For comparison purposes, here's a PCGS 62 (CAC)... ...and here's an NGC 62: I'd take the DGS coin any day!
John, Thanks for the answer. I've put in red the high points, and where I see a slight darkness. Now some of these I could put down as bag marks, and still see it as UNC (low MS) such as the cheek....and face area. That area would be a HOT spot and I can see where that might not be wear. In the hair I just think it looks like this coin has seen circulation. Not much....but some, and enough to cut down eye appeal and luster. If these are scans from DLRC then the luster might be better. I hate to say it....but their scans don't do much for the looks of the coins. On the REV, I see wear. I see no other way you can call it. Now---for the last part. As I said above---I see VERY LITTLE gold and I'm not the best at grading them....I'm still very green I also don't have the coin in hand....DGS did. Last but not least--I marked alot in red. Most of what I did was where I saw a dark color, that normally is wear, but I also tried to point out what I considder the high points on this coin. The Hot spots would be right in front of the face (IMHO) Speedy
I would agree that pictures/ scans et cetera are not always the best, and rarely ever capture "the coin", but I would still question whether this QE has actual wear. I think an awful lot of mint state gold has been touched or lightly thumbed. To me that is not circulation, but I have heard that sometimes this type of noticeable action can get a coin bumped down to AU. Especially if it darkens the coin.... So you may be right. It is also very hard to tell whether some of those spots are actually "dark", as I have all kinds of trouble taking pictures of gold. Nevertheless I can't really see why this coin would ever be graded AU.
I am impressed too [although I am an amateur unlike many of the pros here]. I still carry my trusty Photograde for circulated coins.