Differences in RAW files

[rexbobcat]

I'm editing some photos from an evening play from yesterday and I've noticed some weird variations in the RAW files between my 1D and my 60D. The 60D seems to have better detail and more saturated colors in its RAW files, but my 1D has better color FIDELITY and it seems to have quite a bit more latitude in editing. I know that differences come mostly from discrepencies in the sensors, since they're basically several Canon sensor generations apart, but...


Is it possible for one camera's RAW files to have more latitude in editing than another? The 1D images seem more "RAW" as in they're incredibly easy to manipulate and enhance in Lightroom. The 60D is more fickle. It has just as much dynamic range, but its RAW files don't seem quite as neutral. When changing the WB in LR the 1D also does better. The 60D starts getting unpleasant color shifts it seems - like when I move from 5000K to 3000K the image takes on a magenta tint. The 1D is very faithful to the different Kelvin values.

The 60D's photos just seem more digital in some weird, unexplainable way. Has anyone else every experienced the same thing?

When I finish editing I'll post examples. Maybe I just suck at PP lol

 

[MLeeK]

Makes perfect sense to me. The 60D has less information in it than the 1D. It's exactly as I'd expect.
Part of the reason that raw files look so flat and crappy is the overwhelming amount of information. Kind of like too much of a good thing.
The 1D is flatter yet because there is so much there...

 

[rexbobcat]

I assumed as much, but I wasn't sure since the 1D is about 8 years older than the 60D. Maybe the 1D files have a greater bit depth?