Deciding on a new camera, opinions?

Ruoh

Ruoh

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Sep 16, 2009
Messages
5,857
I'm looking at the 60D or SLT-A65. I'm certainly still amateur, but want a camera that I won't grow out of for a couple years. Which of the two that I listed would you pick, and why?
 
Last edited:
I guess I should specify that I'd like technical reasons. ;) Not personal feelings.
 
The Canon. Because of your VAST selection of potential lenses. ...and I would prefer the IQ of the Canon 60D as well. For me it´s very easy to chose between these two.

But I have been shooting Canon for 17 years, also professionally though not any longer, and I think you need to look at Nikon as well before you decide. They are doing real well at the moment, producing some great products. For instance D300S or more expensive D7000. Also you get a similarly incredible line up of lenses with Nikon.

Zeiss lenses are nice, no doubt. Sony high end DSLRs have very good IQ, same goes for their incredible NEX-7 which is very expensive, has terrible ergonomics to many people and a very narrow selection of huge lenses that makes the size of the body seem pointless.
 
Last edited:
Agreed. If you want to get into DSLR photography, go Canon or Nikon. They have the widest selection of lenses available, so you're not as likely to hit a dead-end when you try to upgrade in a few years.

I'm not 100% sure the 60D is the one you want if you go the Canon route - will let the Canon shooters chime in on that one; but I'll throw in the D3200 as a spectacular option for beginning with Nikon DSLR.
 
I generally speaking prefer to see a price range rather than a direct head-to-head comparison of simply two camera bodies, as well as trying to figure out exactly what you want to do with your equipment.

(First some philosophy...) There are two perspectives when it comes to photography gear: The enthusiast wants to have the latest and greatest, the most technological, etc etc. And there is the professional who wants a tool and isn't limited by their gear being old or new, but knows their gear inside and out and what it takes to get the job done.

This is to say, pros are not limited by their gear. Similarly between the Sony and the Canon you aren't going to be limited per se. But the trade-offs will simply be different.


(The following isn't info so much on the Sony, but more the top competitors in the digital 35mm world, Nikon and Canon.)

When I started in photography (which I admit wasn't all that long ago, 4 years or so) I listened to other pros on the subject. Mostly that the most important aspect of choosing a platform is the glass. I've only seen about 3 generations happen in the digital world, and since then Nikon and Canon have traded blows (which is always great for the customer) and much like all technology they will trade back and forth who has the best system, but I stick with Canon because the L-glass is second to none. Of course L-glass is pricey, but if this is something you're serious about you'll think about what photography is going to look like for you down the road. (Keep in mind this generation, even with current top end cameras, I really feel like you can't lose. If you read balanced reviews on the D800 and the 5D3 as an example, they're both excellent and capable cameras. I am very excited about upgrading to a 5D3, I probably won't do it until some sort of price drop occurs near the end of the year though.)

Some other thoughts. The 70D is rumored to be coming out this fall, this will fall in line with the 7D II, which is also rumored to come out in the fall as an entry level full frame camera to compete with Nikon's rumored D600 entry-level full frame camera. If you want to buy now and you're only concerned with stills, I'd buy a 50D used. The other option if you are interested in video and have a bit more cash is a 7D used. A used 50D can be as low as $600 and I've seen 7D's go for around $1100-$1200.

If you're more towards the Nikon side the new D3200 has an impressive pixel count for the money but it's just a number. The camera is still excellent for entry level however, as is the D5100 and D7100. I have a friend who "upgraded" to a D3100 a few years back and he is proof positive to me that it's the photographer and not the camera. With just the D3100, the kit zoom, and 2 Nikon primes (not even their highest end ones) he took some amazing photos.
 
Last edited:
I'd suggest starting entry level (rebels or nikon d3xxx/d5xxx) with better lenses as opposed to going 60D with a kit lens for a variety of reasons.

1) Better glass is better.

2) You may lose interest in photography really quick or not have time for it, not saying that you will, but I've seen this happen too often.

3) the entry level cameras are good starting points, at which point, it'd take you a good couple of years for you to master it and "be bored" with it, at which point, I'd suggest upgrading to latest camera a tier above in the future. This is in contrast to buying one good camera, and then sticking with it for 5-6 years.

4) The camera is just a tool, its the photographer that takes good photos.
 
Thanks. Fair enough, I've never been a Sony fan, but the Alpha series looked good spec wise. I'm still learning of course, but I feel like I've outgrown the capability of the SX40 HS. The photo guys at work are pretty rabid about the Canons as well, citing the fact that they stick with the same interface over the line of cameras.

Heck, I might be able to buy a 5D2 for a good price later on this year, as a co-worker is getting a 5D3 soon. None of them like Nikons, but it seems like it's mostly a complain of high ISO noise, which is something that Nikon appears to be working on.
 
Just to let you know the 70D will be coming out sometime this year, so you can either have the 60D at a great price or get the upgraded 70D.
 
Given the circumstances (all your co-workers owning Canon cameras) I'd suggest getting a Canon camera too. If nothing else, they will be able to help you out should you have any problems with the camera.

However, if you are not dead set on the Canon brand, I suggest going to the store (Best Buy or something), and checking a few cameras out. See how each camera feels in your hands. You are going to be using it for a few years, so it's best that you are comfortable with the ergonomics of the camera, the menus, buttons. Little things. I suggest limiting your choices to Canon and Nikon for that, for all the arguments listed above.
 
+1 to get the entry level body for Canon (or Nikon) and save the extra cash for more/better lenses/accessories.

I love my Canon T3i but have never used any other DSLR so I can't comment.
 
Sony never gets any respect it its quite sad. The A77 is an incredible camera and paired with Zeiss glass like the 135 or 24-70 is right up there with anything else in the same price range. Canikon users always seem to cast Sony to the side but for comparable prices you get a whole lot. The downside is that there its way more used glass in the Canikon world and it sounds like alot to borrow from friends/coworkers. That would make me also suggest maybe you go Canon over Sony even though I shoot Sony. Although I wish you would just give the A77 a good look just to be fair.
 
Kaolinchemist said:
Sony never gets any respect it its quite sad.
Click to expand...

QFT.

all those saying that there are limited lens options for Sony probably don't realize that you have pretty much the entire history of Minolta's autofocus camera lenses at your disposable. (they're the ones who had the first AF SLR in 1985, remember that, guys?). now, there are some incompatibilities, here and there, but don't write Sony off just because you think that there's limited options.

As far as your specific situation, i'd recommend seeing if you could get your hands around each and everyone of them. personally, i like the ergonomics of sony. nikon, i can stand, but canon's cramp my hands up like no other. also, if you're more likely to be able to borrow Canon lenses, that puts a plus tick in that column.

all in all, it comes down to preference, and what is most convenient for you, TBH.
 
The main reason I'd dismiss Sony is because of their wacky proprietary flash hotshoe that severely limits your access to lights and radio triggers. Otherwise their sensors are quite good (they manufacture Nikon's sensors). The current lens selection is okay but not spectacular.

I'd very much recommend getting into the same camera system your friends use. It will be much easier to learn and you can always share / test drive equipment before buying. Also, you can likely get good deals on used gear as your friends decide to upgrade.

I just upgraded from a 60D to a 5D Mark II today, and have no qualms about recommending the 60D to anyone else. I'm almost tempted to say the 60D is built better than the 5DII...
 
OniFactor said:
QFT.

all those saying that there are limited lens options for Sony probably don't realize that you have pretty much the entire history of Minolta's autofocus camera lenses at your disposable. (they're the ones who had the first AF SLR in 1985, remember that, guys?). now, there are some incompatibilities, here and there, but don't write Sony off just because you think that there's limited options.

......

all in all, it comes down to preference, and what is most convenient for you, TBH.
Click to expand...

I totally agree. I love your passion! Like I tried to say in my post earlier, really it's all going to come down to pluses and minuses, and I would never say that one camera system is better than another out right. It's just a stack of pros and cons and you really should get the system that will suit your needs the best.

SilverMK3 said:
I just upgraded from a 60D to a 5D Mark II today, and have no qualms about recommending the 60D to anyone else. I'm almost tempted to say the 60D is built better than the 5DII...
Click to expand...

The 5D2 is a bit chunky for sure. When I first started using it, it felt big. Now it feels normal. The 60D was produced after the 5D2 so it probably has better ergonomics. After the 5D3, I hear the best non-full size body that Canon makes in-so-far-as comfort is the 7D. Mostly because they streamlined the 5D2's body. It's just the way of the world, whatever is made last will have the latest ______ (insert blank.)
 
SilverMK3 said:
The main reason I'd dismiss Sony is because of their wacky proprietary flash hotshoe that severely limits your access to lights and radio triggers.
Click to expand...

This is true, it is harder to find as many triggers and flashes for the Sonys as you can for Canikon. Although manufactures are starting to make Sony compatible versions.

Alot of younger DSLR users do not know how good the classic Minolta glass still is. I have several AF Minolta lenses that are over 25 years old and still doing great. But to each his own and Sony's market strategy did not seem to go after the Pro users at first and are still pretty slow about getting the A900 flagship pro camera replacement. They targeted the entry level DSLR users with pricepoint and features, and I believe that lack of strong push in the Pro level users has contributed to the immediate Sony blowoff attitude alot of users have. The only reason I chose Sony at the time was because of my Minolta lenses from my Minolta 7000 and 7000i 35mm days, If I hadn't had that glass, I would most likely be shooting Canikon also.

Just make sure you hold all the bodies like others have suggested and compare how they feel in your hands and fit your face ( I am left eye dominant, so my nose gets in way :) ) you want a body that fits you. Good luck with your shopping and update us with your selection.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top