# 60D vs. 650D



## nickwees37 (Jul 15, 2012)

I know that this has been one of the biggest debates since the 650D came out, but I haven't seemed to find any definitive answers.
From a film standpoint, is the 60D still the better camera? Or has the new technology of the 650D outdone the 60D?

For context, I personally make short films and vlogs. This will be my first DSLR.

Your opinions?


----------



## JasonATL (Jul 15, 2012)

First, I will assume that you actually mean 60D, instead of 600D (aka Rebel T3i). This is somewhat of an apples to oranges comparison, as the 60D is a prosumer camera, while the 650D is a consumer camera (and I say that with all due respect for its capabilities). I personally have a 600D (and a 550D and a 5D Mark III). The 60D's build quality is said to be quite a bit superior to that of the 600D or 650D. The image sensor in the 60D is the same as the 600D and the image quality from the 650D appears to me (from posted video samples) to be no better than the 600D (or 60D).

Second, it appears to me that the new technologies in the 650D are the video auto focus and touch screen. If these are things that you really want, then I would say that the 650D is a step forward. I suggest searching Vimeo for some videos of the autofocus in action to make sure it works as you would need it.

For me, I don't consider the 650D a step forward. Indeed, for me it is a bit of a step backward. I say this because Canon did not put one of the 600D's key features on the 650D: 3x digital zoom. All DSLR's suffer from aliasing and moire issues. Canon almost completely eliminated it in the 5D Mark III. But, the 600D, 650D, and 60D all have it. But, with the 3x zoom feature on the 600D, you can nearly eliminate aliasing/moire. See https://vimeo.com/35111205. Again, the 650D does not have this feature and the 60D does not have this feature either.

Worse, I've not seen any evidence that Canon has made the 650D less noisy (i.e., better in low light). Therefore, I see no new technology that really results in better video quality over the 600D (which has the same video quality as the 60D).

Finally, if you are not aware of Magic Lantern, you should look it up. It is a very useful third-party firmware that can be installed on both the 60D and 600D today. Magic Lantern has many features that are very useful for video (and many for stills, especially timelapse). It is not yet available for the 650D.

So, if you weren't already considering the 600D/T3i vs. the 650D/T4i and 60D, I suggest that you add the 600D/T3i to your list. Good luck as you do your research and decide on which of these great DSLR's work for you.


----------



## Videoshooter (Jul 17, 2012)

JasonATL said:


> This is somewhat of an apples to oranges comparison, as the 60D is a prosumer camera, while the 650D is a consumer camera (and I say that with all due respect for its capabilities).



I think it is quite a valid comparison, given the current price points. The price difference is as low as $20 from some reputable dealers. Given that they also share the same 18mp sensor, I'd say the comparison is more like "mandarins to oranges"!

Personally I think the 60D is the better choice. It feels much better in your hands and the 2nd control wheel makes it easy to adjust settings without ever taking your eye off the LCD screen (espescially handy when using an LCD viewfinder). The battery life is also much longer, which is an important consideration seeing how quick these cameras drain a battery in video mode. 

The only advantage of the 650D for video is the questionable AF - but if you're shooting anything other than home movies, you should be using manual focus anyway. You'd also need to use STM lenses in order to have the full advantages and this would limit your choices severely.


----------



## paul13walnut5 (Jul 17, 2012)

Whether you mean the 650D, 600D or 60D I would say the 60D is the weakest choice of the bunch for* video*.*
You would gain intermediate ISO stops. You would gain different handling (try both, see which you prefer)

I make this assertion purely from a* video *point of view, and based on the little extra functionality the 60D offers the* video *user for the extra cash.

Between the 600D and 650D... Both reputed to do the same job. The 650D has the new on sensor AF for live view for STM lenses.. but is largely untested, and still expensive, and as far as I am aware has not been cracked by magic lantern yet.

As such, if you need to buy NOW, for *video* then I would go for the 600D.

*_I am not slating the 60D as a stills camera, or even as a VIDEO orientated DSLR, just it wouldn't be my first choice for VIDEO. 60D owners, please do not get all indignant. If certain stills applications were important to the OP I would steer them towards the 60D or 7D._


----------



## nickwees37 (Jul 18, 2012)

In reply to paul13walnut5,

Though I will be using my camera frequently for video, I will definitely be using it for stills as well. It will not be purely a "video camera".
I didn't mention this because I'm still a beginner when it comes to stills. I will the camera to capture high quality video, as well as honing my skills as a stills photographer.

Does the 60D have the upper-hand over the Rebel series cameras when it comes to stills?
Let me know what you think.


----------



## paul13walnut5 (Jul 18, 2012)

The 60D has a larger body with rear QCD dial. If you have big hands, or once you get adept at using manual settings this can really speed up your working, and let you use the camera at the eye. It's more intuitive.

The 650D is almost a 60D, same AF, same metering, same or at least very similar sensor, more modern processor, but some things money cannot buy, such as handling.

Each of the 600D, 650D and 60D are very very good stills cameras, the rebels are perhaps more forgiving for newbies. The 600D has quite basic AF in comparison to the 650D and 60D, but it's all relative.

See which fits best in the hand.

Buy that one.


----------



## wickidwombat (Jul 19, 2012)

nickwees37 said:


> In reply to paul13walnut5,
> 
> Though I will be using my camera frequently for video, I will definitely be using it for stills as well. It will not be purely a "video camera".
> I didn't mention this because I'm still a beginner when it comes to stills. I will the camera to capture high quality video, as well as honing my skills as a stills photographer.
> ...



the image quality for stills will be identical
the 60D has better Af points (still only 9 though) than the 600D
the 60D has the joystick back wheel which makes handling nicer (however the 600D is easy to use and get used to aswell
the 60D gives you intermediate iso stops which can be handy for stills (not a massive issue IMO since i prefer to try and shoot at fulll stops isos anyway

both have swivelly screens
both are plastic

the 600D is much cheaper than the 60D

personally i would get the 600D and put the savings into some nice glass like the 17-55 f2.8 IS for example


----------



## JasonATL (Jul 19, 2012)

Videoshooter is right. This is a fair comparison and I originally overstated the difference when I said "apples to oranges." Indeed, when I bought my 600D, I weighed it against the 60D. For video, it has the same picture quality. As wickedwombat points out, the focusing points (more on the 60D) could be an issue for stills. 

As for the incremental ISO points, this is actually a reasonably big deal for video. The best ISO's for video are 160, 320, 640, and 1250. The 60D has these, but the 600D only has these with Magic Lantern. With Magic Lantern, you are only left with the 9 focus points as the advantage. With the 600D, I think the 3x zoom to fix moire in video outweighs this. As pointed out, you can take the savings and buy a good lens or two, which will last longer than the camera and will be money well spent when you decide to upgrade the body in a couple of years (or less).


----------



## stephan (Jul 19, 2012)

Every time I use my 60D I'm glad I picked it over the 600D. The The addition of the rear dial is useful in manual video mode for setting the aperture, and the front wheel for shutter speed. 
Using the 3x Zoom to eliminale Moiré will make a 17mm Lens have the FOV of a 50mm, so real wideangle is not possible with it. 
If you can get your hand on both in some camera shop, go and do it. I made the decision very quickly after handling both.


----------



## ishdakuteb (Jul 19, 2012)

imo, i would pick 60D. why? here is why

1. you can probably find it cheaper
2. build quality
3. faster shutter speed (you probably do need 1 stop faster to make your creative picture sometimes)

i do not see why pay almost $200 more to get the rebel version. in term of better iso, it is probably true in paper but in reality, i do not know and i do not think it is full one stop better unless you are shooting in jpeg. touch screen, i am not really crazy about that. build in camera hdr? nah... while paying more when i can do it way better...

aiite... it is my 2 cents suggestion


----------



## tomfu (Jul 21, 2012)

I think everyone has everyone's choice, you can find friends recommend 60d, t3i or t4i, I think you should learn the detail difference in t4i and 60d, you can see http://t3ivst4i.com/canon-rebel-eos-t4i-vs-60d-comparison/, figure out what type of user you are, and which will work better for you? you need to take the following into consideration for choosing a sdlr. First of all, if you tend to shoot RAW at a faster pace, or in groups of several shots at once, the 60D is likely to be preferable for you due to its 16 frame RAW buffer. On the other hand, the Rebel has a 6 frame RAW buffer. This can lead to the t4i having issues due to its smaller buffering capabilities. If you try to shoot too quickly, you will have to wait until the buffer has created enough space before you can take any more shots.


----------



## Ryan708 (Jul 31, 2012)

I had a T1i before my 60d. That 2nd rear dial is quite nice. the top LCD is nice too. just the handling of the 60d was well worth it for my upgrade. but the rebels are a good bang for the buck, except the t4i haha


----------

