For the most part, when viewed at 100 percent my photos weren't as sharp as I expected; this is about the sharpest I was able to get, even with the in-camera setting boosted just a bit, and it looks crunchier than I like it to be.
(1/320 sec, f8, ISO 400, spot metering, AWB, 100-400mm lens at 180mm)
This is pretty typical of the quality of sharpness of the bulk of my photos shot with the 60D. The overall perceived sharpness at smaller sizes is quite good, and frequently the higher-resolution sensors produce softer looking results at 100 percent, especially with the lower-end lenses, tending to compensate by having more pixels for a given display size. In other words, a soft 16-megapixel image may look sharper printed at 8x10 inches than a sharp 12-megapixel image.
(1/60 sec, f5.6, ISO 200, spot metering, AWB, 15-85mm lens at 85mm)
Canon's 14-bit processing pipeline tends to deliver nice tonal range results, and the 60D seems to preserve detail in shadows and highlights pretty well. However, I haven't been able to analyze the raw images yet--still waiting for the software.
(1/100 sec, f3.5, ISO 100, partial metering, AWB, 15-85mm lens at 15mm)
As with its other dSLRs, Canon doesn't reveal the baseline settings for the neutral and faithful color styles, so it's kind of difficult to tweak them with confidence. Because the colors looked so flat (and not particularly accurate) with those settings, I ended up doing what I hate--using the Landscape setting. It produced these very pleasing, saturated colors. But the true colors lie somewhere between the neutral and landscape options.
Overall, the 60D's noise performance seems good, although I only shot as high as ISO 1,250, and I couldn't analyze the raw images, so I'll withhold judgment on its high ISO performance overall. Still, even as low as ISO 400 you can see some color noise in the fur.
(1/640 sec, f5.6, ISO 400, evaluative metering, AWB, 100-400mm lens at 400mm)