Just bought SL1/100D and debating on returning/exchanging

[ughdeejaay]

I bought it for $530 new at best buy. I like it and it was a $100 cheaper than normal. I am mainly going to use for family trips and such. We are going to Southern California in about 2 months, and we are going to Knott's Berry Farm and possibly Disneyland, so I would like to take lots of pictures. After using the SL1 for a couple days the small form factor is getting annoying. (Didnt buy it for its size, bought it because I was able to price match 100 dollars less.)
Now I am really debating on getting the 60D. I have looked several places to see comparisons but I have found nothing. Is the 60D worth the $450 price difference? The 60D is a lot older, should that be something to consider.
What would be the advantages of getting the 60D?

 

[jaomul]

How the camera feels to use is as important as how it works. If you return it go to a shop and try any camera you ate considering. Your gfigures bring the 60d in at nearly 1000. I thought there were better deals on that model now

 

[Scatterbrained]

The 60D and SL1 share the same sensor, so the IQ should be the same. The differences will come from ergonomics and functionality.

 

[ughdeejaay]

I have tried out the 60D, and really like it. I am also planning on getting the 17-40mm f/4L lens and 50mm 1.4 before I go. I have read that L lenses on the SL1 make it really front heavy. Basically I don't want to spend $450 more if its not that much better.

 

[bribrius]

and your reason for returning the other one, is even after you saw it in person you decided you don't like the size?

sounds like a b.s. reason to return a product imo but im sure they would take it back.

not knowing either camera well, it sounds like making the change would be a waste of your money.

 

[Scatterbrained]

I have tried out the 60D, and really like it. I am also planning on getting the 17-40mm f/4L lens and 50mm 1.4 before I go. I have read that L lenses on the SL1 make it really front heavy. Basically I don't want to spend $450 more if its not that much better.

If I were you I'd stick with the 17-55 f/2.8 IS over the 17-40 f/4L. The 17-55 2.8 was designed for APS-C cameras while the 17-40 was designed to be an ultra wide angle lens for full frame cameras. On an APS-C camera the 17-40 doesn't really shine, you'll find yourself not only disappointed in it's performance but missing the reach, IS, and faster aperture of the 17-55.

 

[DarkShadow]

I paid 699.00 New for a 60D almost a year ago. Still 699.00 at B&H photo and my local camera shop.If they are getting $450.00 more the what you paid for the SL1 they are way off by a several hundred and I would look else where. The 60D is better camera for the obvious reasons but I will point them out. Top LCD thats huge in my book and thats all I use and keep the back display turned off. It has Up to 1/8000 shutter speeds,Larger pentaprism view finder,Dust and weather resistant sealing and two control command wheels another biggie for me.

 

[Robin Usagani]

You are buying for the size and ergonomic like scatterbrained mentioned. If I were to buy an SL1, I probably buy a 40mm pancake lens with it.

 

[ughdeejaay]

I paid 699.00 New for a 60D almost a year ago. Still 699.00 at B&H photo and my local camera shop.If they are getting $450.00 more the what you paid for the SL1 they are way off by a several hundred and I would look else where. The 60D is better camera for the obvious reasons but I will point them out. Top LCD thats huge in my book and thats all I use and keep the back display turned off. It has Up to 1/8000 shutter speeds,Larger pentaprism view finder,Dust and weather resistant sealing and two control command wheels another biggie for me.

That's just for the body. I paid 530 for SL1 with lens(normally sells for 650) the 60d with lens is 999

 

[DarkShadow]

Ok then, that makes sense. I guess i read in to that wrong, I thought is was the body only for $999.00.

 

[Derrel]

ANY small, light, polycarbonate-bodied camera is going to feel FRONT-heavy with a big, heavy lens on it...that's going to be true of a 60D with a 44-ounce f/2.8 zoom on it as well...anything that's HEAVY makes a small,light, polycarbonate-type camera body front heavy...Canon,Nikon,Sony,Panny,Oly; big lenses balance best on big, heavy bodies in the 3-3.8 pound range, like Canon 1D or Nikon D3-type, or heavy high-end consumer cams like D700+ Motor Drive Battery grip installed.

I would not look at the 17-40mm f/4-L as a good lens for a 1.6x, ultra-small camera...the range on it is pretty limited, just not much zoom ratio; 17-55 is more zoom. I thought that 60D bodies were available marked down pretty far from the right dealers? They WERE being closed out a while back, so I would not want to pay full list price for a last year's model that has already been End Of Life asssigned, formally.

I looked at the little SL1 at Best Buy a while back--MAN, it is TINY!!!! Viewfinder image was what I liked least, but it's similar to a Nikon D3200 too: small, pentamirror finder type image, not that clear, not that big, kind of a "squinty viewfinder", which my older eyes loathe. As Rob mentioned, a 40mm pancake would be kind of neat, but then, you have basically a 60-ish mm angle of view, which is not everybidy's cup of tea--but, for outdoors, walking around, and one- and two- and three-person snaps, 60mm is kind of nice...sort of a super-normal meets mini-telephoto hybrid length, and VERY small. Verrrry compact lens.

 

[DarkShadow]

A lot of people looking for small and compact but I am on the other side of the fence, I like the big honking gear and no pinky dangle.What said above about the 60D being front heavy as well when you have several pounds of glass up front on a one pound or so body it's going to nose dive but still overall has better balance then it would be on something like the SL1. Beside I usually keep my hand around the lens when shooting.:mrgreen:

 

[KmH]

How the camera feels to use is as important as how it works.

IMO that is far from being a true statement.

I have used many different kinds and brands of camera over a 40 year period and how each camera felt didn't mean squat.
Some were easier or more pleasant to use but the feel of the camera did not impact image quality in any way.

 

[JerryLove]

How the camera feels to use is as important as how it works.

IMO that is far from being a true statement.

I have used many different kinds and brands of camera over a 40 year period and how each camera felt didn't mean squat.
Some were easier or more pleasant to use but the feel of the camera did not impact image quality in any way.

I have used many cameras over the years too (though only a few DSLRs, and those recently), and I found that the sensor in no way affected how easy it was to find the buttons nor how much my hand hurt from holding it too long.

Feel being important is a statement about something other than IQ being important (though I also have a steadier hand with a larger camera, so I do have an IQ improvement)

 

[vimwiz]

ANY small, light, polycarbonate-bodied camera is going to feel FRONT-heavy with a big, heavy lens on it...that's going to be true of a 60D with a 44-ounce f/2.8 zoom on it as well...anything that's HEAVY makes a small,light, polycarbonate-type camera body front heavy...Canon,Nikon,Sony,Panny,Oly; big lenses balance best on big, heavy bodies in the 3-3.8 pound range, like Canon 1D or Nikon D3-type, or heavy high-end consumer cams like D700+ Motor Drive Battery grip installed.

This. I have a 1100D (T3) which is a little bigger, and its front heavy even with the basic kit lens.

I have used many different kinds and brands of camera over a 40 year period and how each camera felt didn't mean squat.
Some were easier or more pleasant to use but the feel of the camera did not impact image quality in any way.

I disagree. I take much better pictures with one of my bodies (avatar one) than another more traditionally shaped one, because the gripped design is better suited to me holding it correctly, to minimize shake, and its heavier.