Dakota 20 vs Oregon 450 vs gpsmap 62s

[+churky]

Hi all,

I'm going to buy a new gps pocket device.

What are the most significant differences between those 3 model?

Basically, I'll use gps device for geocaching and trekking and, on my previous device (acer n35), I used to load my custom maps.

It's possible with all those models?

 

Many thanks,

Churky

Edited September 6, 2010 by churky

[+borrie869]

all three models offer very similar features, slight differances between the units, higher res screen on the oregon easier to read sreen on the dakota and 62s, better aerial and external aerial connections on the 62s but no touch screen. they basically all run the same software though so there is very little differance between them all, having said that i went from an acer n35 to a oregon 300 and all i can say is which ever unit you pick you will be much happier then with the acer

[+churky]

all three models offer very similar features, slight differances between the units, higher res screen on the oregon easier to read sreen on the dakota and 62s, better aerial and external aerial connections on the 62s but no touch screen. they basically all run the same software though so there is very little differance between them all, having said that i went from an acer n35 to a oregon 300 and all i can say is which ever unit you pick you will be much happier then with the acer

 

ok, I'm glad to see that.

[+dfx]

[+borrie869]

i thought the lower resolution made the dakotas easier to read then the oregons

 

edit: just checked the vid you linked, thats a 200 side by side with a 450 apparently

Edited September 6, 2010 by borrie869

[+dfx]

i thought the lower resolution made the dakotas easier to read then the oregons

well, that depends on how you look at it. the decreased DPI on the dakotas either leads to lower-resolution fonts on the screen, which will be less readable, or a larger absolute font size, which will be more readable, while at the same time less information fits on the screen. personally i prefer a smaller and/or higher-rsolution font and also more information on the map view, but that's personal preference.

 

edit: just checked the vid you linked, thats a 200 side by side with a 450 apparently

yep, and sice you have an oregon 300, you have one of the "less readable" screens, which obviously will make you think that the dakotas have a better screen. but that's not true any more when compared to the 450s.

[+ecanderson]

Can't speak to the new 62, but as I now own both a Dakota 20 and Oregon 450, can probably shed some light on that. There are several factors coming into play at once that have an impact on how people perceive the two screens.

 

The Oregon has, at maximum setting, a brighter backlight. This comes into play primarily in those odd lighting situations where you aren't in sun and you aren't in dark, but some sort of shade in between. Advantage to the Oregon in backlight.

 

However... For whatever reason, my eyes perceive that the Dakota screen provides slightly better contrast. What's that about?!? In spite of the fact that the Oregon provides a brighter backlight, the blacks don't seem as "black" as those on the Dakota. The Oregon seems a little bit washed out. Brighter is not always better.

 

In actual practice, what the eye needs depends a little on the eye, especially the older ones. Contrast counts. The size of a GPS display isn't large enough or bright enough to cause the pupil to dilate (and hence, to get you better depth of field / focus). So the Dakota has a small edge in that area.

 

Here's side by side shots in low ambient light. Sorry about the zero-beat of the shutter speed vs. the Dakota display. I was unable to come up with a solution for that. No question that these are very different screens.

 

 

In the following shot, I reduced the brightness of the Oregon two steps to more closely match the Dakota to re-evaluate the contrast issue.

 

 

The softer edges that are created by increased resolution may be more pleasing to the eye (I recall the arguments in favor of 1200dpi print over 600dpi print, and earlier 600dpi over 300dpi), but that doesn't necessarily equate to better readability of the result. While the Dakota's edges aren't as smooth as the Oregon, and hence, there's less detail, that doesn't necessarily equate to a screen that is easier to read.

 

If you're inclined to need reading glasses and try to cache without them, you may well find that the larger and somewhat rougher edges of the text on the Dakota can be easier to read in half light. You call it.

 

For those that don't think the 450 is an improvement over the earlier models, or wonder how well it operates in direct reflected sunlight (when turned appropriately, of course - the sun over your shoulder is a nice way to develop retinal burn!), here's yet another shot of a 450 at that angle with the backlight timed out (off). Hold one of these to use the sun, and it lights up something serious:

 

 

as does the Dakota, but the doggone artifact is there again due to camera vs. Dakota LCD. Sorry.

 

[+jeepdelfuego]

all three models offer very similar features, slight differances between the units, higher res screen on the oregon easier to read sreen on the dakota and 62s, better aerial and external aerial connections on the 62s but no touch screen. they basically all run the same software though so there is very little differance between them all, having said that i went from an acer n35 to a oregon 300 and all i can say is which ever unit you pick you will be much happier then with the acer

 

I definitely agree with this poster. The Dakota 20 is a very nice unit, but the resolution is just not there. The screen looks grainy. I think the 450 is a great unit. I really don't understand why people like the retro 62s.

[+sv_ted]

Check the user reviews for each one on Amazon. I had a horrible experience with the Dakota 20 (my review is there). I now own an Oregon 450 and like it a lot. Never used a 60 series.

[+dfx]

I really don't understand why people like the retro 62s.

probably preference for buttons over touchscreen. the quad-helix antenna is another reason, even though i don't think it makes that much of a difference really.

[flyjazz]

One could also consider the Colorado as it's also a great unit when purchased for $200.00