Nikon D90 vs Olympus E-600

Winner
Nikon D90

100

Olympus E-600

40

Runner-up

Reasons to buy the Nikon D90

High resolution screen
Screen resolution
930k dots
Large viewfinder
Viewfinder size
0.63x
Almost no delay when powering up
Startup delay
300 ms startup delay
Great viewfinder
Viewfinder
Pentaprism
 

Reasons to buy the Olympus E-600

Image stabilization
Image stabilization
  1. Sensor shift
Screen flips out
Flip-out screen
Great for movies
Size
Really small
Prosumer size (130×94×60 mm)
Thickness
Thin
2.4"

galleries

Explore our gallery of 47 sample photos taken by the Nikon D90.
Explore our gallery of 50 sample photos taken by the Olympus E-600.

competitors

Nikon D90 Competitors

Nikon D7000

Nikon D7000

Entry-level DSLR

$849 with 18-55mm lens

Movie format Higher resolution movies
Weather sealed Weather sealed
Viewfinder size Slightly smaller viewfinder
Nikon D300

Nikon D300

Pro DSLR

$1,299 body only

$1,499 with 18-135mm lens

Focus points Many more focus points
Weather sealed Weather sealed
Movie format Does not take movies
Nikon D5100

Nikon D5100

Entry-level DSLR

$350 body only

$649 with 18-55mm, 55-200mm lenses

Movie format Higher resolution movies
Screen flips out Has a flip-out screen
Viewfinder size Much smaller viewfinder

Olympus E-600 Competitors

Sony Alpha a6300

Sony Alpha a6300

Mirrorless interchangeable-lens

$794 - $898 body only

$910 - $998 with 16-50mm lens

Movie format Shoots movies
Screen resolution Much higher resolution screen
Viewfinder Has a digital viewfinder
Sony Alpha A5000

Sony Alpha A5000

Mirrorless interchangeable-lens

$300 body only

$395 with 16-50mm lens

Movie format Shoots movies
Screen resolution Much higher resolution screen
Viewfinder No viewfinder
Olympus OM-D E-M5 II

Olympus OM-D E-M5 II

Mirrorless interchangeable-lens

$1,715 with 14-150mm lens

Movie format Shoots movies
Screen resolution Much higher resolution screen
Viewfinder Has a digital viewfinder

discussion

Nikon D90
D90
Nikon

Report a correction
Olympus E-600
E-600
Olympus

Report a correction

Showing 0 comments