[canon400d]

Hi Hugh here.
Just wanted to know what some of you think about this.
Which camera would you consider the best.
canon eos 600d or canon eos 700d.
Thanks for your opinion. Hugh.

[EdMak]

Not a lot between them, price apart! See here. Ed.

http://snapsort.com/compare/Canon-600d-v...700D/specs

[John M]

Best means what you are doing with them. No equipment is better of itself. A camera with facilities you will never use is a waste.

[johnytrout]

Neither one of them has an Image stabilizer, but the EOS 650D does!

[EdMak]

A camera with facilities you will never use is a waste


That would probably apply to most cameras.

I have features on Sony a290, and, Nikon Coolpix, which I have never used.

All on here are likely to be enthusiasts, have any of you used all facilities.

None of my friends have, and many others asking advice, seem unaware of most features.

Ed.

[John M]

No EOS cameras have image sabilisation. With the EOS range the image sabilisation is in the lens, not the camera.

[Wall-E]

A camera with facilities you will never use is a waste


That would probably apply to most cameras.

I have features on Sony a290, and, Nikon Coolpix, which I have never used.

All on here are likely to be enthusiasts, have any of you used all facilities.

None of my friends have, and many others asking advice, seem unaware of most features.

Ed.

So, Ed:

You're saying that no-one should ever buy a camera that has even one feature that they might never use?

That's kinda harsh.
Buying only what you know how to use RIGHT NOW is very limiting.

I have several pro bodies that do things I never use, like interval shooting, bracketing, time delay.....
If I'm to follow your thought process, I should never have bought those, even though they have other 'features' like metal bodies, fast frames-per-second, available battery grips, etc, because I don't use ALL the 'features'.

There's also the idea of growing into a camera. Starting out using the auto modes and learning when and where to use one of the scene settings, Aperture or Shutter priority, or even manual mode.

The idea is for people to ask here HOW to use the unfamiliar features of their cameras, and how to use them to better advantage.
Not to discourage them from getting a camera that has them.

I *WILL* agree, that many buy way more camera than they are capable of using, WAY too soon. I started out with an Olympus OM10. Manual operation required an adapter I didn't buy for 25 years. Then I moved up to an OM2. Then an OM4t.
Each time I moved up, I gained features I didn't have before, and therefore wasn't familiar with. I had to learn them, and some I never DID use. Same for the Nikon DSLR's I now use.

Ed, do you use EVERY feature in your car? Or on your TV set? Or DVD player? Or cellphone? Or other electronic devices you may own???
I doubt it. Same with digital cameras.

[EdMak]

Read the posts, I did not say it. Cheers. Ed.

[John M]

It was me that made the comment about the features you will never need. And they certainly are wasted if you do not use them. I did not even hint at saying that you should only buy cameras where you will use all the features. What I said was that buying a camera because it has more features than another camera is a waste if you will not use those extra features. The camera with more features is not 'better' unless you are going to make use of those features (the OP used the term 'best' wiothout mentioning use).

None of my lenses have image stabilisation because I use a tripod. My camera has a low burst rate as I take pictures at the rate of one every ten minutes or slower. And so on.

[Wall-E]

It was me that made the comment about the features you will never need.

My apologies to Ed.

The way it got quoted led me to believe it was him that made that comment, not John.

[MrB]

...buying a camera because it has more features than another camera is a waste if you will not use those extra features. The camera with more features is not 'better' unless you are going to make use of those features...

In choosing between two cameras, the one with more features than the photographer needs to use might also have a better implementation of those features that he/she does want to use and, therefore, it would have the potential to enable him/her to generate better quality images. (Whether they are good photographs is, of course, a different issue.) If that were the case, and if it were affordable, it would be the better camera to buy.

Philip

[EdMak]

Doubtful, to me, if the average buyer would be aware of all this. Ed.

[MrB]

Doubtful, to me, if the average buyer would be aware of all this. Ed.

Would it be unreasonable to suggest that Hugh might have asked the question, in the first post, in the hope that the contributions of others to this thread might help him to become more "aware of all this"?

Philip

[canon400d]

Doubtful, to me, if the average buyer would be aware of all this. Ed.

Would it be unreasonable to suggest that Hugh might have asked the question, in the first post, in the hope that the contributions of others to this thread might help him to become more "aware of all this"?

Philip

I was led to believe that even in auto mode the 700d would
out perform the 400d or 600d and this being true would
still make it a good buy when it is our aim to take better photos.
Thanks everyone for all your comments,they have been very
helpful. Hugh.

[John M]

The 600D and 700D have the same sensor so the difference is not going to be massive. 'outperform' is a fairly vague comparitor without specifics of the picture being attempted.

[canon400d]

The 600D and 700D have the same sensor so the difference is not going to be massive. 'outperform' is a fairly vague comparitor without specifics of the picture being attempted.

Thanks for your help and comments John.