Why is it cheaper than Canon's 60D? I know they don't compare side by side because D5100's competition is Canon's T3i. But I hear so many good things about the D5100, and it seems much more superior than the T3i, why is so much cheaper than the 60D? They are both able to produce great images… and even the D5100 is claimed to do better in low light.
Nikon D5100: $596 new w/ kit lens
Canon 60D: $1, 199 new w/ kit lens
New Nikon D5100: $596 new w/ kit lens
Added (1). And I also read that they are both mid-level DSLRs, so it's not like comparing an entry level to a mid level… They're both supposed to be on the "same" category, right?
Added (2). @Kevin: Well that solves some of it 0.0. I got it off two reviewer blog type websites and Nikon's wikipedia.It's so difficult trying to do research online and not being able to tell which things are true or not…
Added (3). @ Keerok: Well I'm actually feeling torn between the two. I like the price of the D5100 and that it does good in low light, but I like the style of the 60D, the menu, the buttons, and it's overall quality. I don't know how to pick between the two, because I can't get that moment where one feels better than the other in my hands since the only place I can handle them is bestbuy and they're tied down with metal plates -_-.
>>> Why is Nikon D5100 significantly cheaper than.?