I currently have a Canon 40D. It is over 2 years old and I have been happy with it. Especially the 6.5 frames per second, with a buffer that can hold 75 hi-res JPGs.
When the 50D came out, it was not enough of a change.
When the 7D came out, I could not justify the cost.
Lately I have been wanting to get decent video capability, and have questions: 7D or dedicated camcorder. The T series did not have some of the features that my 40D has, so they were not in the race.
Now comes the 60D. It is considered a Canon mid-level DSLR, replacing the 50D. The 60D is a smaller camera featuring an articulated screen and plastic body shell and utilizing SD memory cards.
Well, we all knew it would happen sooner or later. But that is an extra cost for me. I have about 20 GB worth of CF cards, but only about 6 GB of SDs.
The 60D has an 18MP CMOS sensor and a 3" LCD that swings out (that is what they mean by articulated) and has base ISO capability from 100-6400. The 40D only goes to 1600, so that 6400 is nice for low light.
Plastic body, only 5.3 frames per second, only 58 JPGs in buffer. My 40D has the alloy body, 6.5 frames per second, and 75 JPGs. Not huge deals, but unfortunate. Saves some money which they put into the swing screen and movie mode I am sure.
Final question: 60D or 7D? There is currently a large price difference.
(or go with stand alone camcorder?)
Finally, it gains the 7D's HD movie capability.