Quantcast
camera upgrade- t3i or 60d? - Page 3
Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 56

Thread: camera upgrade- t3i or 60d?

  1. #21
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Fort Worth, TX
    Posts
    572
    Quote Originally Posted by JBroida View Post
    the camera does all of the product photos for the store, but thats the easy part (which i could really do with a much less expensive camera). Its also my camera for video and photos on our japan trips, which includes dark workshops, bright fires, fast motion, etc.- a wide variety of conditions. I also use the camera for some of the videos we make (again, not necessary to have a nice camera for that). The most important function of the camera is for me to have fun with it taking crazy photos in all kinds of situations. I have a 30mm 1.4, 60mm 2.8 macro, 18-55 kit lesns, 18-270mm tamron (on the way), and access to a 24-70 2.8 l, 24-105 f4 l, 70-200 L, 85 1.8, and 10-22. No nikon friends here in LA, so that is kind of limiting.

    The main reasons i was thinking about switching to nikon if i had the money and it wasnt such a pain in the ass is that the d7000 has better low light performance and a larger sensor. But the canon has better detail in the normal range i shoot and a faster shutter speed, which i actually want and is a big part of my decision to go with the 60d. Sometimes 1/4000 just isnt fast enough.
    Sounds like you need a 5d mark II or III, but I am sure you will be happy with the 60d. The 60d is more rugged for all the traveling you do, plus it is a better fit for some of those lenses. But it sounds like you had already figured that out. My brother has a 60d and loves it.

    If you are shooting in some dark workshops I would suggest you get one of these LED lights.

    They put out a lot of light, generate no heat, battery powered that last at least 2 hours. They are easy to carry and even come with their own case. I usually don't even put them on light stands, I just have someone hand hold them. When I shot my video in the whiskey distillery I had someone hand hold one to use as fill light. They would also be great for product shoots now that I think about it.

  2. #22
    Senior Member EdipisReks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Cincinnati, Oh
    Posts
    3,487
    Quote Originally Posted by JBroida View Post
    except that i have a lot of $$$ invested in lenes

    Thought about the d7000 for a bit for a number of reasons. However, as capable as it is, especially in low light, the canon still has better detail in the shots across the board. Color can always be adjusted in raw. The d7000 is a pretty sweet choice for sure. If i was just buying my first dslr, that would be my top choice for sure.
    i have a friend who just dumped 5d Mk II for a D700, now that the D700 has dropped in price due to the D800. he was able to sell his body and significant lens collection and came out even when buying equivalent Nikon lenses, and is much happier with his pictures. he was a Canon guy for years. i'm a Nikon guy, and i think picture quality and usage of the Nikon control style are both worth the time and effort to switch. they are simply better cameras, and i'll be a Nikon guy until i can afford Leica, if that ever happens. don't be fooled by the apparent "extra detail" with Canon. Nikon does less modification on JPEGS than Canon does, and the same detail on equivalent lenses and sensors can be had with RAW (i only shoot RAW).

  3. #23
    Senior Member EdipisReks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Cincinnati, Oh
    Posts
    3,487
    oh, didn't see that you wanted video. d700 never mind. i haven't tried the newest Nikons (i have a D90 [and an FM2, with a formidable pool of lenses between the two], and i've used D700s and the D3s), but with the previous gen Canon definitely had the leg up with video.

  4. #24
    Quote Originally Posted by sw2geeks View Post
    Sounds like you need a 5d mark II or III, but I am sure you will be happy with the 60d. The 60d is more rugged for all the traveling you do, plus it is a better fit for some of those lenses. But it sounds like you had already figured that out. My brother has a 60d and loves it.

    If you are shooting in some dark workshops I would suggest you get one of these LED lights.

    They put out a lot of light, generate no heat, battery powered that last at least 2 hours. They are easy to carry and even come with their own case. I usually don't even put them on light stands, I just have someone hand hold them. When I shot my video in the whiskey distillery I had someone hand hold one to use as fill light. They would also be great for product shoots now that I think about it.
    a friend of mine just picked up some of those LED's... i'll test them out this year in japan and see how they go

  5. #25
    Senior Member Duckfat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    The Motor City
    Posts
    518
    If your shooting video the 60D should be a significant upgrade from a Rebel. The better viewfinder alone is worth the price upgrade plus you will have a flip screen that may be a valuable tool for you. I'd probably suggest sending the 18-270 back (if possible) as the super-teles usually lack performance at one end or the other not to mention the variable App. Going FF or paying for a larger sensor is not the way I would fly as you won't see a big gain for what you are shooting. I'd suggest upgrading your glass instead with either the Canon 17-55 f2.8 IS or perhaps one of the new Canon Primes with IS that should be ideal for video. I'm not a video shooter myself but I see the 50 1.4 in use on video more than any other Canon lens but the 24-70 is right up there as well. If your a Tammy fan then look at the 17-50 f2.8 (Non OS version)
    I'm shooting a 7D/5DMKII combo.

    Dave

  6. #26
    the 18-270 is not there for performance... sometimes i just cant carry a lot of stuff with me and find myself in need of versatility. Later this year, i'm picking up either the 17-55 or 17-50 for sure... and maybe a couple new primes.

  7. #27
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Gothenburg, Sweden
    Posts
    498
    The 17-55 2.8 is an awesome lens. I run that as my base lens.

    One thing just as a thought, i had all my lenses calibrated to the camera by Canon in Virginia...

  8. #28
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Fort Worth, TX
    Posts
    572
    24-105mm is the lens I use when I am shooting all my food shots or videos. I have a 28-300mm that I use when I am out shooting an events and need a wide range (it is a great airshow lens). My sensor is full frame so 24 and 28 is still wide. If I really need to get wide I have a 12-24mm that is about as wide as you can get on a full frame.

  9. #29
    Senior Member Ratton's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    East Coast Florida
    Posts
    192

    Cool

    Quote Originally Posted by RobinW View Post
    One thing just as a thought, i had all my lenses calibrated to the camera by Canon in Virginia...
    Hi Robin,

    What does this entail? I have never heard of this before!


    Thanks for the info!!


  10. #30
    Senior Member Duckfat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    The Motor City
    Posts
    518
    You can have your lens's calibrated to a body but when you do that you are adjusting the specs on a lens and tweaking them for peak performance to a single body. If your a CPS member that may be more cost effective depending on what your level of membership is. I'd only worry about calibration if you are having AF issues on a given body or have a specific problem with a given lens (front focus, back focus etc). For most this will never be an issue especially since many of the new Canon bodies have micro-adjust.

    Dave

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •