60D or 700D

mavers

mavers

mavers

Associate
Joined
13 Jan 2009
Posts
410
Have been looking at upgrading my current setup - 1000d with the standard lens and 50mm fixed lens.

Popped into Jessops and had a play with the 700d, was impressed with the features and seems to be a massive jump up from the 1000d.

As its quite similarily priced to the 60D, I was wondering on the opinions between the two.

Camera will mainly be used for portraits and architecture. Quite intrigued by the camcorder mode, though that is not a primary feature.

Am looking to spend up to 650 for a new camera and lens, though I'm in no rush to upgrade. Any thoughts on a suitable lens are also appreciated.

Thanks
 
For architecture you'll want a wider lens than the 50mm. But portraiture will require that 50mm. On my Nikon I use a 35mm sometimes when I'm out with friends, but it's definitely no good for capturing the epicness of architecture and landscapes. If you want that range then you'll have to get two lenses or a zoom. I tend to mostly use my Sigma 17-50mm f2.8, which is about £300.

As for the camera body itself. I would get the 60d. The larger viewfinder and the display at the top are both very useful.
 
Last edited:
i have a 60D
the lenses i have are

100mm macro L IS f2.8
50mm f1.8 - im guessing this is the one you have, was £50
10-22mm f3.5-4.5 - this is the wide version for crop bodies

the wideness of the 10-22 is really useful, was at duxford war museum today and because of the restrictions of distance to subject i didnt change it off

its a pricy lens at 440, as much as my 60D actually, but i use it a lot
heres a shot at 10mm on 60D


Duxford War Museum 1 by Al4x, on Flickr
 
AlecR said:
Have you looked at the 70D? It's a much improved 60D.
Click to expand...

its much much more expensive too, thats why i didnt go for it, most of the improvements were video, i didnt think it was worth nearly twice the price, i put the difference towards a lens, (the wide lens actually)
 
Thank you for the quick replies.

70D is out of the budget.
The only drawback to the 60D which concerns me is the age. Its now over 3 years old compared to the fairly new 700D. I suppose if I could get it second hand this would bring the price down.
 
Last edited:
I'm going to keep an eye out for 60D, as I'm not fussed if its second hand or not.

Lens wise what would you recommend for portraits and which is best for architecture/general walking around? I probably won't buy both at the same time, and the budget would be around 250, but happy to go higher if required.
 
mavers said:
I'm going to keep an eye out for 60D, as I'm not fussed if its second hand or not.

Lens wise what would you recommend for portraits and which is best for architecture/general walking around? I probably won't buy both at the same time, and the budget would be around 250, but happy to go higher if required.
Click to expand...
I love my Canon 85mm 1.8 as a portrait lens (circa £200 used, very sharp and rapid / accurate focusing) and is generally regarded as close to perfect focal length on a crop body. A cheaper 50mm 1.8 will mildly distort features unless for step far enough back that you aren't filling close to the entire frame with your subject. Its not that noticeable unless you frame the same subject with an 85mm and then it becomes more apparent.

The only problem i have with the 85mm is space, i reckon around 3m away from your subject to get head or upper body shots. Full length portraits or group shots you'd need to be way way back imo so its not always practical.

Walkabout on a crop the Canon 17-55 2.8 (400 - 500 used) always gets raved about (its a lens i'm after), very sharp, built well and good focusing. The only problem with it for me is its a little on the short side at 55mm so looking at L glass as an alternative (24-70, 24 - 105) but prices jump again. Or go UWA with a 10-22mm, 8-16mm which are lots of fun for landscapes, buildings etc, even people and animals if you want to get creative.
 
mavers said:
I'm going to keep an eye out for 60D, as I'm not fussed if its second hand or not.

Lens wise what would you recommend for portraits and which is best for architecture/general walking around? I probably won't buy both at the same time, and the budget would be around 250, but happy to go higher if required.
Click to expand...

For portraits a 50mm 1.8 or 1.4 is what I use. For a walkaround lens a tamron 17-50mm 2.8. Infact you could just use the tamron for both unless you really need a very low light lens.
A 50mm will give the same fov as an 80mm on Full frame.
 
The non VC Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 for a walkabout, Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 USM for portrait. I wouldn't bother buying a 50mm for portrait especially when you have that range covered already. You still get distortion at 50mm as mentioned above and it can be noticeable.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom