d90 or t2i?

i am going to be using this camera for pictures of cars and learn how to do hdr shots and pictures where u see a car going fast in focus and the backround is all blurry which would be better

The D90 is a faster camera for shooting a moving car.

D90: 4.5 frames per second continuous shooting

T2i: Continuous shooting at 3.7fps

I don't have experience with either of these cameras.

Please don't make the exact same post in multiple forums. I deleted two of them as I think it's best to discuss this in a forum that's not manufacturer-specific. Once you start to refine what you want you can make a new post in the correct manufacturer forum and you might also consider posting on the Sports Photography forum.

For action photos I'd go with the D90. Like poker said, it's a faster camera. I believe it also has better image quality than the Canon T2i. Plus, the Canon T2i is really about the video features. Unless those are important to you, better to go with a camera that's more about still quality. And the D90 is that camera. The D90 is actually a step about the T2i if you look at the Canon and Nikon product lines. Nikon hasn't added an upgrade for the D90 yet, but the corresponding Canon model would be the EOS 50D. And the D90 was a much better camera than the 50D as far as image quality. The 50D is much faster, though. So if you're inclined to buy a Canon, you should see what you can get a 50D for.

oh ok thanks

http://www.iwsti.com/forums/gr-membe...-moar-116.html well if u look at these pictures they were takin with the t1i and i think this is what i want so if ur sure the d90 can do this and better then ill get that

Yeah - the D90 can do that, no problem. The image quality you see in those photos is almost all HDR post-processing. It's more a matter of technique than the camera. In fact, technique is almost always more important than the camera. But the D90 is a better still camera than the Canon T2i and it's a wayyy better camera than the T1i.

I have a Nikon D90 and I am very happy with it but you must remember the most important factor in taking a picture is the one operating the camera. Remember it is not the pen but the writer that makes a best seller, just like it is the photographer and not the camera that gets the great photos. The camera is only a tool. A better made tool helps to some degree but the talent of the user is what makes the REAL difference, Jeff

arite thanks

http://www.iwsti.com/forums/gr-membe...dclip-vid.html what about these

so u think the 50d would be a better choice.. is nikon ever going to come out with somthing newer then the d90?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by eddiewilpan

so u think the 50d would be a better choice.. is nikon ever going to come out with somthing newer then the d90?

---

For sure they will....something new always comes out. I'm not familiar with the Nikon product lifecycle. The Canon T1i was barely out by the time the T2i came out. You can never tell when something new is on the horizon. I've been waiting for a 50D replacement myself but I might be waiting for nothing. You buy what you need at the moment.

the 50d is kinda expensive tho actually its only 1100 that would b my limit

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by eddiewilpan

the 50d is kinda expensive tho actually its only 1100 that would b my limit

---

You can buy a used 50D for far less than that. I just sold one for $750 and felt like I did really well.

Any of the cameras we've been talking about will take any of the photos you've linked to. As a couple of us have said, most of the time, it's more about technique than the camera. The most difficult thing about the last photos you linked to is how they were shot. It looks like they were shot at a very low angle from a moving vehicle. That means they were either shot from a camera mounted outside another car, or from a car without a door. Either way, it's the way they were shot and not the camera that made them look the way they do.

I really don't think that you need to spend a lot to get what you want. In fact, I'd encourage you to look at the D5000 instead of the D90. I've used both and for the most part, I like the D5000 better. The D90 is faster and has better image quality. But image quality isn't going to matter that much for the kind of photos you've posted so far. And we always recommend people spend less on the camera and more on lenses. If you're really on an $1100 budget, you should look for a less expensive camera so you can buy a better lens. In the long run, lenses are always the more important investment.

they said it was a lot of editing i think in like photoshop i thought it was the camera that made them look like that i guess its a lot of computer editing afterwords too

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by eddiewilpan

they said it was a lot of editing i think in like photoshop i thought it was the camera that made them look like that i guess its a lot of computer editing afterwords too

---

Editing is important - especially with the HDR photos in the first link you posted. No matter what, you're going to have a bit of a learning curve. I think the most important thing is for you to get yourself a good camera and lens and start shooting. Until you do that, you're just sort of fantasizing. Actually taking pictures is the best way to learn :)

arite the guy who took those last pictures said it was with a 40d.. i dont see a 40d anymore on there website tho i think the new one might be the 50d right? and im sorry guys but there all usin cannons so im deffinatly goin to go with a cannon

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by eddiewilpan

and im sorry guys but there all usin cannons so im deffinatly goin to go with a cannon

---

No problem there - I am a Canon owner. But don't get too caught up in the brand. It really is the photographer and not the camera. Even though I'm a Canon owner, I really do think Nikon is, for the most part, making better DSLRs right now. And last year my Canons mostly stayed in the bag while I did most of my shooting with the Olympus E-620. Buying a Canon won't automatically deliver the photos you want. No matter what camera you buy, you're going to have to earn those photos. But don't worry - we'll be here to help you get there :)

i think im gonna go with the 50d unless nikon comes out with somthin better soon

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/...d.php?t=559704 wow check that out

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by eddiewilpan

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/...d.php?t=559704 wow check that out

---

Check what out??? A post from Aug 2008 where posters on a Canon forum picked Canon??? - TF

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by eddiewilpan

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/...d.php?t=559704 wow check that out

---

The 50D will serve you just fine. But for what it's worth, I owned the 40D, the 50D and now I own the 7D. I own an XSi, which I still use all the time, too. I've also used the D90, and the D5000 extensively. I can take any of the photos you linked to with any of those cameras. None of those really required a special camera. And the D90 has better image quality than the 50D. The 50D is faster - that's about it. For what it's worth, here's a gallery of my outdoor and action photos, taken with all kinds of cameras: http://gallery.photographyreview.com...&mcats=555,502

the d90 has a better image quality then the 50d? what do u mean and what do u mean the 50d is faster

The 50D can shoot up to 6.33 frames per second. The D90 can shoot 4.5 frames per second.
Here is a link comparing the two...both have different advantages. http://www.digitalreview.ca/content/....shtml#D90_50D

Many photographers will swear up and down that their brand is better than the other even when hit over the head with facts. Decide for yourself by reading professional reviews and reviews of every day users.
The 50d can bump its iso up to up 12,800 while the D90 goes to 6400, I believe. Yes the 50d has more megapixels but as I've learned here that is not necessarily a good thing and the evidence is that the D90s high iso quality is better. Are you going to be shooting in less than ideal light? Dose photo noise matter to you?

Here are the reviews written on this site for the 50d http://www.photographyreview.com/cat...2_3127crx.aspx

Here are the reviews for the D90 http://www.photographyreview.com/cat...3_3127crx.aspx

Note that reviews here are by pros and amateurs, novices, enthusiasts and none get paid for their reviews nor do they sell cameras.

Better quality means the shots are clearer, have more dynamic range, and a bunch of stuff that an amateur like me can't always recall late at night. All modern dslr cameras take good pictures. Some a little better than others but for the average joe it is not distinguishable.
As has been said, it is mostly the skill of the person holding the camera and their knowledge of how to use it.

My $.02:
I'm with John in that I think Nikon is building the better DSLR right now, but it's only a slight advantage here and there. I think Canon offers a better lens selection at slightly better prices than Nikon. Olympus, Panasonic, Sony, Pentax, etc. also make fine cameras that take fine photographs. The big two offer very large lens selections that get into the special such as large aperture super tele's, tilt and shift, fisheyes, etc.

I also agree that any camera brand offers the ability to take fine photographs, and none of them offers anything that's head and shoulders over competition. So it all boils down to what features you think are important.

It has always been my opinion that Nikon and Canon are two companies with different philosophies. Canon seems to be going in the direction of higher pixel count. Nikon is going in the direction of low light capabilities. I don't think either way is right or wrong. I think it gives the people more choices on finding something that works the way they shoot. I shoot Nikon and I love my D300 for low light. But if given the chance and I could afford it I would love to give the Canon 7D a shot. But there is no way I could afford to run both systems so i will stick with what I got.