DPReview's Canon 60D review

[MrLogic]

Review: 20. Conclusion & Samples: Digital Photography Review

 

[Derrel]

It seems that they made a decision to remove the AF microadjust, remove the controller joystick, and make adjusting the AF points and some settings a bit more "fiddly", according to the dPreview reviewers. It's kind of an odd decision, removing features like AF microadjust entirely, and removing the control joystick, and still calling it an XXD camera...while dumbing the camera down and making it more of a super-Rebel...

I do not think I have ever seen a camera company do this kind of a re-direction after such a long and progressive upward climb; it seems like a marketing blunder, or a missed opportunity to have named it something else, something "catchy", something that would make it attractive, instead of something that would just piss off all their 30D,40D,50D customers who wanted to upgrade to a 60D, instead of down-grade to a body that's really a Super-Rebel...

I just do not "get" why Canon would do this to its D30-D60-10D-20D-30D-40D-50D lineup...each body got better and better spec-wise....and then 60D regresses...

 

[Dao]

As a 40D user, I really have no reason to jump to 60D. I love the micro adjustment on 50D. I want more AF focus point. Maybe next step up is 7D. However, I want full frame. Oh well ...

I think I will be happy with 5D classic if I can find a good one at good price.

 

[emh]

I do not think I have ever seen a camera company do this kind of a re-direction after such a long and progressive upward climb; it seems like a marketing blunder, or a missed opportunity to have named it something else, something "catchy", something that would make it attractive, instead of something that would just piss off all their 30D,40D,50D customers who wanted to upgrade to a 60D, instead of down-grade to a body that's really a Super-Rebel...

I just do not "get" why Canon would do this to its D30-D60-10D-20D-30D-40D-50D lineup...each body got better and better spec-wise....and then 60D regresses...

My guess is that this camera is Canon's attempt to hit the same lucrative market segment that Nikon did with the D90. Remains to be seen how well it'll do bracketed between the competition from the D90 at a lower price and the D7000 with better specs for pretty much the same price (not to mention renewed competition from Pentax). I think it'll do reasonably well -- it should, at the very least, appeal to Canon p&s owners upgrading to a DSLR who want better controls or don't want to sport the childish, screaming red REBEL logo.

 

[MrLogic]

Thursday, 11 November 2010 23:39 GMT.

Just Posted: comparison data for the Nikon D7000 and Pentax K-5. Alongside the Canon EOS 60D we've been testing a series of the other hot releases announced at this year's Photokina and two of the hottest are undoubtedly the 16MP mid-range DSLRs from Nikon and Pentax's. Following the hype and excitement about the D7000 and K-5, we thought it'd be nice to see what their output actually looks like so have added them to our list of cameras that can be compared. We've also included them in the Canon EOS 60D review to show them in context.

Canon 60D, 50D, Nikon D7000 & Pentax K-5 comparison images:

Just Posted: Nikon D7000 and Pentax K-5 comparison images: Digital Photography Review


ISO 100 JPEG comparison:

Review: 17. Compared to (JPEG): Digital Photography Review




ISO 3200 JPEG comparison:

Review: 18. Compared to (JPEG High ISO): Digital Photography Review




ISO 100 RAW comparison:

Review: 19. Compared to (Raw): Digital Photography Review

 

[SLRJoe]

Yes, from what I've heard the 60D does seem like a bit of a step back from the previous incarnations, I wouldn't upgrade from the 50D for this one, rather make the jump up to the 7D or perhaps 5D MK 2....

 

[cfusionpm]

Thursday, 11 November 2010 23:39 GMT.

Just Posted: comparison data for the Nikon D7000 and Pentax K-5. Alongside the Canon EOS 60D we've been testing a series of the other hot releases announced at this year's Photokina and two of the hottest are undoubtedly the 16MP mid-range DSLRs from Nikon and Pentax's. Following the hype and excitement about the D7000 and K-5, we thought it'd be nice to see what their output actually looks like so have added them to our list of cameras that can be compared. We've also included them in the Canon EOS 60D review to show them in context.

Canon 60D, 50D, Nikon D7000 & Pentax K-5 comparison images:

Just Posted: Nikon D7000 and Pentax K-5 comparison images: Digital Photography Review


ISO 100 JPEG comparison:

Review: 17. Compared to (JPEG): Digital Photography Review




ISO 3200 JPEG comparison:

Review: 18. Compared to (JPEG High ISO): Digital Photography Review




ISO 100 RAW comparison:

Review: 19. Compared to (Raw): Digital Photography Review

Very very interesting to see how each camera system draws the image slightly differently! I absolutely love how they presented this in interactive visual form. It's definitely a lot more useful to see image examples than a series of numbers on a chart, IMO.

As for the 60D itself, I don't think anyone's viewpoints have changed as a result of the review. As already stated, it seems Canon was trying to go after the D90 market with a lower-spec, lower-priced camera. It will likely have good appeal to those in more casual market. It's a decent upgrade from a Rebel and a reasonable jump for P&S owners to make, while those who want more can stretch to the 7D.

I think it has taken a lot of steps backwards with maybe only one or two forward. Maybe if they incorperated some form of real time AF for video like Nikon has in their recent releases, a purchase might be justified for current owners of a 40D/50D or 7D seeking better video.

Nikon has released a fantastic little camera with their D7000, and at a cost only about 200$ more than the 60D. If one were not already commited to a particular brand, it would be a very hard sell to get someone to pick up a 60D over a D7000.

 

[shaunly]

jpeg output at 3200 and up doesn't look too hot on the 60D. RAW output is much better. It's strange because the 7D jpeg looks much better at retaining details.

 

[MrLogic]

Hmmm. I'm probably alone in this, but I don't think the Nikon D7000 sensor is all that hot when compared to the D90 / D5000 sensor.

I get that D7000 files may require more sharpening and that contrast levels are significantly lower, which can, of course, be "corrected" in post - I get that - but I played with the RAW files some and I found it very hard to make them look as good. I'm sure someone with better PP skills will disagree.

And sure, the D7000 captures a tad more detail (but not as much as the Canon 60D / 7D), has even better DR and slightly better high ISO performance, but I like the general look of the D90 / D5000 SOOC RAW files better than any of these cameras. At least, at low to moderate ISO levels. (High ISO performance is piss poor, anyway, when compared to a D3S.)


Not too impressed with the Pentax, by the way. Maybe I'm missing something here, but it looks like there's a lot of NR going on in the RAW files. That can't be right.

 

[cfusionpm]

I get that D7000 files may require more sharpening and that contrast levels are significantly lower, which can, of course, be "corrected" in post - I get that - but I played with the RAW files some and I found it very hard to make them look as good.

Considering how well it scored on DxOmark, it's really surprising to see this in their test images.

 

[MrLogic]

I get that D7000 files may require more sharpening and that contrast levels are significantly lower, which can, of course, be "corrected" in post - I get that - but I played with the RAW files some and I found it very hard to make them look as good.

Considering how well it scored on DxOmark, it's really surprising to see this in their test images.

Keep in mind that it's probably a minority opinion. A case in point: I often use my friend's Canon 5D's and I prefer the 5D "Classic" sensor over the 5D Mk II sensor, which, of course, scores better on DxO Mark and has better high ISO performance.

 

[cfusionpm]

Well I was also surprised at the much finer detail and better contrast found in the 60D, even compared to the 7D. Maybe there's something more going on in the JPGs? The 7D looks downright soft by comparisson, especially at 3200:

 

[MrLogic]

Well I was also surprised at the much finer detail and better contrast found in the 60D, even compared to the 7D. Maybe there's something more going on in the JPGs? The 7D looks downright soft by comparisson, especially at 3200:

Hmmm... interesting. It's certainly NOT reflected in the overall IQ scores (JPEG and RAW) in DPReview's conclusions of the 60D and 7D reviews. Then again... it may be in DPReview's best interest that the 60D doesn't "score" higher than the 7D... :er:

^ I don't know what RAW converter(s) they used, but the D7000 looks terrible here, IMO. Just based on the converted RAW files, the 60D looks like the clear winner. It just looks better than all of them, IMO, including the 7D, with the D7000 being a distant 4th...

 

[cfusionpm]

I just do not "get" why Canon would do this to its D30-D60-10D-20D-30D-40D-50D lineup...each body got better and better spec-wise....and then 60D regresses...

Well if you were in their shoes, what would you do? If I worked at Canon and saw Nikon's wild success with the lower priced D90, I would want to try to capture that market. It would be difficult to make a camera better than the 50D but not too good so as to compete with the 7D. With the 7D more or less the "spiritual successor" to the 50D, there was a nice neat hole to be filled between it and the 550D/T2i; perfect for a D90-like camera. Since their current naming structure goes xxxxD -> xxxD -> xxD -> xD, there's not a lot of leeway in fitting this new body in. They had to choose between continuing it as a xxD camera, or branch off into an entirely different naming structure (like what Nikon did) which could be quite confusing until the dust settles. This keeps it simplified and lets the consumer know where it stands relative to other products in the current lineup.

I'm not saying I agree with everything, but I can't think of another way they would handle this without shifting around their entire product line or naming scheme.

 

[Montana]

Agreed^. I think the xxD line has more or less been "reinvented" as more of an advanced novice lineup. And the 7D effectively carrying on where the 50D left off. Thats how I see it anyways. Basically the xxD line has moved to the naming of 7D, XD...etc.