I wouldn't take the flip-screen over the 7D's focusing to be honest. It's also got better build quality, burst rate and sealing.
But it's horses for courses, I have a 60D because I couldn't afford (or wait to afford) the 7D.
I wouldn't take the flip-screen over the 7D's focusing to be honest. It's also got better build quality, burst rate and sealing.
But it's horses for courses, I have a 60D because I couldn't afford (or wait to afford) the 7D.
Last edited by ham; 08-23-2012 at 08:05 AM.
One of many reason I have a 60D as wellOriginally Posted by ham
Do you think a lens like the Canon 16-35mm f/2.8L II USM is a good lens for a first lens, walk around and indoor photography on a crop body like e 60d, or is the 17-55 still a better option?
It will be better weather resistant, probably better IQ in terms of corner to corner sharpness and chromatic aberration but it will be a little less versatile, alot more expensive and a lot heavier.
In my opinion the 16-35mm focal length would be too short for everyday walk around lens. It would be good for wide angle and group shots but wont be good for portraits and head shots as focal length is not long enough.. between the two of these the 17-55 would be more suitable for your needs.
My first walk around lens was a EF-S 18-200mm 3.5-5.6 Lens which i found was very useful but it is not comparable to 17-55 in image quality as the 17-55 out performs this. the only advantage is 200mm focal length and was around $400 cheaper than 17-55 and I follow the principle that an average shot is better than no shot at all, so rather than getting great shots at 55mm max I opted for average shots at 200mm.
I did buy the 17-55 later and found it great for indoor parties, weddings as it performs great in low light.
I think the 17-55mm is a better option. The 17-55mm is actually a little sharper than the 16-35L II when comparing both on the same APS-C camera. The 17-55mm has a more useful focal range, and has image stabilization. The 16-35L II is significantly more expensive. It's true that the 16-35 II is weather sealed, but that is only useful is you're using it on a weather sealed body (the T4i is not, the 60D has some sealing, but really you'd want a 7D for decent sealing); also, a filter is needed to complete the sealing and 82mm filters aren't cheap.
If you were asking about an ultrawide zoom for a FF camera, the 16-35L II would be the recommendation. For a general purpose lens on APS-C, the 17-55mm is the better choice of the two.
What is your opinion the Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM vs the 17-55mm worn on a 60d? Would you still go with the 17-55mm for an all purpose lens?
I owned one, it has no IS and this is a negative. Lens was soft, I sold it.
Wait for the 24-70 II to be released, last update I heard it should be out next month. If you go FF I would wait for the new 24-70.
It seems to me that the answer keeps coming back to the 17-55mm.
unless you go ahead and get a full frame camera.
Here are my thoughts on going full frame and L gear. When I first started with digital I bought a 50D, it had the kit lens and a 70-300mm IS. I spent about $2,400 and thought I was set. The 7D didn't exist at that time and the 5D II had not been released. I bought mine to go in to photography, not to take pictures of the grandkids. Grandkids and family pictures were just a bonus. I could do those with a much cheaper set up.
Like I said I thought I was close to being set, the only thing left was a really long lens. What I quickly learned is to go from the prosumer bodies and kit lenses to the full frame and L lenses cost well over 3 times as much money. Had I known this I would have skipped the 50D completely, but when you are laying out $2,400 to get in to something at the start it feels like you are already paying the full premium. Yesterday on a job site I was taking pictures. I was asked how much camera cost, I didn't want to tell him but he was guessing it was worth about $1,000. In reality it was about $4,000 and all together I had about 20 grand worth of gear with me. So if you decide full frame just be aware you are going to spend 3 to 4 times the amount of money as you will with the crop body and lower grade lenses, you will be able to do more creative things and possibly get better IQ but that little bit of extra creativeness and IQ cost a huge amount.
Regarding the price difference, I agree, the FF is just too expensive for me and my needs.
I am deciding between the 60D and 7D. The price deference between these two is about $500, and I am trying to weigh the pros and cons of each. Through recent research I have read that the major differences (aside from the price) are 1) that the 7D has more focus points (19 vs 9, not sure if that matters too me), 2) the 7D is weather sealed (I do like to hike) and the 3) 7D is 100% vs 96% in the 60D. The 7D also just had a firmware update... not sure if that will make a difference for me or not. The 7D also has more options, which again, I'm not sure if I will use now... but maybe in a year or two.
The 60D does have a flip out lcd screen, which seems like a nice option, and its lighter, which is good for traveling.
Do you think the 7D is a better choice? Or am I over spending and should go with the 60D?
Thank you again.
I think the 7D over the 60D is a good choice.
The 7D should be the next body due for an upgrade from Canon. But I am not sure it is coming since they did the big release. That would be my only fear, that a better version is released next month. You can ask the question if anyone knows if there will be an upgrade, but you will not get a reliable answer.
About your points;
1, The af system will perform better on the 7D, the points really do not matter other than it is an indication of how much more is put in to the system over the other.
2, It is talked about all the time. It is something I do not worry about one way or the other. If it is raining I don't let me equipment get wet. If I were in a very humid part of the world, worked at sea or was in some other similar environment I might worry about it. For me thought this point is a non issue.
3, Not sure what you are referring to.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote