XSi to 60D/T3i... or save for FF?

I think this is the last "body upgrade" question I'll need to ask for a while. IF I upgrade now, I'm set on the 60D or T3i. I've eliminated the 7D, I think it's just too much camera for what I really need right now.

The reason I'm looking to upgrade is for better AF, low light performance, and video ability in that order. I find the AF lacking when tracking moving objects such as pets or running kids. As for low light, I'm personally satisfied with pics I get up to ISO 800, but once it's at 1600 I notice significant and noticeably noise to the extent that I don't have many keepers at that ISO. And of course, the ability to go to higher ISO doesn't even exist with the XSi. I've started shooting more in RAW, but I also have to consider the needs of my wife, who I share the camera with. She shoots in JPEG only.

Based on my research, this is what I've gathered on the bodies, please correct if wrong:

IQ : T3i/ 60D will basically be identical and a very slight improvement over my XSi.
AF: The T3i will give me similar AF performance, the 60D will be noticeably better than my XSi.
Low Light: T3i/60D will basically be identical and slightly better than my XSi.
And of course, both will give me video.

So, it does seem like either may be a decent upgrade based on what I'm looking for. Should the better AF ability of the 60D swing my decision that way?

Another question is, would the improvements I'm looking for be marginal enough to justify just continuing to use my XSi and just save for a FF instead?

What your comparison doesnt include is the superior control system of the 60D. Its a lot easier to use in terms of dialing in compensation and adjustments using the multi controller and wheel. That alone is worth the upgrade to the XXD line. As for upgrading to FF, it really comes down to what you shoot. Until the 5D3 came out the full frame bodes were better suited to landscape and portraiture with crops being better for sports/wildlife. The focusing system on the full frame bodies is comparable with your xsi and you lose some "reach" as your lenses will give you a wider angle of view if you go full frame.

gonzogolf wrote in post #14946753
What your comparison doesnt include is the superior control system of the 60D. Its a lot easier to use in terms of dialing in compensation and adjustments using the multi controller and wheel. That alone is worth the upgrade to the XXD line. As for upgrading to FF, it really comes down to what you shoot. Until the 5D3 came out the full frame bodes were better suited to landscape and portraiture with crops being better for sports/wildlife. The focusing system on the full frame bodies is comparable with your xsi and you lose some "reach" as your lenses will give you a wider angle of view if you go full frame.

Thanks. I've never used an FF DSLR, so maybe I should rent a 5D MKII and try it out. If I'm absolutely amazed by the IQ then I guess it will motivate me to save for one. OTOH, if I find the improvement to be just marginal, I guess I can happily settle into the APS-C line without regrets.

I think I'm hung up on IQ more than anything. I'm thinking FF will give me much better IQ, but if this isn't necessarily true then I guess it'll be easier to let that go.

The Dark Knight wrote in post #14946799
Thanks. I've never used an FF DSLR, so maybe I should rent a 5D MKII and try it out. If I'm absolutely amazed by the IQ then I guess it will motivate me to save for one. OTOH, if I find the improvement to be just marginal, I guess I can happily settle into the APS-C line without regrets.

I think I'm hung up on IQ more than anything. I'm thinking FF will give me much better IQ, but if this isn't necessarily true then I guess it'll be easier to let that go.

I'm pretty sure the IQ will impress you, if not blow you away. My point is that IQ doesnt mean anything if you can cant lock focus or frame your subject (sports and wildlife).

gonzogolf wrote in post #14946812
I'm pretty sure the IQ will impress you, if not blow you away. My point is that IQ doesnt mean anything if you can cant lock focus or frame your subject (sports and wildlife).

Ahh, got ya. Decisions, decisions.

To me, the big pointers on going full frame are getting a shallower DoF and a big boost in low light performance. And even if you don't go with a full frame you'll notice a lot more range in your usable ISO with the current 18MP sensor from the T3i/60D/7D/etc. The uptick on this when you go FF is just massive though, you can shoot at 6400 like it's no big deal, no distracting noise to speak of. I tend to think of them as portrait machines, between the the sensor's performance in low light and the decreased DoF, it's perfect for capturing and creating those moody dreamy shots you want for weddings and such.

The Dark Knight wrote in post #14946727
... I also have to consider the needs of my wife, who I share the camera with. ...

This may dictate what you end up getting
The T3i will feel similar to what you have now, the 60D will be a little bigger and heavier and have more control. The 5DII will feel big and heavy in comparison to both.

Have you considered the T4i ?

What do you shoot?

Even a 40D would be an increase in AF capability, for not much more money than your XSI would sell for.

Ceremus is spot on. FF is not designed to give better image quality. It gives shallower depth of field, better low light capability (given the same generation of sensor), and different uses for the same lens (50mm is normal on FF, portrait lens on crop).

I shoot primarily friends/ family in all sorts of settings - casually indoors/ outdoors/ parties / graduations/ weddings etc... Next would be wildlife, some landscapes, and basically anything else that catches my eye/ I feel like.

But yea, mostly the subject is people in candid moments.

I upgraded just a few weeks or so ago from the xsi to the 60D.

Not been out with it yet as not had he time. Just from playing with it, it's a huge upgrade, especially ergonomically!

Just down to the fact you can have a level through the view finder I like a lot! Along with the dedicated back button AF.

I'd say go for it unless you decide on FF.

Perfect_10 wrote in post #14946917
This may dictate what you end up getting
The T3i will feel similar to what you have now, the 60D will be a little bigger and heavier and have more control. The 5DII will feel big and heavy in comparison to both.

Have you considered the T4i ?

No, haven't really looked at the T4i. I guess for that money I'd rather get the 60D

To me, it seems like you already know what you want... You want a t3i or a 60D, but not a t4i- because you'd rather have a 60D. You don't want the newest Rebel, but would consider an older Rebel- or a 60D. I'd bet that you really want a 60D and are looking for reasons to put the extra money into the pot - over the t3i. Nothing wrong with that. Comparing a 60D and a t3i- I'd take the 60D first. Easy choice- in my books.

Having used the t4i, and impressed by the little camera- the things I like about it are probably the same things you would like about the t3i; swivel screen, lighter weight, movie capabilities.. Additionally- the AF during video, all cross type AF points, and the general accuracy of the system overall ( focusing accuracy seems much better than I remember my old T1i - whose AF system is like the T3i ). Handling in the hands seems better than I remember the t1i being. ISO capability seems to be a little better- at least when using JPG output. The things that I miss about my pro bodies; controls (touch screen makes up for it some )- but the pro body controls are better. AF Accuracy - comparable although the 7D & 5D3 are more sophisticated. 5D3- af accuracy is way beyond the 7D's. Brighter viewfinder ( and larger ). Gosh- I do miss that part. The 60D and the 7D are similar in many respects. The dedicated AF-ON button. More controls. The round dial in the back. The feeling that a larger body gives in your hands- not as cramped.. With larger lenses- yes- I'll grab the larger bodies- and remember why I like them..

So, there you go- I ain't gonna lie- I like all of my cameras - the t4i, the 7D, and the 5D3. There are times I prefer a lighter weight camera - and video ( and video AF ), I grab the t4i.. Sports and other events , or if I am grabbing the longer or larger lenses - either the 7D or 5D3- mostly the 5D3. You can't beat the pro bodies for some things. You already know you want the 60D over the t3i- go get it.. You'll love it.

The Dark Knight wrote in post #14948128
No, haven't really looked at the T4i. I guess for that money I'd rather get the 60D

With the prices of the T4i coming down now the initial rush is over I still think it's a better buy for what you want to shoot.
If you grab the 60D you know you'll be disappointed as soon as the 70D is announced

I think Rebels are awesome for first time cameras, but myself I wouldn't be happy moving from an older Rebel to a newer one. Too much of a lateral move. If you're coming up from a 450D or older body you do get a nice bump in IQ from a newer gen sensor, so it's a good thing on that hand. You miss out on a lot by not moving to the XXD or XD line though, not the least of which being ergonomics. And now, even though the T4i and 60D are nearly identical in terms of their internal specifications, I would probably lean more to the 60D for the more comfortable grip and dual dial controls. Although for me, starting off with the T3i meant there were already too many similarities between it and the 60D for me to consider it as a serious upgrade, not to mention niggling things like missing out on microfocus adjustment. One of several reasons the 7D appealed to me.

Have you handled the products yourself? How the camera feels to you in-hand can make a big difference helping you decide, whether it feels right, how it handles, etc.

Perfect_10 wrote in post #14949201
If you grab the 60D you know you'll be disappointed as soon as the 70D is announced

always happens. As soon as you upgrade a new model comes out and you want that one