danisnug From Indonesia, joined Mar 2012, 5 posts, RR: 0 Posted (5 months 2 weeks 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 2788 times:
I know this is some people problem back day. I always wanted to having 7D. For me its such a great camera. I've been doing research for months reading pros and cons and reviews for 7D.
But something change my mind so fast when I saw the price tag of 60D drops steeply. It drops $150 in my local store from $850 in March 2013 to only $700 by now!! And this making more than $500 price gap with the 7D.
I once taking indoor basketball shots with my friend's 60D and his 70-200 F4 IS. In my opinion its great but the only thing missing is I missed the moment. I am using iso 800 and it doesnt enough. So I moved to 1600 It's OK, I could get more thack sharp photos more often but the noise is noticably high even with camera's built in LCD screen. It's OK, too, I can use some like Nik's software to minimise the problem.
I've never taking shot using 7D so far, no one of my colleagues own 7D I can borrow. If there's 7D owner who might tell the story about sports photography with that mighty 8fps burst 50 shots non stop with JPEG and 20 shots non stop with RAW (CMIIW ) that'd be very pleasure to hear.
Using 60D for aviation photography is enough for me but this decision is for long time period (about 5 years, maybe). Looking the price drop on the 60D, I am worried about its future resale value compared to 4 years 7D which is drops $500 since its launch and 3 years 60D drops $400 since its launch too.
With exactly same image sensor and other similar features to the 7D, is $500 price gap is worth of money to spend? Should I go with 7D or just 60D and saving more money for other lens? And what is your opinion about 60D's price drop? Is that normal? hehehe
Anyway, I'm sorry for any grammatical errors, thank you and cheers.
Comparing the 60D to the 7D, they appear to have nearly identical specs, and scores. I guess the 7D has a faster frame rate (perfect for all you stomp and sprayers). The price reduction probably means there are new cameras coming out.
trvyyz From Canada, joined Oct 2004, 1365 posts, RR: 10 Reply 2, posted (5 months 2 weeks 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 2778 times:
7D. Better AF, FPS, metal body. You know the answer yourself. The 60D is poor in burst mode, you'd be lucky to have some keepers. i have used the 40D and 60D, I liked the 40D much more, the burst performance was very good. I felt the 60D was a downgrade.
southwest9 From United States of America, joined Nov 2012, 63 posts, RR: 0 Reply 3, posted (5 months 2 weeks 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 2771 times:
Quoting trvyyz (Reply 2): 7D. Better AF, FPS, metal body. You know the answer yourself. The 60D is poor in burst mode, you'd be lucky to have some keepers. i have used the 40D and 60D, I liked the 40D much more, the burst performance was very good. I felt the 60D was a downgrade.
True, I have a 7D and it is the best camera that I have had so far. The 7D is a very good choice if you want to get quality pictures and very quickly too with the 8 frames per second.
trvyyz From Canada, joined Oct 2004, 1365 posts, RR: 10 Reply 4, posted (5 months 2 weeks 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 2769 times:
Quoting clickhappy (Reply 1): for instance the D7100, you will see that the Nikon just crushes the Canons:
There is no prosumer camera in Nikon line up to beat 7D in highspeed action shot where you actually need the spray.
But except the spray part, Nikon will beat all other aspects of the 7D be it a D7000 or D7100. the buffer performance of the D7100 is not even as good as the D7000 which already sucks.
I was debating between the 50D, 60D, and 7D about a year ago. I settled on the 50D.
Pros versus the 7D:
-possibly less noisy at low ISOs (based on people's experiences with the 7D)
Pros versus the 60D:
-magnesium alloy body
-better burst rate (I never use it, but it's nice to have just in case)
-has AF micro-adjustment (can't believe they got rid of that on the 60D!)
Obvious con versus both cameras is less megapixels, but I'm not convinced that 3 more megapixels is worth much more money. And the 7D has an 8 fps burst rate, versus 6.3 fps....again, not worth more money to me. And note the 50D doesn't do video, if that's your thing.
Did I mention it's cheaper?
Also, Royal, is it entirely fair to compare a 2013 camera (D7100) with a 2010 (60D) and 2009 (7D) camera? True, they are the latest releases in their category, if you will, but technology evolves a lot in 3-4 years....
[Edited 2013-06-25 20:50:57]
"Two and a Half Men" was filmed in front of a live ostrich.
I agree with Royal on this one, it is fair since even in 2013 canon's APS-C sensor is that same 18MP cmos sensor. they didn't bother to upgrade it for so many years. The Nikon 16MP sensor on D7000 etc. from sony and the new 24MP sensors are better than the 18MP on canon. It is like nikon is two steps ahead.
clickhappy From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 9549 posts, RR: 70 Reply 7, posted (5 months 2 weeks 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 2740 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW PHOTO SCREENER
Quoting vikkyvik (Reply 5): is it entirely fair to compare a 2013 camera (D7100) with a 2010 (60D) and 2009 (7D) camera?
Dunno, is it? Does Canon have anything newer in a APS-C sensor newer than either of those? I plugged in the D7000 (announced in 2010) and it still has quite an advantage over the Canon offerings. In fact, if I was buying a Nikon DX class camera (APS-C) I would look at the D7000, the prices have come WAY down, and it seems like a great camera.
Thankfully Nikon has given me a D7100 to play with. I will be sad when I have to send it back. I just wish it had the build quality of my D200s.
Tonyholt777 From United Kingdom, joined Dec 2010, 155 posts, RR: 0 Reply 9, posted (5 months 2 weeks 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 2694 times:
Quoting vikkyvik (Reply 5): is it entirely fair to compare a 2013 camera (D7100) with a 2010 (60D) and 2009 (7D) camera? True, they are the latest releases in their category, if you will, but technology evolves a lot in 3-4 years
Hi Vik - made me smile when I read that as I had literally finished reading an article in the June 2013 edition of Digital Photographer magazine on 'Great Value DSLRs'. In which they compare the Canon 60D, Nikon 71000, Sony Alpha A77, Pentax K5-11.
Quote "Handling like a much newer camera the Canon 60D is responsive, accurate and easy to control...Surprisingly, even though the 60D only offers a 9-cross type AF system, against Nikon's (7100) 51-point and Pentax 77-point, in true David and Goliath style it is able to meet and in some cases exceed the reliability and pace of its peers".
All things considered they they conclude the Canon 60D as: "Not the easiest to shoot with, but its outstanding image quality and tough shell make it a winner for this category and price point".
Before anyone jumps on this or me I advocate personal experience rather than lab/software performance tests that are quoted way too often in camera reviews and debates.
I have both the 7D and 60D + 5D's. I agree the 60D needs understanding to get the best from it (+7D) and contrary to myth the 60D has moderate/good weather sealing.
I also agree that the Nikon 7100 is reliable, well-made and capable of fantastic image quality, as is any decent DSLR with a good lens in the right hands
trvyyz From Canada, joined Oct 2004, 1365 posts, RR: 10 Reply 11, posted (5 months 2 weeks 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 2653 times:
Quoting Tonyholt777 (Reply 9): All things considered they they conclude the Canon 60D as: "Not the easiest to shoot with, but its outstanding image quality and tough shell make it a winner for this category and price point".
That review seems biased. 60D is an ok camera, but is no where close to a D7000, I also talk from experience because I switched from 60D to D7000. The only thing good about the 60D is the price.
I never missed the 60D after switching, only thing I miss are the nice body of the 40D and my L glasses. The pictures of the D7000, especially indoors, low light and landscape are outstanding (even compared to older prosumer niks) because of the better sensor and high DR, never tried D7100.
For aviation a 60D or D7000 is not going to make a difference. 60D is more than adequate to meet the requirements of the site and it's high iso is better than any of canon's previous aps-c models.
danisnug From Indonesia, joined Mar 2012, 5 posts, RR: 0 Reply 12, posted (5 months 2 weeks 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 2624 times:
Btw, just noticed that my local store now offers Canon 70-200 f2.8L IS (mark I) with $1,200 price tag. I have no idea why are they selling it back but I'm glad to hear this. Do you guys the expert have any suggestion, should I go with 60D + 70-200 Mk.I f2.8 IS or just taking the 7D and continue using my 55-250mm kit as its partner?
Me, who else. I sold my 60D and bought the D7000 and have first hand experience.
If you take a statistics of all the reviews, they are with me on that. 60D excels D7000 only for video nothing else, most people agree on that. I am not a Nikon fan, I used more canons than Nikons. I have a D300 and d7000, and I prefer the images from D7000 over any camera i have used so far.
Tonyholt777 From United Kingdom, joined Dec 2010, 155 posts, RR: 0 Reply 17, posted (5 months 2 weeks 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 2518 times:
Quoting trvyyz (Reply 16): Me, who else. I sold my 60D and bought the D7000 and have first hand experience.
As do many on this forum including me - my point was dont get hung up - all these cameras with good glass will deliver the goods in the right hands. As the review said in their experience the 60D is a better all round camera than the Nikon 7100 (not 7000) at the price point and to be honest I don't give a hoot one way or the other if the kit gets the result.
trvyyz From Canada, joined Oct 2004, 1365 posts, RR: 10 Reply 18, posted (5 months 2 weeks 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 2493 times:
Agreed 60D is a good bang for the buck. I care a bit more about the DR, AF finetune and better noise performance and construction of the D7000.
As you said nobody capable, is going to miss great a shot because he had a 60D and not a D7000.
andrew50 From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 108 posts, RR: 1 Reply 20, posted (5 months 2 weeks 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 2478 times:
I have the 7D and am ok with it. I have 2 40D's and will never get rid of them. I really can't see any difference in quality between the two. I always shoot raw so I really like the 10mp on the 40D. You can really burn through some CF cards with the 18mp 7D. This discussion about Nikon vs. Canon keeps popping up from time to time. They both make good products, I have to say Nikon might make better bodies, more bells and whistles, but in my opinion Canon has Nikon beat with their glass. As far as looking at shots on a.net from Canon and Nikon users, I have never really seen a big difference in the photos that would make me want to sell all my Canon gear and buy Nikon. It is always amusing reading when this topic comes up!