlikely IMO, defective cameras.

Those with NO standards will be happy with anything.
Those with PERFECTION as a standard will be happy with nothing.

Most of us prefer to select our own "expectation" level somewhere in-between, ...

I'm sure you don't mean to suggest that only expectations that are identical to yours are "realistic".

Re. those unhappy with the MF "alternative", ...I agree 1000%!

The "standard" focus capability of a SLR of 30 years ago (Minolta SRT 101, for instance), especially with one of the faster lenses (say the 58mm/1.2) will SHOCK anyone who is too young to have lived-with and used those marvelous machines. Unless they have some similar experience, they simply won't know what is being talked about here.

The fact that such capability has been "improved" into a pathetic state is outrageous, given the advances in other areas over the intervening years.

I appreciate being given a better "foot"(AF), ...but was it really necessary to cut off my "hand"(MF) at the same time?

Simply put, a camera that costs what these do, and has NO means of precise, exact focus adjustment, is a travesty. What do the designers think happens to the resolution of the expensive lenses they brag about, when the image is poorly-focused? DUH!

Anyone who thinks that something as basic as focus-ability should be expected only on a "pro" level camera is buying into some insulting marketing BS!

Sometimes it seems that a loud chorus of "bitching" is all that will get the attention of those making design decisions. I hope that is what they hear on this issue ;-)

For my money, NO ONE should find ANY camera that can't be precisely focussed, "acceptable"!

Larry

 

[hokie]

Well, I am a very conservative poster here and have been here a while. I hardly classify my dissatisfaction as trolling.

Perhaps what you should do is post some samples of your photography in low level light and let us see what you get. That would be the most helpful thing an owner can do.

I often find that folks who really want to buy a certain brand of camera (in my case Canon) and are frustrated by seemingly obvious concerns should be considered very carefully. It's not like I came here and said "OOoOOohh...Canon AF sucks..I bought a Nikon".

Folks who want to shoot some nightime baseball, football or some indoor low light motion shots with an interchangeable lens camera for their own use should not have to buy a $5,000 camera body to get consistent results.

That is not trolling..it's just frustration.

Sometimes I wonder what is being posted when a whole series of
threads start blasting one feature of a camera, maybe trolls???

Haven't tried moving kids yet, that is next, but this AF stuff is
way overblown IMO!!!!

brentski

 

[Hugo So]

I had a chance trying the 1D. It is a superb camera that is a completely point adn shoot in almost any circumstances. However, it doesn't say D60 is not good. Actually I takes photos of my sleeping kid and my wife for their funny post in a dreaming bed in complete darkness. With the help of the 420EX, I don't have a single issue with autofocus. Lens used is the 50/1.8 or the 28-70L. Also in a playyard I can take picture at ISO400 at 1/40s with my 135L wide open at F2 with available light. Not a single issue from the camera. The only problem is the camera shake.

May be I don't have a very high expectation.

But things are not perfect. Sometimes I would want to have two more extra focus points above and under the centre one so that when I shoot in AI Servo I can keep my kid's face in focus using the upper focus point. Right Now I have to track in vertical orientation or just track him at his body.

Also, I like Canon to have the focus point metering option that I think is more convenient for portraits in some cases.

Though, I think most photographers or hobbiest like me can just doing a little efforts and the shortfalls are compensated. I don't agree with the saying that if Canon install a better AF system into its body and users will buy it at higher price. At this point, it is an ethical thing that Canon doesn't have a good respect to its customers that I think it try to do it to segment the market for later upgrade. Canon has better system on hand and we just cannot see why they don't put it into the D60 and there should be no obvious cost difference as price of this level. They should do it a better one and sell it at lower price. The currently price is already high enough.

My decision is to enjoy funs in my life with the best available option. I got my D60 from end-March and I had 7000 photos from it already. Now it is still the D60. The next upgrade will be something like the current 1D is modified to have at least 6mp resolution and as light as around 700g and sells for under HK$2000.

After reading this forum and hearing the problems with the AF
working only 10% of the time makes me rethink wanting to buy this
camera. Even if is not true with all of the D60's, it sounds like
it's enough not to take a chance. Some people are reporting that
they are not getting AF at all. Other complain about its speed and
low light problems. Maybe Canon hurried to release this camera
without much quality control.

I think I willo pass and wait for the D90 or whatever.

Hi

I think you will be missing out - The D60 is a superb camera

You must bear in mind that on forums such as these, it tends to be
the people that have problems that do a lot of the posting, which
can present a somewhat skewed perception of the camera.

As a rough rule of thumb with the AF performance - I find it great
if there's enough light to comfortably read a newspaper I did
try a few portrait shots of my wife in darkness using the built in
flash and a 550ex, I had to use the AF assist lamp to find her (!)
I'll admit I had a few AF issues under those conditions

regards - Rob

--
20/1.8 (sigma)
50/1.8
135L/2
28-70L/2.8
70-200L/4

 

[Brent Simcosky]

Well, I am a very conservative poster here and have been here a
while. I hardly classify my dissatisfaction as trolling.

Well, what do you call it Hokie? Do you own a D60? How would you know what it does or doesn't do? So far, you're just whining about something you haven't even used!!!

I now own one, have tested it and I'm saying that for me (so far) the AF speed is excellent. Granted I haven't tried it with fast moving subjects yet, but I didn't get it to shoot fast moving kids in a lowlit room.

brentski

 

[hawkeye12]

hopefully this caught some attention..........but even though i don't have my D60 yet (supposedly next week..........), all i can say is your all puttin doubts in my head. but since i still have my Minolta D7i, and AF speed seems fine with it, i'd like to know if the D60's is at least as good as the Minolta or better???

Well, I am a very conservative poster here and have been here a
while. I hardly classify my dissatisfaction as trolling.

Well, what do you call it Hokie? Do you own a D60? How would you
know what it does or doesn't do? So far, you're just whining about
something you haven't even used!!!

I now own one, have tested it and I'm saying that for me (so far)
the AF speed is excellent. Granted I haven't tried it with fast
moving subjects yet, but I didn't get it to shoot fast moving kids
in a lowlit room.

brentski

 

[hokie]

Did I insult you or anyone else here other than Canon (in very mild terms..certainly they can take a little prodding since they make money in this whole endeavor).

You own Canon stock..are you one of their executives?

I don't "Own" a D60. I work in an environment where others own various cameras (a newsmagazine) and have had an opportunity to handle several different cameras including the D60.

All you seem to want to do is call people trolls and whiners for having open discussions about camera equipment. Discussions that this sight and it's forums were designed specifically for.

I'll be happy to talk about specific features and more than happy to see some photos from you to address all this "whining".

Well, I am a very conservative poster here and have been here a
while. I hardly classify my dissatisfaction as trolling.

Well, what do you call it Hokie? Do you own a D60? How would you
know what it does or doesn't do? So far, you're just whining about
something you haven't even used!!!

I now own one, have tested it and I'm saying that for me (so far)
the AF speed is excellent. Granted I haven't tried it with fast
moving subjects yet, but I didn't get it to shoot fast moving kids
in a lowlit room.

brentski

 

[danks]

The "standard" focus capability of a SLR of 30 years ago (Minolta
SRT 101, for instance), especially with one of the faster lenses
(say the 58mm/1.2) will SHOCK anyone who is too young to have
lived-with and used those marvelous machines. Unless they have some
similar experience, they simply won't know what is being talked
about here.

The fact that such capability has been "improved" into a pathetic
state is outrageous, given the advances in other areas over the
intervening years.

Most unfortunately, I am not so young. Cameras owned and used extend through Minolta SR7/SRT101 (the 60's) through Nikon F, F2s and F3s (from the seventies) to several of todays electronicised wonders, including Nikon's F90X and the EOS3.

I simply do NOT find AF on the D60 to be so wanting as some here would imply. And I think a positive disservice is being offered if these threads deter someone from experiencing this camera. It is likely their first digital SLR and it will be a revolution for them. It certainly has been for me. AF on the D60 is far, FAR better than I expected after reading the compliants here.

That cameras designed for MF (and lenses so designed I might add) are easier to focus manually is not at issue or debate.

That there are better cameras than the D60 in the AF department is not at issue either AFAIK.

That the D60 is somehow "pathetic" in this department is at issue as I read this thread.

I do not think it is . . . it is far from pathetic. And I think Canon has done a great job in getting this absolutely wonderful piece of gear to the marketplace at a price point substantially less than its immedite predecessor.

That said, I have no doubt the next one will be even better. If people choose to wait, that's their decision.

But they are missing out.

And it AFs just fine . . .