camera upgrade- t3i or 60d?

Kitchen Knife Forums

Help Support Kitchen Knife Forums:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

JBroida

KKF Vendor
Founding Member
Joined
Feb 28, 2011
Messages
6,801
Reaction score
1,736
Location
Beverly Hills, CA
I've decided its time for a new camera and i've been split between the t3i and 60d. I'm leaning towards the 60d, but i thought i'd throw the question out there to see if any of you guys had anything to say on the subject.
 
My wife, who uses Nikon because it has better skin tones and shutter performance. She said that if you are going to get an upgrade and don't want to upgrade again anytime soon, get the d7000. The ISO is a lot more capable, and if I understand correctly, you do your photos in natural light mostly, which is what she does.

The 60d would be a good choice if you are one a budget that won't fit the d7000, but she's pretty solid that Nikon is the better option, at least for the kinds of photos she does(natural light lifestyle photography). She used Canon for a long time, a couple years, and then switched to Nikon and never looked back.
 
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.
 
Plus, you already have invested in a few canon lenses, haven't you? I'd go 60d. It'd be a sweet step up from what you have now, whereas the t3i I think would be a relatively small improvement...
 
OH my wife was confused about what I was relaying to her from another room, lol. She thought you asking if you should switch to Nikon.

She says T3i. The t3i has better video than the 60d, and if you are going to get a 60d, you might as well get a mark V.
 
t3i and 60d have same video/same sensor/etc. Just different body and shutter. I liked the shutter on the 60d better (and its faster at 1/8000 sec). But i'm debating if its worth the extra $200 for the shutter, slightly faster focusing, and larger more sturdy body. The t3i is about $699, the 60d is about $800. The from there it jumps up like crazy. The 7d is $1600 (but $1200 or so if i buy used). A used 5d mkII is still about $1600-1800. And the new mark III are in the $3k+ range :(
 
Probably not worth it for what you are doing with it. Knives are patient subjects, and you have always gotten great photos in the past with what you have already.

You using this for skype stuff too, or do you have a dedicated video camera?
 
Probably not worth it for what you are doing with it. Knives are patient subjects, and you have always gotten great photos in the past with what you have already.

You using this for skype stuff too, or do you have a dedicated video camera?

i have a dedicated skype cam... this is for product photos, but more so just for fun. Its my expensive hobby (yes, even when compared to knives and stones) ;)
 
My wife likes her EOS 1d Mk 4. She is looking at selling het Mk3 to get a lighter weight body for some stuff, tho. She's getting tendinitis in her shooting hand.
 
Well, then imagine you are your customer in JKI. You got a hobby and are trying to decide on a semi-rare upgrade if it is worth 14% extra to get a few performance-related features you don't really NEED, but want. Things you'd probably think about all the time if you got the "practical" choice.

I think you know what to do.
 
I'm sixty eight years old and have gone through a lot of expensive and frequently esoteric hobbies/obsessions. I can't remember ever being sorry that I went with the better (read more expensive) option when faced with a choice. I have regretted trying to economize.

I agree with Eamon...the practical choice is highly overrated.
 
Sorry to spoil your idea,but I`d go with the t3i. Use the rest of the money for lenses or evenbetter a lensbaby if you dont have one
You should definitely get a lensbaby if you are wanting to have some fun with a camera. Acquiring my lensbaby was the most refreshing photographic experience I can think of; I will have some knife pics shot with the lensbaby posted sometime soon.

I vote for switching to Nikon before you are too far invested in Canon stuff.
 
The 60d is a better camera than the t3i, I just don't know if it is better that much in ways that you would use it.

The image and video is pretty much the same with the t3i having a few extra video functions and the 60d having more range in shutter speed.

The advantages the 60d has is faster frame rate that helps with sports, better auto focus that also helps with sports, brighter viewfinder, longer battery life and a heavier frame with better grip and larger body.

For me personally, I would get the 60d if I did not already have a 5D Mk II. But I have some pretty big lenses, and the tiny body of the t3i would not work to well.

I don't know if you shoot any sports stuff or have large lenses, but for shooting knife videos and pictures I think both would do equally well.
 
focusing quickly in low light situations, faster shutter speed for some very brigt situations and fast action, and the better build quality are all considerations... switching to full frame or nikon would end up costing me over $2k... not quite where i want to be right now
 
What lenses do you already have and what type of photos you are wanting to take might help in recondmendetions. I have a lot of canon lenses so I am not even looking to switch to nikon, but honestly I have not heared of reason why to switch?
 
same boat but with sony for me i have a good little DSLR and wouldl love to upgreade but im bent on 2 or 3 bodies and not even sure i like where sony is takig there bodies (DSLT)
it woudl be muhc different if my cam died and i needed one for work
 
What lenses do you already have and what type of photos you are wanting to take might help in recondmendetions. I have a lot of canon lenses so I am not even looking to switch to nikon, but honestly I have not heared of reason why to switch?

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.
 
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.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
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).
 
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.
 
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
 
Last edited by a moderator:
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
 
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.
 
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.
 
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!
:scratchhead:

Thanks for the info!!

 
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
 
Back
Top