60D "minimum skill requirement"

[micoruiz]

I'm Not really a professional shooter,nor would I count myself as a total novice. More of someone who would really want the best pictures at a budget
just someone who shoots volleyball games from time to time.

However, I'm finding my setup currently lacking (a Rebel XT/350D and 50mm 1.8)

I'm looking at the 60D as compared with the 600D.
I was planning on getting either one of them + the 18-135kit.

Given that I'm not really that skilled, would I notice the difference between the 60D and the 600D? or would the roughly 250 dollar savings if choosing the 600D, be offset by the quality of the shots that I can take?

 

[KentG]

You are going to have more issues with a slow lens like the 18-135. You will have to shoot at a much slower shutter speed and/or a higher ISO.

With your current setup I suggest you consider shooting at possibly F4 and a shutter at about 1/200. This will bring more of the players in focus by increasing the DOF and 1/200 should still be fast enough to stop people action. I realize the light might not support it. In that case a better camera with better hi-ISO performance might help. Instead of the 50/1.8 I suggest the 17-55/2.8 instead due to IS and very good IQ overall.
Kent Gittings

 

[jitteringjr]

If you want to shoot indoor sports, the cross point AF upgrade and faster FPS will come in very handy with the 60D. Skip the 18-135 though and get some 2.8 or faster glass preferably with USM. The Sigma 17-50/2.8 and Canon 85/1.8 would be good lenses on a budget for this type of stuff.

 

[ultimitsu]

Given that I'm not really that skilled, would I notice the difference between the 60D and the 600D? or would the roughly 250 dollar savings if choosing the 600D, be offset by the quality of the shots that I can take?

Given that you are not heavily invested in canon lens, only a 100 USD 50 F1.8 which you can easily sell and get most of it back, I would recommend you get a nikon D5100.

it is better than 600D is pretty much all aspects for approx the same amount of money, it is lower spec-ed compared to 60D but not by much, it produced better IQ than them both. nikon has a 18-105 which is similarly priced to 18-135 but is better IQ wise and has ultrasonic motor (SWM) which 18-135 lack.

Right now there is very little reason to buy into canon system, their sensor tech across board is just too far behind.

 

[aVolanche]

Given that I'm not really that skilled, would I notice the difference between the 60D and the 600D? or would the roughly 250 dollar savings if choosing the 600D, be offset by the quality of the shots that I can take?

Given that you are not heavily invested in canon lens, only a 100 USD 50 F1.8 which you can easily sell and get most of it back, I would recommend you get a nikon D5100.

it is better than 600D is pretty much all aspects for approx the same amount of money, it is lower spec-ed compared to 60D but not by much, it produced better IQ than them both. nikon has a 18-105 which is similarly priced to 18-135 but is better IQ wise and has ultrasonic motor (SWM) which 18-135 lack.

Right now there is very little reason to buy into canon system, their sensor tech across board is just too far behind.

That is very debatable!

According to the dpreview reviews, the 600D is very competitive with the 5100D. In fact, it surpasses it in many categories and gathers a better overall score . Add that to what, in the minds of many is the trump card, Canon has a better (and cheaper) overall system....particularly their great lens lineup (and better lens prices).

Most photographers will tell you that it makes no sense to buy Canon vs Nikon body vs body, but look at the system.

Fred

 

[aVolanche]

I'm Not really a professional shooter,nor would I count myself as a total novice. More of someone who would really want the best pictures at a budget
just someone who shoots volleyball games from time to time.

However, I'm finding my setup currently lacking (a Rebel XT/350D and 50mm 1.8)

I'm looking at the 60D as compared with the 600D.
I was planning on getting either one of them + the 18-135kit.

Given that I'm not really that skilled, would I notice the difference between the 60D and the 600D? or would the roughly 250 dollar savings if choosing the 600D, be offset by the quality of the shots that I can take?

Any new body is going to be a major step up. If volleyball is important, then you probably need a fast lens. You've probably already noticed how bad the lighting is in most gyms. A logical step up can be as cheap as a used Canon 85mm f1.8 for $300ish. It's not got IS, but for volleyball, works very well. It's a very nice portrait lens,too. The F2.8 lenses mentioned by others have the advantage of IS, but are over a stop slower. They are typically zooms, so more versatile (and more $$).

Also, the 600D or 60D have a great (same on both) sensor that will give you better results at higher ISO like you have been using ( ISO 800 or so). The ability to crop the 18mp sensor is a bonus,too.

Keep in mind that the overall system is very important, particularly if you continue to upgrade. IMO, Canon still has a much better lens lineup and better lens pricing.

Good luck!
Fred

 

[Schnapper]

I upgraded from a Rebel XT/350D to a 60D and the biggest improvements/differences I noticed were:

1 - Second control wheel makes it much more convenient to change settings

2 - Higher MP count makes it more possible to crop for composition (the 600D also will give you the same advantage)

3 - Better high ISO performance (600D also gives you this)

4 - Higher frame rate - very nice for action shots (7D is even better)

5 - More accurate/consistent AF - I have less missed focus shots than I used to with the 350D

6 - Wireless flash controller - only helps if you have an external flash and take the time to figure out how to take advantage of it (I've used it a few times with my 430EX II, but I'm still low on the learning curve)

7 - Bigger (a disadvantage at times, but sometimes it feels more steady/substantial... definitely a personal preference thing)... Consider Blackrapid strap, as it makes it easier to carry

8 - much better display on the back for reviewing pictures (and articulating capabillity is nice)... also Live View capability is a nice feature that the 350D didn't offer

9 - SD cards instead of CF (I prefer SD because they plug right into my laptop and netbook, and also there's no chance of bending a pin in the camera, but some people prefer CF for the speed and "reliability of the cards" (which I've never had an issue with with either format))

 

[ultimitsu]

it is better than 600D is pretty much all aspects for approx the same amount of money, it is lower spec-ed compared to 60D but not by much, it produced better IQ than them both. nikon has a 18-105 which is similarly priced to 18-135 but is better IQ wise and has ultrasonic motor (SWM) which 18-135 lack.

Right now there is very little reason to buy into canon system, their sensor tech across board is just too far behind.

According to the dpreview reviews, the 600D is very competitive with the 5100D. In fact, it surpasses it in many categories and gathers a better overall score .

Firstly DPR's review is pretty outdated now, it is not a good indicator of camera quality.

• it doesnt place enough emphasis on RAW DR comparison
• it is flawed in general IQ comparison for not using the same lens (unlike IR)
• it is flawed in high iso test for not using constant light and constant lens + aperture + shutter speed

Secondly even with its flaws, DPR correctly acknowledges D5100 is noticeably superior in IQ, 600D narrowly wins in overall score (77 vs 76) because DPR has given it significant better score for its video implementation. If you take video out of the equation, 600D is soundedly beaten even by DPR's results.

Thirdly, from a pure RAW IQ point of view, DXO is much more authoritive. there you have D5100 beating 600d by a large margin, 80 vs 65.

Add that to what, in the minds of many is the trump card, Canon has a better (and cheaper) overall system....particularly their great lens lineup (and better lens prices).

This is either a outright lie or a very outdated generalisation, these days the two systems are about equal in terms of overall performance/price. canon has better lenses in some cases (17-55,70-200 F4 IS) and nikon has better lenses in other cases ( 14-24, 16-35). some of the latest canon lenses are decidedly more expensive than nikon's equivalent, check 24-70 II.

The lens that OP is looking at, 18-135, is decidedly beaten by nikon's counter part, the 18-105.

Most photographers will tell you that it makes no sense to buy Canon vs Nikon body vs body, but look at the system.

Because most photographers in your world probably do not keep up to date with the development. I am not the only one saying there is nothing going for canon right now. bobn2 has said that too.

 

[aVolanche]

it is better than 600D is pretty much all aspects for approx the same amount of money, it is lower spec-ed compared to 60D but not by much, it produced better IQ than them both. nikon has a 18-105 which is similarly priced to 18-135 but is better IQ wise and has ultrasonic motor (SWM) which 18-135 lack.

Right now there is very little reason to buy into canon system, their sensor tech across board is just too far behind.

According to the dpreview reviews, the 600D is very competitive with the 5100D. In fact, it surpasses it in many categories and gathers a better overall score .

Firstly DPR's review is pretty outdated now, it is not a good indicator of camera quality.

• it doesnt place enough emphasis on RAW DR comparison
• it is flawed in general IQ comparison for not using the same lens (unlike IR)
• it is flawed in high iso test for not using constant light and constant lens + aperture + shutter speed

Secondly even with its flaws, DPR correctly acknowledges D5100 is noticeably superior in IQ, 600D narrowly wins in overall score (77 vs 76) because DPR has given it significant better score for its video implementation. If you take video out of the equation, 600D is soundedly beaten even by DPR's results.

Thirdly, from a pure RAW IQ point of view, DXO is much more authoritive. there you have D5100 beating 600d by a large margin, 80 vs 65.

Add that to what, in the minds of many is the trump card, Canon has a better (and cheaper) overall system....particularly their great lens lineup (and better lens prices).

This is either a outright lie or a very outdated generalisation, these days the two systems are about equal in terms of overall performance/price. canon has better lenses in some cases (17-55,70-200 F4 IS) and nikon has better lenses in other cases ( 14-24, 16-35). some of the latest canon lenses are decidedly more expensive than nikon's equivalent, check 24-70 II.

The lens that OP is looking at, 18-135, is decidedly beaten by nikon's counter part, the 18-105.

Most photographers will tell you that it makes no sense to buy Canon vs Nikon body vs body, but look at the system.

Because most photographers in your world probably do not keep up to date with the development.

Really?!!!! What do you know about my world?

More long-winded baloney from ultimitsu. Is it not possible for you to be civil?

Frankly, I could not care less about what you (and bobn2) say. I posted the truth. You are being nothing but contentious.

Fred

 

[micoruiz]

Thanks guys for the heated debate.

You are correct in the fact that I'm not really invested in Canon lenses so I can choose both ways.

However, Given that I would need the camera by sunday, I would think that Im going to be a tad more comfortable with a Canon body, (I still have 2 days to go and a chance to use a D40 tomorrow, so we'll see)

On the other hand, I realized that I didn't leave my budget requirements here,

I only have around 1200 dollars to spend. So I need to balance the lens, and how edffective those lenses would be to the body that I would be using.

(IE getting a zoom lens but still reliant on the 350D would probably force me to use a higher iso and kill the image)

 

[micoruiz]

You have been very helpful sir,
so maybe I can coax this answer from you

if I had 1200 dollars to spend, could you recommend a setup that you would go through?

 

[VisualNectarPhotography]

Personally I’d choose the 60D body only and buy whatever lens you like with the remainder. The 18-135 is not a bad lens. It has decent to above average IQ from 18-70mm 70-100 it is less desirable and 100-135mm is not the lenses strong suit. But then again most telephotos suffer on the long end.

As far as this canon v Nikon debate. This is a tug of war that has happened and will continue to happen for many more decades to come. Right now it looks as though Nikon has pulled the center of the rope closer to their side, but canon will answer like they always do and the tides will shift again.

Arguing that Nikon gear is better than canon gear in terms of build quality and price is simply stupid. Nikon has their own bag of issues that their customers deal with, for example mirror lockup and failure has plagued many Nikon bodies for many years. (happened to my D7000).

The menu setup on Nikon is more confusing to leaf through and can frustrate a user who is standing at best buy looking between the canon and Nikon displays. Canon’s menu system (while some Nikon die-hards will disagree) is bloody simple. It is set up like a filing cabinet, with tabs and folders. Granted there are some annoyances such as mirror lock up being covered up by 6 menu clicks.

Nikon’s bodies are an ergonomic mess and IMO looks like the button fairy threw up on them. Where most canon’s I have used have everything laid out simply so that I can comfortably change settings while looking through the view finder. (Before you flame me, I own both Nikon and Canon).

Then again it’s well known that Canon sensors can’t capture the color red without freaking out.

So take your pick, but understand that both companies make high quality products and people have and are happy using both. Also each company makes good glass as well as bad glass. It just is the way it is. (oh and typically Nikon lenses are slightly more costly than canon from my experience)

Don’t knock a company until you've tried it. I have been in both camps. Nikon D2HS (in-use) , D7000 (broke) - Canon 300D (retired) , 60D (daily use)

--

Be Content with what you have; rejoice in the way things are. When you realize there is nothing lacking, the whole world belongs to you.

 

[Christoph Stephan]

..like the D5100 is that they have no inbuildt focus motor, so many cheaper lenses without Focus motor (i.e. without the Nikon euivalent of USM) won't Autofocus on them.

When you are on budget, this is an important consideration. You should check the lenses you envisage to buy in advance.

More reecently, Tamron and Sigma are adding focus motors to more and more of their lenses, but the issue is still important, particular if you buy older used lenses.

The Sigma 50mm f2.8 Macro or the Sigma 18-50mm f2.8 Macro are examples of such lenses.

The problem goes away with the Nikon D7000 or D90 (if you choose Nikon)

I would go with Canon if you already have Canon lenses, If not; I would also consider Pentax.

Thanks guys for the heated debate.

You are correct in the fact that I'm not really invested in Canon lenses so I can choose both ways.

--
Chris
-----
http://christopher363.redbubble.com
http://www.whitewall.com/christopher

 

[ultimitsu]

it is better than 600D is pretty much all aspects for approx the same amount of money, it is lower spec-ed compared to 60D but not by much, it produced better IQ than them both. nikon has a 18-105 which is similarly priced to 18-135 but is better IQ wise and has ultrasonic motor (SWM) which 18-135 lack.

Right now there is very little reason to buy into canon system, their sensor tech across board is just too far behind.

According to the dpreview reviews, the 600D is very competitive with the 5100D. In fact, it surpasses it in many categories and gathers a better overall score .

Firstly DPR's review is pretty outdated now, it is not a good indicator of camera quality.

• it doesnt place enough emphasis on RAW DR comparison
• it is flawed in general IQ comparison for not using the same lens (unlike IR)
• it is flawed in high iso test for not using constant light and constant lens + aperture + shutter speed

Secondly even with its flaws, DPR correctly acknowledges D5100 is noticeably superior in IQ, 600D narrowly wins in overall score (77 vs 76) because DPR has given it significant better score for its video implementation. If you take video out of the equation, 600D is soundedly beaten even by DPR's results.

Thirdly, from a pure RAW IQ point of view, DXO is much more authoritive. there you have D5100 beating 600d by a large margin, 80 vs 65.

Add that to what, in the minds of many is the trump card, Canon has a better (and cheaper) overall system....particularly their great lens lineup (and better lens prices).

This is either a outright lie or a very outdated generalisation, these days the two systems are about equal in terms of overall performance/price. canon has better lenses in some cases (17-55,70-200 F4 IS) and nikon has better lenses in other cases ( 14-24, 16-35). some of the latest canon lenses are decidedly more expensive than nikon's equivalent, check 24-70 II.

The lens that OP is looking at, 18-135, is decidedly beaten by nikon's counter part, the 18-105.

Most photographers will tell you that it makes no sense to buy Canon vs Nikon body vs body, but look at the system.

Because most photographers in your world probably do not keep up to date with the development.

Really?!!!! What do you know about my world?

I know that you said "Most photographers will...." if they are not in your world then are they from an imaginary world?

More long-winded baloney from ultimitsu.

this is yet another blatant lie, I had give you a detail analysis as to why DPR's score doesnt mean much and why system cost isnt what you make them out to be. now you have got no substantive comeback so you resort to personal attack again.

Is it not possible for you to be civil?

LOL says the moron that attempts (and fails) to attack every chance he gets.

Frankly, I could not care less about what you (and bobn2) say. I posted the truth. You are being nothing but contentious.

what truth?

• that 600D received better DPR score so it is a better camera ? - it has been shown not to be the case.
• that nikon system cost more overall? you made a untrue assertion, whether intentional misleading or sheer ignorant. I explain why it is not truth, you have no comeback.
• that you claim "most photographers will.."? where is your evidence? if most will say which system to choose doesnt matter then surely difference between 550D/600D/60D would matter even less, so what is the point of having this forum or this discussion?

the only one has posted no real analysis but being pure contentious is you, idiot, just like your inability to read your own link regarding printing DPI, you havent checked any of your facts when you asserted them.

 

[ultimitsu]

..like the D5100 is that they have no inbuildt focus motor, so many cheaper lenses without Focus motor (i.e. without the Nikon euivalent of USM) won't Autofocus on them.

When you are on budget, this is an important consideration. You should check the lenses you envisage to buy in advance.

this used to be a problem several years ago when there werent many G-type (has built-in SWM motor, though G doesnt actually mean that) lenses around, things has changed so much more. all G-type lenses have better IQ than D-type that it makes little sense to buy D-type.

for example nikon 50 F1.8G is noticeably better in most apertures than the old 1.8D (and for most part better than canon 50 F1.8). it does cost more but is still a cheap lens compared to other primes. 85 F1.8G is also quite a bit better than 85 F1.8D.

Further more, all DX lenses are G-type, that includes the popular 18-55, 55-200, 55-300, 18-105, 17-85. so basically for every need there is a good G-type lens available, realistically you wont run into AF problem.

More reecently, Tamron and Sigma are adding focus motors to more and more of their lenses, but the issue is still important, particular if you buy older used lenses.

The Sigma 50mm f2.8 Macro or the Sigma 18-50mm f2.8 Macro are examples of such lenses.

why buy old tamron or sigma lenses at all? they havent been that good back then and there are better lenses all around now.

The problem goes away with the Nikon D7000 or D90 (if you choose Nikon)

D7000 is out of OP's budget and in my view is unnecessary - he doesnt apppear to have strong need for faster FPS and more AF points. you pay extra 500 USD just so you can use cheap and outdated lenses?

D90 is too outdated camera now.

D5100 struck the right balance between excellent IQ, modern features and good price.

I would also consider Pentax.

Pentax offers far less value for money compared to canon and nikon, K5 is more expensive than D7000 again, K-01 is cheaper but has not OVF, and IQ suffers a bit by having only 12-bit RAWs. their lens line up is both considerably more expensive and considerably more limited than either canon and nikon.

 

[aVolanche]

it is better than 600D is pretty much all aspects for approx the same amount of money, it is lower spec-ed compared to 60D but not by much, it produced better IQ than them both. nikon has a 18-105 which is similarly priced to 18-135 but is better IQ wise and has ultrasonic motor (SWM) which 18-135 lack.

Right now there is very little reason to buy into canon system, their sensor tech across board is just too far behind.

According to the dpreview reviews, the 600D is very competitive with the 5100D. In fact, it surpasses it in many categories and gathers a better overall score .

Firstly DPR's review is pretty outdated now, it is not a good indicator of camera quality.

• it doesnt place enough emphasis on RAW DR comparison
• it is flawed in general IQ comparison for not using the same lens (unlike IR)
• it is flawed in high iso test for not using constant light and constant lens + aperture + shutter speed

Secondly even with its flaws, DPR correctly acknowledges D5100 is noticeably superior in IQ, 600D narrowly wins in overall score (77 vs 76) because DPR has given it significant better score for its video implementation. If you take video out of the equation, 600D is soundedly beaten even by DPR's results.

Thirdly, from a pure RAW IQ point of view, DXO is much more authoritive. there you have D5100 beating 600d by a large margin, 80 vs 65.

Add that to what, in the minds of many is the trump card, Canon has a better (and cheaper) overall system....particularly their great lens lineup (and better lens prices).

This is either a outright lie or a very outdated generalisation, these days the two systems are about equal in terms of overall performance/price. canon has better lenses in some cases (17-55,70-200 F4 IS) and nikon has better lenses in other cases ( 14-24, 16-35). some of the latest canon lenses are decidedly more expensive than nikon's equivalent, check 24-70 II.

The lens that OP is looking at, 18-135, is decidedly beaten by nikon's counter part, the 18-105.

Most photographers will tell you that it makes no sense to buy Canon vs Nikon body vs body, but look at the system.

Because most photographers in your world probably do not keep up to date with the development.

Really?!!!! What do you know about my world?

I know that you said "Most photographers will...." if they are not in your world then are they from an imaginary world?

More long-winded baloney from ultimitsu.

this is yet another blatant lie, I had give you a detail analysis as to why DPR's score doesnt mean much and why system cost isnt what you make them out to be. now you have got no substantive comeback so you resort to personal attack again.

Is it not possible for you to be civil?

LOL says the moron that attempts (and fails) to attack every chance he gets.

Frankly, I could not care less about what you (and bobn2) say. I posted the truth. You are being nothing but contentious.

what truth?

• that 600D received better DPR score so it is a better camera ? - it has been shown not to be the case.
• that nikon system cost more overall? you made a untrue assertion, whether intentional misleading or sheer ignorant. I explain why it is not truth, you have no comeback.
• that you claim "most photographers will.."? where is your evidence? if most will say which system to choose doesnt matter then surely difference between 550D/600D/60D would matter even less, so what is the point of having this forum or this discussion?

the only one has posted no real analysis but being pure contentious is you,* idiot*, just like your inability to read your own link regarding printing DPI, you havent checked any of your facts when you asserted them.

TOTAL RUBBISH!

You are so arrogant to know so little.........so childish......and once again you resort to calling someone " idiot " because that is all you know to do when you lose an argument. Someone who constantly resorts to that tact has obviously proven nothing. Too bad that you have no respect for others....It goes to your character (lack of!). I hope your anger has subsided! It really isn't good to be constantly angry.

Fred

 

[micoruiz]

I got this lens instead of purchasing a body.
Someone is selling it to me used for around 280$

I guess I'll use this and wait til they announce the new 650D.

and then make a choice as to whether I would get that or see how much the price of the 600D would drop.

 

[Digirame]

Then you might like my volleyball pictures. Bet you hadn't taken any like that.

See the last three pictures at the bottom...taken with my Canon T2i (550D) camera.

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1031&message=41509379

 

[ultimitsu]

TOTAL RUBBISH!

You are so arrogant to know so little.........so childish......and once again you resort to calling someone " idiot " because that is all you know to do when you lose an argument. Someone who constantly resorts to that tact has obviously proven nothing.

Fred

Yep, right back to where you were and always been - a total idiot who has nothing or next to nothing substantive to the argument yet cant resist the urge to make a foll of yourself..

Too bad that you have no respect for others....It goes to your character (lack of!).

I have full respect to a lot of forumers here in DPR, some for their knowledge and some for their photography skills and a few for their good manners, but I have none for you fred because your severe lack of all three above qualities.

I hope your anger has subsided! It really isn't good to be constantly angry.

LOL, I think the only angry idiot is you.

You have been angry ever since I kicked you so hard in discussions happened years ago and you still havent got over it. why else would you attack my posts almost every chance you get? in contrast when was the last time I initiated a response to a post made by you (without reference to my post first)? Never.

To me, you are just a little annoying bug which i have to reluctantly crush from time to time, I don't particularly look forward to it but if it does happen it is fun nevertheless.

 

[bronxbombers]

neither of those are so hot for indoor sports

you want some fast glass for one

volleyball is a tricky sport to shoot

I'm Not really a professional shooter,nor would I count myself as a total novice. More of someone who would really want the best pictures at a budget
just someone who shoots volleyball games from time to time.

However, I'm finding my setup currently lacking (a Rebel XT/350D and 50mm 1.8)

I'm looking at the 60D as compared with the 600D.
I was planning on getting either one of them + the 18-135kit.

Given that I'm not really that skilled, would I notice the difference between the 60D and the 600D? or would the roughly 250 dollar savings if choosing the 600D, be offset by the quality of the shots that I can take?