Reading mode: Light Dark

D60 Dissapointment? Really?

Go to last post
J

jlf

Senior Member
Messages
1,422
Reaction score
18
Location
San Francisco, CA, US
It surprises me how many are disappointed with the D60 without seeing a single photo taken with the camera.

So much of the D300 is about EXSPEED's great image processing. This one change alone may be enough to make the D60 the choice to buy over a D40, D40x, D80 or any number of the competitor's products. The JPEGs that come out of the D300 are significantly better than earlier generation cameras. While I'm sure the D300's CMOS sensor helps, it's not everything.

The D300's color accuracy and tonal rendition are exceptional, its noise reduction is sublime. Bring these qualities to the body size of the D60 and that's a compelling camera for me.

In the end, isn't a camera's IQ important? I highly doubt the D60's pictures will look like the D40x. Prepare to be stunned.

j.
 
I agree. Nikon KNOWS what they are doing (well...most of the times anyway). Just let go people...there will always be a new body round the corner.

cheers
 
For anybody shooting RAW (that's a lot of us, BTW) there's very little excitement over improved JPEG quality from the camera.

--
'If it wasn't for disappointment,
I wouldn't have any appointments.' - TMBG
 
RAW isn't RAW - biggest myth going that the RAW data is actually what came from the sensor. Of course it's processed - just lightly.

Nikon certainly processes their RAW images before saving them. So, there is likely some improvement in the RAW data too with EXSPEED.

But, with Capture NX you get the great color and processing that the D300 produces from RAW only editable. I would expect nothing less from the D60.

j.
 
jlf said:
The JPEGs that come out of the D300 are significantly better than earlier
generation cameras.
Click to expand...
Out of camera JPEG improvement may very well be the D60's most important improvement. Of course we won't know until we see how it performs, but Nikon has shown improvement in that area with each new DSLR released. Other than that, the D60 appears to be a minor update to the D40x. I just wish that Nikon chose to make those updates to its oldest model, the D80, instead of its most current model (excluding D3, D300).
jlf said:
Bring these qualities to the body size of
the D60 and that's a compelling camera for me.
Click to expand...
I have a D70 which I share with my wife. Lately, we have found ourselves needing to use the camera at the same time, so I am in the market for a second body. While none of us have particularly large hands, my wife, my daughter and I agree the D40/D40x feels too small. So, bringing those qualities to the body size of a D80 would have been far more compelling to me.

Of course had I liked the feel of the D40/D40x and not wanted the in body focus motor, I might really like the D60. I hope the D60 produce the finest in camera JPEGs this side of the D300. That would really make a modest update to the D40x more substantial.

Alan
 
n8gray said:
For anybody shooting RAW (that's a lot of us, BTW) there's very
little excitement over improved JPEG quality from the camera.
Click to expand...
How many RAW-shooters do you think are in the prospective D60-buyer demographic?

To me it looks like most of you good folks here griping about the "disappointing" D60 specs. is really griping about Nikon not instantly fulfilling your wish for the D300 feature set in a D80 body with a D80 pricetag (i.e. the D90).

Of course, the D90 will be released (eventually). But not until the D300 has saturated demand. Nikon is a corpoaration that knows a thing or two about selling. It is not a charity set up to supply camera junkies with an instant fix.

As for the D60, it is clearly an entry-level camera, aimed at replacing the succesful D40x. Its key segment is point and shooters (most of which have never heard about RAW) that are replacing their compacts with a DSLR. This is a huge, and very price-sensitive, market.

Why replacing the D40x, which by all reports are still selling well?
I can think of at least three reasons:

1. Nikon need to get its new dust-removal system field tested before introducing it on the pro' models.
2. Releasing a new model gives Nikon free publicity in the form of reviews, etc.

3. Some people will buy the newest camera on the simple assumption that newer=better (that's why brand-name toothpaste almost always comes with the text "new formula" stamped on the box).

From a camera junkie's point of view (and I am one) it is a bit disapponting to see such a limp "upgrade" after Canon's highly innovative EOS 450D release. But if I held Nikon stock (I don't), I would not worry about the D60. I think it will outsell the EOS 450D by a wide margin (obviously on price, not on features). It will probably make Nikon the #1 DSLR manufacturer worldwide (a positon the D40x has already secured for Nikon in Japan). And it is market position and market share stock holders care about - not features.

However, I agree that $750 is too much for a D60 kit. I think the street price will drop to $630 with the Nikkor 18-55 mm f/3.5-5.6 G VR AF-S DX before end of April.
--
 
gisle said:
n8gray wrote:
It will probably make Nikon the #1 DSLR manufacturer worldwide (a positon the
D40x has already secured for Nikon in Japan). And it is market
position and market share stock holders care about - not features.
Click to expand...
Having worked for a Japanese company, it was clear to me that the driving force behind their business is market share and market share alone. When you have enough market share you then dominate the market. (not the case here as the market share between Nikon and Canon is too close)
--
http://www.kevin-barton.co.uk
 
I cannot believe the constant carping, wailing and whining about a camera nobody here has actually held in their hands. If the low end camera does not have enough features for you, buy a higher end camera that does. Features do not come free. I have a D200, a D70 and a D40. I could care less about live view or AF-S. I like the D40 because it is small, same reason I like the FE2. I wish they made a D20 without all the "modes" but would meter with MF glass. Whining is so unattractive....
--
'Once in a while, you get shown the light
in the strangest of places if you look at it right...'
WSSA Member #80



 
In what way was my post carping, wailing, or whining? I merely stated my preferences. I tried to keep my comments in a positive light, but I forgot to make the title of my post more positive. If you reread my post you may find that my comments actually expressed some optimism that the D60 might actually be more of an update than appears on the surface. Nikon has updated its top of the line cameras with the D300 and D3 and its entry level with the D60. I like Nikon's mid-level cameras for size and weight, so it is only natural to be a little disappointed that even a minor update to that range wasn't announced. If you really think whining is so unattractive, maybe you should have thought of that before you posted.
 
jlf said:
It surprises me how many are disappointed with the D60 without seeing
a single photo taken with the camera.
Click to expand...
People are disappointed because it's just a D40x with a few more little gimmicks. Useful ones, no doubt about that, but why weren't they in the original D40(X), because they're not something like 'teh latest technology available', and the competition has some of them embedded in products one generation earlier.

Also they're disappointed because a D80 follow-up was highly expected (and needed in order to cope with the competition), and none announced.
jlf said:
So much of the D300 is about EXSPEED's great image processing. This
one change alone may be enough to make the D60 the choice to buy over
a D40, D40x, D80 or any number of the competitor's products. The
JPEGs that come out of the D300 are significantly better than earlier
generation cameras. While I'm sure the D300's CMOS sensor helps, it's
not everything.

The D300's color accuracy and tonal rendition are exceptional, its
noise reduction is sublime. Bring these qualities to the body size of
the D60 and that's a compelling camera for me.
Click to expand...
D300 is a great camera, but if you shoot RAW you don't give much of a rat's ass on the out-of-the-camera jpegs. Unless you-re we-know-who (KR) wink-wink.

And a D300's intended target is an advanced-amateur - to - pro guy that knows what RAW is and what to do with it.

I'll get me a D300 in a few months, and except from the situations where I'll need hi fps for continuous shots for a looong time, I'll use RAW.
Heck, that's how I'm using my D40 now.
jlf said:
Nikon certainly processes their RAW images before saving them. So, there is likely > some improvement in the RAW data too with EXSPEED.
Click to expand...
The Nikon processing of the RAW file is in fact the extraction of a bias frame.

The only improvement might be the frames speed, which is not changed from D40x, due to the fact that the CCD sensor works at it's full speed already.
jlf said:
In the end, isn't a camera's IQ important? I highly doubt the D60's
pictures will look like the D40x. Prepare to be stunned.
Click to expand...
The RAW files, identically processed will be identical with those from D40x.

Maybe, using some new super-duper-EXPEED-jpeg-processing techniques, you might get a default jpeg that might be more eye-candy than de D40x one.
Maybe.
 
MirceaR said:
The RAW files, identically processed will be identical with those
from D40x.
Maybe, using some new super-duper-EXPEED-jpeg-processing techniques,
you might get a default jpeg that might be more eye-candy than de
D40x one.
Maybe.
Click to expand...
I agree, and I may add that market-wise, we should think that it's not the D60 that is the problem, but rather the D40x. To my humble, ignorant, customer eyes, there was little benefit in making a camera that was practically identical to the D40 with a 10MP sensor only 5 or so months after the D40. I think that if we saw the D60 without having ever seen the D40x, we'd be much more positive. Of course, D40x has sold very well, which proves that Nikon knows what's going on better than us :)

As for the D60, I'm a D40 user and I surely don't intend to upgrade, being extremely pleased with my camera. I shoot RAW all the time, and I doubt I could get better quality from the D60.

--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/96953368@N00/
 
Koanut said:
I wish they made a D20 without
all the "modes" but would meter with MF glass.
Click to expand...
While this may or may not materialise, you can now buy an Olympus E-410 or E-510 with a Nikon F adapter and enjoy using your MF Nikkors with TTL metering. Surely, the crop will be greater than on a DX format camera, but otherwise it might just be the answer to your request, and is available now. Of the two, I would pick the E-510, because I have found it better in the handling department - actually, the best-handling small SLR to date. Also, with the new firmware update you can make your MF Nikkors even have image stabilisation. Rather cool methinks. One useful piece of advice: get the ME-1 magnifying eyecup - it makes manual focusing easier.
 
Ancient_Mariner said:
MirceaR said:
The RAW files, identically processed will be identical with those
from D40x.
Maybe, using some new super-duper-EXPEED-jpeg-processing techniques,
you might get a default jpeg that might be more eye-candy than de
D40x one.
Maybe.
Click to expand...
I agree, and I may add that market-wise, we should think that it's
not the D60 that is the problem, but rather the D40x. To my humble,
ignorant, customer eyes, there was little benefit in making a camera
that was practically identical to the D40 with a 10MP sensor only 5
or so months after the D40. I think that if we saw the D60 without
having ever seen the D40x, we'd be much more positive. Of course,
D40x has sold very well, which proves that Nikon knows what's going
on better than us :)

--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/96953368@N00/
Click to expand...
It does make you wonder, if they'd originally called the D40X the D60, would there have been any need for this new camera?

Nick
 
gisle said:
n8gray said:
For anybody shooting RAW (that's a lot of us, BTW) there's very
little excitement over improved JPEG quality from the camera.
Click to expand...
How many RAW-shooters do you think are in the prospective D60-buyer
demographic?
Click to expand...
Haven't you noticed that many of the high-end P&S cameras can shoot RAW? The people buying those are the same people thinking of moving up to DSLRs. So actually, I think there are quite a few RAW shooters in that market. At the very least they're not going to be fooled by non-features like "stop-motion animation" mode.
gisle said:
To me it looks like most of you good folks here griping about the
"disappointing" D60 specs. is really griping about Nikon not
instantly fulfilling your wish for the D300 feature set in a D80 body
with a D80 pricetag (i.e. the D90).
Click to expand...
No, just disappointed that the D60 is so weak compared to the alternatives at or around its price point. Nikon just produced two earth-shatteringly good high end cameras and we were hoping they had some hotness in store for the low end too. But it turns out the only plan was a new badge on an old camera with some song-and-dance features for the clueless. Oh well, we'll all just wait for the D90 and hope for something better.

OTOH, I should be happy that there's still nothing in Nikon's stable to tempt me away from my D50. My wallet remains safe for now.

Cheers,
-n8

--
'If it wasn't for disappointment,
I wouldn't have any appointments.' - TMBG
 
I am sure the D60 will deliver beautiful photos and I think Nikon made a conscious decision in leaving the AF motor out. At the same time, the D60 does look underwhelming compared to newly announced entry level bodies by Pentax, Sony and Canon.

Entry level body it is very important for bringing customers into the brand. Most people who buy these bodies have no existing lens, so they are free to choose from different brands. Some of them may not even realize that the body is only part of the equation in the SLR world. Lenses and other accessories are equally, if not more important than the body. So it seems to me the spec for a entry level body is even more important than higher end body since new buyers are not bounded by lenses that they currently own.

Although I am not in the market for a entry level DSLR, but I still hope Nikon will bring out a body that is competitive in both IQ and spec. After all, it is easier to sell a body to a new to DSLR person on spec rather than just IQ alone.

Time will tell, I guess...

--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/hellbunny/
 
You really think all the people who bought D40 is only because it is small? Many people bought D40 is because it is cheap. Please respect poor people. Most people will actually go to the brand that provide what they need (at a cheaper price). Buying a higher model is usually not the final result (unless they are royal to Nikon).
Koanut said:
I cannot believe the constant carping, wailing and whining about a
camera nobody here has actually held in their hands. If the low end
camera does not have enough features for you, buy a higher end camera
that does. Features do not come free. I have a D200, a D70 and a D40.
I could care less about live view or AF-S. I like the D40 because it
is small, same reason I like the FE2. I wish they made a D20 without
all the "modes" but would meter with MF glass. Whining is so
unattractive....
--
'Once in a while, you get shown the light
in the strangest of places if you look at it right...'
WSSA Member #80



Click to expand...
 
nifi said:
It does make you wonder, if they'd originally called the D40X the
D60, would there have been any need for this new camera?
Click to expand...
Bingo!

With the new D3, D300 & 14 - 24mm f2.8 - I'd guess Nikon needs some time to come up with something else of note.

Personally, I don't see this camera doing so well against the 450D/XSi at the current price-point - even given the target market ("p&s move-up" buyer) this camera is geared to.

While the D60/D40 limited, quality AF lens choice's is more of an issue with photographers (than snap-shooters) - the 3" live view LCD is likely to be more of an issue. Those big LCD's are nice!

And a "new" 2008 $800 Nikon (or Canon) dSLR with a 2.5" LCD & no live-view simply isn't state of the art.

Sure they'll sell some, & it gives Nikon something "new" to generate free press & interest, but this is a highly uneventful "new" camera (name) & possible misstep.

Best.
--
imo
(c) fastglass
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top