Confusion between Canon 50D and Nikon D90

<p>The D300 was the competitor of Canon's 40D. The 50D is a better, higher spec'd camera than the 40D.</p>

<p>http://www.popphoto.com/cameras/5062/nikon-d300-vs-canon-eos-40d-a-hands-on-workout.html</p>

<p>For those who don't like to read the Manufacturer's website regarding these cameras.</p>

 

<p>?<br>

By that article <quote> the D300 easily takes the prize <\quote><br>

I also went to the D300 website: http://www.nikonusa.com/Find-Your-Nikon/ProductDetail.page?pid=25432<br>

And the 50D website: http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/controller?act=ModelInfoAct&fcategoryid=139&modelid=17499<br>

And didn't see where either manufacturer said their camera was a competitor of such and such. Maybe I missed it? Personally, after having shot with both a 40D and a D300 and a D90, the 40D isn't anywhere in the same league as a D300. I haven't shot with a 50D, but I don't see where Canon changed it's philosophy- just gave us more MP. AGAIN, Canon reserves their "Better" AF and metering for their TOP TWO BODIES. Whereas with Nikon you essentially get it with the D300 and up. This makes the D90 the "prosumer" camera which would be what the 50D is. I'm not making this up- this can be confirmed by reading the info or actually shooting with these cameras. And I have nothing against the 50D. Personally, I would have rather had Canon's better AF and metering instead of more MP, but that's me. And any of these three are capable of great images. </p>

<p>As Matt Laur noted above "The real deciding factor: you need to physically touch these camera bodies. The 50D is going to feel very, very different in your hands than will the other two you mention. It's a love at first touch sort of thing. Most people just naturally like the way Canon, or Nikon physically arrange the controls and design the user interfaces. It's very subjective. If you have larger hands, the D300 may feel far more pleasant to use than the D90. Things like that require personal, hands-on looking at the cameras."<br>

... this can't be more true. Go hold and play with the camera's you are interested in, see what feels best, search for the best price.. and BUY IT! :-)<br>

For me.. Nikon's are the way to go. They fit great in my hand and their controls are laid out in a way the works for my brain.<br>

Jeff</p>

<p>For me, this choice came down to availability of lens rentals and overall prices of lenses (and lens rentals). I sure I would be happy with either Nikon or Canon. I just found that the availability and pricing of Canon lenses (and rentals) were overall more affordable. </p>

<blockquote>

<p>For me.. Nikon's are the way to go. They fit great in my hand and their controls are laid out in a way the works for my brain.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I hear you Jeff, but I don't really understand it. I have Nikons, Canons, Leica, Voigtlanders, a Hasselblad, Rollei, Mamiya, and others. The 35mm cameras are really similar to me, and the others I get used to in just a few minutes of using, but to each his own. <br>

<br /><br>

Just one thing though ... some Nikon brand enthusiasts speak of "ergonomics" as if each Nikon model camera is exactly the same in form and function, but of the (film) Nikons I own, each one seems to be laid out differently than the next or is this just a recent feature starting with digital SLRs?</p>

<p>For my experience, I have heard ergonomics from all camps: if you like the feel on one camera over the other, then you may like shooting with it more. In terms of the discussion, there is a difference between the D90, the D300 and the 50D. Just as there is a difference with any camera with a built in camera grip. The D90 and the 50D will be close in there layouts. Each has a "creative" dial, each accesses a number of functions via the menus. Alternately, the D300 has metering and focusing controls on the back of the camera. It forgoes the creative dial and puts the ISO, WB, Image Quality and shooting release mode there instead. I prefer to shoot with 2x D300s than 1x D90 and 1x D300 so that I don't have to mentally change gears when switching bodies. But any camera is really a matter of determining correct exposure no matter where the controls are. </p>

<p> <a href="http://www.popphoto.com/cameras/5062/nikon-d300-vs-canon-eos-40d-a-hands-on-workout.html">(link)</a>Article comparing Nikon D300 and 40D</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>"the D300 easily takes the prize"</p>

</blockquote>

<blockquote>

<p>"But given the Canon's excellent performance in the things that count, we'd call the match differently. "</p>

</blockquote>

<p> One article two conclusions.</p>

<p><br /></p>

<p><em>@ Daniel, one of the many functions outside the cameras menu system (D300) is selecting it's metering system: matrix, center weighted, or spot.</em></p>

<p>It's outside the menu system on Canon as well. Rear thumb or top index finger doesn't seem to matter much.<em></em></p>

<p><em>Same with selecting the AF system.</em></p>

<p>Also outside the menus on Canon. Perhaps we should define menu system: the computer display you see on the rear LCD to reach various settings. I don't need to drill through computer screen menus on the rear LCD to reach either setting. I can reach any of the top right three "mode" buttons and change a setting without pulling my eye from the viewfinder.</p>

<p><em>Also, Nikon's CLS system can be used via the D300 as the commander. The Canon flash system requires you to use another flash or controller on the camera to achieve this.</em></p>

<p>The price of a 50D plus ST-E2 wireless transmitter is LESS than a D300. So what is your point?</p>

<p>You should have brought up the D300's built in intervalometer. I can't for my life figure out why every digital body doesn't do this since there's a full blown computer in the camera. Kudos to Nikon for that. BUT a 50D plus ST-E2 wireless flash controller plus intervalometer is about the same price as a D300, and Canon's intervalometer is much more flexible. So which one is better again?</p>

<p><em>So getting it right the first time is nice, for whatever reason it happens to get it right.</em></p>

<p>I've seen no real, consistent difference between Canon and Nikon bodies on metering with the exception that Canon biases the flash exposure too tightly to the selected AF point. If you have AF activation off the shutter release, it's not a problem. This was much more of a problem with E-TTL I than E-TTL II any way.</p>

<p><em>And while the 50D may be better built than it's predecessors, it is still closer to the build of the D90 than a D300.</em></p>

<p>No it's not. I'm not going to argue which is better built between the 50D and D300 because absent independent, third party review using standardized tests there is no argument, just opinion. So until dpreview starts destroying camera bodies we don't know. One can point out that the D300 has more rubber seals, but Canon must have some confidence in their "precision split level alignment" because it's how the shutter button is sealed and they rate the 50D for use in moderate rain. There is zero body flex in any Canon xxD model so I'm not buying the argument that the magnesium shell is subpar or sub Nikon.</p>

<p>I have had Canon 10D's and 20D's in rain and splashed with seawater with no ill effects and they're not supposed to be sealed at all. I've setup one body for star trails only to find it an hour later soaked with condensation (an unexpected fog rolled in). No problems. I've also had a Canon with L lens drop from a RV seat (I'll never make that mistake again) to the floor with a nice loud "thunk" with no ill effects on camera or lens. The 50D improves on both of those models.</p>

<p>I guess what I'm getting at is that when you say to someone that the D300 is "better built" you are implying that it will survive some use or environment that a Canon will not as if the Canon were delicate. That's BS. Canon xxD bodies are very rugged.</p>

<p>I'll never buy a prosumer Canon again after the horrendous failure of 5DMk2's Luminous landscape suffered with its trip to Antarctica. Any manufacturer who wants to charge up to 4 grand for a body should at least extend the weather seals to all orifices on the body....like Nikon with their D300/700 and D3/D3x, and the better Sony's.<br>

Its no good having all the techo bells and whistles if the shutter rots on you after a light shower, and even though you had the camera in a bag. Imagine how you would feel if you had forked out $20k for an adventure trip like that and your new camera carks it on day one!<br>

I don't care...Canon, Nikon, Sony...But I will do research and buy quality. I loved my EOS 50E when I was in film. Their range then was better than Nikon. I think Nikon is ahead at the moment. But the Canon quality build just does not seem to be there anymore in the prosumer Canon range.<br>

For my money, get the D90 or a good used D300. The FX bodies are still too expensive, used. And remember: less pixels, but bigger ones mean less noise and better high ISO performance.</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>What about the rumors that the D90 causes a painful rash?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Obviously you can't believe everything you read. Both cameras are great. Identify what lenses you want first, and then choose whichever camera works best with those lens choices. You won't go wrong.<br /> <br /> For a similarly pointless debate, with more than 312 equally valid opinions posted so far, see here:</p>

<p>http://www.photo.net/digital-darkroom-forum/00SZ2i</p>

<p> </p>

<blockquote>

<p>I hear you Jeff, but I don't really understand it. I have Nikons, Canons, Leica, Voigtlanders, a Hasselblad, Rollei, Mamiya, and others. The 35mm cameras are really similar to me, and the others I get used to in just a few minutes of using, but to each his own. <br /><br /><br />Just one thing though ... some Nikon brand enthusiasts speak of "ergonomics" as if each Nikon model camera is exactly the same in form and function, but of the (film) Nikons I own, each one seems to be laid out differently than the next or is this just a recent feature starting with digital SLRs?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Hi Thomas, I don't know regarding the film and DSLR nikons. I currently own Nikon's D200, D300, D700 (yeah.. let's not bring up upgrading here..) and they all fit my hand very well.<br>

Jeff</p>

<p><em>I'll never buy a prosumer Canon again after the horrendous failure of 5DMk2's Luminous landscape suffered with its trip to Antarctica.</em></p>

<p>Don't buy Nikon either given the horrendous failure of multiple professional D3's and a prosumer D200 at a freezing NFL game: http://alittlenewsphoto.com/?p=311</p>

<p><em>Its no good having all the techo bells and whistles if the shutter rots on you after a light shower, and even though you had the camera in a bag</em></p>

<p>That the camera you speak of was in a rain cover, and therefore protected from rain exposure, proves the failure was not related to seals or rain exposure. It's impossible to say with certainty what the cause was, but photographers on the trip admitted to moving between warm and cold environments and changing lenses and opening doors without giving the equipment any time to adjust to the ambient temperature. One even mentioned on his blog that he could see condensation forming while doing this, after which he commented that it probably wasn't wise. (Duh.) Internal condensation will kill any camera, even a diver's Nikonos.</p>

<p><em>Imagine how you would feel if you had forked out $20k for an adventure trip like that and your new camera carks it on day one!</em></p>

<p>Imagine how you would feel if you were employed to shoot a NFL game and your pro Nikons froze up mid game! Imagine losing a critical action shot, rushing to get a working camera body, only to have the same thing happen again!</p>

<p>We can play this mud slinging game all day long. Truth of the matter is if you don't do stupid things with your equipment, like changing lenses immediately after walking in from a frozen landscape to a heated room, you will generally be fine with either brand's equipment. The failures popularized by brand fans on the Internet are generally unfortunate flukes or stupid behavior. They are not indicators of overall model quality no matter how much brand fans want you to believe they are. For every "Canon failed" story there is a "Nikon failed" story. (Want to read the forum post of the guy complaining about water drops in the viewfinder of his "sealed" D300 after a rain storm?) Take it all with a grain of salt and treat your equipment with some common sense.</p>

<p>Rajnish, you should be asking yourself which lens system you wish to buy into. Lenses have a much longer life span than cameras, especially disposable digitals. Nikon maybe a better choice today, but tomorrow you can count on Canon topping them (or vice verca). Lenses have a far greater impact on your final image. If you are really concerned about reliablity and weather proofing, buy two entry level DSLR's and keep one in your bag just in case. And remember, there is no such thing as pro cameras, only pro photographers.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>And didn't see where either manufacturer said their camera was a competitor of such and such. Maybe I missed it? </p>

</blockquote>

<p>It's in the text of different reviews.</p>

<p> </p>

Pick the black one,....wait a minute.......

<blockquote>

<p>Pick the black one,....wait a minute.......</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Ha, I was going to say pick one ... they're both big, black, plastic, heavy, have dials and buttons, cost too much, and gives you a neck-ache after touring with it for a few hours.</p>

<p>You are committing to one brand or another. Look at the lens lineup and what could be a more affordable lineup to you now or in the future. If it's less $ new, it will be less $ used, whether you plan to buy lenses now or later.<br>

The cameras themselves will feel very different to you, I have used Nikon for 10 years and I like the focusing point selection, i am used to the grain, and other factors ergonomic and feature based of F100 [film body] and in the past few years D200 and D300, so picking between the 2 i would be more comfortable with D90 over 50D.<br>

I have heard from 50D users about the noise concern and need to over-expose for shots including sky, so as to avoid noise in the sky, from the very-cramped 15mpix sensor [highest concentration of pixels/sensor size] even though one would first think that more pixels = better.<br>

Because of that too D90 is said to have lower noise, or better ISO.<br>

But what about lenses? Want a 70-200mm? Nikon: $1700 please, 1 choice. Canon: pick from 4 versions from $700 to $1500, IS or no IS, f/4 or f/2.8. nice. want macro? Nikon seems to have an edge.<br>

Top photographers use either Canon or Nikon, so apparently both are usable :-).</p>

<p>I did not know D3 was so bad for sports shooting and it give you a rash on top of that. Wow I never heard of Canon MK3 failing like that this must mean Canon better than Nikon for sports. Why do I feel like I am at DPreview?<br>

Sergio (my camera is better than yours LOL)</p>

<p>from robert body (who is an excellent photographer, go look at his work...):But what about lenses? Want a 70-200mm? Nikon: $1700 please, 1 choice. Canon: pick from 4 versions from $700 to $1500, IS or no IS, f/4 or f/2.8. nice. want macro? Nikon seems to have an edge.</p>

<p>that seems to say to me that canon might have an edge on the 70-200. choose the one that you need. gonna use it all day long on a tripod, skip IR. lighting no problem, get the f/4. whereas with nikon, no matter your needs, you get IR and f/2.8. all for around 2000 now. i shoot nikon and the lens seem a little expensive. but i love my new 17-55DX. thing is gorgeous.</p>

<p>Well one thing to consider is that camera specifications like MegaPixels, and LCD screens, and picture modes are not the whole story. A camera is a tool, and just as important are how it feels to use, and how easily you can operate its controls, and of course the overall ergonomics. I think an important part of getting good pictures is having a camera where you feel comfortable using all its controls.<br>

I was a life-long Nikon shooter, and was pretty dead set on possiblly getting a D90.<br>

But, I went to a camera store and picked up the D90 and just did not like how it felt. I was very surprised. I then went to another camera store and compared the Nikon D90, D300, and the Canon Rebels, and the 40D and 50D. I really liked the build quality of the 40D and 50D cameras (It reminded me of my old Nikon Film SLRS like F3 HP). I also liked how the controls were laid out on the Canon 40D and 50D.<br>

The Nikon D90 just seemed more like plastic and too small for my hands. My fingers couldn't really grip it properly. While the Canon Rebel Cameras also had a plastic quality to them, and I really missed that they did not have a top view LCD.<br>

As far as the D300, it definitly had the build quality of the Canon 40D and 50D, but in a side to side comparison I just liked how the controls are laid out on the Canon cameras better.<br>

I would recommend going to a camera store and picking up each of these cameras. Try out all the controls, especially using focus controls, chaning shutter and aperture settings, etc. Which camera in your hands will help you take better pictures.<br>

I ended up buying the 40D and I am extremely happy with it.</p>

<p> </p>