- Status
Okay, I've done this with USM, and I'm doing it now with the D60.
My advice is not to get carried away. Consider your purchase decision carefully guys. You need to budget for the camera, as well as a range of good lenses. Buying a D60 or 1D and then sticking on a superzoom is fair play, but akin to buying a Ferrari and filling it with diesel. Or driving it in auto.
As I did before with USM (and got several strong opinions in return), how many of you need the D60? If you have the cash and want to spend it fair and good, all power to you. But if you're struggling, what's wrong with the D30? A D30 with a range of lenses will be an excellent buy in today's market. Now I'm not a Canon user, but from what I understand the main difference between the two is really the pixel count. Well take this from someone who's used digital for a very long time (relatively anyway), 3.3mp on a digital SLR is enough.
If you're intending to crop down 1/10 of your frame and blow that up to 20x30 then I'm not saying anything, but if you're shooting more or less full frame then there really isn't much of a need for much more than 3.3mp. Serious question, honest replies only -- how often do you guys crop your shots when they're taken with film? This applies to printing only, for screen use, a 3.3mp camera can be cropped with impunity.
What I'm seeing in all honesty is a rush to get the latest and greatest. Relax guys. Actually, just thought of another analogy. Buying a D60 and sticking say just a 50/1.8 on the front is like buying a Lamborghini in Singapore. What's the point? You want the German autobahns, wide open countrysides, and private race tracks that are your quality lenses from wide angle through to tele.
Let me emphasise that I'm not being a wet blanket or anything, nor am I trying to thwart clubsnap's attempts at obtaining a group discount. Just consider the D30. AF aside, it was a very good camera. It's still a very good camera, especially when you consider that for all intents and purposes the D60 has not improved that aspect.
My advice is not to get carried away. Consider your purchase decision carefully guys. You need to budget for the camera, as well as a range of good lenses. Buying a D60 or 1D and then sticking on a superzoom is fair play, but akin to buying a Ferrari and filling it with diesel. Or driving it in auto.
As I did before with USM (and got several strong opinions in return), how many of you need the D60? If you have the cash and want to spend it fair and good, all power to you. But if you're struggling, what's wrong with the D30? A D30 with a range of lenses will be an excellent buy in today's market. Now I'm not a Canon user, but from what I understand the main difference between the two is really the pixel count. Well take this from someone who's used digital for a very long time (relatively anyway), 3.3mp on a digital SLR is enough.
If you're intending to crop down 1/10 of your frame and blow that up to 20x30 then I'm not saying anything, but if you're shooting more or less full frame then there really isn't much of a need for much more than 3.3mp. Serious question, honest replies only -- how often do you guys crop your shots when they're taken with film? This applies to printing only, for screen use, a 3.3mp camera can be cropped with impunity.
What I'm seeing in all honesty is a rush to get the latest and greatest. Relax guys. Actually, just thought of another analogy. Buying a D60 and sticking say just a 50/1.8 on the front is like buying a Lamborghini in Singapore. What's the point? You want the German autobahns, wide open countrysides, and private race tracks that are your quality lenses from wide angle through to tele.
Let me emphasise that I'm not being a wet blanket or anything, nor am I trying to thwart clubsnap's attempts at obtaining a group discount. Just consider the D30. AF aside, it was a very good camera. It's still a very good camera, especially when you consider that for all intents and purposes the D60 has not improved that aspect.
Well said, Jed. I totally agree with him. I wonder why pple say they got to save and save juz to get the D60. After buying the accessories, including a few hundred $$$ worth of memory cards, and not to mention good quality lenses, you'll end up spending I daresay $6000 and above? And guess what...in probably another less than 2 years' time, your D60 becomes obsolete. Then what??? Sell again?
Maybe it's ok if you're pro and make money out of it. But otherwise, I wonder if it's just a case of "they have a D60 and I must have it too!!"
On the other side of the coin, in my opinion, if you don't shoot very often and are not a pro, a high end camera body like the EOS3+ a range of high qulaity glasses, even L will set up back for less than $6000. And the quality of images you can get is far more supreme than any digital images can give.
Putting a cheap lens on a DSLR like the D60 is like Jed say, buying a Ferrari and using diesel or buying a Lamborghinni in Singapore. Will you really need the D60 or fully utilize its function? What do you want to take or do with it?
Ok much said, not being a wet blanket here. But at the end of the day, if you still feel you have the $$$ you've saved, begged, borrowed or stole, or if you simply feel you have too much $$ in the bank, and somehow you must buy the D60, then go for it.
Maybe it's ok if you're pro and make money out of it. But otherwise, I wonder if it's just a case of "they have a D60 and I must have it too!!"
On the other side of the coin, in my opinion, if you don't shoot very often and are not a pro, a high end camera body like the EOS3+ a range of high qulaity glasses, even L will set up back for less than $6000. And the quality of images you can get is far more supreme than any digital images can give.
Putting a cheap lens on a DSLR like the D60 is like Jed say, buying a Ferrari and using diesel or buying a Lamborghinni in Singapore. Will you really need the D60 or fully utilize its function? What do you want to take or do with it?
Ok much said, not being a wet blanket here. But at the end of the day, if you still feel you have the $$$ you've saved, begged, borrowed or stole, or if you simply feel you have too much $$ in the bank, and somehow you must buy the D60, then go for it.
Hi
i take it / assume that u are saying an EOS 3 with L lenses for less than $6000 produces quality of images far more supreme than any digital images taken with a D60 with cheap consumer superzooms for less than $6000 or with cheaper non L lenses for more than $6000. (though honestly, i don't think that's what u meant
)
If not, i'm going to have to take issue with your assertion and start the flame ball going :rbounce:
Also, by your same reasoning, "if you don't shoot often", then even an EOS 3 is an overkill
i take it / assume that u are saying an EOS 3 with L lenses for less than $6000 produces quality of images far more supreme than any digital images taken with a D60 with cheap consumer superzooms for less than $6000 or with cheaper non L lenses for more than $6000. (though honestly, i don't think that's what u meant
)If not, i'm going to have to take issue with your assertion and start the flame ball going :rbounce:
Also, by your same reasoning, "if you don't shoot often", then even an EOS 3 is an overkill
Originally posted by Red Dawn
Hi
i take it / assume that u are saying an EOS 3 with L lenses for less than $6000 produces quality of images far more supreme than any digital images taken with a D60 with cheap consumer superzooms for less than $6000 or with cheaper non L lenses for more than $6000. (though honestly, i don't think that's what u meant)
If not, i'm going to have to take issue with your assertion and start the flame ball going :rbounce:
Also, by your same reasoning, "if you don't shoot often", then even an EOS 3 is an overkill
Hi
i take it / assume that u are saying an EOS 3 with L lenses for less than $6000 produces quality of images far more supreme than any digital images taken with a D60 with cheap consumer superzooms for less than $6000 or with cheaper non L lenses for more than $6000. (though honestly, i don't think that's what u meant
)If not, i'm going to have to take issue with your assertion and start the flame ball going :rbounce:
Also, by your same reasoning, "if you don't shoot often", then even an EOS 3 is an overkill
About professional cameras like the D60, perhaps it might be worth it to hold on to your money for a while. I read that there's a revolutionary new type of sensor that's been invented that is practically as good as film-- in fact it works on exactly the same principle as film. You can read about it here:
http://www.dpreview.com/news/0202/02021101foveonx3.asp
and the first ones should be coming out near the end of the year... so those might be a better buy...
http://www.dpreview.com/news/0202/02021101foveonx3.asp
and the first ones should be coming out near the end of the year... so those might be a better buy...
Hi
personally i m very happy for the pple (Megaweb, Bluestrike, Shadus etc) who have decided to spring for the D60 and experience digital photography. I'm very sure they will enjoy the experience as much as I have, and I'm also very sure they will not regret purchasing the Canon EOS D60.
congrats!
On the other side issues raised in this thread...........
I agree with what Jed has said about the D30 still being a very capable camera. Considering the many pple selling it (and the bargaining possibilities), it should not be too difficult to source for one for a low price, a price that can possibly afford you several good lenses if u're cash strapped.
Also, if u're a first time SLR user, chances are you wouldn't know wat lenses you will like, or eventually stick with. So don't go all out and buy a huge collection of glass covering everything from 14mm to 400mm. Start small, and then slowly build up your collection of glass according to your own style of shooting, and your needs.
On the issue of superzooms, well, they have their markets. (mostly consumer, casual hobbyists.) However, if u're serious about making good images, I wouldn't waste time on them. Especially if u're serious about spending $3800 on a digital SLR. The quality of the images just aren't worth it when u stare at them at 100% in photoshop.
You will do much better with a couple of fast and cheap primes. The difference in quality between a 50 f1.8 and a 28-200 is day and night. The 50 f1.8 is just so much better, more contrasty and much sharper.
personally i m very happy for the pple (Megaweb, Bluestrike, Shadus etc) who have decided to spring for the D60 and experience digital photography. I'm very sure they will enjoy the experience as much as I have, and I'm also very sure they will not regret purchasing the Canon EOS D60.
congrats!
On the other side issues raised in this thread...........
I agree with what Jed has said about the D30 still being a very capable camera. Considering the many pple selling it (and the bargaining possibilities), it should not be too difficult to source for one for a low price, a price that can possibly afford you several good lenses if u're cash strapped.
Also, if u're a first time SLR user, chances are you wouldn't know wat lenses you will like, or eventually stick with. So don't go all out and buy a huge collection of glass covering everything from 14mm to 400mm. Start small, and then slowly build up your collection of glass according to your own style of shooting, and your needs.
On the issue of superzooms, well, they have their markets. (mostly consumer, casual hobbyists.) However, if u're serious about making good images, I wouldn't waste time on them. Especially if u're serious about spending $3800 on a digital SLR. The quality of the images just aren't worth it when u stare at them at 100% in photoshop.
You will do much better with a couple of fast and cheap primes. The difference in quality between a 50 f1.8 and a 28-200 is day and night. The 50 f1.8 is just so much better, more contrasty and much sharper.
- Status