So, now that the 600D was announced, what is the point of getting the 60D? The thumbwheel probably as it's really a big deal. But then again I might just get a second hand 5D.
Earthlight
RAW buffering capacity has always been a limitation of the XXXD/Rebel bodies. This has always been an intentional differentiator between the XXXD and XXD bodies. The 600D has a RAW buffering capacity of only 6 frames. The 60D has a RAW buffering capacity of 16 frames! Why is this a big deal? Well, because with any amount of brisk-paced shooting in RAW mode, the 600D's buffer quickly fills up. For example, when doing a model or portrait shoot, I typically might shoot at a pace of 1 to 2 frames per second. A XXXD body like the 600D can't even handle this modestly brisk pace of shooting without bottlenecking after a few minutes because its RAW buffer is just too small to handle that steady influx of RAW files. But with an XXD camera like the 60D, this is never an issue because the 16 frame RAW buffer is huge compared to the 600D's. The 60D's RAW buffering capacity is almost three times as large. That means no bottlenecking, and totally unimpeded shooting throughput.
Of course, I know this from personal experience because I starting shooting digital with the 10D, which had a RAW buffering capacity of 9 frames. But the 10D had a relatively low write speed, so I'd regularly have bottlenecking, waiting for the buffer to clear. Then I went to a 20D, which supposedly had faster write speeds, but the RAW buffering capacity went down to 6 frames (probably due to the increase in resolution from 6mp to 8mp). So bottlenecking was still a regular issue with the 20D. By the time I got the 40D, its RAW buffer had been increased to 17 frames!!! Finally, no bottleneck! Now, with the 60D we have a 16 frame RAW buffer, which is still excellent considering the enormous increase in resolution and file size that we have with the 60D (18mp with the 60D vs only 10mp on the 40D).
So with the 600D's tiny 6 frame RAW buffer, trying to flush huge 18mp RAW files, you can imagine that this is going to be a major issue for anyone who wants to shoot at a brisk pace. If you're just a casual shooter who only shoots JPEGs, this won't be an issue. But for RAW shooters, it's definitely an issue.
With the Canon 5D, a camera that Canon knew was going to be heavily used by portrait and model shooters, Canon gave the 5D a RAW buffering capacity of 17 RAW frames right from the start, even though it only had a frame rate of 3fps. This ensured steady, unimpeded image throughput for a typical portrait/model shoot or any reasonably brisk-paced shooting situation. This is stuff that a 600D's 6 frame RAW buffer can't handle. And definitely not with those massive 18mp RAW files. But, of course, the 600D is a camera catering to amateur and casual shooters, so this probably won't be an issue for them. And it may not even be an issue they may ever become aware of. But for more advanced shooters with higher needs, it's definitely a major limitation.
, top LCD ... higher fps...
