Canon EOS D60 - should i buy?

[Viva]

Should i go for Canon EOS D60 or is there any alternative cams with this quality/price ?

I need
- good quality on pictures
- supports for CF cards/microdrive to save many pictures

Battery no problem, they have that in stores. Quality of picture is more important.

[lziering]

I don't know how anyone can really answer your question without knowing what you want to take pictures of, where you will take the pictures, how many pictures will you shoot per week, what your workflow will look like, how you will use the final output, etc.

I own a Canon D60 and it takes great pictures but so do a lot of cameras that cost 1/4 the price. The digital imaging portion of the camera is very good but the body is from a $300 film camera. The metering is not great, the focus is slow, the body is not as durable as an EOS-3 and is nowhere near as strong as an EOS 1v.

I bought my D60 because I'm shooting 200-300 shots a day, my workflow is pure digital, my client needs very fast turn-around, I don't shoot in bad weather, I don't shoot sports, I can't afford a Canon 1Ds.

In short, no one can answer your question without knowing a lot more about the type of photography you want to do.

[defordphoto]

Yes, no one can really answer that question other than yourself, but I can offer opinions without bashing the D60.

You might consider the many great 4-plus megapixel cameras out there that might just do what you need. You should consider what output you need and how big a photo you need.

Doing 8x10's? The 4 megapixel cameras will do just fine, especially if you don't require a lot of different lens combinations, etc.

If you're just pointing and shooting the D60 makes for an expensive toy that'd probably be overkill if that's the case, but if you're doing semi-pro or pro work the D60 will do an excellent job and produce professional results.

Just shop around and check out the many forums (DPReview.cam fredmiranda.com luminouslandscape.com) before deciding. Also remember that a lot of what you read on the fourms are people venting their frustrations, etc. so take it all with a large barrel of salt. ;)

And to add: I do have a D60 and love it! I've done sports from ball and stick to motorsports with great success and if I was shooting in bad weather with ANY camera I'd use a hood anyway so...

Good luck with your decision.

[robertwgross]

I've had my D60 for six weeks or more now, and I shoot it and also a film camera sequentially alternating, with the same shared lenses.

The digital images need some processing to work with, and then films have to be scanned and processed to work with them. About the biggest differences I find are that film has to be de-dusted before scanning, or else dust spots have to be edited out of the scanned file. With digital, there is no dust.

My digital images are stored on the computer taking up about 36MB per frame. Scanned 35mm film stores at about 140MB per frame. The computer resources required are much more for the film, so it takes more time.

What I like about digital is that it is just me, the camera, and the computer.

Other than all that, the finished image quality is about a wash. The D60 gives me a fine enough resolution to print anything up through the limit of my printer, so I can't complain.

---Bob Gross---

[Longwatcher]

A follow up note to the second post mentiong slow focusing. What kind of lens are you useing. About a month ago I was showing off my D-60 to a professional photographer I know who uses Nikon and she mentioned that she expected the lenses to focus much faster and was very dissapointed. But recently I bought the 16-35mm lens and it focuses much faster then my other two lenses, 28-135mm IS and 75-300mm IS. The Image stabalised lenses are apparently amoung the slowest in terms of focusing, where as my new lens apparently is amoung the fastest and I believe it since my first shot, I did not notice that it had focused and was worried for a moment that the autofocus was not on or working. As long as I don't punch the trigger, it focuses fast enough that in good light conditions it finishes before I finish pressing the button. That is pretty fast in my mind.

Just thought I would mention that to the person looking at the D-60. autofocus speed is a factor of the type of lens.

[lziering]

The D60 focus is slower than an EOS-3 or 1v. It is also not very good at focusing in low light conditions. I think it can take great pictures but if we are honest we will acknowledge that it has the body of Canon Rebel that you can buy for $300. I think Canon should have at least used the body from an Elan or an EOS-3 if they were going to charge $2200.

[Viva]

Nature/human pictures, some sport, possible some pictures in rainy weather and of snowy weather. We got some aurora's here too.

The EOS D60 is not that expensive in norway, but the D1s is. Thats a camera for the milionarie.

Not sure how many shoots there will be in the weeks. sometimes many, others none. What i care about is the dead-pixel's, shooting blue heaven and green trees with a non-quality camera looks bad. It looks like a bad paint. Some digital cameras with digital zoom can't focus. They take only a wide picture without focus on details (like faces, leaves eg.) Pictures in the night also. If we take streetligts, buildings and similiar.

Pictures for posters would need a 3000px high quality wide shoot to get clear.

I will check out these forums you gave me here :-)

Anyone have sites with picture gallerys taken with EOS d60?

[billfranklin]

Check out photosig.com. There is a category for the d60 and it has hundreds of pictures.

[defordphoto]

Doubt the toughness of the D60 body? Read here: http://www.robgalbraith.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=8&t=003605

[robertwgross]

lziering wrote:
The D60 focus is slower than an EOS-3 or 1v. It is also not very good at focusing in low light conditions. I think it can take great pictures but if we are honest we will acknowledge that it has the body of Canon Rebel that you can buy for $300. I think Canon should have at least used the body from an Elan or an EOS-3 if they were going to charge $2200.

Actually, Iziering, this is not correct. I have a Canon Rebel here, and I can assure you that my Canon D60 is not built like the Rebel body at all. For one thing, the Rebel body is 11 ounces. The D60 body is 27.5 ounces. They are of completely different size. Shall I go on?

---Bob Gross---

[lziering]

Bob Gross asked if he should go on and I think he should.

What do you think about the D60's all plastic body? Do you think the D60 is good at focusing in low light? Do you think it offers satisfactory metering in backlit conditions? Do you think it provides a satisfactory way to do spot metering?

My view is that it does okay at all these things--about as good as a $300-400 EOS. It does none of these things as wells as a $500 Elan 7. I think Canon did a great job with the imaging technology they put in the D60 but I wish they would have done better with the body itself. I don't think my view on this is very different than what most reviewers have said.

For me it seems a bit strange to have just spent $2200 on a camera that in most ways is inferior to my $900 EOS-3. I don't know why I should have to spend an extra $3000-5000 to get features that in a conventional SLR would cost me just a few hundred more. I think Canon is seeing that early adoptors like me and you will pay a big fat premium for digital. I know I did but I sure wish Canon had spent a few more dollars on metering and focusing technology.

[robertwgross]

lziering wrote:
Bob Gross asked if he should go on and I think he should.
...



I will repeat. The Canon EOS D60 body is not the same body as the Canon EOS Rebel, as you incorrectly stated.

Now, if you wanted to make comments about the features of this versus that, then you can go ahead. If you wanted to compare performance in certain selected areas, then go ahead. However, that is changing the subject from your earlier posting. I just wanted to point out the error of your earlier statement so that potential purchasers would not be confused.

Besides, if you don't like your D60, or if you think its performance stinks, then I would recommend to throw it in the river. I'm happy with mine, and I sure see the differences to the Rebel body.

---Bob Gross---

[Morden]

Besides, if you don't like your D60, or if you think its performance stinks, then I would recommend to throw it in the river.
Oh no! Don't do that! I could always use a spare camera body!

And, anyway, you might hurt a fish.

[lziering]

Bob,

You seem a bit defensive. I didn't say the performance was bad. I said that the body performed like a $300-400 EOS. The D30 while similar had even worse issues. How about Canon charging $3000 for a camera body that had focus points that didn't even illuminate?

I believe that the way companies produce better products is by hearing from their customers about what could be better. Just take a look at how Canon responded to the criticisms of the D30 and G1 and G2. My old G2 produced very good images but the focusing was sloooow and the cameras handling was awakward. Canon heard this from a lot of their customers and brought out the G3. I'm hoping that when Canon hears from customers like me that they are not thrilled with the metering, etc on the D60 that when the bring out the next camera it will address these issues.

Those of you going fishing this weekend will not find my D60 on the end of their line. I will keep it until Canon produces a better camera for a similar price. My guess is that will be in about 6 months.

Lanny

[lziering]

One more thing...

I've had my D60 for about 6 weeks and have taken over 7000 images with it. The quality of the images is very good. I'm working on a very demanding assignment that justified the $2200 the body cost. If I had done this work with film (I had planned to shoot Provia 100F and 400F) I would have shot about 200 rolls of film at this point. Assuming film cost of $6 a roll and processing at $7 for a total of $13, we would have had costs of $2600. Not to mention the cost of scanning the 400-500 images we need in out final product! So, despite the weaknesses of the D60 it is saving us lots of $$$s.

[Viva]

Nice pictures on photoSIG. Like lziering says, it is saving a lot of $$$.

Scanning 500 images do take time.. just imagine the price of the scanner if the results should be good.

[robertwgross]

Iziering, I'm not defensive, but I just don't like obviously erroneous statements to stand. When I have a Canon Rebel body sitting on my left, and a Canon D60 sitting on my right ... yes, I can state with absolute certainty that they are not built on the same body. They aren't even close, so it is a struggle to understand why you persist with your statement.

I share the some of the same justifications for using the D60 as you. Film cost is not so bad, but sloppy E-6 processing is terribly expensive. With digital, I have gotten away from that, except when I pull out the old Rebel, of course.

---Bob Gross---

[robertwgross]

lziering wrote:
Bob,

You seem a bit defensive. I didn't say the performance was bad. I said that the body performed like a $300-400 EOS. The D30 while similar had even worse issues. How about Canon charging $3000 for a camera body that had focus points that didn't even illuminate?

...

Lanny

Actually, that is not what you wrote.

What you wrote is this:
"I think it can take great pictures but if we are honest we will acknowledge that it has the body of Canon Rebel that you can buy for $300."

Let me state once more. The Canon D60 and the Canon Rebel bodies are not anything close to similar. I'm surprised that you don't admit it. We know you have a D60 body. Do you have a Rebel body to compare? I've got them sitting right here, and they are not the same at all.

It is admirable that what you meant might have been correct, but we are not mind readers. All we know is what you wrote.

---Bob Gross---