Fafhrd on 25/12/2010 at 23:18
Additional notes/impressions: It only appears to do 1080i through the HDMI out, so you won't be able to get full HD using an external HDMI recorder.
It does have one feature that's just made me sort of fall in love with it (maybe other cameras have had this, but it's new to me): You can define non-CPU lenses. Which means I can tell it that when I'm using my 500mm t-mount reflex that it's a 500mm f/8 lens, and it'll figure out exposure times and ISO (if I've turned on Auto-ISO) automatically when shooting in Aperture priority mode. And when using my 28mm f/2.8 non-AF lens with the manual aperture ring, since that lens is compatible with the aperture metering, it'll know the f stops for the aperture settings (it also has a button that'll step down to the selected aperture when looking through the viewfinder for the purposes of checking depth of field, which is kind of nifty. Though sometimes my finger brushes it and I hear this clicking sound from the camera that freaks me out for a second).
(
http://picasaweb.google.com/daffydlejeune42/RandomCrap?feat=directlink) These are a couple of shits and giggles high-ISO shots out my window late at night. There's a firmware update that apparently reduces a lot of the hot-pixel noise, but I haven't installed it yet. I want to actually do some astro-photography first to determine if I really need it.
Muzman on 4/1/2011 at 05:05
Excellent. I got me that 60D a month or so ago (or as a guy from Hong Kong said it Canoh Sicksteady). Word is that if I was really hard core in video terms I'd get the Panasonic GH2 instead (although there's some debate on whether even that has continuous full res HDMI output now, which was one of its more anticipated un documented features), but it keeps getting delayed, costs more, has rarer and more expensive lenses (around here anyway. Even the parallel importers and cheap Asian exporters don't stock four thirds stuff very much). Plus I wanna camera nownownow.
Anyway it's good. I haven't got any complaints with it yet. It's obviusly the more video oriented version of the 550D really. The design is such that you can change the battery and the memory card without taking it off the tripod (which one or both, from memory, was a problem on the other big Canons). It seems to have the best screen in the range too, on top of it being able to move (which I probably couldn't do without).
It's really solid, surprisingly so. Which is basically a nice way of saying it seems well built but heavy. The grip is pretty good though, with extra thumb holds so I can manage. I got to play with a Nikon, I think, D90 very briefly a couple of weeks ago. With a light lens on it it was really noticable that the weight is distributed over to the right so your fingers and wrist don't have to do as much work to hold it up. So I can see what people are talking about with handling there. If you're a walk around snap shooter with small girlish hands the 60D probably isn't for you.
I got a mixed bag of lenses, the one I've used most being the 50mm 1.8 because it obviously gives the best low light. Here the cam performs great. I had heard stories that the low light wasn't much. I think that was by people using the standard kit lens which is pretty meh and like f4 or something. Finances have meant I can get on the lens treadmill already, with a well reviewed Tamron 28-50mm f2.8 on order. It's debatable whether I should have done this in the first place. That thing costs the same as the other three put together (after recently dropping in price), which didn't seem like a good idea at the time. I've been having fun with the others anyway. I never know with this stuff. I got serious lens envy from I guy I know with a (
http://www.dpreview.com/news/1009/10091411sx30is.asp) Canon SX30is. A pretty decent camera, but obviously not as high res as mine and meh video. But the lens on the thing is a friggin telescope. Something like 800mm equivalent on 35mm format. He was showing me the mid shot size frames he was taking from the back of the stadium at the Eagles concert recently (hey, he's that vintage) plus all these great closeups of birds and bugs and things. Instant "OMG! I wanna do that stuff!". I daren't look at the prices. It's addictive all this.
I'll bung up some decent samples in the other thread.
Fafhrd on 4/1/2011 at 06:05
Lenses will get ya. I had to do a lot of digging around on e-bay to find the 28mm f/2.8 Nikkor for a not ridiculous price (they go for ~$500 new, which I did not know at the time all my old kit was stolen. Managed to find one for ~$190). And FILTERS are a bitch, too. I didn't really pay attention to the price of the UV filters when I got my old stuff (since it was all coming out of Christmas monies), but then I ended up dropping over $200 on the fuckers for my replacements, and that was just for three of them. And I still secretly want a Nikkor Fisheye, but (
http://www.nikonusa.com/Nikon-Products/Product/Camera-Lenses/2148/AF-DX-Fisheye-NIKKOR-10.5mm-f%252F2.8G-ED.html) fuck me, they go for a lot. Tempted to cheap out and go with a Lensbaby, because they are really cheap and apparently still half way decent, but I'm not sure how a full-circle fisheye image will take to being fisheye corrected (I'm interested in fisheye for the super-wide angle, not the crazy distortion effect).
