D100 vs D60 by an avid amature.

Reuven Levitt said:

Ok I finally did it and went to my local store and did a full two
hour evaluation of both the D60 and D100 (and a little on the S2).
So far I have had a handfull of digital cameras including the G2,
the Sony F707, and P1. I have read every bit of information and
review out there about the D60, D100, and S2. I was truly
confused. The more I read the harder it was to decide. So I
called around and found a store that had both to demo, and all the
lenses you could ever want. So what did I think?

The S2 had the nicest grip, then the D100, and lastly the D60. The
body of the D60 was the smallest. The menus on the D60 were very
familiar as I am used to the G2, however the nikon seems to offer a
lot more options on many things than the D60 (eg zoom levels on
playback). When I looked through the viewfinder I liked the canon
significantly better, it has a larger viewfinder, and also a
brighter one. One of the key issues that also bothered me about
the Nikon was the fact that it has a much smaller buffer than the
Canon for continuous shooting (espacially clear in Raw mode). Next
I checked out the lenses the 100-400mm vs the 80-400mm. I liked
the Canon significantly better. It is much easyer to zoom back and
forth, and the focus noise of the Canon is orders of magnitude less
than the Nikon !!! The Nikon does seem to have a better focusing
system (but they are both so much better than the G2 its unreal),
and like I said before a lot more flexibility. Another thing it
has going for it is the fact that the S2 is Nikon compatible, and
so there is more than one company making bodies for your lenses (I
think the Kodak is also Nikon Lens compatible). This means that
long term when you upgrade the body you have more choice then with
canon.

All things considered I think I am going to get the D60 with the
100-400mm and a simple 50mm to start out with. I do a lot of
wildlife photography, and I need the large zoom.

If anyone knows any reason why I should not spend the $4000 please
let me know now, or forever hold your tongue.

Cheers,
Reuven.

Click to expand...

Bernard Williams said:

Reuven Levitt said:

Ok I finally did it and went to my local store and did a full two
hour evaluation of both the D60 and D100 (and a little on the S2).
So far I have had a handfull of digital cameras including the G2,
the Sony F707, and P1. I have read every bit of information and
review out there about the D60, D100, and S2. I was truly
confused. The more I read the harder it was to decide. So I
called around and found a store that had both to demo, and all the
lenses you could ever want. So what did I think?

The S2 had the nicest grip, then the D100, and lastly the D60. The
body of the D60 was the smallest. The menus on the D60 were very
familiar as I am used to the G2, however the nikon seems to offer a
lot more options on many things than the D60 (eg zoom levels on
playback). When I looked through the viewfinder I liked the canon
significantly better, it has a larger viewfinder, and also a
brighter one. One of the key issues that also bothered me about
the Nikon was the fact that it has a much smaller buffer than the
Canon for continuous shooting (espacially clear in Raw mode). Next
I checked out the lenses the 100-400mm vs the 80-400mm. I liked
the Canon significantly better. It is much easyer to zoom back and
forth, and the focus noise of the Canon is orders of magnitude less
than the Nikon !!! The Nikon does seem to have a better focusing
system (but they are both so much better than the G2 its unreal),
and like I said before a lot more flexibility. Another thing it
has going for it is the fact that the S2 is Nikon compatible, and
so there is more than one company making bodies for your lenses (I
think the Kodak is also Nikon Lens compatible). This means that
long term when you upgrade the body you have more choice then with
canon.

All things considered I think I am going to get the D60 with the
100-400mm and a simple 50mm to start out with. I do a lot of
wildlife photography, and I need the large zoom.

If anyone knows any reason why I should not spend the $4000 please
let me know now, or forever hold your tongue.

Cheers,
Reuven.

Click to expand...

--
Bernie

Click to expand...

Reuven Levitt said:

Ok I finally did it and went to my local store and did a full two
hour evaluation of both the D60 and D100 (and a little on the S2).
So far I have had a handfull of digital cameras including the G2,
the Sony F707, and P1. I have read every bit of information and
review out there about the D60, D100, and S2. I was truly
confused. The more I read the harder it was to decide. So I
called around and found a store that had both to demo, and all the
lenses you could ever want. So what did I think?

The S2 had the nicest grip, then the D100, and lastly the D60. The
body of the D60 was the smallest. The menus on the D60 were very
familiar as I am used to the G2, however the nikon seems to offer a
lot more options on many things than the D60 (eg zoom levels on
playback). When I looked through the viewfinder I liked the canon
significantly better, it has a larger viewfinder, and also a
brighter one. One of the key issues that also bothered me about
the Nikon was the fact that it has a much smaller buffer than the
Canon for continuous shooting (espacially clear in Raw mode). Next
I checked out the lenses the 100-400mm vs the 80-400mm. I liked
the Canon significantly better. It is much easyer to zoom back and
forth, and the focus noise of the Canon is orders of magnitude less
than the Nikon !!! The Nikon does seem to have a better focusing
system (but they are both so much better than the G2 its unreal),
and like I said before a lot more flexibility. Another thing it
has going for it is the fact that the S2 is Nikon compatible, and
so there is more than one company making bodies for your lenses (I
think the Kodak is also Nikon Lens compatible). This means that
long term when you upgrade the body you have more choice then with
canon.

All things considered I think I am going to get the D60 with the
100-400mm and a simple 50mm to start out with. I do a lot of
wildlife photography, and I need the large zoom.

If anyone knows any reason why I should not spend the $4000 please
let me know now, or forever hold your tongue.

Cheers,
Reuven.

Click to expand...

Reuven Levitt said:

Ok I finally did it and went to my local store and did a full two
hour evaluation of both the D60 and D100 (and a little on the S2).
So far I have had a handfull of digital cameras including the G2,
the Sony F707, and P1. I have read every bit of information and
review out there about the D60, D100, and S2. I was truly
confused. The more I read the harder it was to decide. So I
called around and found a store that had both to demo, and all the
lenses you could ever want. So what did I think?

The S2 had the nicest grip, then the D100, and lastly the D60. The
body of the D60 was the smallest. The menus on the D60 were very
familiar as I am used to the G2, however the nikon seems to offer a
lot more options on many things than the D60 (eg zoom levels on
playback). When I looked through the viewfinder I liked the canon
significantly better, it has a larger viewfinder, and also a
brighter one. One of the key issues that also bothered me about
the Nikon was the fact that it has a much smaller buffer than the
Canon for continuous shooting (espacially clear in Raw mode). Next
I checked out the lenses the 100-400mm vs the 80-400mm. I liked
the Canon significantly better. It is much easyer to zoom back and
forth, and the focus noise of the Canon is orders of magnitude less
than the Nikon !!! The Nikon does seem to have a better focusing
system (but they are both so much better than the G2 its unreal),
and like I said before a lot more flexibility. Another thing it
has going for it is the fact that the S2 is Nikon compatible, and
so there is more than one company making bodies for your lenses (I
think the Kodak is also Nikon Lens compatible). This means that
long term when you upgrade the body you have more choice then with
canon.

All things considered I think I am going to get the D60 with the
100-400mm and a simple 50mm to start out with. I do a lot of
wildlife photography, and I need the large zoom.

If anyone knows any reason why I should not spend the $4000 please
let me know now, or forever hold your tongue.

Cheers,
Reuven.

Click to expand...

Hot_Pixel said:

Reuven Levitt said:

Ok I finally did it and went to my local store and did a full two
hour evaluation of both the D60 and D100 (and a little on the S2).
So far I have had a handfull of digital cameras including the G2,
the Sony F707, and P1. I have read every bit of information and
review out there about the D60, D100, and S2. I was truly
confused. The more I read the harder it was to decide. So I
called around and found a store that had both to demo, and all the
lenses you could ever want. So what did I think?

The S2 had the nicest grip, then the D100, and lastly the D60. The
body of the D60 was the smallest. The menus on the D60 were very
familiar as I am used to the G2, however the nikon seems to offer a
lot more options on many things than the D60 (eg zoom levels on
playback). When I looked through the viewfinder I liked the canon
significantly better, it has a larger viewfinder, and also a
brighter one. One of the key issues that also bothered me about
the Nikon was the fact that it has a much smaller buffer than the
Canon for continuous shooting (espacially clear in Raw mode). Next
I checked out the lenses the 100-400mm vs the 80-400mm. I liked
the Canon significantly better. It is much easyer to zoom back and
forth, and the focus noise of the Canon is orders of magnitude less
than the Nikon !!! The Nikon does seem to have a better focusing
system (but they are both so much better than the G2 its unreal),
and like I said before a lot more flexibility. Another thing it
has going for it is the fact that the S2 is Nikon compatible, and
so there is more than one company making bodies for your lenses (I
think the Kodak is also Nikon Lens compatible). This means that
long term when you upgrade the body you have more choice then with
canon.

All things considered I think I am going to get the D60 with the
100-400mm and a simple 50mm to start out with. I do a lot of
wildlife photography, and I need the large zoom.

If anyone knows any reason why I should not spend the $4000 please
let me know now, or forever hold your tongue.

Cheers,
Reuven.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Tom A. Brink said:

Hot_Pixel said:

Reuven Levitt said:

Ok I finally did it and went to my local store and did a full two
hour evaluation of both the D60 and D100 (and a little on the S2).
So far I have had a handfull of digital cameras including the G2,
the Sony F707, and P1. I have read every bit of information and
review out there about the D60, D100, and S2. I was truly
confused. The more I read the harder it was to decide. So I
called around and found a store that had both to demo, and all the
lenses you could ever want. So what did I think?

The S2 had the nicest grip, then the D100, and lastly the D60. The
body of the D60 was the smallest. The menus on the D60 were very
familiar as I am used to the G2, however the nikon seems to offer a
lot more options on many things than the D60 (eg zoom levels on
playback). When I looked through the viewfinder I liked the canon
significantly better, it has a larger viewfinder, and also a
brighter one. One of the key issues that also bothered me about
the Nikon was the fact that it has a much smaller buffer than the
Canon for continuous shooting (espacially clear in Raw mode). Next
I checked out the lenses the 100-400mm vs the 80-400mm. I liked
the Canon significantly better. It is much easyer to zoom back and
forth, and the focus noise of the Canon is orders of magnitude less
than the Nikon !!! The Nikon does seem to have a better focusing
system (but they are both so much better than the G2 its unreal),
and like I said before a lot more flexibility. Another thing it
has going for it is the fact that the S2 is Nikon compatible, and
so there is more than one company making bodies for your lenses (I
think the Kodak is also Nikon Lens compatible). This means that
long term when you upgrade the body you have more choice then with
canon.

All things considered I think I am going to get the D60 with the
100-400mm and a simple 50mm to start out with. I do a lot of
wildlife photography, and I need the large zoom.

If anyone knows any reason why I should not spend the $4000 please
let me know now, or forever hold your tongue.

Cheers,
Reuven.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

--
Tom A. Brink
600 pictures in two hours!
sorry!

Click to expand...

Hot_Pixel said:

Tom A. Brink said:

Hot_Pixel said:

Reuven Levitt said:

Ok I finally did it and went to my local store and did a full two
hour evaluation of both the D60 and D100 (and a little on the S2).
So far I have had a handfull of digital cameras including the G2,
the Sony F707, and P1. I have read every bit of information and
review out there about the D60, D100, and S2. I was truly
confused. The more I read the harder it was to decide. So I
called around and found a store that had both to demo, and all the
lenses you could ever want. So what did I think?

The S2 had the nicest grip, then the D100, and lastly the D60. The
body of the D60 was the smallest. The menus on the D60 were very
familiar as I am used to the G2, however the nikon seems to offer a
lot more options on many things than the D60 (eg zoom levels on
playback). When I looked through the viewfinder I liked the canon
significantly better, it has a larger viewfinder, and also a
brighter one. One of the key issues that also bothered me about
the Nikon was the fact that it has a much smaller buffer than the
Canon for continuous shooting (espacially clear in Raw mode). Next
I checked out the lenses the 100-400mm vs the 80-400mm. I liked
the Canon significantly better. It is much easyer to zoom back and
forth, and the focus noise of the Canon is orders of magnitude less
than the Nikon !!! The Nikon does seem to have a better focusing
system (but they are both so much better than the G2 its unreal),
and like I said before a lot more flexibility. Another thing it
has going for it is the fact that the S2 is Nikon compatible, and
so there is more than one company making bodies for your lenses (I
think the Kodak is also Nikon Lens compatible). This means that
long term when you upgrade the body you have more choice then with
canon.

All things considered I think I am going to get the D60 with the
100-400mm and a simple 50mm to start out with. I do a lot of
wildlife photography, and I need the large zoom.

If anyone knows any reason why I should not spend the $4000 please
let me know now, or forever hold your tongue.

Cheers,
Reuven.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

--
Tom A. Brink
600 pictures in two hours!
sorry!

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

William Hubert said:

I have both D100 and D60. The differences between these 2 cameras
are greater than some might imply. Since ergonomics is a personal
thing no one design is always superior to the other just different.

But at the end of it all these are my thoughts at this point ( 1
month with the D100 and 3 with the D60).

The Nikon is more flexible, almost instant in powering up and is
always ready to shoot. The controls provide better access to
camera features than the D60. Obviously there are more options
available in shooting menus.

The plastic cover for the LCD is a wonderful idea and it really is
something the D60 could use. The low light capability with the
extended ISO gives this camera uses for concerts and sports where
the D60 has to go to bed.

With all these fine attributes why bother with the D60. Well I
really like the dual control for manual settings a little more than
D100. It is not bad ergonomically but the D100 is generally
preferable.

But in the end the out of camera results are generally far better
with the D60 than the D100. Less Noise, smoother and sharper. For
viewing on the monitor the D60 images win 90 percent of the time.
The D100 after PS processing produces prints and enlargements that
are of very high quality and can equal the D60 consistently. Then
when it comes to lower light situations the D100 wins 90% because
of its increased ISO capabilities.

If forced to choose one I guess it comes down to a day and night
difference, literally. The Canon D60 for the day and the D100 for
the night!

At this time I think the best camera in this price point would be
the D100 with the D60 CMOS imager in it.

Click to expand...

Reuven Levitt said:

Ok I finally did it and went to my local store and did a full two
hour evaluation of both the D60 and D100

Click to expand...

William Hubert said:

I have both D100 and D60. The differences between these 2 cameras
are greater than some might imply. Since ergonomics is a personal
thing no one design is always superior to the other just different.

But at the end of it all these are my thoughts at this point ( 1
month with the D100 and 3 with the D60).

The Nikon is more flexible, almost instant in powering up and is
always ready to shoot. The controls provide better access to
camera features than the D60. Obviously there are more options
available in shooting menus.

The plastic cover for the LCD is a wonderful idea and it really is
something the D60 could use. The low light capability with the
extended ISO gives this camera uses for concerts and sports where
the D60 has to go to bed.

With all these fine attributes why bother with the D60. Well I
really like the dual control for manual settings a little more than
D100. It is not bad ergonomically but the D100 is generally
preferable.

But in the end the out of camera results are generally far better
with the D60 than the D100. Less Noise, smoother and sharper. For
viewing on the monitor the D60 images win 90 percent of the time.
The D100 after PS processing produces prints and enlargements that
are of very high quality and can equal the D60 consistently. Then
when it comes to lower light situations the D100 wins 90% because
of its increased ISO capabilities.

If forced to choose one I guess it comes down to a day and night
difference, literally. The Canon D60 for the day and the D100 for
the night!

At this time I think the best camera in this price point would be
the D100 with the D60 CMOS imager in it.

Click to expand...

21farms said:

i've learned that
with the appropriate speedlight attached to either camera, it will
use the flash's AF assist light, which should help matters
considerably for both cameras (the flash is cancellable on the D60
through a custom function...i don't believe this is the case in the
D100).

Click to expand...

NKH said:

the review also noted that, although the D100's battery life was
rated at over 1,000 shots, their low-battery indicator came on
after 400 shots.

Click to expand...

NKH said:

although the D100's batter is rated for 300 mAh
more than the D60's, i would expect battery life on both cameras to
be similar, given the D60's CMOS sensor which uses less juice than
the D100's CCD.

Click to expand...

NKH said:

pop photo also made a big deal about the poor low-light image
quality of CMOS sensors. but all of the samples i've downloaded and
looked at carefully look better to my eyes than those from CCDs.

Click to expand...

NKH said:

i agree with you that the perfect camera would be the
D100 with the D60's CMOS sensor (but i would add the D60's higher
flash synch capability and port).

Click to expand...

Reuven Levitt said:

All things considered I think I am going to get the D60 with the
100-400mm and a simple 50mm to start out with. I do a lot of
wildlife photography, and I need the large zoom.

If anyone knows any reason why I should not spend the $4000 please
let me know now, or forever hold your tongue.

Cheers,
Reuven.

Click to expand...

21farms said:

hi reuven,

i'm trying to decide between the two as well and am also going back
and forth.

first of all, where do you live that you have a camera store with
both cameras in stock? i'm in northern california and i can't find
either camera to look at, although i can drive 100 miles and see a
D100.

anyway, i just received my september issue of popular photography
wherein they reviewed the D100 and compared it to the D60 (which
they reviewed in the july issue). although it seemed extremely
biased (toward the nikon), it did offer some data that fills in
some of the gaps in phil's review. for example, re: auto focus
speed in various lighting situations, here are the numbers at
ISO200:

D100
EV12=0.5 seconds
EV7=0.65 seconds
EV2=1.3 seconds

D60
EV12=0.4 seconds
EV7=0.9 seconds
EV2=2.4 seconds

so, in the brightest situation (EV12), the D60 is actually a tad
faster auto focusing than the D100. but, after that, the D100 is
the clear winner. what was interesting is that they found that the
low light focus limit was EV2 for BOTH cameras. i've learned that
with the appropriate speedlight attached to either camera, it will
use the flash's AF assist light, which should help matters
considerably for both cameras (the flash is cancellable on the D60
through a custom function...i don't believe this is the case in the
D100). in fact, i did some low-light testing with my canon EOS IX
yesterday...in a dark room, i aimed it at various objects and
half-pressed the shutter to get a feel for low long it took to auto
focus (slow). then, i attached my 420EX speedlight and
repeated...it was night and day! AF was almost as fast using the
infrared assist light as in normal lighting. since, i'll almost
always have an external flash mounted in low light, i think AF with
either camera will be fine.

while much is made over the D100's faster AF times, seems to me
that file flush timing should be pretty important too. in this
regard, the D60 is about a third faster than the D100. RAW files on
the D60 are about 2mb smaller than the D100s.

the review also noted that, although the D100's battery life was
rated at over 1,000 shots, their low-battery indicator came on
after 400 shots. although the D100's batter is rated for 300 mAh
more than the D60's, i would expect battery life on both cameras to
be similar, given the D60's CMOS sensor which uses less juice than
the D100's CCD.

comparing the metering patterns on the two, the ones on the D100
look a lot more useful to me, particularly since the D60 lacks a
true spot metering option.

pop photo also made a big deal about the poor low-light image
quality of CMOS sensors. but all of the samples i've downloaded and
looked at carefully look better to my eyes than those from CCDs.

personally, i find the five AF areas on the D100 much more useful
than the three on the D60. on the D60, the three AF areas are
bunched closely together near the middle which is fine when
shooting in landscape mode and especially for using the D60's A-DEP
feature. but, on the D100, they're actually far enough apart to
make choosing one over the other more meaningful, especially when
shooting using the rule of thirds or shooting in portrait mode.

so, where does that leave me? still stuck. my brain tells me that
the D60 makes more sense for me, especially since i already have a
canon flash and compatible battery, but i WANT the
nikon...ergonomics is HUGE for me and the D100 seems more right in
that regard. i agree with you that the perfect camera would be the
D100 with the D60's CMOS sensor (but i would add the D60's higher
flash synch capability and port).

good luck.

norm

Click to expand...

teski said:

I'm confused. At the beginning of your post you say that you
haven't been able to get your hands on the cameras, and then at the
end you mention that ergonomics are huge and that's why you want
the D100 because it seems more right. How can you know that if you
haven't handled them? Just curious.

Teski

Click to expand...

Thom Hogan said:

21farms said:

pop photo also made a big deal about the poor low-light image
quality of CMOS sensors. but all of the samples i've downloaded and
looked at carefully look better to my eyes than those from CCDs.

Click to expand...

Depends upon the scene, methinks, and it's hard to tell from images
that are "properly" exposed. The issue is signal-to-noise level,
and the noise would be buried in the shadow detail. Find a low
light, high contrast situation and look at the noise levels in the
shadow area. Better still, shoot the shot underexposed by two stops
in RAW and bring it up in exposure in Capture or the Canon
equivalent. The true noise levels will be more visible then.

Click to expand...

21farms said:

what was interesting is that they found that the
low light focus limit was EV2 for BOTH cameras.

Click to expand...