Considering a new DSLR Body

[phillip s cheng]

<p>So I've been using my 400D for about 6 years give or take, and I think it's time to upgrade.<br>

I'm considering the 7D or the 60D. </p>

<p>Things about the 400D that I disliked greatly and want to be rid of:<br>

<strong>95% viewfinder</strong>. It's really annoying having to compensate for extra bits showing up later, while it doesn't matter so much with post processing crop, the <strong>small viewfinder</strong> itself is annoying.<br>

<strong>Small body.</strong> I simply can no longer use the 400D without a body grip. I have also realized the perils of third party body grips. Don't do it. I also shoot in portrait alot with a relatively heavy lens (compared to the structural integrity of the body grip).<br>

<strong>1600 max ISO.</strong> (And a noisy 1600 too.) I work in dark environments (indoors in poorly lit areas) quite often, and would appreciate a higher ISO limit.<br>

Lack of an<strong> LCD settings display</strong>.<br>

<strong>3FPS</strong> max.</p>

<p>7D Features the 60D doesn't have that I like.<br>

I do like the <strong>AF system on the 7D</strong>, while I've only used it on a limited basis, I do feel it performs somewhat better (I wasn't able to use both 7D and 60D at the same time, so your input is appreciated).<br>

7D Controls and feel. I like the <strong>video mode switch</strong>, the <strong>joystick</strong>, and the <strong>larger grip</strong>.<br>

<strong>Full viewfinder</strong>. I love the 7D viewfinder<br>

<strong>Transmissive LCD focusing screen</strong>.<br>

<strong>Magnesium body. </strong>I am however unsure of how much difference this makes over the life of the camera.</p>

<p>Features the 60D has that the 7D doesn't. <br>

<strong>Articulated LCD</strong>. I like the 3:2 aspect ratio also. <br>

<strong>Lower price</strong>. I'm a poor college student. I am not going to pursue any money for my photography, but I do enjoy photography quite a bit, and use my camera extensively. (Sadly I don't use photo.net to post pictures often.) I do however use my camera for work.</p>

<p>What I want to know from you guys, is if you had enough money to buy either camera with a lens, which would you buy? Another reason this is giving me so much trouble, is the 7Ds age.<strong> I feel like the 7D mkII is about to come out this year also. </strong>However I want to make a <strong>purchase before March 31st</strong>. <br>

Additionally with the 60D I'd likely get a 17-40 F/4L, and with the 7D I'd likely get a 15-85 IS USM EF-S.<br>

Other questions: Is the 7D shutter quieter, is the 7D any more durable over time (Also I work in a marine environment). Any suggestions for lenses, underwater housings, or just general suggestions overall would be appreciated.</p>

 

[alan_bryant1]

<p>Just to address your last question, according to the-digital-picture.com the 7D shutter is rated for 150,000 actuations, and the 60D for 100,000. So the 7D is higher, though many photographers won't approach the limit of either camera.</p>

<p>If you're working a lot near seawater and you don't have to have DSLR image quality there, I'd recommend getting a waterproof P&S like a Canon D10 or the (recently announced) D20. They're much cheaper than a DSLR, have decent image quality in good light, and have a much longer lifespan when submerged in water.</p>

[matthijs]

Have you held and handled them?

If not, please do, how a body feels is pretty important too.

 

Never wait for the next model. The current bodies are very good, available now at a normal price.

 

Are you sure about that 17-40? If you use crop the 15-85 beats it in practically every way except weather resistance...

 

Good luck, Matthijs.

[phillip s cheng]

<p>Thanks Alan and Matthijs.<br /> I did see the D10, but the D10 really is comparatively cheap enough that if there's no better option, it's quite attractive. Has anyone tried those waterproof camera bag housings?<br /> Just to clarify the question, I realized the comma was somewhat ambiguously placed. I was more wondering if the 7D chassis is more reliable than the 60D chassis in experience. <br /> And if users who have both recall if one is quieter than the other.<br>

Also while I did have the luxury of being able to try the 7d for about a week, and I did go to a brick and mortar store to play with the 60d, the two experiences are so far apart in time that it's hard to describe the feel of the cameras in a rational and evidence based method.<br>

I did very much like how the 7D felt when I used it. I would have gladly bought it at the time if I had the money. When I used the 60d in store(sadly for only 10-15 minutes) it didn't have the same "at home" feeling I had with the 7D.<br>

But at the same time, I wanted a sanity check, is the 7D <em>really</em> worth all (well to me $600 is a lot) that extra money?</p>

[craigd]

<p>The 7D is much younger than the 5D Mark II, and the 5D Mark II hasn't been replaced yet (though there are always rumors, and the arrival of the 1DX has some people thinking that a new 5D must be on the horizon). So I doubt the 7D will be replaced this year.</p>

<p>The importance of a magnesium body is just durability. It's more likely to survive being dropped or bashed into things. If you're careful with your equipment and don't get into risky situations, this may not be a big concern for you.</p>

<p>If I were choosing between the 60D and the 7D, I'd go for the 7D. But unlike you, I don't care at all about the 60D's articulated LCD screen.</p>

[alan_bryant1]

<p>I haven't had experience with either camera, but I would expect the 60D to be at least as durable as your 400D, and the 7D to be better than the 60D. But durability is tough to quantify. Surviving a fall to a concrete floor is largely a matter of luck.</p>

<p>If you're not shooting sports, or something else that's highly demanding on the AF, the 60D might well be the better choice. You could buy the 15-85 for the difference in price.</p>

[Marcus Ian]

<p>I don't think there is any quantifiable data comparing the actual performance of the plastic body (w/ AL frame) 60D vs. the Mag alloy 7D. Either will be more robust than your 400D, which has obviously survived you for 6+ yrs (as mine has!). I doubt that anything short of severe abuse will reveal the weak points of either.</p>

<p>That said, based on your description of your shooting, a 7D is probably a great choice. The ergonomics are superior, and the size is better. Of course just don't expect vastly improved noise (though still better) natively, but the 7D's files will respond better to NR given their increased resolution.</p>

[mark_ethridge]

<p>I moved from a 400D to a 7D and I've been very happy. My two cents would be to determine if you really want the articulated screen. In every other way, the 7D comes out on top and you're getting what you pay for with the extra cost. I've never used a 60D so I don't know how it compares but the 7D is very robust compared to the 400D. I baby my equipment, but I really like the added piece of mind that the magnesium body gives me.</p>

[Marvin]

<p>I recently tripped and dropped my 7D (including its lens) on cement. Scuffed the body but otherwise it's still perfect.</p>

[randallfarhy]

<p>I have both the 7D and 60D. There is no appreciable difference in how they sound other than the frame rate. For my purposes (moving subjects), the 7D outperforms by a longshot due to it's superior AF system and increased frame rate. Ergonomically, I also prefer the 7D, the joystick is indispensible for changing AF points on the fly.</p>

<p>The locking mode wheel on the 60D was a nice improvement. Prior to having Canon replace it on the 7D with the locking version, accidentally changing modes while switching cameras was something to be wary of.</p>

<p>The 60D is a good camera, though it only sees light duty as a remote, or loaner. I'd say if the budget allows, you like how it feels and you will find even occasional use for the improved AF and frame rate-then go for the 7D. If not, you won't be dissapointed with the improvements in terms of IQ offered by the 60D over what you now have.</p>

[jaydesi]

<p>As a 7D owner, I have to plug it. I think it's a fantastic camera. Like you, I had a smaller camera (Rebel T1i) and hated how tiny it was in my hands, not to mention the missing rear dial. The 7D was like a dream come true, although I still like to use a grip so that it fits my hand perfectly. It also gives me a contortionless shutter button when shooting vertical.</p>

<p>I don't know if the 60D has the same 19 point AF that the 7D does, but I felt very limited by 9 points. 19 seem to do a better job covering. I have an EOS 3, and while the precision of 45 points is nice, it's tough to navigate. 19 seems to make a nice middle.</p>

<p>I have to admit that I spin the function dial once in a while, and it's annoying. I'm trying to decide if spending the $100 and being without my camera for a week or more is worth the minor inconvenience. The fact that I haven't done it yet, and live 5 mins from the Jamesburg service center, may be telling.</p>

[ljwest]

<p>About a year and a half ago, when I was shopping for a camera, I was thinking about the 50D (no 60D quite yet) and the 7D. When I picked up the 7D, I just knew that was the camera.</p>

<p>I took the long term view, and thought that the extra money over the time I expect to have the camera (at LEAST 5 years, and I'm hoping for more like ten!) was well worth it. I'm not one to upgrade every year or so just because something shiny catches my eye someplace else (nor do I have the income to support that!). On the other hand, if you plan to "upgrade" again after your studies are complete, then perhaps the less costly camera would be the wiser choice, and you could put the added money info lenses.</p>

<p>Regarding the as yet speculative 7D Mark II, remember one thing about almost anything you buy today: It doesn't matter if you buy the item on the first day of availability, the maker is already working on it's successor. It works for cars, computers, and cameras, and a whole lot more. And, there's almost no way you'd be able to buy one by 3/31/12, even if they announce it today...</p>

[philip_wilson]

<p>I would suggest that you go and play with both cameras in a store. Take a card and shoot some passing cars etc... if they let you take it outside the store. Most stores will get close enough to online prices and you can sample the goods. While technical differences are nice (better AF, frame rate etc...) I think you will find that the 7D handles much better than the smaller consumer bodies.<br>

Although under-rated I find that the handling of a camera is very important. A camera that is well laid out, has a good viewfinder, simple ergonomics and is easy to adjust when held to the eye allows you to get shots you would otherwise miss.</p>

[alan_bryant1]

<blockquote>

<p>the 7D handles much better than the smaller consumer bodies.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>7D: 5.8 x 4.4 x 2.9"<br>

60D: 5.7 x 4.2 x 3.1"</p>

<p>They're basically the same size and both are much larger than the 400D. The 60D has a pentaprism viewfinder, a step up from the pentamirror of the 400D, though not as nice as the 7D's viewfinder.</p>

[phillip s cheng]

<p>Thanks to all for their responses,<br>

I guess it was a little silly to think that I would be able to make a purchase on a 7D mkII before March 31st. March 31st is the optimal date for me because after March 31st I lose a 5% cashback reward on my Chase Freedom card. Additionally, I wanted a few weeks at least to acclimate to the camera before I take it on my summer job.<br>

I would like to insert a small note about my 400D, as of today it still functions beautifully, there were a few niggles with a few botched exposures, but those problems seem to have disappeared. It's survived a 18 inch drop onto a rug, many rainshowers, and toting around on 2 trips around the world, about 10 trips to various locations across the nation, most of the humid, moist, sandy, and hot. It's lost an eyecup (on order), been through quite possibly the worst aftermarket grip (which itself has been repaired many times), and generally has been a very faithful camera. I keep all my gear in a nicely padded bag (that however falls off various surfaces), but in general I keep my gear pretty well taken care of.<br>

That being said, it is aging extensively.<br>

The very irritating thing about where I live is apparently every camera store I walk into either a) has a 60D, or a rebel, or both, but very few (I havent seen any, but I assume they exist somewhere) seem to have a 60D and a 7D. <br>

Back to my story, I do plan on one day getting a full frame camera, but I honestly cannot afford one in the near future. I'd estimate well after my studies (which are going to take me a long time, I plan on going to graduate school, and from what I see it doesn't pay well enough to afford a 5Dmk II or its equivalent.)<br>

So the way I see it the 7D has got to last me at least 6 years, preferably more of course, but new technology has a way of being very tempting. <br>

I'm still questioning my sanity as a college student to purchase a 7D to be quite honest, I absolutely love the way it felt in my hand when i picked it up many months ago, and I loved how responsive it was. But given the two are so similar in size, the feel is probably the same, I just don't remember.<br>

So, Sanity check? Is it crazy for me to be buying a 7D and expecting it to run for 6 years, and for a 6 year investment, is the extra money on the 7D rational for someone who will be only indirectly earning any funds from his camera? How many here have purchased a 7D without intending on getting paid from it? Am I crazy and should just go with the 60D?</p>

<p>Thanks again to everyone.</p>

[arie_vandervelden1]

<p><em>I would like to insert a small note about my 400D, as of today it still functions beautifully, there were a few niggles with a few botched exposures, but those problems seem to have disappeared. It's survived a 18 inch drop onto a rug, many rainshowers, and toting around on 2 trips around the world, about 10 trips to various locations across the nation, most of the humid, moist, sandy, and hot. It's lost an eyecup (on order), been through quite possibly the worst aftermarket grip (which itself has been repaired many times), and generally has been a very faithful camera. I keep all my gear in a nicely padded bag (that however falls off various surfaces), but in general I keep my gear pretty well taken care of.</em></p>

<p>I own both a 7D and 400D. Your experience with the 400D is exactly the same as mine, except for the grip part. 3 months in Central America, 3 months in SE Asia, 3 months in Europe, 3 months USA, countless backpacking canoeing and backcountry ski trips. Still going strong except for the eyecup.</p>

<p><em>So, Sanity check? Is it crazy for me to be buying a 7D and expecting it to run for 6 years, and for a 6 year investment, is the extra money on the 7D rational for someone who will be only indirectly earning any funds from his camera? How many here have purchased a 7D without intending on getting paid from it? Am I crazy</em></p>

<p>You're overthinking this. I can't answer this question for you, and neither can you. You want the 7D, so go and get one. No need for justification. Any buyer's remorse will be gone after your first substantial shoot.</p>

<p> </p>

[arthur_reyes1]

<p>Hi Philip.<br />My two cents:<br />I don't have either but have used both from time to time. I've always felt the 7D was the better camera so it gets my vote. But I'd have to agree that you're overthinking this. My mantra has always been to get the best that you can afford at the present time and its tended to serve me quite well; especially since I'm not the kind to constantly upgrade when newer and better things come around. It sounds like the 7D is within your reach, so go for it. It takes fantastic photos. Six years from now, it will still take fantastic photos. Just because a new camera with better technology comes out, it doesn't mean the one you have will autopmatically stop doing what it does. I was fortunate enough to get the 5DII soon after it was introduced. Sure I'll be tempted when its replacement is introduced, but finances dictate otherwise. It takes great photos now and I'm sure it will 5, 10, 15yrs from now. Go out, buy the 7D and have fun! Good luck.</p>

 

[mark_ethridge]

<p>To answer a couple of your questions:<br>

I bought a 7D without intending on getting paid from it. I am an amateur, hobbyist photographer. I did, however, find that there were some times when my 400D wasn't giving me what I wanted. There's no question, the 7D's burst rate alone has been worth the upgrade because of two of my favorite subjects--my kids and airshows.<br>

I also think you should expect more than 6 years from either of these cameras (7D or 60D)--how long have you had your 400D? I'm pretty sure I bought mine somewhere around 6 years ago and it's still working fine. Everyone I loan it to says it works great!<br>

I'll leave you with my experience. I've rarely been disappointed when I paid more for more/better features. I've often been disappointed when I didn't. </p>

[romuald.janik]

<p>Some time ago I upgraded from a 350D to a 7D. Partly for High ISO reasons (the 350D was several generations back) and also I really liked the large 100% viewfinder - this makes shooting the 7D a pleasure...<br>

But, perhaps ironically, the only thing that I miss from the 350D is the small size - as you see everything is extremely subjective.<br>

As another point - I did not go the full frame route (5D MkII) since I prefer shooting tele (the 70-200/4L becomes a 300 (angle of view) at the long end) and also I already had good EF-S glass with covered ultrawide and normal. However the viewfinder of the 5DII is even nicer (less coverage but larger format makes it bigger) and the IQ is marvelous as everyone is saying. So maybe getting a 5DII may be an option if a 5DIII would appear soon and everyone would upgrade...</p>