Digital SLR Cameras Forum

Digital SLRs Forum Discuss digital SLRs, lenses, RAW conversion, or anything else related to digital SLRs. You may also want to see the Nikon, Canon, and Sony camera forums.
Digital Camera Pro Reviews >>
Read and Write Digital SLR Reviews >>
Digital SLR Buyer's Guide >>
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 34
  1. #1
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    St Louis, MO
    Posts
    8

    Pitch Tent... Camp Canon or Camp Nikon?

    Greetings All,

    I have been monitoring this and a few other forums for about half a year now and concluded that the quality respondents frequent this forum.

    I am about to purchase a DSLR and it will be either a Canon or a Nikon and the initial cash outlay will be in the neighborhood of $2500. (That’s what my permission slip allows.)

    To my question(s). I would like comments on the following impressions that I have developed over the last ½ year to help me decide in which camp (Canon or Nikon) to pitch my tent. And please comment on the following based on offerings in my stated price range. I will not buy a top of the line professional DSLR… overkill.

    1) Canon has a slight edge at higher ISO settings 800+ (Less Noise… etc)
    2) Nikon has the best ‘constructed’ body in the D200
    3) Nikon generally has better mid-range priced lenses
    4) Canon has been the camera of choice for sports photography
    5) Some Canon lenses are actually built by Sigma
    6) Tamron lenses are generally a step up in quality from Sigma

    What I would love to do for my initial purchase is to get a quality body and on versatile ‘good’ quality lens. Two options that I’m looking at are:

    Nikon D200 with Nikon AF-S Nikkor 18-200 mm f/3.5-2.6G DX ED VR
    Or
    Canon 30D with Tamron AF 28-75mm f/2.8 XR DI

    Regards,

    Ed

  2. #2
    can't Re-member lidarman's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Boulder, Colorado
    Posts
    206

    Re: Pitch Tent... Camp Canon or Camp Nikon?

    One other important thing to add to your question.

    Canon has already shown a move toward full frame sensors which can change the long term outlook on what you get for lenses. The DX lenses or ones optimized for small sensors will not work with a fill 35 mm chip so if you want to invest in lenses, be aware of this. If everyone moves to the large CCD and you intend to upgrade your body, you will have lost if you bought lenses for small sensors.

    But back on topic. I don't think you can go wrong with either camp. Canon was adopted early on by photojournalists but Nikon makes a killer product. It always comes down to the skill of the photographer in the end and some of these details are in the noise relatively speaking.

  3. #3
    Be serious Franglais's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Paris, France
    Posts
    3,367

    Get out of cyberspace

    Quote Originally Posted by ejlatstl
    Greetings All,

    I have been monitoring this and a few other forums for about half a year now and concluded that the quality respondents frequent this forum.

    I am about to purchase a DSLR and it will be either a Canon or a Nikon and the initial cash outlay will be in the neighborhood of $2500. (That’s what my permission slip allows.)

    To my question(s). I would like comments on the following impressions that I have developed over the last ½ year to help me decide in which camp (Canon or Nikon) to pitch my tent. And please comment on the following based on offerings in my stated price range. I will not buy a top of the line professional DSLR… overkill.

    1) Canon has a slight edge at higher ISO settings 800+ (Less Noise… etc)
    2) Nikon has the best ‘constructed’ body in the D200
    3) Nikon generally has better mid-range priced lenses
    4) Canon has been the camera of choice for sports photography
    5) Some Canon lenses are actually built by Sigma
    6) Tamron lenses are generally a step up in quality from Sigma

    What I would love to do for my initial purchase is to get a quality body and on versatile ‘good’ quality lens. Two options that I’m looking at are:

    Nikon D200 with Nikon AF-S Nikkor 18-200 mm f/3.5-2.6G DX ED VR
    Or
    Canon 30D with Tamron AF 28-75mm f/2.8 XR DI

    Regards,

    Ed
    Stop looking at the forums, reading the reviews, theorising on what is the best possible camera.. The camera is just a tool which you have to get out and use. And that's quite a difficult task. You have to feel at home with the thing in your hands, and understand rapidly how it works.

    Take the time to go into a camera shop and try out your chosen configurations. See which one you like best.

    That's why it's difficult to pick the "best" camera from other people's reactions. All the choices are good. It's a question of personal preference.

    - Do you like a camera which feels heavy in your hands or light in your bag?
    - Small lenses that don't stick out or do you like to impress the crowd?
    - Do you like doing pictures in low light or are you always in the best light possible, flash? -- Do you have friends or relations who have brand X and can help you out?

    Charles

    p.s. The Nikon 18-200 and the Tamron 28-75 are suited to totally different things. You should really try to decide what you are going to photograph before going any further

  4. #4
    Senior Member payn817's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Georgia, usa
    Posts
    2,180

    Re: Pitch Tent... Camp Canon or Camp Nikon?

    Just a note on this... I spent the last 1.5 months not shooting because I was worried about equiptment. It's better to be shooting than worrying. Now that I have the equiptment I was so worried about, I still haven't used it...lmao

    Best Camera?? The one you use ;)

    Remember, everyone is biased even if they say they aren't.

  5. #5
    sqrt -1 greghalliday's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    American Fork, Utah
    Posts
    211

    Re: Pitch Tent... Camp Canon or Camp Nikon?

    Quote Originally Posted by ejlatstl
    Nikon D200 with Nikon AF-S Nikkor 18-200 mm f/3.5-2.6G DX ED VR
    Or
    Canon 30D with Tamron AF 28-75mm f/2.8 XR DI
    Both cameras are fine. I use Canon stuff, but that doesn't mean Nikon is bad. (They are, but I'm trying to be diplomatic here )

    One suggestion though. I think that having a primary lens of 28mm on a 1.6x chip is a bad idea. Unless you don't mind not having wide angle capability. 28mm=45mm on a 30D. Also, and this is my own strange habit, I think it is preferable to stick with Canon or Nikon lenses for your primary ones. The main reasons for me are their image quality, you aren't likely to get crazy error messages, and (big one) hypersonic focus motors. Most off-brand manufacturers still use micro-motors for focusing. Not bad, but once you get used to silent focus and full-time manual focus, it is hard not to have. When I take my 17-40L off and put my Tamron 70-300 on, the thing sound like a chainsaw in comparison.

    Just some things to consider. But the points below should be well taken. Any camera you have is capable. If you are.

  6. #6
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    McCordsville, IN
    Posts
    4,755

    Re: Pitch Tent... Camp Canon or Camp Nikon?

    ejlatstl wrote:
    1) Canon has a slight edge at higher ISO settings 800+ (Less Noise… etc)
    2) Nikon has the best ‘constructed’ body in the D200
    3) Nikon generally has better mid-range priced lenses
    4) Canon has been the camera of choice for sports photography
    5) Some Canon lenses are actually built by Sigma
    6) Tamron lenses are generally a step up in quality from Sigma

    #1: Canon has a three year advance over Nikon's sensor supplier - IE: Nikon can't even produce their own sensors - Sony supplies Nikon - I wouldn't buy from a company that can't produce the product.

    #2: WHAT? I hope you are joking - No body is better than the Canon 1D series and no Nikon comes close. The weather and dust sealing is unmatched, and even lower class bodies are better sealed.

    #3: I don't see this either, not that Nikon doesn't have nice glass, I don't see it better, but equal on midrange glass. - the advantage though is in AF speed, which goes to Canon.

    #4: No doubt here - faster frame rates, bigger buffers, and faster AF

    #5: and #6: Not sure where you got your information, Tamron is a huge leap down from Sigma. Sigma only makes the glass for a very select few cheaper Canon lenses and assembles them. The electronics are ALL Canon built and designed. The only Sigma lens I would suggest using is the 70-200 f2.8, but for real quality and speed I'd go with the Canon lens over it.
    I had a couple Tamron lenses, but they wound up in the trash, they didn't come close to the worst Sigma lens. The $79 Canon 50mm f1.8 is a better lens than the $600 Tamron I had. Tamron has one lens that is worth using (I forget which one) but I won't use anything BUT Canon lenses as the off brand stuff does damage the Canon AF after time. I know, I had to get a body repaired because of a non Canon lens. $248 repair plus shipping each way.

    JS
    Canon 1D
    Canon 1D MK II N
    Canon 70-200mm USM IS f2.8
    Canon 200mm f1.8 USM
    Canon 300mm f2.8 USM IS
    Canon 28-300mm USM IS f3.5-5.6
    Canon 50mm f1.8
    Vivitar 19-35mm f3.5-5.6

  7. #7
    Learning more with every "click" mjs1973's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Mineral Point, WI, USA
    Posts
    7,562

    Re: Get out of cyberspace

    Quote Originally Posted by Franglais
    Take the time to go into a camera shop and try out your chosen configurations. See which one you like best.

    If you ask me, this is the BEST advice that can be given to someone who is looking for a new camera system. I like to do my research, and check out the specs as much as the next person, but when it comes down to it, I want something that feels good in my hands, and that I can find and run all the controls without having to take the camera away from my eye everytime I want to adjust something.

    So go to the store, pick up the models that you're interested in, and just play with them. Perhaps you will love the controls on one versus the other. Perhaps one will fit in your hands better than the other. Perhaps one is balanced better than the other. These are things that only you can decide for yourself, and the only way to figure it out is to get your hands on them.
    Mike

    My website
    Twitter
    Blog


    "I thought that because fewer wolves meant more deer, that no wolves would mean hunters' paradise. But after seeing the green fire die, I sensed that neither the wolf nor the mountain agreed with such a view."
    Aldo Leopold

  8. #8
    Be serious Franglais's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Paris, France
    Posts
    3,367

    A Troll wanders by..

    Perhaps the Moderator is right. The original poster wants us to slag of the other camp. Well here goes, bearing in mind that I have only one of the two cameras being compared (D200 vs 30D):

    1) Canon has a slight edge at higher ISO settings 800+ (Less Noise… etc)
    - The photosites on the 30D are bigger because there are less of them (8Mpix vs 10MPix). Apparently you will only see the difference if you often do giant enlargements at 1600 ISO or more..

    2) Nikon has the best ‘constructed’ body in the D200
    - The D200 is starting to come close to the 1D and that's why Canon are worried. It is better built than the 20D and reports say it has better autofocus, flash, exposure, etc.

    3) Nikon generally has better mid-range priced lenses
    - Canon have nothing to equal the 18-70 and nothing remotely resembling the 18-200 IS

    4) Canon has been the camera of choice for sports photography
    - You see more sports photographers using Canon, I believe.

    5) Some Canon lenses are actually built by Sigma
    - Oh really?

    6) Tamron lenses are generally a step up in quality from Sigma
    - Pass. Never owned Sigma, don't own any Tamron currently. Just use Nikon (oops - gave my camp away).

    Conclusion:
    The D200 is the benchmark system in the expert/low-end pro space. Canon are busy preparing the replacement of the 1D family, they didn't have the new DIGIC/Sensor combination ready for the 30D (3 year lead over Sony? LOL). They had to come out with something so they did a few minor improvements to the 20D and dropped the price. This is all good for you. Try the cameras out and see which one you prefer. They're both excellent.

    Charles
    Last edited by Franglais; 03-11-2006 at 11:51 AM.

  9. #9
    can't Re-member lidarman's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Boulder, Colorado
    Posts
    206

    Re: Pitch Tent... Camp Canon or Camp Nikon?

    Quote Originally Posted by JSPhoto


    1) Canon has a slight edge at higher ISO settings 800+ (Less Noise… etc)
    - The photosites on the 30D are bigger because there are less of them (8Mpix vs 10MPix). Apparently you will only see the difference if you often do giant enlargements at 1600 ISO or more..
    This is getting harder to compare because the photosites on a CCD are larger than a photosite on a CMOS sensor because the CMOS uses real estate for procession electronics. Thus a 8 micron pixel in a CCD has more collection area than a 8 micron pixel on a CMOS...but then there is added noise on a CCD when the chip is read that CMOS doesn't have. That said, Canon does have better performance on the high ISO range.

  10. #10
    Be serious Franglais's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Paris, France
    Posts
    3,367

    Comparisons are difficult

    Quote Originally Posted by lidarman
    This is getting harder to compare because the photosites on a CCD are larger than a photosite on a CMOS sensor because the CMOS uses real estate for procession electronics. Thus a 8 micron pixel in a CCD has more collection area than a 8 micron pixel on a CMOS...but then there is added noise on a CCD when the chip is read that CMOS doesn't have. That said, Canon does have better performance on the high ISO range.
    It's difficult to compare the technology becase Nikon and Canon no longer release products that are directly comparable. Nikon sensors go 6Mpix - 10 Mpix - 12Mpix and Canon go 8Mpix (1.3x & 1.6x) 12Mpix (full-frame) and 16Mpix (full-frame).

    How much you need high ISO depends on what you shoot. I was going to write that I rarely use high ISO (1600 & above) because I always have a big flash with my DSLR - but then I rembered my point and shoot Fuji F10 which is often at 1600ISO. The flash is just as bad as any point & shoot but the high ISO performance is incredible - from a 1/7 inch CCD..

    Charles

  11. #11
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    McCordsville, IN
    Posts
    4,755

    Re: Pitch Tent... Camp Canon or Camp Nikon?

    Franglais wrote:

    2) Nikon has the best ‘constructed’ body in the D200
    - The D200 is starting to come close to the 1D and that's why Canon are worried. It is better built than the 20D and reports say it has better autofocus, flash, exposure, etc.


    Canon worried? Not, and after seeing and holding a D200 it doesn't compare in any way shape or form body wise to the 1D series, and electronically the D200 isn't close either. The D200 may have better AF than the 20D, a P&S can have better AF than a 20D, but it certainly isn't better than the 1D. And the failures of the original 1D flash exposures was fixted when Canon came out with the 580EX and then built the 1D MKII & MKII N etc. to work with the flash.
    In fact, the only advanatage the Nikon MAY have had fro the past few years was with flash and Canon finally got to work on the problem.
    Canon is not in fear of Nikon competing in anything close to the 1D, and they won't replace the 1D family anytime soon, they will come out with newer versions etc. Remember the 1D is the digital twin to he 1N film camera. All accessories are the same except for a few rare exceptions. The 1D is a system as much as it is a family, they will not drop the line, that would be suicide when it leads the sports and journalism world.


    as for Sigma, they(used to at least) make the glass and assembled two cheap Canon lenses. I am not certain if they still do though, since going to USM I believe Canon does everything in house to keep technology out of the competitions hands. In fact, Nikon has a number of lenses built and asembled by other companies so it's not new for either company to outsource. But Canon does it's own electronics and sensors which makes parts and repair much easier, one of the reasons Nikon service is so poor is they have zero control on the supply chain for parts. If they need a replacement sensor they have to depend on Sony to have it in stock...not good business sense when dealing with customers.

    JS
    Canon 1D
    Canon 1D MK II N
    Canon 70-200mm USM IS f2.8
    Canon 200mm f1.8 USM
    Canon 300mm f2.8 USM IS
    Canon 28-300mm USM IS f3.5-5.6
    Canon 50mm f1.8
    Vivitar 19-35mm f3.5-5.6

  12. #12
    Check out our D300 Pro Review! deckcadet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Gainesville, Florida, USA
    Posts
    1,189

    Re: Pitch Tent... Camp Canon or Camp Nikon?

    JS, no offense but some of your claims are IMO very closed minded. I hate canon cameras like the plague...but I still respect them as great cameras that just don't do anything for me, and in fact I know precisely which cameras and lenses i'd buy if I had to go canon tomorrow.
    You're totally dodging the build quality issue- we're talking D200 vs. 30D, not D200 vs. 1D Mk II N. I've used both- I can say that the 1DIIN is built better- it's a full size pro camera- what do you expect?
    You state that even lower class cameras are sealed better (than the D200). Well, in case you didn't notice, The D200 has weather sealing, and the lower-class 20D and FULL FRAME 5D both lack sealing to anywhere near the degree of the D200.
    Harrison
    Nikon Forum / Digital SLR Forum Moderator | moderator bio
    Check out our new Nikon D300 Pro Review D3 review coming soon...
    Nikon Samurai #9 | NPS Member
    10 Lenses • 5 Bodies • 3 Macs • 1 Sore Back

  13. #13
    sqrt -1 greghalliday's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    American Fork, Utah
    Posts
    211

    Re: Pitch Tent... Camp Canon or Camp Nikon?

    Hey deckcadet. Why do you hate Canon cameras like the plague? Do you know what the "plague" is. Do you really hate a camera as bad as something capable of wiping out half of the European population? They must have done something very bad to you.

    Anyway, I would like to hear people's stories of what happened to them when their camera didn't have EOS 1 or F5 level weather sealing. I've been some pretty gnarly places with my Elan II and Elan 7 and have never had a malfunction due to the elements. Thus I have never been impressed by weather sealing being a selling point. But I hear A LOT about this issue (particularly in the Canon vs. Nikon vs. epidemic infectious diseases debate.) What has your experience been?

  14. #14
    Check out our D300 Pro Review! deckcadet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Gainesville, Florida, USA
    Posts
    1,189

    Re: Pitch Tent... Camp Canon or Camp Nikon?

    Greg-
    Yes I do know what the plague is. I'm a bit beyond history buff
    It isn't just their cameras, it's their whole company really.

    My D70 seemed much more prone to condensation inside than my D200 does, but we haven't had any of the really steamy weather yet, so well have to see. I did take out my D70 and 17-35 AF-S (pro grade lens) during the then-cat-1 Hurricane Katrina as the storm was ramping up towards the full force we got. I have to say...it was an experience. My D70 did not malfunction, though there was some moisture getting into the mirror box.
    Harrison
    Nikon Forum / Digital SLR Forum Moderator | moderator bio
    Check out our new Nikon D300 Pro Review D3 review coming soon...
    Nikon Samurai #9 | NPS Member
    10 Lenses • 5 Bodies • 3 Macs • 1 Sore Back

  15. #15
    has-been... another view's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Rockford, IL
    Posts
    7,649

    Re: Pitch Tent... Camp Canon or Camp Nikon?

    Guys - they're just cameras. Yes, really.

    PS - that Tamron 28-75 f2.8 is an incredibly good lens; very small, light and inexpensive as well. A good friend pays the rent with that one. Tamron has made junk but so has every other manufacturer. Personally, this focal length doesn't work as an all-purpose lens on a DSLR (but fine on 35mm) - but this is based on my personal preference. Big difference from 18mm to 28mm on the wide end!

    If it were my choice, I'd downgrade the bodies a bit (look for a bargain on a 20D or get a D70s), get their best flash unit, and spend the rest on lenses. Of course, you'll need memory cards too though; two 512mb cards should be a good start.

  16. #16
    Member danag42's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Posts
    141

    Re: Pitch Tent... Camp Canon or Camp Nikon?

    Don't forget to check out Camp Minolta and Camp Pentax, unless you have a significant investment in Canon or Nikon lenses.

    Pentax has been around forever, and has the best compatability with older lenses. Sony has bought the Minolta mount, and plans to use it in their cameras. They're a big player.

  17. #17
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Nottingham UK
    Posts
    30

    sledgehammer to crack a nut

    Questions...

    What do you currently use?

    Post a few pics from that camera

    What do you want different from your current camera?

    Why?


    What sort of pics do you want to take, and in what environment?




    Just as a footnote - I originally brought Nikon film cameras, because they were the best product (by miles) in my budget. I'm still using those cameras regularlary (and quite chauffed I can use the lenses on them on my new gear), and they are rock solid on build... But.... I tried Canons, and I found that the operation was awkward in my hands (which are quite big).. the Nikons feel like a glove, and just become an extension of me. For that reason, I am on my 5th Nikon camera, and I still use the first one occasionally
    __________________

    Richard King

    www.nottspcservices.co.uk
    _______________________

  18. #18
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    St Louis, MO
    Posts
    8

    Re: Pitch Tent... Camp Canon or Camp Nikon?

    Harry,

    Fair questions.

    I've been shooting SLR film since high school... let's just say over 20 years now. At that time it was mostly sports photography... basketball, football...

    Since then I've shot with a 2 Minolta SLR. (One now... one drowned in the Deleware River.)

    I verntured into an APS Minolta for 2 years... very dissatisfied with the quality of the camera body and with the glass.

    Lately I've been shooting with a Canon S1 IS. This is a worthy P/S camera but
    1) the camera is too small for may hands
    2) shutter lag has cost too much in 'missed' shots
    3) forget indoor photography without the flash
    4) indoor photograhy with the flash is washed out....
    ... you get the idea.

    My passion is to be outdoors capturing nature if I'm in the country or recording architecture if in the city.

    But life is also about family and my boy plays soccer. So I cannot ignor a little sports photography. (This is where the Canon S1 really falls down.)

    Regards,

    Ed

  19. #19
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    3

    Re: Pitch Tent... Camp Canon or Camp Nikon?

    This whole conversation doesn't even make sense...comparing an $1800 D200 with a $7000 1D. Can someone grab a reality check. If anything the comparison should be between a D2X and a 1D, and even then its a stretch. Fine, Canon makes a great camera, but so does Nikon.

    Fundamentally, each person needs to find the camera that works for them. For instance, I'm a novice photography just getting started. Will I notice the differences between a Nikon D50 and a D70s? Probably not. Now, does that mean anything to a more seasoned photographer? Not really. Someone of a greater skill will notice subtle differences between cameras and lenses.

    The bottom line is that such extreme claims and debate about cameras that don't even compare is a waste of time relative to the original question of what options there are in the $2500 range. The 1D is definitely not even in the ballpark. The D200 is a definite consideration as are the various Canon cameras. I've got a brother-in-law who just purchased a D200 and the samples he sent me are simply amazing. That said, I can't afford a D200, but have friends who use the Nikon D50 and are very happy with their purchase. Thus, the discussion about D50's is on target for ME.

    Thus, how about some of you experts out there take a breath and speak on topic so the rest of us can learn and not just waste our time reading about two people's strong opinions about cameras that don't even compare to one another. Canon makes great cameras and Nikon makes great cameras as do Minolta and Pentax.

    Now that we've got that settled what are some things to keep in mind as ejlatstl looks for a way to blow $2500? I don't have $2500 to blow, but the conversation, as long as it is relavant, is good use of my time and I'm sure some others'.

  20. #20
    Pentax Forum Moderator
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Platteville, WI, United States
    Posts
    2,043

    Re: Pitch Tent... Camp Canon or Camp Nikon?

    hahaha...ok...I have just moved into the dslr camp...I was using the Nikon Coolpix 8400. Great camera and will continue to use it for many things. That said...I recently purchased the Pentax *ist DL for the wife. The decision for her came down to the wire. I went to the camera shop and put the Nikons, the Canons, the KM's, and the Sony's in her hands. She played with all of them and chose the Pentax. I have since had the opportunity to start playing with it as well. I just ordered one for me. The decision came down to whether or not we wanted to have to learn 2 camera systems and purchase 2 different types of lenses each time we made camera purchases. Now we will be a one system family. We can share lenses and help each other to learn. My point is...any camera you choose will be great in the price range you are talking. As it was said earlier in the thread, go play with the cameras, consider the future, and make an "informed" decision on what you already know. Put the cameras side by side, shoot them, put different lenses one each one and HOLD them. The camera that is right for you will jump out at you. If it doesn't...then I'm sure either one that you choose will be right for you.
    Ken
    Ken


    Click these links for the K5 Review Page and the K7 Review Page
    Remember, Reviews help keep our site free!!!

    Your reviews are the foundation of this site - Write A Review!

    The K-Teams Updated Logo CLICK HERE to add a link. Many thanx go to Axle for his hard work.


    Nikon Samurai #20

  21. #21
    nature/wildlife co-moderator paulnj's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    hillsborough NJ, USA
    Posts
    9,315

    Re: Get out of cyberspace

    EXACTLY!!!!! Go to a good camera store or even BEST BUY and test drive ( or at least handle and play with) the 20D/XT and a D70s/D200. Your hands have to hold that camera, not mine


    I think the nikon / canon thing is hillarious, both can take great images! The few valid reasons to choose CANON are TELEPHOTO PRIME PRICES and IMAGE STABILIZING in more lenses. If those are a concern, then maybe Canon might have an edge in the real world ;)
    CAMERA BIRD NERD #1




    BIRD NERD O'CANON

    "Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both" - Benjamin Franklin

  22. #22
    Senior Member readingr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Basingstoke UK
    Posts
    4,564

    Re: Pitch Tent... Camp Canon or Camp Nikon?

    I use a Fuji P&S and Canon AE1 and a Canon Powershot Pro 1.

    I challenge anyone to spot the difference on some of the shots I've taken with any of the above camera's as its not the camera its the way you use them.

    The AE1 was bought when I got my first job in 1980 and it was what felt comfortable in my hands and at that time it had the functions I need. Its indistructable as I still use it, and its not been well looked after.

    The Fuji was bought in 2000 when I dipped my toes into Digital space and was bought because it had the functions I needed at the time and also felt more comfortable than the others compared in the shop - Canon, Nikon, Sony and others compared.

    The Pro1 bought in 2003 because the Fuji did not have some of the features I needed. Again the Pro 1 won on functions required and comfort in the hand over all the other makes including DSLR's and money was not a concern at the time. I needed almost an SLR but had concern because the camera would spend a lot of time on beaches and on a sailing boat so did not want to keep changing lenses and getting salt and sand in them. Worst environment for electronic reliability.

    Now I've started to research the functions I need from a DSLR with the idea that in 1 years time I will be buying one. I will not and refuse to be limited by make or camera religion. Now if I had a load of lenses that could be reused and therefore replaced then that would be a different kettle of fish.

    The best advice is make a list of the functions you want from the camera, then research the models on the web that give you the functions required and then go to a good photo shop and play with each one for some time to make sure all the buttons and functions are easily accesiible when taking photos. This is the reason I chose my Pro 1 - I never take need to take my eyes from the viewfinder to find any function when taking a photo, and that to me is the most important thing of all.

    Happy hunting

    Roger
    "I hope we will never see the day when photo shops sell little schema grills to clamp onto our viewfinders; and the Golden Rule will never be found etched on our ground glass." from The mind's eye by Henri Cartier-Bresson

    My Web Site: www.readingr.com

    DSLR
    Canon 5D; EF100-400 F4.5-5.6L IS USM; EF24-70 F2.8L USM 50mm F1.8 II; EF 100 F2.8 Macro
    Digital
    Canon Powershot Pro 1; Canon Ixus 100


  23. #23
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    McCordsville, IN
    Posts
    4,755

    Re: Pitch Tent... Camp Canon or Camp Nikon?

    Quote Originally Posted by philmaloy
    This whole conversation doesn't even make sense...comparing an $1800 D200 with a $7000 1D. Can someone grab a reality check. If anything the comparison should be between a D2X and a 1D, and even then its a stretch. Fine, Canon makes a great camera, but so does Nikon.
    .

    Ummm, speaking of reality checks.... the 1D is NOT $7000, that is the 1DS. The 1D MKII N is anywhere from $3400-$3999, Second, you can get a good used 1D (original) for under $1600, which does put it in the price range. And it's an excellent choice for someone needing a good fast, quality camera that is also weather sealed. Thats also $200 or more for lenses

    JS
    Canon 1D
    Canon 1D MK II N
    Canon 70-200mm USM IS f2.8
    Canon 200mm f1.8 USM
    Canon 300mm f2.8 USM IS
    Canon 28-300mm USM IS f3.5-5.6
    Canon 50mm f1.8
    Vivitar 19-35mm f3.5-5.6

  24. #24
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    McCordsville, IN
    Posts
    4,755

    Re: Pitch Tent... Camp Canon or Camp Nikon?

    In fact, one sports forum shooter just picked up a 1D (original) for $900, and thats $900 more for lenses!

    JS
    Canon 1D
    Canon 1D MK II N
    Canon 70-200mm USM IS f2.8
    Canon 200mm f1.8 USM
    Canon 300mm f2.8 USM IS
    Canon 28-300mm USM IS f3.5-5.6
    Canon 50mm f1.8
    Vivitar 19-35mm f3.5-5.6

  25. #25
    has-been... another view's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Rockford, IL
    Posts
    7,649

    Re: Pitch Tent... Camp Canon or Camp Nikon?

    Quote Originally Posted by readingr
    I challenge anyone to spot the difference on some of the shots I've taken with any of the above camera's as its not the camera its the way you use them.
    I agree - to some extent. One member here switched from Nikon to Canon but I can't tell which shots were taken with what camera. He did it because he felt that the Canon was better suited to what he was shooting - so I guess his "keeper ratio" went up. If the camera is doing what you need it to do, then you shouldn't be able to tell in most cases. You wouldn't use a pinhole camera to shoot sports unless that is the result that you wanted, for example.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •