Fancy a New Camera Canon Body

rookies

rookies

Messages
8,064
Name
Andrew
Edit My Images
No
I currently have a Canon 40D that I plan to sell as I fancy a new camera.

I love the 7D my father in law got it and I have got loads of cracking images from it easily.. But the £££ is a bit steep.

What other Canon Bodies can perform near as good? The canon 60D?

I fine the Auto ISO and in AV mode on the 7D brill it got me loads of great images.

The Auto ISO on the 40D is no way as good so I want a upgrade but dont want to spend silly money but want be able to take images easier.
 
The 600D, 60D and 7D share the same sensor. Difference between 600D and 60D - bigger body, more features but same autofocus. Bizzarely, the 600D has a higher auto ISO of 6400 compared to 3200 on the 60D. 60D to 7D is magnesium body and vastly superior autofocus as well as microadjust.

This summarises most of the different Canon models:

5630405857_65f1ba3b1f_b.jpg
 
So sounds like the 7d still street ahead nothing comes as near?
 
Or should I go nikon? But I got 3 canon lens
 
Why would you want to switch?

What Nikon do you find suits you better than the 60d or 7d?
 
I don't really want to switch just open to ideas :) I always had canon.
 
That be interesting but I believe canon l lens are better? As I have L lens
 
550D and 7D share sensor, ISO 6400 [12800 with extensions]. Of course, I have a vested interest in telling you this.... but that aside, I did the research and figured that for my setup [centre point AF] then the 550D and 7d were identical image quality wise.

Have a look at the dpreview reviews...
 
But the 7d has 2 digi 4 processor what dif this makes.
 
Also are the screens on the camera better on some than others making it difficult see end result before transferring yo iMac
 
what are you struggleing with on the 40D. I cant honestly see much difference between the 2 bodies aprt from the AF and the ISO the rest is much of a muchness (I am no expert with either of these bodies).
Does your photography deal with fast moving objects or low light situations to the point it justifies the extra expense.

now you said you have used your FIL camera and there is a marked improvment. Just to clarify in what way is there an improvement.
 
When I set both camera with same settings etc the end results on FIL 7d is much better. Also most images I took on the 7d are keepers on the 40d lots get erase. I just found am more bond to the 7d but like a cheaper alternative
 
There are many differences between 40D and 7D. 40D is still a good camera but can't match 7D.
 
is it sharpness, exposure, noise something else that makes them better.
there is no real alternative to the 7D, that wouldnt make any commercial sense to canon.
 
Everything to be honest noise low light sharpness etc is great that why need find out if a 60d worth considering
 
If you really like the 7D you'll never be happy with the 60- thats not a reflection on the 60 per se, but you'll be constantly comparing it and thinking if only...
 
if the 7D is what you want i would save for one. you will always find you are missing something if you dont.
 
But I can't afford to waste money hence am trying find out how the 60d compare to it
 
rookies said:
But I can't afford to waste money hence am trying find out how the 60d compare to it
Click to expand...

Surely it's not a waste if it gets used and you deliver better images consistently ?

Steve
 
IMO the 60D is basically an upgraded 40D (ive looked at both of them recently- and the 50- as i'm upgrading from a 20D) so you need to decide what is it that you want that the 40 doesnt give you. If its major (rather than just more pixels or just a desire for a new toy) theres a good chance that you'll find the 60 lacking also

The 7D will hold its value better so it wouldnt be a 'waste' of money so long as you can actually afford it - if you cant it depends on whether you need a new camera right now or can you wait til you've saved up

Incidentally you may find it quite difficult to get a 7D right now, they are on back order anyway in a lot of places due to the issues in japan
 
rookies said:
That be interesting but I believe canon l lens are better? As I have L lens
Click to expand...

No point changing just for the sake of it!
 
rookies said:
But I can't afford to waste money hence am trying find out how the 60d compare to it
Click to expand...

if there is a doubt it would be a waste then my i would keep the money. I dont think you are convinced on the 7D as a worthwhile upgrade. Its a lot of camera and yes it demands a expensive price tag. Is the improvement in images worth the cost to upgrade or can you get by with the 40D ?
 
arad85 said:
Enables the fast burst rate...
Click to expand...

true but the xxD range all do about 6fps - which isnt that noticeably different in practice - its only the xxxD s that have a stupidly slow burst.
 
big soft moose said:
true but the xxD range all do about 6fps - which isnt that noticeably different in practice - its only the xxxD s that have a stupidly slow burst.
Click to expand...
The 60D is 5.3fps. The need for dual DIGICs will be because of the increased resolution and the number of pixels to process.
 
So would u say I would easily get a image on par from the 60d to 7d?
 
tbf that depends more on your ability than the camera - if you know what you are doing you can get a cracking image with any camera - if you dont the most expensive camera in the world wont help.

all else being equal the 7D is 'better' but thats why its more expensive - so you pays your money and takes your choice
 
rookies said:
So would u say I would easily get a image on par from the 60d to 7d?
Click to expand...
The only real difference which is image quality related is the autofocus system. The 7D will focus and track better on moving targets, but you will need to spend time and effort understanding it for best use. If you don't shoot moving targets, you'll probably find the image quality identical in 99% (made up statistic ;)) of the cases. Having said that, there are probably going to be a few instances when the 7D focus system will react better for static targets and as it has a dedicated focusing processor, it's likely to be faster to focus too. It also has a predictive focus system for hand held macro work which is better than the 60D. Other than that, sensor/processing are the same so the 60D will be equivalent to the 7D picture quality wise (assuming perfect focus).
 
The only real difference in picture quality appears to be down to the skills of the user, when I moved from the 400D to the 40D I found I had a lot more keepers, my skills had not improved but the camera made things easier for me to get it right obviously with an improved autofocus system there is a degree of this going on between the 40D and 7D.

Spend your money on better glass and practice your skills.
 
Have already got good glass that how I compared. Think a 7d on the list due to better iso etc than my 40d
 
Don't get me wrong, I would love a 7D and if I save for another month or two may treat myself or being impatient may get a 60D this month.
 
Now you made it harder ha ha. What make you think getting a 60d

I might go in shop tmr have a toy with a 60d
 
Having had a play with both i'm going down the 60D route as I dont shoot subjects that require the use of the improved AF system on the 7D. I shoot a lot of interior/architectural photography so the moveable screen is a benefit i'm keen on as it allows me to put the camera tight up into corners, and not need to stand behind it.

I think you need to consider what you shoot, and then find the camera that best suits your needs. There are too many things which affect image quality overall that I dont think you can judge one body vs another on this aspect alone.

Just my opinion. :)
 
All I do mostly is portraits and landscapes. I do plan do macro once i got a macro lens :)
 
portraits and landscapes dont need the AF of the 7D, to be honest landscapes dont need the high ISO as a tripod can steady thing in dim light. You would be using apertures that are generally regarded as a lens' sweet spot.
For portraits again, unless shooting in low light alot and not controlled lighting the high ISO is not important. If you are using good glass it will probably be fast glass too.

I dont want to come across mean but, if you want a 7D you are going to have to pay 7D prices, if you want a nice new shiney bit of kit then go for the 60D and save some money.
 
Buy more lenses, or do nothing until you actually know what you want to buy the kit for?! Crazy ideas i know.
 
Yup portraits indoor low light of my 13 month old daughter who can't keep still. I like natural lights portrait rather than flash. Think going try a 60d shame there no return options.
 
I did the mistake of switching brands but it is expensive. I went from Nikon D7000 to a Canon 5d Mark II before going for a D700 then D3s. I lost money getting rid of glass on my D7000 and lost money when the 5D didn't click for me. In the end it prompted me to FX so no loss no gain :D
 
If you're worried about the speed, you might consider a 1D Mk2 to complement rather than replace your 40D

The processor will be making next to no difference, if you like the colours, learn to post process, that's all I'll say.

If it's colours and noise, I have a feeling it might be that the 7D is shooting jpeg and you're comparing it to RAWs from the 40D?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top