60D or D7000 questions inside. Thank you.

[Lee_Maryland]

This might be a beat up question, but I would like to hear your feedback if it is feasible.
I am still deciding between 60D and D7000, and to be honest this will be my first DSLR camera. I wanted to shoot wedding, and baby portrait as my future career. I have few questions please chip in:
1. Canon 60D has 96% viewfinder coverage vs. the 100% coverage on the Nikon D7000. Would I see a big difference?
2. Resolution for 60D is a bit higher than the D7000, 18 vs. 16.2. I have taken few pictures with both camera, but couldn’t really see the benefit of having a higher resolution.
3. The maximum burst for canon is 5.3 vs. 6 on the Nikon, but when I shoot burst on the canon it lasted a bit longer. Anyone notice that? Since my goal is to shoot wedding, then having a higher burst wont matter? Since I am clicking one picture at time anyway?
4. Nikon has 39 focus points but 9 cross type sensors, and canon has 9 cross type sensors as well. Since Nikon has 30 more focus points, would it be harder to focus on the object? And what does the extra 30 focus points do anyway?
5. Canon is made from glass fiber (so basically plastic). And Nikon has magnesium alloy chassis, but I am assuming only the chassis is alloy and rest of the body is made from plastic as well? Anyone felt the 60D is kind of plasticy? But I mean, it is much ligher than the Nikon so I guess it is easier to carry it? What do you guys think?
6. Also, which camera is easier to learn by a newbie? LOL, kinda of a weird question. I mean like change settings, change AF points etc.

 

[AUG19]

Good questions Lee.

1. You'll notice a difference. The Nikon will allow perfect framing in tight compositions but you can quickly and easily crop the 60D shots if necessary using the right software.

2. There is very little difference between these two resolutions in practical terms.

3. It doesn't matter to you.

4. The extra focus points allow the camera AF system more points of reference in a scene where the intent is to achieve best focus throughout. Both cameras offer 9 points of selective focus using AF.

5. Easier to carry (are even the sturdiest pro SLRs that difficult to carry? they're not that heavy!) Heft is good - makes a steady camera most of the time.

6. ? depends on the user. Probably quite similar.

 

[enzodm]

http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/...-reviews/217729-nikon-d7000-vs-canon-60d.html

Canon EOS 60D vs. Nikon D7000 - which one is right for you? - DigitalRev.com

My next camera will most likely be a 60D because I already have Canon, however it seems to me D7000 is slightly higher in specifications than 60D (and price too).

If this will be your professional career, I leave answers to the six specific questions to your personal knowledge .

 

[memento]

you're over thinking things. get which ever one feels better in your hands.

 

[Ginu]

D7000 compares more to the 7D then the 60D.

1. You will notice a difference if compared side by side
2. The difference is minimal and I don't think you should worry about it (both very capable)
3. You're not shooting sports so I would not worry about it (D7000 has dual cards slots however)
4. Both similar (again I would not worry much about this)
5. D7000 has magnesium front and back plate so not the whole body is magnesium and it weights in at 690g. 60D weights in at 755g and the body is a combination of aluminum and polycarbonate resin
6. This depends on the user. I suggest playing with both and making some decisions. Some people love Nikon for their menus and some love Canon. The beauty in this instance is the fact that you can make this choice as it is much harder for a Canon user to switch over to Nikon and the other way around due to the fleet lenses and accessories.

If you compare the two side by side, I believe the Nikon will shine unless you plan to shoot movie. Again you have the choice of making the right decision since you dont have a fleet of lens worth thousands which will automatically steer you in the direction of buying Nikon or Canon.


Here is a thread comparing the 7D with the D7000

 

[KmH]

get which ever one feels better in your hands.

Why? Can you elaborate on this!

How come this issue is never mentioned in a formal camera review?

I have used SLR, DSLR, TLR, and other camera configuration types from Canon, Nikon, Minolta, Ricoh, Hasselblad, Mamiya, and other brands over the years, and how any of them felt in my hand was about #62 on my list of concerns.

The D7000 does not have a magnesium front plate, or a full magnesium body. It has a magnesium back and top plate. The screws that hold the lens mount to the body are still just screwed into plastic like the other Nikon entry-level cameras. Here is a naked D7000 and a 7D - http://www.lightandmatter.org/watermark.php?src=wp-content/uploads/2010/09/7dvsd700body.jpg

For weddings the D7000 has a lot more usable low-light high ISO capability than the 60D has. DxOMark - Compare sensors

 

[Lee_Maryland]

you're over thinking things. get which ever one feels better in your hands.

I am a bit lost on this one. To me 60D has a better grip, so don't worry about spec.? Just buy what feels right when I am holding it? I mean, I am new at this but...

 

[analog.universe]

I think the point is that these 2 cameras are so similarly spec'd, that you will get the best results from the one you're most comfortable using...

Also, I've seen that DxOMark sensor comparison before. It's a very large database of measurements that in my experience do not correlate to the subjectively most appealing results. This comes up in the audio world all the time as well. The gear that produces the most linear signal and has the highest accuracy on a scope, and wins the numbers game isn't always the gear that sounds the best. This is an artistic field, we're not using this gear to get lab measurements to .1% tolerance, we're trying to get appealing images right? The best gear is the stuff that enables your creativity, even if it is less accurate than it's counterparts.

So if it feels better, you'll think more about being creative, and less about operating the machinery.

 

[analog.universe]

get which ever one feels better in your hands.

Why? Can you elaborate on this!

How come this issue is never mentioned in a formal camera review?

Because you can't review it... it's different for everyone. In a formal review all you can really write about is the stuff you can explain and back up. It's purely about the technology. Once you've actually got the thing though, the technology should get out of the way and just let you take pictures, and different brands have different methods of accomplishing that.

 

[AUG19]

Lee, check it out..the Nikon's more capable..

DxOMark - Compare sensors

 

[Derrel]

To me, the stat that REALLY stands out in favor of the Nikon D7000 is the Dynamic Range test result, 13.9 stops, versus the Canon 60D's range of 11.5 stops--that is a HUGE, huge advantage for the Nikon. Simply HUGE. That is a 2.4 f/stop difference in favor of the Nikon in terms of tested dynamic range that the sensor can handle. That is the kind of real-world advantage that the newer and better Sony-made sensor gives the newest Nikon. The D7000's sensor performance is about equal to that of the new Pentax which uses the SAME, Sony-made 16.2 megapixel sensor...that sensor is currently state of the art in the APS-C size...the 60D and Canon 7D sensors are now outdated...sorry, but true. One of the weakest things about the Canon 7D (and 60D) is its sensor noise, its limited dynamic range, and its lack of color depth. In my opinion, the Canon 60D's sensor performance measurements translate to images that 1) have a lot of noise at elevated ISO settings and 2) require a lot of noise abatement and 3) worst of all, have a narrow dynamic range and 4) lack color depth.

Many people hate to admit it, but the Sony-made 16.2 MP sensor that Pentax and Nikon are now using in their very-newest cameras is the BEST APS-C sensor, in several tests. The dynamic range advantage of 2.4 stops MORE Dynamic Range for the Nikon over the Canon sensor is a big,big difference,and it impacts basically most all outdoor exposures where there is any kind of contrast to the lighting. Each stop is a doubling of the light level...a two f/stop advantage is an eight-fold increase in the amount of light that the Sony sensor can handle and record...add in that extra .4 stop, and you're looking at a 10-fold advantage in recordable light differentiation for the Nikon over the Canon.

Canon wins on pixel count....woo-hoo! I'm rich!!!!!!! I have 250 pennies in my pocket!!!!!!

 

[KmH]

I think the point is that these 2 cameras are so similarly spec'd, that you will get the best results from the one you're most comfortable using...

Also, I've seen that DxOMark sensor comparison before. It's a very large database of measurements that in my experience do not correlate to the subjectively most appealing results. This comes up in the audio world all the time as well. The gear that produces the most linear signal and has the highest accuracy on a scope, and wins the numbers game isn't always the gear that sounds the best. This is an artistic field, we're not using this gear to get lab measurements to .1% tolerance, we're trying to get appealing images right? The best gear is the stuff that enables your creativity, even if it is less accurate than it's counterparts.

So if it feels better, you'll think more about being creative, and less about operating the machinery.

get which ever one feels better in your hands.

Why? Can you elaborate on this!

How come this issue is never mentioned in a formal camera review?

Because you can't review it... it's different for everyone. In a formal review all you can really write about is the stuff you can explain and back up. It's purely about the technology. Once you've actually got the thing though, the technology should get out of the way and just let you take pictures, and different brands have different methods of accomplishing that.

I don't buy either of your suppositions.

Regarding feel, because of a human's remarkable manual dexterity and ability to adapt.

The nuances of feel are to sutble to interfer with creativity, or the problem is in the photographers mind, not the ergonomics of the camera.

Regarding usable ISO, color depth, dynamic range, etc, those are certainly quantifiable and meaningful for gauging the likely real world performance of 2 consumer electric devices.

DXO Mark at least provides a basis for determining technical performance with some measure of precision, when compared to, "subjectivity appealing results".

 

[analog.universe]

Well, everyone perceives the world differently. Without getting into typology theory or anything like that... for some people, overall feel, the "chi" of a device, so to speak, is more important than quantifiable performance. Not true of everyone, but this is where these sorts of recommendations come from, and this method is the only way I've ever ended up with stuff that was satisfying to use. (after having done whatever technical research, etc..) ymmv