Canon releases EOS 60D and lenses

[milwman]

Originally Posted by Ween

Again, it's more gut feeling than anything...

I understand but the next camera up from the 50D is the 7D, The XXD's are back to Amateur not semi pro and to prove it, its got an SD card not that thats bad.

[milwman]

Originally Posted by JRMDC

$1099 body only, available late September

It's a better starter camera if you gave the cash BUT the price the 50D may not go down and may sell fast. It's selling for the same price now and is a tufter camera! And vote you look at getting one if you can? or want or need.

[milwman]

Originally Posted by Chase55671

Group,
the 70-300mm looks sharp, too!

Chase

If I didn't have a 300 F4LIS I would jump on it, looks to be a great lens if you can take the 5.6 at 300mm?

[JRMDC]

Originally Posted by milwman

It's a better starter camera if you gave the cash BUT the price the 50D may not go down and may sell fast. It's selling for the same price now and is a tufter camera! And vote you look at getting one if you can? or want or need.

Agree on the possibility for the 50D price, we shall see. Just saw one on craigslist for $700, and another for $850 with battery grip! That's cheap; KEH is much higher. That might not be the current norm.

60D vs 50d? well, a LOT depends on video, if you don't need that, a lot of the upgrade serves no purpose. Nor would any number of recent body upgrades, I think. Things are getting to be pretty incremental, no?

BTW, another point, I believe I am correct in saying that this is the lowest price point an xxD body has ever started at. Now, of course, some of you will respond that it shouldn't be considered an xxD! So be it. It may just be marketing strategy by Canon to move the middle price point down a bit (isn't the economy weak these days? ), so anyone locked into the previous product positioning will be pissed, but that's the way it goes.

[Dennis A. Livesey]

Originally Posted by troy12n

I doubt it, thats a point and shoot gimmick, a good # of my shots are made on a tripod anyway

I love the shots I get with my tripod and use it as much as possible.

However with the orientable screen, I would be able to shoot on the tripod with the camera over my head and over the crowd or fence that is in my way. Or down on the rail head where my knees fear to bend.

I too thought a camera in an phone was stupid. I thought texting was stupid.
I have now seen good uses of both including making money.

I don't think they are stupid anymore.

All I'm saying is that it's wiser to wait an see what the new technology does in your own hands before condemning it.

[milwman]

Originally Posted by JRMDC

BTW, another point, I believe I am correct in saying that this is the lowest price point a xxD body has ever started at. Now, of course, some of you will respond that it shouldn't be considered a xxD! So be it. It may just be marketing strategy by Canon to move the middle price point down a bit (isn't the economy weak these days? ), so anyone locked into the previous product positioning will be pissed, but that's the way it goes.

1D is pro, 5D, 7D is semi pro and 60D is advanced amateur, Rebel cameras are beginner. The line up is back to what Canon had for years as they had 10D - 50D doing two roles. So now their back to their film days line up and says something about how Canon must be ahead in RD now and the MP race maybe winding down? So they Didn't downgrade the xxD line but just added a camera 7D and made it the semipro.

I think its good move and a new camera fills a need (price point) so the semipro isn't cheeped to keep cost down. Think Canon had some trouble making the 50D in numbers to fill both semi and advanced amateur in one camera and now has two lines to build cameras.

[milwman]

Originally Posted by Dennis A. Livesey

However with the orientable screen, I would be able to shoot on the tripod with the camera over my head and over the crowd or fence that is in my way. Or down on the rail head where my knees fear to bend.

.

It will come in handy for video.

[milwman]

Originally Posted by Joe the Photog

I think it would do nicely as someone who wants to upgrade his XTi to get into the video capabilty, but can't afford the 7D. I also like the wireless possibilities, the "endless memory card" as well as the flip around screen for easier shooting it tight corners.

I think the 60D is going to be a camera thats sell well and too thews its made for Photographers moving up from Rebels. Is it an upgrade of the 50D no but the 7D is.

[Frederick]

Wake up, Canon, the megapixel war is over. People want better noise control and dynamic range, not images big enough to make wall-sized prints.

[nikos1]

The only bad thing about the tilt swivel screen is the greater chances of the LCD shorting out, hence why I have been shooting in red-o-vision with my S5IS for the past year....
But functionally, indeed, I cant see how I would live without it now, as charles was saying, low angle rails eye shots and such are much easier, and I cant say ive never stood on the the trunk of my car holding the camera above my head to get a shot......

[jnohallman]

Originally Posted by Frederick

Wake up, Canon, the megapixel war is over. People want better noise control and dynamic range, not images big enough to make wall-sized prints.

Actually, I rather like the idea of wall size prints. Of course, the other alternative with one of these ultra-high MP cameras is to just own a single wide angle L lens and crop everything you don't want at wide angle down . . . especially when they release that 120MP sensor

Jon

[JRMDC]

Originally Posted by Frederick

Wake up, Canon, the megapixel war is over. People want better noise control and dynamic range, not images big enough to make wall-sized prints.

Originally Posted by jnohallman

Actually, I rather like the idea of wall size prints.

My reading of the debate (came up in force when the 50D came out at 15mp vs the 40D at 10mp) is that there is no loss of noise control at the final image level from having more but smaller pixel bins on the sensor. The increased noise that may be seen at the 100% pixel-level view of an image is compensated for by the extra pixels, and when one turns it into a print there is no increase in noise.

So when people say they want a camera with fewer MP because of reduced noise, I think they are just wrong, at least at the MP levels under consideration in DSLRs and given what is being actually achieved by the camera manufacturers.

[jnohallman]

Originally Posted by Frederick

People want better noise control and dynamic range

If you want more dynamic range, there's always Kodachrome. Oh, wait, no there isn't anymore . . . Velvia?

Jon

[trainboysd40]

I don't believe I've ever seen a slide with dynamic range anywhere near my 5D's...

[Chris Z]

Originally Posted by trainboysd40

I don't believe I've ever seen a slide with dynamic range anywhere near my 5D's...

Yep, layering multiple slides.

Chris Z

[trainboysd40]

Woohoo! Using multiple exposures to create what you can do in one!

[Cinderpath]

Originally Posted by Frederick

Wake up, Canon, the megapixel war is over. People want better noise control and dynamic range, not images big enough to make wall-sized prints.

Um- they already have this and can make wall size prints with a 5D Mark II. After using this, crop bodies will never be the same, as for a previous comment the 5 D II is semi-pro, I know of several full time pros that droped using medium format digital, (in advertising) as according to them it was "Almost as good for a fraction of the cost."

Personally 18mp on a 1.6x crop body is a recipe for noise, I'll wait for the 5D Mark III to upgrade.

[milwman]

Originally Posted by Cinderpath

Personally 18mp on a 1.6x crop body is a recipe for noise, I'll wait for the 5D Mark III to upgrade.

Yes, there limits on how small a pixel can be with current censers and there now for 1.6x Canons. But I am sure if they can the will is to best the other guy and have more pixels for marketing to brag about. I too hope the cost for FF go's down but is not likely as less chips pure wafer are made pushing up costs.

[JRMDC]

Originally Posted by Cinderpath

Personally 18mp on a 1.6x crop body is a recipe for noise, I'll wait for the 5D Mark III to upgrade.

Please point to the reviews saying, for example, that the 7D provides noisier images than the 50D.

I believe this more mp / more noise belief is a misconception, or rather, a reasonable theoretical possibility that so far in practice isn't yet a binding constraint or gets overridden by other things. Happy to looks at evidence to the contrary.

[troy12n]

That is a very sticky subject and one which always brings up controversy. There are dozens of threads in the Fred Miranda forums on this subject. People are very opinionated on both sides of the argument. Unfortunately there is no way to test because the only real test is to uprez or downrez photos and compare them, which is a terrible test.

[JRMDC]

Originally Posted by troy12n

That is a very sticky subject and one which always brings up controversy. There are dozens of threads in the Fred Miranda forums on this subject. People are very opinionated on both sides of the argument. Unfortunately there is no way to test because the only real test is to uprez or downrez photos and compare them, which is a terrible test.

The test is to make identical images and output them in the same medium. No need to uprez or downrez. Just take, say, a 7d and a 40D, capture the same image (tripod, switch the bodies, same lens, same focus, same exposure, perhaps a studio scene), and then, say, print them both out 8x12 and compare.

Now, for the narrow point of pixel size vs. noise, it is true that the perfect test would involve someone making the two sensors using the identical technology, which we don't have. But one can still do the comparison to answer the interesting alternative question, say, was Canon successful in going from 10mp to 18mp, did they also reduce noise, as evidenced in the image in the final medium? My take on the stuff I read in the various boards is that the answer is yes.

[Chris Z]

What is the relation between megapixel and noise. That's something I know nothing about. I use a Nikon D700 and my daughter a Nikon D80 which have the same megapixel size. The D700 has like no noise at low ISO and some noise at high ISO's, while the D80 has much more noise compared at the same ISO's. Just curious.

Chris Z

[JRMDC]

Originally Posted by Chris Z

What is the relation between megapixel and noise. That's something I know nothing about. I use a Nikon D700 and my daughter a Nikon D80 which have the same megapixel size. The D700 has like no noise at low ISO and some noise at high ISO's, while the D80 has much more noise compared at the same ISO's. Just curious.

Chris Z

The belief is more megapixels -> more noise. This is probably true for two sensors of identical technology differing only in pixels, and thus in the size of each pixel "bin" (cell?) on the sensor (call this the "narrow" form of the belief). The difficulty is that manufacturers have improved the noise performance of the bins over time, so when comparing sensors it isn't apples to apples and even if the narrow form of the belief is true, the result may turn out otherwise because over time manufacturers have found ways to compensate for the shrinking size of the bins as they pack more pixels on sensors of the same size.

The issue becomes what the impact is on the final image. The tradeoff is that, while each individual pixel may be more noisy (that is an analogy; by definition noise is something that applies to comparisons of adjacent pixels, not to individual pixels alone) the image is not necessarily more noisy as each pixel forms a smaller part of the final image (since there are more of them).

Pushing further, even if there turns out to be more noise in the final image (and from what I read, I don't think so, at least in terms of Canon DSLRs), there is also a gain in resolution - more pixels in the file! - so at worst it is a tradeoff between noise and resolution. My read is that for Canon DSLRs over time there has been no tradeoff - yet - and that higher mp sensors are not resulting in more noise, as Canon has found ways to improve noise control.

An addendum, when I say noise control, I am NOT talking about in-camera noise reduction after the capture of the image but before downloading from the camera, I am talking about noise control at the sensor level AS the image is being captured.

[Cinderpath]

Originally Posted by JRMDC

Please point to the reviews saying, for example, that the 7D provides noisier images than the 50D.


I believe this more mp / more noise belief is a misconception, or rather, a reasonable theoretical possibility that so far in practice isn't yet a binding constraint or gets overridden by other things. Happy to looks at evidence to the contrary.

-Reviews? How about one from me. I have looked, and converted literally thousands of raw images from a multitude of cameras doing Photoshop work for magazines, (Mostly for Kalmbach's Locomotive), and I am here to tell you a lot of MP on a croped sensor does not give you the same quality of pixels as a full-frame sensor. While cropped sensors are improving, they have a long way to go to catch up to a full frame sensor. I had a lot of hope for the 7D, but compared with a full-frame, it is simply left in the dust. I actually think the 40D was better than the 50D or 7D in this area. Remember, all pixels are not created equal.

[trainboysd40]

Originally Posted by Cinderpath

-Reviews? How about one from me. I have looked, and converted literally thousands of raw images from a multitude of cameras doing Photoshop work for magazines, (Mostly for Kalmbach's Locomotive), and I am here to tell you a lot of MP on a croped sensor does not give you the same quality of pixels as a full-frame sensor. While cropped sensors are improving, they have a long way to go to catch up to a full frame sensor. I had a lot of hope for the 7D, but compared with a full-frame, it is simply left in the dust. I actually think the 40D was better than the 50D or 7D in this area. Remember, all pixels are not created equal.

Listen to this guy, he's a major photo deity.
I agree wholly, and have personally found the following:
5D Mark II > 5D > 7D > 40D/50D