Canon EOS 60D vs Olympus E-30

Winner
Canon EOS 60D

62

Olympus E-30

40

Runner-up

Reasons to buy the Canon EOS 60D

Almost no delay when powering up
Startup delay
400 ms startup delay
Great battery life
Battery life
1100 shots
Phase detection autofocus
Badge
fast and accurate
Flip-out screen
Screen flips out
Great for movies
 

Reasons to buy the Olympus E-30

Image stabilization
Image stabilization
  1. Sensor shift
Longest exposure
Long exposures
60 seconds
Screen flips out
Flip-out screen
Great for movies
Fastest shutter speed
Fast shutter speed
1/8000 of a second

galleries

Explore our gallery of 50 sample photos taken by the Canon EOS 60D.
Explore our gallery of 50 sample photos taken by the Olympus E-30.

competitors

Canon EOS 60D Competitors

Canon EOS 70D

Canon EOS 70D

Pro DSLR

$750 - $999 body only

$839 - $1,099 with 18-55mm lens

Autofocus Video autofocus
Shutter lag Much less shutter lag
Startup delay More startup delay
Canon EOS 80D

Canon EOS 80D

Entry-level DSLR

$1,137 - $1,199 body only

$1,226 - $1,349 with 18-55mm lens

Touch screen Has a touch screen
Weather sealed Weather sealed
Battery life Slightly shorter battery life
Canon Rebel T5i

Canon Rebel T5i

Entry-level DSLR

$404 - $649 body only

$495 - $599 with 18-55mm lens

HDR Has in-camera HDR
Touch screen Has a touch screen
Color depth Worse color depth

Olympus E-30 Competitors

Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX85 (Lumix DMC-GX80 / Lumix DMC-GX7 Mark II)

Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX85 (Lumix DMC-GX80 / Lumix DMC-GX7 Mark II)

Mirrorless interchangeable-lens

Movie format Shoots movies
Screen size Much larger screen
Viewfinder Has a digital viewfinder
Olympus E-5

Olympus E-5

Entry-level DSLR

$1,800 body only

Screen size Much larger screen
Movie format Shoots movies
Weight Heavier
Olympus E-3

Olympus E-3

Entry-level DSLR

$890 body only

$3,599 with 12-60mm lens

Color depth Better color depth
Weather sealed Weather sealed
Screen size Much smaller screen

discussion

Canon EOS 60D
EOS 60D
Canon

Report a correction
Olympus E-30
E-30
Olympus

Report a correction

Showing 0 comments