# canon 600d or 60d?



## deathbyfish (Feb 16, 2011)

i am defiantly going to get a new camera soon and i need to know if i should get the newer 600d or the slightly more expensive 60d?


----------



## unruled (Feb 16, 2011)

biggest difference: ergonomics


----------



## EYEONE (Feb 16, 2011)

I agree. The grip alone makes the 60D worth it.


----------



## KyleSTL (Feb 16, 2011)

Ergonomics are better on the 60D, but only if you're looking for a mid-sized camera. The big difference in my mind is the pentaprism viewfinder in the 60D that is not only bigger, but brighter as well. The dual control dials on the 60D are also a good reason to upgrade. The higher burst FPS is also a benefit, but not everyone is looking for how fast the continuous is.


----------



## justicend (Feb 16, 2011)

Slight high price, but it's worth

Top LCD (Low Power) ,don't bother using all confusing menu.
1100 shots battery life.

Other advantages are mentioned above. I am happy with it, I bought 60D over 550D. And there is not much of difference in 550 and 600, Go with 60D it's worth spending little more.


----------



## ordad12 (Feb 16, 2011)

I have a 60D and a Rebel XSi and I have used my nephew's T2i, and I vote for the 60D, particularly if the rebates for the 60D reduce the price below the current $888 price at B & H, Amazon, and Adorama. I like both the Rebels a lot, but the 60D has a more substantial build, feels better in the hand, and is overall more pleasurable to use that my XSi. In fact, I am thinking of selling my XSi and getting a second 60D.
That said, I have not seen or used the T3i, but I still expect the 60D to be a bit better and worth the extra money.


----------



## gbaturin (Feb 16, 2011)

Go for the 7D ! I should have waited for it instead of buying the 50D, I still regret that...


----------



## Canonix (Feb 17, 2011)

On the other hand, whilst the 60D sits better in the hand, it is a bit heavier than the 600D. And the Live View mode autofocus on 600D is reportedly faster.

By the way, what is the point of the top display on the 60D? When is it of use?



PS: "defiantly"? Whom do you plan to defy?


----------



## Macadameane (Feb 17, 2011)

Canonix said:


> By the way, what is the point of the top display on the 60D? When is it of use?



If you are using manual modes Av, Tv, and M, the top LCD is really handle to see your settings without having to purposely turn on the screen (or leave it on, wasting battery power) or look through the view finder to see your settings.

Before I got a 7D, I didn't think the top LCD was a big deal, but I find that I use it constantly every time I use the camera


----------



## justicend (Feb 17, 2011)

Macadameane said:


> Canonix said:
> 
> 
> > By the way, what is the point of the top display on the 60D? When is it of use?
> ...



Agree


----------



## telephonic (Feb 18, 2011)

Canonix said:


> By the way, what is the point of the top display on the 60D? When is it of use?


All the time.

I own 20D, and before that, used a 500N (a film camera) which explains my behaviour. But to have large, power-consuming LCD just to change settings is nonsensical to me.


----------



## MK5GTI (Feb 18, 2011)

i believe (i read it somewhere) the 60D also has a bigger buffer. so you could shoot more before it stop.


----------



## EYEONE (Feb 18, 2011)

It's the same 15 RAWs I believe. But the 7D will reach that 15 faster with the 8fps.
Both can do Jpegs until you get board basically.


----------



## unruled (Feb 18, 2011)

telephonic said:


> Canonix said:
> 
> 
> > By the way, what is the point of the top display on the 60D? When is it of use?
> ...



to me its not about the power use of the LCD so much, more just the fact that its easier to glance at the top display, and its always on, always shows exactly what you want (and expect)... 

the 350d i had previously had a tiny display on the back.. that sucked.


----------



## Canonix (Feb 19, 2011)

unruled said:


> the 350d i had previously had a tiny display on the back.. that sucked.



I still have a 350D and having played with a 60D in a shop I have to agree with you about the 350D's diminutive display.


----------



## Canonix (Feb 19, 2011)

Along with the 60D/600D decision comes the lens decision. I have a two lenses for my 350D - the 18-55 that came with it, and a Sigma 18-125, neither of which have IS. So I could get a new body and continue to use those lenses, or get a new lens with the new body, since the extra cost of a kit over the body only is half of what the lenses cost alone.

The 60D and 600D are available body only, or with 18-55 IS, or with 18-135 IS. The 60D is also available with 17-85 IS USM. Now the 17-85 IS USM costs as much, if not more that the 18-135: is it worth it? I'm not a frequent lens-changer; I prefer so-called 'super-zooms', but in this megapixel range, where further zooming can be done later on the PC, is there any reason to have a heavier super-zoom?

Which brings me back to the 60D vs. 600D debate: do either, or both, have digital zoom?


----------



## Rocky (Feb 19, 2011)

For a difference about $200 (not counting rebate). I definitely will vote for 60D. The following four items will make it worth to spend $200: 1. Much better hand grip (a lot more comfortable in the hand) 2. Penta prism ( brighter image in the viewfinder) 3. extra control wheel at the back ( a lot easier to set function). 4. LCD panel on top ( a lot easier to set and know the camera setting). For people that do not want to change the lens most of the time, 15-85mm will be a good choice or for people that hardly uses long lens, 17-40 f4.0 L lens (27 to 66mm 35mm equilvalent) will be a good alternative.


----------



## tombo (Feb 20, 2011)

Definitely the 60d. Love the articulated screen. Amazin how useful it is for event photography. Something my 7d cannot do. THE 60d also fits my hand better, although that would be more an individual choice.


----------

