Re: Canon 40D or Nikon D90?
As you need good low light ability you should go for the Nikon D90.
- The D90 goes up to a maximum of 6400 ISO with 3200 ISO being very usable (it's the same sensor and image processor as the Nikon D300 that I have).
- The Canon 40D is previous generation technology and only goes up to 3200 ISO. It's a more pro-level body with up to 6 frames/second but you haven't said you need that.
Nikon also has the advantage in lenses with the best bang-for-the-buck:
- the 35mm f1.8 is cheap and a good walk-around low-light standard lens (no Canon equivalent)
- the 50mm f1.8 is a cheap low-light telephoto
- if you want a really versatile lens usable in low light then the 18-105VR is supposed to be really good (and cheap - it's almost given away in the D90 kit). It isn't really a low-light lens (maximum aperture f3.5-5.6) but the VR (vibration reduction) helps you to get a sharp picture at slow shutter speeds - as long as the subject isn't moving. (No direct equivalent from Canon)
There are lots of other lenses possible (second-hand 85mm f1.8, 18-200VR..) but they are all more expensive.
Re: Canon 40D or Nikon D90?
Low light isn't my first priority, but it is quit important to me.
Which lens will be cheap and good for macro/portraits? :)
Thank you so much!!
Re: Canon 40D or Nikon D90?
I'm not a big macro fan. By "macro" we mean something really small like insects or jewelry. The 50mm won't focus that close. You really want a 60mm or a 90mm macro lens, but they aren't cheap..