600d ot 60d

[gonzostar]

Hi

I have just spotted 2 Canon DSLR cameras second hand

A 600d @ 299 pounds

The 60d @ 389 pounds

Both look to have same size senors, pixal sizes and articulating screen. The 600d model came out a year after the 60d and is around 200g lighter

Given a choice which model would be the better option?

Cheers

Dean

[Dr_Ju_ju]

I can't speak for the 60D, but I have 2 600D's (one astro modded) & both perform well. The Astro one works fine with BackYardEOS together with a modded 1100D.

One thing I've noticed is that the Canon EOS tools don't work with USB3, but are fine with USB2, something to bare in mind if you have limited ports on your computer\pc.

[Alien 13]

I would personally go for the 60D, it should have many more features and have better noise performance. Another benefit is that it uses the "pro" batteries i.e. LPE6 which should give you more shots.

Alan

[RichM63]

I would and do, always go for 'fewer zeros' when I am looking for something for me. Might take a while to get to 'no zeros'.

60D for me as the above choice, as per Alan.

Then again I have no idea where you are looking, but MPB have 18; 60D cameras starting at £194, but even better if it was me again 32; 7D starting at £259.

PS. 600D, starts at £184

Look around.

Best Rich

[gonzostar]

So at the moment its looking promising for the 60d. As Allen mentioned better noise performance sells its self. Also i have looked into to and seems a big difference in terms of battery life and more shots. 

And yes Rich being a Yorkshire man I will shop around  

Cheers

Dean

[JohnSadlerAstro]

Something you may want to consider as well--Are you planning to get your DSLR modified, and if so will you be modding it yourself or pay to have it done? 

Self-modding is, of course, the hill farmer's choice, but some Canon DSLRs are easier to mod than others, I'm told. My 100000000d was very easy.  

John

[Alien 13]

MPB photographic would be my choice of retailer too, you may even get a 70D for a similar price. Battery life is often overlooked especially when used for astro and the temperature drops.

Alan

[gonzostar]

No, No wouldnt even attempt to modify camera. Would send it off 

[gonzostar]

Will have a look at MPB. Nver seen that site before 

Cheers Allen  and Rich

[Alien 13]

2 minutes ago, gonzostar said:

No, No wouldnt even attempt to modify camera. Would send it off 

To be honest all the Canons I have owned have had plenty of Ha response without modifications, would never ever never mod mine..

Alan

[Alien 13]

3 minutes ago, gonzostar said:

Will have a look at MPB. Nver seen that site before 

Cheers Allen  and Rich

Wex Photographic is another worth looking at for used cameras and lenses.

Alan

[gonzostar]

Liking the look of MPB at mo, also looked at ffjords photographic

[JohnSadlerAstro]

32 minutes ago, Alien 13 said:

Would never ever never mod mine.

It's actually far easier than it all sounds--reading the instructions is intimidating, but once you're actually inside the cameras circuitry it's really fun. The only bad thing resulting from my handiwork is a rattle--one of the screws went into a black hole inside the camera, and I messed up pretty much everything possible during the 5 hours it took. On a nice new camera, or one that's less than 10 yrs old, though, I would recommend sending it off. 

Also apologies about the dreadful hill farming joke--being born within a mile of the Thames does mean I have these genetically engrained prejudices.  

John

[Alien 13]

Just now, JohnSadlerAstro said:

It's actually far easier than it all sounds--reading the instructions is intimidating, but once you're actually inside the cameras circuitry it's really fun.

Also apologies about the dreadful hill farming joke--being born within a mile of the Thames does mean I have these genetic prejudices.  

John

Its not that I cant do it but in my view its at best not required and worst case makes the camera realy useless unless you want everything red. 

Alan

[JohnSadlerAstro]

It's true that modding is controversial!

You do have a point, many nebulae will look more colourful without the modding, I believe. The official explanation is that for me, having limited imaging time etc means I want to get the best out of the shortest subs--and on objects like the Rosette, where the modding really shines, it takes a 5 min sub at ISO 800 with my setup to show the nebula.

The actual explanation is that there was a lack of clear skies around the Autumn and Winter of last year. I was basically bored and wanted to see what daytime astronomy I could do. Modding a camera seemed a good choice. I probably ought to be ashamed, really, but the horsehead photo I got a week later made it worth the time.

As a rough comparison, (They aren't the same object, times, or settings, but you get the idea) the Rosette and Horsehead. The Rosette was 5min subs, and I think the Horsehead was 2 min subs. The individual subs basically looked like the Horsehead image, not much processing there really, but the Rosette needed a lot of work. As far as I remember, the nebulosity surface brightness is about the same for the rosette and flame.

I guess modding is really a many-feathered bird, something worth considering if you're getting a new camera but by no means necessary for Deep Sky. Overall red tint is easily sorted with some processing, when imaging ordinary objects.

John

[gonzostar]

Thanks for posting the images. I would be quite happy with those images  . Last summer I managed to image the eagle nebula with the un-modded 450d. However i did have CLS so maybe that also helped to pick up the nebulosity. I wouldnt have thought to astro-moddd my DSLR anyway

Just to open another can of peas, i would have considered a dedicated camera if i had a obs. The concern is the time taken to set up. Especially with the lack of clear nights

[JohnSadlerAstro]

17 minutes ago, gonzostar said:

Just to open another can of peas, i would have considered a dedicated camera if i had a obs. The concern is the time taken to set up. Especially with the lack of clear nights

I am in basically the same boat--although you could look at one-shot-colour CCDs as an alternative to DSLRs. I'm not really convinced that colour CCDs' performance justifies their 10x price label over DSLRs. Perhaps someone who has experienced one can give advice on that issue.

(To be honest I don't know how even the mono CCDs are worth the thousands of pounds, it seems a complete rip-off to me. Basically they are nothing but a sensor, a USB plug or two and a mini freezer. A DSLR has a larger sensor, screen, onboard computer, often comes with a lens, can take photos stand alone or connected in, has autofocus, etc etc etc. And is way cheaper!). ? What are the CCD pixels made of!?! Antimatter or something?  

John

[RichM63]

11 hours ago, gonzostar said:

Liking the look of MPB at mo, also looked at ffjords photographic

Just noticed your location. Although MPB are online retaillers they are based in Brighton. You might be able to save another £20 by phoning to arrange a personal pickup. ?

[gonzostar]

Wow, live near the blooming town, And didnt know that. That is certainly on the agenda

Cheers

[gonzostar]

John, You may have caused a riot  OSC did think about but agai Need n tha hassle of setting up etc. Need some more dosh to collect this antimatter!

[gonzostar]

Just seen a second canon  70d for 400 should i push the buy button?