Take your photography to the next level and beyond...

  • NEWS
  • REVIEWS
  • INSPIRATION
  • COMMUNITY
  • COMPETITIONS

Why not join for free today?

Join for Free

Your total photography experience starts here


PRIZES GALORE! Enter The ePHOTOzine Exclusive Christmas Prize Draw; Over £10,000 Worth of Prizes! Plus A Gift For Everybody On Christmas Day!

What I dislike about my 60D- if you are upgrading bodies beware NOT A REVIEW


28 Nov 2012 9:15AM
Firstly I want to point out that THIS IS NOT A REVIEW or a critique of the camera because Contrary to the title I love my beloved 60D. This is a cautionary note about lenses.

So why do I say I dislike it, this is down to money. I bought my body from HK so it was a good deal at about £500. However because of this I am now looking to spend circa £1500 on glass for the front. Reason being was that with my 350d, the results from my sigma 17-70 and sigma 70-300 were more than acceptable and appeared sharp, however now I am putting the same lenses on a much better body, the flaws in the 70-300 are starting to show. Prompting me to upgrade. Anyone that has read previous posts will know that I have been looking at a 70-200 for a while, with my recent thought on my sigma I tried a friends Canon 70-200 F2.8 L IS ii USM and convertor and wow what an amazing combo. So guess what I am now saving for one myself with 2xTC MKiii

So my point is that if you are looking at upgrading bodies (and I've seen people looking to go from xxxx/D and older xxxD to even xD ie 5/6/7D make sure your glass is up to it.

(Mods: Apologies if this is in the wrong section, seemed most appropriate)

Join ePHOTOzine for free and remove these adverts.

SlowSong e2
6 4.8k 29 England
28 Nov 2012 9:24AM
Well I don't know about lens quality as I don't have quality lenses to start with, but the noisy shutter/mirror does get on my nerves. Just about the only thing though.
28 Nov 2012 9:28AM
It is a bit on the loud side, sound solid. Just like a golf Smile
SlowSong e2
6 4.8k 29 England
28 Nov 2012 9:28AM
Not so useful when you're sneaking up on people though. Grin
JackAllTog e2
5 4.0k 58 United Kingdom
28 Nov 2012 9:28AM
Hi Chris, Initially when i Got my 60D after a 400D I too thought that my images were initally worse, but now i think they are better. I can't fully quantify why i feel this but this is what i think.
In part it was the almost doubling in megapixels so looking on screen at full zoom in did seem to look worse but looking at the picture as a whole was still better.
After a couple of weeks including using slightly faster shutter speeds I then became happier with the new camera than the old one.
Its interesting to hear what others might say.

But yes i also think that glass is key and idolise the better pro spec lenses that i hope to oneday bay including the newer Canon 70-200 family.
One exceptions to this - the 50mm f1.8 for under £100 - wow great value for money.
In fact i still like all my lenses but find i seem to use them in different ways to how i first used them. Before i'd really just use any lens for almost any shot, but now its much more driven by the effect i'm after and the light available.
28 Nov 2012 9:35AM
Don't get me wrong the pictures I've taken with my 17-70 and little 50mm I love it's just the 70-300 that I'm not so happy with. As you say I think it's down to the improved resolution
mikehit e2
5 7.1k 11 United Kingdom
28 Nov 2012 9:46AM
Out of interest, when you look at the images from the 350D and the 60D at the same image size, what 'defects' are you noticing that were not apparent before?
28 Nov 2012 9:55AM
The images taken with the 60D with my 70-300 don't seem as sharp shots taken on the 350D. The other lenses are fine but I consider these to be more superior to my 70-300 anyway
sherlob e2
8 2.4k 126 United Kingdom
28 Nov 2012 9:58AM
Just a thought - when judging the sharpness of your images are you pixel peeping?

When I upgraded to 5dMk11 I noticed my images appeared soft - especially when I prepared them for the web. It took advice from Paul (Sut68) to point out that I had nearly doubled my resolution, and that reducing an image from 5000 or so pixels down to 1000 was likely to affect the final images quality more than the previous sensor which produced files of nearer 3500 px. In other words I learned the importance of sharpening for the output medium been used.

I'm not saying that the 60D doesn't need L series glass - frankly I don't know. However, this tale is a cautionary note to consider alternative factors that can impact on the quality of a final image in the context of the output medium being used.
mikehit e2
5 7.1k 11 United Kingdom
28 Nov 2012 10:11AM
This sounds like an AF issue because I would not expect the image to be worse on the 60D. When compnies like Sigma make Canon (or Nikon)-compatible lenses, they have to reverse engineer things like the AF algorithms. The problem is when Canon then bring out a new camera with an improved AF system the third-party lens may not be as well optimised with the new AF. You can send the lens back to Sigma to be re-chipped though I don't know how much that costs - it also depends on the basic quality of the lens as to whether it is worth it.
GlennH 9 1.9k 1 France
28 Nov 2012 10:25AM
The thing that bothers me most about the 60D is the focusing inaccuracy of Live AF mode, which I've yet to figure out. It uses contrast detection AF, which theoretically should make it more consistent rather than less. Something about Canon's implementation of it nobbles the accuracy. I'm guessing that's been improved in the newer hybrid AF system.
collywobles 10 3.4k 9 United Kingdom
28 Nov 2012 10:45AM
All you need do is focus on a higher contrast object the same distance from the camera and then recompose - whats the problem if you understand what the cause is?
GlennH 9 1.9k 1 France
28 Nov 2012 11:41AM

Quote:All you need do is focus on a higher contrast object the same distance from the camera and then recompose - whats the problem if you understand what the cause is?


Even ignoring the assumption that everything I shoot is low-contrast, I wouldn't ordinarily expect to get focus confirmation if the image was still out of focus.

It's a problem that's been documented elsewhere , and also in the 7D.
mikehit e2
5 7.1k 11 United Kingdom
28 Nov 2012 12:02PM
If I recall correctly the difference is the number of iterations that the AF goes through before it decides it is 'good enough' and given that the LiveView is mainly for video this may explain why.
The camera still has a mirror lock-up (people use LV as a shortcut) so if you use that it should maintain the (for your purposes) more accurate phase detection.
GlennH 9 1.9k 1 France
28 Nov 2012 1:19PM
From page 168 of the manual (silly me!):

Quote:If you autofocus in the Live View mode’s normal view and then magnify the image, the focus might be off


RTFM, as they say, but it's something of a bizarre 'note': tantamount to an admission that the Live Mode isn't really much cop if you want critically sharp photos.

LiveView is a pretty serious feature for stills photographers, particularly those that wield a tripod. But the 60D is very much a video-orientated camera I guess so the explanation makes sense Mike, thanks.

Sorry for the hijacking, incidentally. Sad

If a modern camera existed with 'old-fashioned' resolution, I'd certainly still consider it. I love the look of old 5D files, and 1D MKII files, and never really needed anything more than that (dust was a different matter). A cynic might believe that the higher resolutions are designed so that we regenerate our lens collections. Smile

Sign In

You must be a member to leave a comment.

ePHOTOzine, the web's friendliest photography community.

Join For Free

Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more.