Dilemma

I recently graduated from an S95 to an SL1/18-55 kit.
I was on a recent family trip that we typically do every summer.
Many shots were indoors in light that wasn't great (cruise ship)--needed the flash for a lot of them.
I'm sure that many of them could have come out better with a faster lens.
I just picked up a 17-55/2.8 for that reason.

My problem is this.
With the pending 70D release, I'm salivating.
I'm considering picking it up with the 18-135, since I think it would make a great walk-around/travel lens for it.
I'm now having buyer's remorse regarding the 17-55. I'm not sure I'll use it enough to justify the expense.
I'm thinking of returning it, and using the funds towards the 70D/18-135.

I know I'm just rambling, but I'd appreciate your thoughts.
And, my daughter is currently using the SL1/18-55 on a trip, and I'm not sure she's going to give it back.

Merlin_AZ wrote in post #16090590
I recently graduated from an S95 to an SL1/18-55 kit.
I was on a recent family trip that we typically do every summer.
Many shots were indoors in light that wasn't great (cruise ship)--needed the flash for a lot of them.
I'm sure that many of them could have come out better with a faster lens.
I just picked up a 17-55/2.8 for that reason.

My problem is this.
With the pending 70D release, I'm salivating.
I'm considering picking it up with the 18-135, since I think it would make a great walk-around/travel lens for it.
I'm now having buyer's remorse regarding the 17-55. I'm not sure I'll use it enough to justify the expense.
I'm thinking of returning it, and using the funds towards the 70D/18-135.

I know I'm just rambling, but I'd appreciate your thoughts.
And, my daughter is currently using the SL1/18-55 on a trip, and I'm not sure she's going to give it back.

Give your daughter the SL1/18-55. The wives/girlfriends/daug​hters/sons get them eventually from us guys anyway, you might as well join the club. This has been documented on several threads here.

As to what to do, I would suggest ordering the 70D body only and use the 17-55 on that. With the 70D's impressive specs, you should get outstanding shots with the 17-55, unless you need/want a longer focal length. If that's the case, then you probably should sell the 17-55 and order the 70D with the 18-135 STM lens instead.

If the SL1 was a valid option for you, the 70D is only an over-priced 60D. Both the 60D and 7D have more to offer and cost less, at this point. The huge exception is if you use it for video. I think anyone who does any DSLR video at all has to look at the 70D. I agree with you that the 17-55 is over-priced. There are a lot of alternatives that cost less than half as much. But, if you want the best....

Glass over body. The 17-55 is a great lens. I think you would be disappointed in the image quality of the 18-135 vs the 17-55 on your SL1.

That said, saying the 70D is just an overpriced 60D is not true either.

MP: 60D - 18.1, 70D 20.2 = not much difference.
LCD: same
FPS: 60D - 5.3, 70D 7 = small difference.
Processor: 60D Digic4, 70D Digic5+, irrelevant if you shoot raw.
AF: 70D wins this one, 60D is very good, though.
Metering: same.
Video: same, except for AF which is huge.
In-cam processing: 70D has a few more options. Both come with DPP. LR4 is available.
WIFI: 70D wins again.

So the 70D offers better AF and WIFI. That could be a reason to upgrade, but you get only that for your money, unless you use LV/Video a lot. If you use LV/Video the Dual Pixel AF is monumental. I use neither so what does the 70D offer me, or shooters like me. From a purely still picture perspective, the 70D does not offer much more than the 60D for all that money. It offers less than the 7D. Excuse me, but I don't get it.

EDIT: I may be the odd-ball. I saw the 60D as a huge improvement over the 500D. It got widely panned when it was released. IMHO, all things considered, it is (still) the best APSc camera Canon has ever made.

It's all comparisons on paper until we actually see people using 70D and get a better idea what it can (and can't) do.

Most of Canon's marketing touts the new Live View/video focusing system, which really is a big deal. But there are other key considerations... such as high ISO noise handling, dynamic range, and more. Canon appears to have constrained themselves in resolution increases (18MP to 20MP while rival cameras are now at 24MP). Does that mean they paid more attention to the quality of the images produced, over sheer resolution increases? I hope so, but it remains to be seen. The highest ISO sample 70D images I've seen so far is 3200, and I don't know if that was shot as a JPEG (in-camera processing) or a RAW (post-processed), but it looked to have very low noise.

70D also appears to have inherited the 7D's excellent 19-point AF system, but it remains to be seen if it's as good in 70D as it has been in 7D. The 7D has a discrete chip driving the AF (1D series style), separate from it's dual Digic 4 image processors... At this point in time, I just don't know how the 70D handles this. Is it using the single Digic 5+ both for focusing and and to handle 7fps images? If so, it might not give the same level of AF performance as the 7D. We'll have to wait and see formal and informal user reviews to find out.

On paper, I am a little disappointed that 70D's AF is rated to -0.5EV. That's the same as previous generation cameras: 60D, 7D, 5DII. The 1DX, 5DIII and 6D (center AF point only) all are rated to much dimmer -3EV. My 7Ds do hunt a bit in low light. And in a little lower light they give up being able to focus completely, when 5DII still can (altho it's center AF point only and rather slow), even though Canon rates them the same.

Still, 70D is impressive in most respects. I'm glad to see MFA back in the xxD body, especially in the latest and greatest iteration (40 lenses, lens specific, dual adjustments for zooms). And I'm very pleased to see expanded bracketing capabilities.

70D looks to be a great camera. But it's all on paper for now. I'll be anxiously awaiting reviews... and a 7D Mark II announcement. It will be interesting to see what Canon does with the next generation of 7D, to one-up the 70D!

Tommy1957 wrote in post #16090891
MP: 60D - 18.1, 70D 20.2 = not much difference.
LCD: same
FPS: 60D - 5.3, 70D 7 = small difference.
Processor: 60D Digic4, 70D Digic5+, irrelevant if you shoot raw.
AF: 70D wins this one, 60D is very good, though.
Metering: same.
Video: same, except for AF which is huge.
In-cam processing: 70D has a few more options. Both come with DPP. LR4 is available.
WIFI: 70D wins again.

So the 70D offers better AF and WIFI. That could be a reason to upgrade, but you get only that for your money, unless you use LV/Video a lot. If you use LV/Video the Dual Pixel AF is monumental. I use neither so what does the 70D offer me, or shooters like me. From a purely still picture perspective, the 70D does not offer much more than the 60D for all that money. It offers less than the 7D. Excuse me, but I don't get it.

EDIT: I may be the odd-ball. I saw the 60D as a huge improvement over the 500D. It got widely panned when it was released. IMHO, all things considered, it is (still) the best APSc camera Canon has ever made.

As someone who has shot a lot of sports over the last 19 months with the 60D, I have to say that the 70D is pretty tempting with football season on the horizon. The extra FPS, resolution, improved JPG shooting, larger viewfinder and even WiFi will make my job just that much easier if I choose to upgrade.

And this is coming from someone who really loves the 60D. If the 7D offered better IQ, I would have probably gotten one, although I would have missed the articulating display. With the 70D, it does some things closer to the 7D's like MFA (I shoot primes, it could help), 19-point AF, and 7 FPS. That it inherited the touchscreen from the T5i and WiFi from the 6D--and gets full-time AF with EOS lenses--that's a real nice bonus.

Shooting video will be a breeze, whether it be an interview with a player or coach, or filmin my daughter's 2nd birthday party. Even with Magic Lantern, shooting video with the 60D in-focus isn't a breeze for us non-pro video guys.

As an all-around crop body, the 70D--on paper--appears to be a winner . . . Even more so than the 60D was when it was rolled out a few years ago. Unless some Nikon-like QC issues pop up, this camera looks to be everything xxD shooters could ask for.

Mickeyb105,
It sounds like you have pretty specific uses in mind for the 70D's feature set. I think a lot of the 60D shooters are like me. We want more than a superzoom/bridge can offer, but mainly shoot our grandkids, and such, at play, at school functions, and lots of cat/dog pics. The 60D is more than adequate for that kind of stuff. I assume (we all know what that means!) that most paid/pro shooters are using a more advanced body than the 60D, such as 7D/5D3/1D series. To me, the 70D appears to be geared toward hobby shooters such as us. The inclusion of this new video focus system makes sense, too. The 60D was geared towards video; the 70D improves on that in a big way. I don't think the 70D is much of an upgrade for shooters like me. I realize their are people who use their equipment differently than I use mine. The 70D may well appeal to loads of people. I really hope that it does. Sales drive, and pay for, research. That benefits all of us.

Thanks for your thoughts, guys.
I have a little time to decide before my return window for the 17-55 closes.
If I do decide to get the 70D, I'm leaning towards the 18-135 kit.
I'd consider just keeping the 17-55 on it, and use the 18-135 when I need a little reach/travel/walk-around all-in-one.
I've read that the 18-135 STM isn't a bad lens, and for the cost with the kit, it's probably worth getting it to keep around.

amfoto1 wrote in post #16091181
It's all comparisons on paper until we actually see people using 70D and get a better idea what it can (and can't) do.

This.

Until there are real world shots showing if the ISO performance and AF improvements are as great as the Canon hype would like us to believe they are you can't really make an informed comparison beyond specs on paper.

Improved AF...
But for what?!
Movie Okay, but as I understand it, for Photograpy, it has no real uses.
If I use Live View, I use Manual Focus anyway, and without Live View, the new system is useless.

I'm very tempted of updating my backup camera (t1i) with a 70D. I've been wanting to upgrade it for a while but nothing out there until now seemed worth it. I don't mind having more or less the same IQ and ISO performance as the 60D. The major thing that makes me interested in the 70D over the 60D is AF Microadjustments (aka. MFA). If you ever start shooting with wide apertures and razor thin depth of field, this for me, is a must have feature. The 2nd major thing is having 19 af points vs 9. Also important if you use narrow depth of field. Focus recompose just doesn't work well in some situations. Especially if you are tracking a moving object with AI Servo and want to place the subject you are tracking in a specific place in the image for composition reasons.

Merlin_AZ wrote in post #16090590
I recently graduated from an S95 to an SL1/18-55 kit.
I was on a recent family trip that we typically do every summer.
Many shots were indoors in light that wasn't great (cruise ship)--needed the flash for a lot of them.
I'm sure that many of them could have come out better with a faster lens.
I just picked up a 17-55/2.8 for that reason.

Are you talking on-board pop-up flash? Because that is almost useless. I too went for the 17-55 for my 60D indoors, but that alone doesn't solve the problem. Adding a 430EXII did.

Merlin_AZ wrote in post #16091269
Thanks for your thoughts, guys.
I have a little time to decide before my return window for the 17-55 closes.
If I do decide to get the 70D, I'm leaning towards the 18-135 kit.
I'd consider just keeping the 17-55 on it, and use the 18-135 when I need a little reach/travel/walk-around all-in-one.
I've read that the 18-135 STM isn't a bad lens, and for the cost with the kit, it's probably worth getting it to keep around.

Personally, I don't see the point in getting 70D and using it with 18-135 unless you intend to purchase a better glass very soon anyway. IQ wise, you will get better results with your current camera+17-55 than with 70D and 18-135 lens. If I was you, I would keep the 17-55 and wait a few months, until 70d's price drops.

Mag-1981 wrote in post #16092308
Personally, I don't see the point in getting 70D and using it with 18-135 unless you intend to purchase a better glass very soon anyway. IQ wise, you will get better results with your current camera+17-55 than with 70D and 18-135 lens. If I was you, I would keep the 17-55 and wait a few months, until 70d's price drops.

If you shoot video having the 18-135 STM (or any of the other STM lenses) with the T4i, T5i or 70D would be beneficial. It all comes down to what you want to use the camera for though.