Jump to content

Should I upgrade the 60D to the 6D on Canon's customer loyalty program?


aaron_mccormick

Recommended Posts

<p>I have a canon 60D and bought the Canon brand 10-22mm wide angle lens for a pretty penny (I find it ironic that this lens costs more than the camera body) What I want to know is: <br /><br /><strong>Should I try and trade in the 60D for a 6D on Canon's customer loyalty program? <br /><br /><br /></strong>If my 10-22mm lens fits the 60D, but doesn't fit the 6D, then I guess the answer is already obvious... "NO" lol</p>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Oh, it's not that complex, really. 6D = better than 60D in certain technical ranges, naturally, since it utilizes slightly better technology... I was actually never complaining about any hardware limiting my photography. I just like to have better things when it might be a possibility... Hence my questions that primarily revolve around price and compatibility with that wide angle lens I bought.</p>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>its not so bad as you think. your lens in good condition is worth about the exact same price as a used Canon 17-40L. So for maybe $75 difference you could swap lenses and have similar focal lengths if you really want the 6D. i'd take a 6D and the 17-40 if given the choice.</p>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Jeez, now you got me thinking, brad. <br />My 10mm-22m is pretty much new.. no scratches or anything. But anyways, since a camera like a 6D has less crop, does that mean a canon 17-40L lens might yeild somewhere near the equivalent of the wide angle that I usually use with a 10-22mm on my 60D? I'm just trying to understand if I'd get some minor differences in the angles of "wide angle" using a 6D, without getting into any mathematics.</p>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Some maths is unavoidable.</p>

<p>10mm on a 1.6x crop camera like the 60D gives an effective FoV of <strong>16mm</strong> - 10 x 1.6.</p>

<p>This is essentially the same (1mm doesn't matter) as a 17-40mm at <strong>17mm</strong> on a full frame (no "crop") camera like the 6D.</p>

<p>No offence, Aaron - but don't you think you might benefit from learning something about the very basic topics raised by this thread (like the compatibility of EF-S lenses like the 10-22mm, and how to calculate the effective FoV of a given lens on a given camera) before throwing money at cameras and lenses when you don't appear to have a grasp on <em>why</em> you're throwing money at them?</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Having owned both full frame and crop, I don't see much of a difference in my pictures between the two. I print a lot at 13x19 and it's hard to tell the difference even when you view quite closely. Post processing in important. I have shown both. The judges can't tell nor do they care what camera you use. The 10-20 is a good lens. What does make a difference is improvements in lens quality. I don't know what other lenses you have but the Canon 17-50 2.8 is a great lens for the 60D. I have a Tamron 17-50 2.8 that is half the price of the Canon that Photozone says is quite sharp and half the price of the Canon.. The Canon is heavier, large and is bult better. If I were you I would plan ahead for a couple of years around where you want to go and then build toward it rather than impulse buying which has cost me some bucks. Remember, the best is the enemy of the very good; least ways so's you can really see it. I am going to shoot orchids this afternoon with a 7D and the Tamron and a remote flash. The Canon 15-85 crop is supposed to be very good.</p>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>As I recall, the <em>Canon's customer loyalty program requires a trade in. </em>Trade in grampa's broken Powershot, don't give them your 60D. Sell it for $600.</p>

Sometimes the light’s all shining on me. Other times I can barely see.

- Robert Hunter

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p><strong>@ Keith Reeder</strong><br /> I always get a kick out the "complaining helpers". They like to help, but always make sure to include some sort of contempt for the asker. Keith, I'm not sure why you think the way you do, but it certainly gave me a chuckle. "No offense"? I'm not so sure you're helping anybody with assumptive claims like yours. I never said I like to throw my money around.<br /> <br /> <strong>@ Dick Arnold</strong><br /> I see what you mean but with prints there are other deciding factors like the printer, paper, ink, digital prepress, etc. But on a computer screen, I've looked at pictures taken by all the double and triple digit Canon DSLR's (40D, 60D, etc) and compared them to all the single digit Canon DSLR's (6D, 7D, etc.) and notice a remarkable difference in picture quality. I don't know what lens was being used per camera, but as expected, the 5D's, 6D's, and 7D's have the capability to pick up better dynamic range and tonal contrast if you know how to shoot the scene. (considering that the lens being used is not some piece of junk, the better sensor makes a difference.)<strong><br /></strong></p>

<p><strong>@ Puppy Face</strong><br /> You're right, it's a simple matter of what's going to get more cash towards an upgrade... giving it to Canon, or giving it to some other guy who wants the 60D.<strong><br /></strong><br /> <br /> <strong>@ Peter J</strong><br /> Thanks, that's a pretty good article, especially with the comparison part about sensors.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>I myself hate to trade in camera bodies as I feel they hold some of "my life experience" whether they produced good images or not. With that said, I too thought of this same upgrade but won't. Have that same zoom I brought specifically to photography the Palo Duro canyons in Texas and while mounted on a Canon Rebel T-1, which is an APS-C sensor, the zoom range was more like a 16mm-35mm, which is really wide enough. Made great photos. For me it would not make sense to upgrade to a FF and then have to get either a 17-40mm or something else. FF is great but opens the door to needing only EF lenses. It's the old story and age old battle new tech presents to us all the time. Do you need it or do you just want it ? I would say continue to find more ways to enjoy that zoom, it may be an EF-s but it still is a great lens.</p>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

<h6>@ Robb<br />I feel the same way. I haven't spent a lot of time with my 60D, but already realize that my "old" Powershot G11 took pics effortlessly in a way I cannot capture with this new DSLR. That realm of photography (macro mostly) is something the G11 specializes in right off the shelf. It would require me a whole new lens setup, just to get the same results with my 60D.. and I already bought two lenses and am looking at a better camera body. eff it all! LOL</h6>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Aaron: I do not have a G-11 but have watched the "G" progression through the recent years and they do look convenient, and quite capable. The G-11 was the one I would have purchased but decided in January I need and can use a 100mm EF macro. Not the L, as that would have been twice the cost. And yes, it amazes me the it was about the same cost as a new T4i. My mantra is "use what you got" and keep it working. The call and lure of new technology is always gonna be there ... with new products ! But you're saying the G-11 is easier to use than your DSLR ... that's interesting.</p>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>My Canon PowerShot ex-G10, ex-G11 and current G12 are easy to use. May not be any easier than than a 60D, but the technological advances in the PowerShots have been tremendous enough to warrant a model upgrade for the newer features. Also, the macro is impressive for the G12.</p>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...