DSLRUsers.com

i duno which one to go for....any advice??

Hold them, feel them, try them in store and then make your choice

Go instore and try one out for yourself.

Both are excellent cameras.

The responsible way to answer your question is to advise you to go and try them both.....but to hell with that.....the Nikon is the best so go get it!

aiyo friend dont ask in such a general manner, u'll get nowhere...
do your research dont so lazy!! its your money after all...

Matt. K wrote:T.....but to hell with that.....the Nikon is the best so go get it!

That's pretty biased




Go with whatever lenses you have at the moment, Canon or Nikon...

If you dont have any yet, go into stores and try them both, go with the one with ergonomics that suits you best... Cant go wrong with either two.

What will you be using the camera for?

If you dont need all of the features and better build, then consider the D80 or 400D xti and invest in better glass.

Also consider what lenses you will use / want, check what each brand has to offer.

Then go in to a shop and try each of them out.

i'm starting up in the photography industry - most prob portraits...so my dream is to own a d2x (nikon) or one of the marks (canons).
been using dad's gear all the while...so need to start my own gear....

Well it's the old Canon vs Nikon. Like other people have said, go and have a good look at the cameras, see which feels better, has more intuitive menus. Both make good lenses, I remember when I started people were saying Nikon glass is slightly better - I can't comment on that since I don't own any Canon lenses anymore.

There really is no "wrong" choice as long as you feel comfortable with your gear. Having just recently bought a D200 I can say it rocks

If your dream is a D2x then go the Nikon path, accumulate some Nikon lenses which you can then use when you purchase your dream machine.

What camera brand do most of your friends own? Being able to borrow lenses and accessories is a huge advantage.

I'd suggest Canon because with your $4000-$5000 budget to get started you can obviously afford the best.

If you don't have that much, buy a cheaper body and some decent glass, you'll be much better off. The camera depreciates really fast - DSLRs are going through a generation every year or at most two, just like computers. But lenses last much, much longer. My good lenses are both 5 year old designs but they're still state of the art in the sense that you can't buy better, only different (ie, the 24-70/2.8 now competes with the 24-105/4 IS which is different and for some things better, but there's not an f/2.8 zoom with more range or IS).

So if you only have $4k to spend, I'd suggest a second hand D70 or 20D and a $2000 lens like the 24-105/4 or the Nikon equivalent. Then spend the other $1000 on a tripod, memory cards, batteries, filters, a bag, a fast 50 (lens) and other necessary accessories.

If you only had $2k, a 400D or D50 is about your limit - by the time you have a cheap plastic version of the accessories you'll be out of cash. Just buying a D200/30D and a 1GB memory card will quickly leave you frustrated, and when the replacement comes out in 12 months time your camera will be worth ~$1000 second hand. And with the kit lens, even the better Nikon kit lens (which is significantly better than the Canon kit), you'll be quite limited compared to a cheaper body with a better lens.

Full disclosure: I bought a Canon 300D, then over the next 12 months bought a Sigma 12-24, Canon 50/1.4, Canon 70-200IS, tripod, memory cards etc etc to the tune of perhaps $4000. All for a dodgy, bottom-of-the-line DSLR. So that's my preferred way to do it. I now have a 30D, but that's how I started.

What have you been using of your dads? i'd suggest getting the same for 2 reasons.
1. your knowledge of the system already.
2. the ability to borrow / inherit lens'

DStrom wrote:
If you dont need all of the features and better build, then consider the D80 or 400D xti and invest in better glass.

god no, the 400d is so small its almost a compact and the d80 although speced up a bit still feels small and cheap, although i know some ppl may find that an attraction i personally feel they dont give me the feeling of solid dependable cameras.

i went the d200 due to the bargain price, and imho its superior, but the 30d is also a nice camera.
Go play with both and get the one you feel comfortable with.
You may also want to stay with what the family is using; at least u can borrow equipment.

Dont forget the Nikon Flash system... with a few SB800s linked to the D200 can outrage any Canon out there in the field. Unless you plan to carry few thousands $$ worth of lighting system at hundreds of kg weight around into an outdoor portrait shoot.

dad's got a nikon d70...

so yea..i did think of the whole familiarity etc...and dad's asking me to go for NIKON!! then he can steal my lenses and camera body!!! haha..

frens - some nikon some canon...so a mixture

y-pi:
what did u mean by "with a few SB800s linked to the D200 can outrage any Canon out there in the field. Unless you plan to carry few thousands $$ worth of lighting system at hundreds of kg weight around into an outdoor portrait shoot."?

Get the Canon.
You can always put nikon glass on the canon.

phillipb wrote:Get the Canon.
You can always put nikon glass on the canon.

Very true

u can put nikon on canon too right?

s_havohej wrote:u can put nikon on canon too right?

Not as far as I know. Well, not without an adapter with a lens in it, and there are other problems (Canon AF motors are in the lens, and need to be controlled by the camera. Nikon cameras can't do that).

But it's as much the physical size thing - Canon's lens mount is very large, so there's a big hole in the front of the camera and you can stick anything into it - a Nikon lens mount plus a small metal ring that adapts between the two, for instance. But fitting the big Canon mount onto a wee Nikon porthole means mounting the canon lens in frontof the camera and bridging the gap with a focus-changing lens.

Both are great cameras, and playing with both is a really good idea. If your Dad has some decent Nikon glass then unless you really hate the ergonomics and feel of the D200 I'd get the D200! This will help you decide what you need in your glass without having to buy it. Plus when you get other things, your Dad can share them too.

Mounting Nikkor glass on the Canon with an adapter is doable, but not really optimal. You get stop-down metering in manual or aperture priority modes, TTL flash. You're even further limited with "G-type" Nikkor lenses (including all DX lenses): you can only shoot wide open with these as they have no aperture ring.

Ask the stars, tarot cards, your neighbour, whatever. Make the decision you're comfortable with. Just make sure you get the Nikon

Cheers
Steffen.

EDIT: I can't believe I responded to this thread...

moz wrote:

s_havohej wrote:u can put nikon on canon too right?

Not as far as I know. Well, not without an adapter with a lens in it, and there are other problems (Canon AF motors are in the lens, and need to be controlled by the camera. Nikon cameras can't do that).

But it's as much the physical size thing - Canon's lens mount is very large, so there's a big hole in the front of the camera and you can stick anything into it - a Nikon lens mount plus a small metal ring that adapts between the two, for instance. But fitting the big Canon mount onto a wee Nikon porthole means mounting the canon lens in frontof the camera and bridging the gap with a focus-changing lens.

And there's the issue of the depth of the camera body and focussing accuracy.

A Nikon lens, with an adaptor, can be mounted on a Cann body, and will work, albeit fully manually. You would have no Canon functionality in terms of focus, exposure, etc.

But a Canon body is thinner than a Nikon, and a Canon lens, mounted on a Nikon body, could never achieve focus under all conditions. This is a physical constaint.

But the bottom line is why would you even bother? Canon glass is every bit as good Nikon, and you have no built-in functionality. For very limited specialist usage, perhaps.

But that's it.

Getting back on topic, the only answer is to wandewr into a local store and have a play with each camera under consideration. Talking about the bodis great fun, but if the body you choose doesn't feel comfy in your hands ...

If you do decide to go Canon, I can let you try some of my glass (although it's not the best glass).

thanks adam *grin*
u know who i am right? or are u bring soo nice to a total stranger??

hehe

If you capture a lot of high iso images with no strobe, get the 30D. But if you have a collection of Nikon lens, I would stick with a Nikon

You need to answer that question for yourself. do some research on what is going to suit your style of photography and budget. They are both good systems and you cant go wrong with either. Chose what suits you the best and good luck with your photography..

When I bought my first DSLR, it was a choice between the Canon EOS 300D or the Nikon D70. I had a Canon G3 and loved it, so was leaning towards Canon.

I read everything I could on the two cameras, including the in depth reviews on DP review, and lots of stuff elsewhere on the net. Then I went out and checked the cameras out in the flesh, so to speak. I liked the Nikon D70 better and I thought the specs were a bit better, so that's what I bought.

The comparisons between the D200 and the 30D are quite different of course, and but the process is sound. Research and more research, followed by handling.

Don't even think about using Canon lenses on Nikon or vice versa. Once you make a choice of brand, you go with it.

The good news is that there is no wrong choice here, either camera will be fantastic. I have the D200 now and I love it. I am sure if I had gone with Canon and now had a 30D, I would love that too. (Although arguably not as much as the D200 Sorry, couldn't resist)

s_havohej wrote:thanks adam *grin*
u know who i am right? or are u bring soo nice to a total stranger??

hehe

adam is always nice... i'm thinking of shifting to canon just so i can leech his lenses... ho ho ho

Echo everything everyone has said about glass, if you have decent Nikon glass go with the D200.

If you don't then the question is a little harder, personally I am making the move from Nikon to Canon for my main camera (the D70 will become my wifes camera), just started a business with two guys who shoot Canon, makes sense for us to all use the same brand, and as one of them has some decent L series glass and I don't have any decent Nikon glass the choice was easy for me.

However in saying that the choice for me would be difficult.

I like the Nikon way of doing things, I am used to the feel, the menu, the controls, the D200 feels great in the hand and is super easy to use. Has some nice customisable features, 10MP.

On the other hand the Canon has less noise, is smaller though (could be better or worse), is only 8MP, but there is not a huge difference there. In RAW format is a little sharper than the D200 (according to dpreview).

The Canon is also cheaper than the Nikon, considerably. I don't know about Sydney, but I've found that more shops can actually get Canon glass over Nikon glass. Photo Continental here in Brisbane had no decent VR lenses where as they had 3 or 4 Canon IS lenses in stock.

It's a hard one, go into the store and have a good play with them, don't worry too much about the menu system, get a feel for it in your hands, how easy is it to move with, get on target, does it feel like a part of you. Also try it with various glass, something like a 70-200 VR or IS, put an extender on it and try again...

Good luck in your choice

Brett