Canon or Nixon

Discussion in 'Canon EOS' started by joel_ballanger, May 27, 2009.

  1. I am a beginning photographer, I'm 18, and previously used my friend's EOS 40D with a Sigma 30/1.4 lens. I am now planning on buying my own Digital SLR but a problem has arisen; which camera should I get?
    < p>The Canon EOS 40D or the Nixon D80?
    If I do get the Canon I would, most likely purchase the Sigma 30/1.4 lens (it was recommended to me by the re view on photo.net that I read) but which lens should I purchase for the Nixon if I decide to get that instead?
    Also, I enjoy shooting most things but what really interests me is extending the exposure on a camera and playing with light and the shapes and things it does. For example i enjoy shooting pictures at night from the ove rpass of cars on the highway. With the extended exposure the light creates streaks and it is really interesting.--thi s being said is there a camera that i should get that would be better for that as well as good for shooting all aro und?
    B asically this is what it comes down to:
    W hich is better for me- Canon EOS 40D or Nixon D80 and which ever one is better which lens should I purc hase?
    A s a new photographer I don't want to rush in and make an ill-informed decision and end up regretting it late r, rather I would appreciate help in making an informed decision to buy the camera and lens that best suits my need s!
    T hanks a lot, I really appreciate you help!
    J oel Ballanger
    ����
     
  2. you might want to check reviews of the niKon D80 in the niKon forum, and see what others have to say. Additionally, you could compare it with reviews of the Canon 40D and see what the similarities(and differences are). Since this is the Canon forum, I doubt if people would have much(if any)experience with Nikon's digital bodies.
     
  3. The big difference between Canon and Nikon is feel. Overall both make great cameras. I would suggest you try both out and see what feels better in your hands. Nobody can tell you which is better for you.
     
  4. Any modern dSLR from any manufacturer will be more than sufficient for beginner's photography -- and you already made a wise decision to stay away from entry-level gear. When it comes down to Canon vs. Nikon I prefer the former, because of the better backwards-compatibility of adapted lenses, less expensive full-frame option (used 5D) and plentiful and inexpensive gear on the used market. Nikon only offers slightly better ergonomics/design and a more sensible flash technology.
    But why not Pentax, Sony or Olympus? Just because Canon & Nikon spend more on their marketing? CaNik lack in-body stabilization which is a mayor drawback if you prefer prime lenses (like that 30mm). They also offer only very few APS-C dedicated primes.
    If I do get the Canon I would, most likely purchase the Sigma 30/1.4 lens (it was recommended to me by the re view on photo.net that I read) but which lens should I purchase for the Nixon if I decide to get that instead?​
    Uh, the SigMa 30mm f/1.4 comes in all kinds of mounts... Nikon, Canon, Pentax, Olympus etc.
     
  5. Canon or Nikon. Both are awesome and very capable cameras. You can't go wrong.
    By all means get yourself a Sigma 30/1.4, but I suggest also picking up a kit zoom lens. Both Nikon and Canon offer kit lenses that are excellent value when purchased with the camera body. The prime and the zoom will have different creative purposes.
    If you're interested in time exposures of car lights, you'll need a tripod and cable release.
     
  6. you'll need a tripod and cable release.​
    ...or a tripod and mirror-lock plus self-timer. Cable releases are not needed anymore, Arie.
     
  7. As others have pointed out, it is hard to go wrong with either camera. Picking a camera is more than just picking a body however. You are picking a system: bodies, flashes, lenses and even third party support and after market support. These are the reasons I would stay with Nikon or Canon (don't get me wrong, I would love to play with the Pentax but I don't have unlimited funds!). I would ponder that decision more than just a single body decision.
    Between the Canon and Nikon, I would choose Nikon. Between the 40D and the D80, I would choose the 40D. I would choose the 40D because I need the high ISO the CMOS chip in the 40D can provide. The Nikon D80 uses a CCD chip which will produce more noise at ISO 800 and above. However, the new D5000 and the D90 use a CMOS chip for lower noise now.
     
  8. A refubished Canon EOS 30D or a Nikon D200 -- still available, I think -- might be worth looking at too. They were great cameras a year ago and still are. And of course Pentax. Their new K7 should send the price of the very able K20D in a positive direction.
     
  9. Remember, the Canon 40D is a step above the Nikon D80. The D80 is on the same level as the Rebel XTi. They came out at the same time and was direct competitors. The 40D is a prosumer level camera. Wise to go ahead and step up first. The Nikon equivilent of the 40D is the D300. Both are great cameras. Just play with them and see which fits you best. Neither will hold you back. The more you like your camera the quicker you will learn. So see which feels better, which allows you to find menu functions easier. The one that makes the most since. Research real good, cause once you buy into the system, its not wise to switch from cost standpoint.
     
  10. The Nikon equivalent of the 40D is the D300​
    I respectively disagree. Nikon doesn't have an equivalent to the 40D, although besides the CMOS vs CCD thing, I would say the D80 is darn close. The Nikon D90 would be the equivalent to the 50D. The Nikon D300 is in another league which Canon doesn't have an equivalent too, except perhaps the 1D Mark II/III.
     
  11. Bueh. I've shot headlight trails. Sometimes the action is intermittent - not much traffic, traffic gets backed up behind a light and then surges forward when the light goes green. The cable release allows you to catch the best action. Ditto for fireworks. Plus you pretty much need a cable release to shoot bulb.
     
  12. The camera is the least important part of the equation. It's the lens system that you should be concerned about. Check which maker has the lenses you want and go that way. Camera bodies come and go, one brand leap frogging the other and vice versa. Lenses on the otherhand can last for many, many years.
    If the choice becomes better body or better lenses, go with the better lenses.
     
  13. If buying a refurbished, is this a good idea? What I mean is do they come with warranties?
    When buying a lenses are there certain companies which make the best lenses? Or yet again is it a matter of personal preference?
     
  14. a tripod and cable release.
    What will this do?
    A- what is a cable release?
    B-How much will this set me back?
    p.s-how do you, when responding to something someone else said, have that grey square appear?
     
  15. Here is another question: Should I buy new, used
    or refurbished?
     
  16. I respectfully disagree. Nikon doesn't have an equivalent to the 40D, although besides the CMOS vs CCD thing, I would say the D80 is darn close. The Nikon D90 would be the equivalent to the 50D. The Nikon D300 is in another league which Canon doesn't have an equivalent to.​
    David is absolutely right about this: in terms of performance, capability and IQ, the 40D is right there with the D300 - no question about it.
    The D80 (and the D200 - the camera that drove me away from Nikon once and for all ) has the worst sensor ever to see the inside of a camera, and the AF in either camera is just awful.
    Oh - and where the D200 is concerned, let's talk about battery life...
    The 40D only lacks a few bells and whistles compared to the D300, but in terms of end results, it is a match in every way (yes, including AF) for the D300, and in some respects is demonstrably better.
     
  17. Joel, tripod and cable release. You set up the camera on a tripod, and plug in the cable switch which activates the shutter. By using the cable release you don't have to touch the camera so it stays steady for the duration of the shot.
    If you set the camera to Bulb mode, the shutter stays open for as long as you hold the botton on the cable release. For really long exposures you can lock the button down so that you don't have to keep pressing it.
    Examples. 1/2 second exposure. The train comes by every 10 minutes so using the self-timer is not really feasible.
    http://photos.photosig.com/photos/62/88/1878862-3d8313f9681e2279.jpg
    http://photos.photosig.com/photos/39/39/1723939-8586df3aabe996c4.jpg
    30 second exposure. This onewould be possible to shoot with the self-timer
    http://photos.photosig.com/photos/78/59/1705978-f8a3be51784fc95b.jpg
    1 hour exposure. You definitely need the cable release for this - you can't hold the camera steady for 1 hour and get the mountains in sharp focus.
    http://photos.photosig.com/photos/76/34/1653476-bab1242559bd5e6c.jpg
     
  18. Hopefully I can ask few things, since they are, I think, kinda similar and on subject with what you guys are talking about here.
    I'm losing my mind over my first DSLR camera these days... whether to go for Nikon or Canon.
    Obv I'm just entering the DSLR world.
    I'm considering 40D or D90 (and maybe D5000 - still not sure if it's a good buy cause it's still very much new and the price might drop down in the next few months).
    I was thinking maybe Nikon D90 kit + wide angle lens 10-20mm by Sigma. That's what looks appealing the most to me atm, but it seems that Canon 40D is a bit more "professional" camera with better picture quality if I'm not mistaken?
    Which camera is more "professional": D90 or D5000 ? Better capabilities with manual settings and all? Or are they pretty much the same, just that D5000 has few more "fancy" features?
    Canon or Nikon? D90 or 40D?
    Thanks!
     
  19. It doesn't answer your question directly, but the following link highlights some of the more prominent differences across Canon and Nikon product lines...
    http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/nikon-d3-d300.shtml
    Personally, I prefer Canon over Nikon because of the availability of fast USM primes. Nikon's selection of AF-S lenses is limited unless you're considering those for the DX format as well. In addition, I find Nikon's AF lenses noisy and distracting, which may or may not matter to you...
     
  20. I didn't think that Watergate Dick was in the camera business...
    But seriously, get a 40D (for all the reasons already cited), and an EF 50/1.4. Using a normal prime lens will teach you more about photography than almost anything else.
     
  21. Go handle the ones you can afford. Buy the one you like most. Get one lens for it. If you change your mind later, sell both and buy something else.
     
  22. Why consider a 40D? Its been superceded by the 50D. Unless you can get a 40D for 50% off retail, then in a year you will understand all about serious depreciation. I'm not getting into a debate about Nikon/Canon. Its far too subjective, but I have Nikon and Canon, and now have a D300 and I got it for A$1500, six months old (A$3500 new). Thats about $1000 US dollars.There's your benchmark. Adorama have a used 40D for US$754.
    In a year from now the 40D will be $500, the 50D will be a grand and the 60D will be out. Same with Nikon. There will be a D400, an upgrade to the D90 and a D6000. Its madness. never buy new and retail. Look on Adorama or B&H for a mint used camera and with their returns policy, you can't go wrong. I do and from down here in Australia. Even with the exchange rate its still better because of used camera availability.
     
  23. I am a lifelong Canon user but Nikon has some good cameras out at the moment (I wish Canon had a D3 equivalent) and a great lens (the 14-24 F2.8 zoom). I would not get the Nikon D80 but would buy the D90 - I have played with both as a friend is a big Nikon shooter and the 90 is a much better camera - you could also look at a used 200. On the Canon side the 40 is also very competent.
     
  24. I'm a fan of Nixon and Nikon ;)
    Arie, your first link, the shot of the train and the city is stupendous! Great light. Where is it?
     
  25. I used to work in a major NYC camera store. I believe it was the Nikon rep (but I can also imagine the Canon rep saying the same in reverse) once said to a bunch of us in a meeting, if you don't buy Nikon, then buy Canon. Forget all the rest. Keep in mind, this comment is made strictly regarding digital slr's. I think this says a lot about both Canon and Nikon.
    So, I really don't think you can go wrong with either company from a quality and image making consideration. You really have to handle them and see which feels better in your hands, and which method of menu/functional control "thinking" you like best.
    It is really down to that. I have two friends that own both Nikon and Canon cameras. And they swear by both for different reasons. And coincedently, one started out Nikon, and eventually bought Canon also......and the other started Canon and eventually bought Nikon also. For all the rivalry between the two users of Nikon and Canon.....you never do hear them mention other brands of DSLR and SLR............now, do you?
     
  26. The spider in the wood pile in the future may well be Sony. They have a great camera for $3500 in the a900. Mag construction and proper weather sealing on body and lenses, and those lenses from Zeiss. If they ever get their firmware and menus/features etc sorted out, they could be a real threat. I do know for a fact that both Nikon and Canon are nervous about Sony. Its a comapny that could easily buy market share. The installed base of Canon and Nikon are keeping them out right now, but you watch what will happen if the big two stuff up on, say, lens compatibility in the near future.
     
  27. Well I would suggest that you would buy a real cheap but good old film camera and practice with that. The lens could be then used in the digital camera later- Novadays people are selling Nikkormats and old Nikons in C-condition and sometimes you can get them with bargain price with a good lens. Once you have done your homework and understand all what you can do with the film camera I suggest you move to shoot more digital - and hey why not do that at the same time:)? Be just sure that you get good digital body to support the lens. Nikon digital body D90 (if that accepts the lens) would be my choice (there are many others-depends how keen you are with your hobby and how you look into future) but you have to figure out the whole budget. Cards, printers etc. If you are eager enough you might find all of the stuff at the same place. If not - do some studying after consulting camera club senior or someone who is really dedicated long time photographer and has a open mind for your project.
    Good luck in the search- and as you know and notice you can always consult sites like photo.net and many other as you get closer making decisions. BR Hannu
     
  28. go for whichever offers you the right lens combination for your needs, everything else is just irrelevant. i have always shot nikon, but given my choice again, i would go canon because it is alot easier to put on leica glass.
     
  29. Dear Stephen the Sony A900 is $2,700, not $3,500. Cheers.
     
  30. FYI Joel, Nixon (ie. Richard Nixon) is a former president of the US who was impeached (fired) and Nikon is a camera manufacturer.
     
  31. >>> FYI Joel, Nixon (ie. Richard Nixon) is a former president of the US who was impeached (fired)...

    Actually, Nixon resigned. He likely would have been impeached if he had not done so.
     
  32. As Tommy said: Hands on - don't buy without having both in your hands and in front of your eye - Check which viewfinder is best for you - you have to be comfortable with it!
     
  33. I hear the Nixon can also record audio...
     
  34. Thanks for clearing that up for me Keith.
    Mike must be out of his ever loving mind if he thinks the Canon equivalent to the D300 is my 1D Mark III. A $4500 camera vs a $1600 camera. Pro Level everything vs mostly consumer everything. The D300 has similar AF as the D3, but it doesnt carry real pro level quality.
    It is ahead of the 40D in bells and whistles, but that is the direct line of competition. The D80 is exactly a direct competitor to the Rebel XTi. They both have similar sensors. Identical noise control. Identical fps,size, level of AF etc. I know cause I did 2 months of research on the both of them when I bought the XTi. They were released at almost the exact same time. The D200/D300's have always been a direct competitor to the 30D/40D of Canon. Just recently, the Nikon started offering a lower level than the D80/D90 as a very basic entry level camera. So did Canon with the Reble XS.
    Where in the world do you get off thinking the D300 was anywhere close to performance of a Canon 1-Series is beyond anything I've heard. By that methodology, why buy a D3 when you could just buy a D300 and get the same quality. And all the new D90 is in level compared to Canon is the new T1i. I think Nikon has more AF in the lower end cameras than Canon offers, but thats it in terms of IQ. And I thought the AF in the 40D/50D was pretty good. And probably right on with the D300. Yes I know the D300 has a 51 point AF etc. But just like with my Mark III, I always use 1 focus point anyway, so whats the use. Having all 45 points of my AF system active is only good for tracking flocks of birds maybe. No pro uses that method of AF.
     
  35. Thanks a lot Arie! Thats really helpful, those pictures really illustrated what's possible, what I want to do as wel!
     
  36. FYI, John-- Nixon is also watch company that makes " style or sport surf watches"
    However I do know who Nixon is, although that was long before I was born. (I am currently reading a book called Worse than Watergate which compares the Bush administration to the Nixonian administration and demonstrates how much worse it is, or rather was, halleluiah!). Its really good though--you should read it.
    Thank You for all your help, I now understand that it really boils down to personal preference, or at least that seems to be the general consensus, and I am grateful for all the help. Keep posting please, this website is a fountain of knowledge and I am extremely glad I stumbled upon it.
    And it looks like I will be getting a Canon EOS 40D kit with a zoom lens and a prime lens (probably EF 50/1.4) ....Unless some valuable post persuading me not to arises!
    Thanks again Arie-- your help concerning extended exposure was incredible and priceless- i will definitely be buy a tripod and cable release and hoping to do what your amxing pictures achieved! (they are awesome! Wow!)
     
  37. Nikon! And don't look back. You won't regret it.
     
  38. I would recommend the Nikon D90 or the newer D5000 over the D80 as it is a little dated now,& I can't believe I'm saying this but wow the turn over in the digital market is a little much to bare at times IMHO.
     
  39. Canon or Nixon

    I'm still loving the title of this when it comes up on the main page of the site.
    --Lannie
     
  40. I think Nixon, difficult to figure out, not much of a camera.. but lasting images.
     
  41. Funny guys-- the reason it says nixon is because my computer at home uses mozilla and apparently Nikon isn't a word and it auto corrected it to Nixon!
    Still its worth a laugh though!
     
  42. Arie where could I buy a cable release
     
  43. at least nixon isn't a crook or so he claimed.
     
  44. seriuosly though, both cameras can lead you to excellent results. I would go to your local camera store and try them out. Try to see if one or the other feels better in your hands. Try adjusting aperture and shutter speeds etc... and you may find you prefer the ergonomics of one or the other. I went with the Canon 40D so that I could adapt my Zeiss lenses to it so my decision was predetermined. Either way enjoy your shooting.
     
  45. the self timer works great on unchanging scenes, but I would recomend a cable release so that you can capture the exact moment and scene and not 2 seconds into the future.
    check ebay for cable releases - I find buying from hong kong via ebay is often cheaper than going to my local Toronto store.
     
  46. My choice was also between Canon and NiKon when I was to choose my digital equipment. As others have pointed out, you have to feel the cameras, how they are in your hands. Both are magnificent systems, with lots of extra accessories and lenses, so whatever you choose you cannot go wrong.
    But ergonomics is the main, main desicion point.
     
  47. Don´t buy any of them! Buy Nikon D90 or Canon 50D!
     
  48. I see a lot of great pics out of the Canons and I have to say they tend to have more neutral of a look. That is, to me the Nikon images say Nikon all over them (lots of browns and stuff).
    However, I shoot Nikon (both a D300 and a Fuji S5) and one major particular advantage is being able to use the older lenses (however, if it's a D80, well, not as easily if they aren't AF). There's a lot of great cheap lenses in older forms due to Nikon keeping their mount since basically, forever (ok, well the PC ones are out unless they've been AI converted but...).
    Regardless, they're both great and I don't think you'll get a rational answer out of a discussion here. I agree with one of the posts - try `em.
     
  49. I have a Canon 40D and my girlfriend has a Nikon D90, and I often try to figure out which one is better. Her Nikon has that great high-resolution LCD and 12 megapixels, but I like the ergonomics on my Canon much, much better. The controls on the Nikon just seem kinda goofy to me. (Nixon seemed kinda goofy too, and I'm old enough to remember him.) Neither one of us is too invested in camera gear, so we could easily switch to the other line if a compelling reason arose, and I think that compelling reason would be image quality. If I believed Nikons produced better images, I would switch to a Nikon and just learn how to use it. So far, however, most everyone says the image quality is comparable (except for those guys who keep saying it's the photographer, the photographer, which is only partially true). But, as I bet everyone does, I still look at my images and wonder if they would be better if I had taken them with a different body or lens....
    In any case, Joel, you'll probably be equally happy with either a Canon or Nikon, but still always wondering if you made the right choice.
    BTW, that incredible image of the train and city skyline looks like Atlanta, to me. Am I right?
    Time to log on to B&H and look for cable releases....
     
  50. I think you're going to be happy with either Nikon or Canon. Both obviously high-quality systems. "System" is the key word. Remember that as you get into this, you're not only buying a camera, but buying into a system.
    Think serioiusly about what you want to do. Consider the lenses and accessories you will be likely to need in the future. Check the availability/affordability of the entire system you will want. Which will make it more practical for you to build your ideal system? Which will actually have more backward-compatabilty to fine affordable used lenses?
    Nikon or Canon, but I think I'd stay away from Nixon; It's my understanding that you have to shred the prints at some point in the future...
     
  51. Clinton was impeached, and that didn't mean crap.
    I think that the OP meant "Cannon vs. Nixon".
     
  52. Speed Graphic.
     
  53. "I hear the Nixon can also record audio..."
    Did you know that the famous 18 1/2 minute gap in the Nixon tapes is almost exactly the same length as Arlo Guthries recording of Alice's Restaurant? Mr. Guthrie has speculated that the length of his recording might somehow explain the length of the gap in the Nixon tapes.
     
  54. Chevy v. Ford again. (Yawn. . . .)
    --Lannie
     
  55. As Stephen has rightly said, Sony is the company to watch out.
    They are much bigger than both Canon and Nikon put together, and they seem damn serious about their DSLR business.
    Gurbally/Toronto
     
  56. Hi Joel! Sorry if this response is a bit late. My opinion: you really can't go wrong either way, Canon or Nikon. One is not overall better than the other. They're just different. It really depends on your eventual style or genre of photography. It's even possible that the choice you make will impact the evolution of your style, or what you like to shoot. It's exciting starting out, but don't get too hung up on the whole which camera/which lens if it at all impedes you from actually going out and taking photos. Good luck, and stick with it!
    Oh, and I highly recommend trying before buying: http://www.lensprotogo.com/shopping/start.php?browse=1&cat=11&=SID
     
  57. david_henderson

    david_henderson www.photography001.com

    I never felt that I quite got the whole picture from a Nixon.
    New or used? Can't speak for the new Nixons. I do suggest avoiding the old ones, but the very worst models can no longer be found.
     
  58. between the two bodies you mentioned, I like the canon body better (and i'm a nikon user). You'd be better off buying a slightly used Nikon D200 than D80. but you have to take into consideration that you are "marrying" that brand in a sense.
     
  59. ....I can see clearly now.... (I tried both out) that I was wrong in not acting more decisively and more forthright in dealing with my camera choice......-Joel Ballanger
    ....I can see clearly now... that I was wrong in not acting more decisively and more forthrightly in dealing with Watergate.....-Richard Nixon
    But seriously, I tried it out and I found that I really like the ergonomics of the Canon more than I do the Nikon and well say I do find out, in say a year, that Canon has some major problems or things I don't like ..then I'll invest in a Nikon. Hell, I'm young it's not like I have a mortgage to pay for!
    Thanks a lot Mark Thomas, your help has been awesome, I probably would have searched ebay and bought something only to find out that it was incompatible!
    BTW I LOVE THIS SITE ITS AWESOME!
     
  60. Quick question (I'm getting the EOS 40D) :
    Zoom lens (comes as a kit) - EF-S 17-85mm f/4-5.6 IS USM
    or
    buy the body and a prime lens- EF 50/1.4
     
  61. Which lens? That's an entirely separate debate, one that would probably spawn another hundred replies.
    But with respect to those two specific lenses you mention (EF-S 17-85/4-5.6, vs. EF 50/1.4), ask yourself two questions:
    1. How much do I really need the flexibility of a zoom? Am I willing to accept reduced optical quality and a smaller max aperture in order to obtain that flexibility in focal length?
    2. Do I envision staying with the Canon EF mount for the long haul--in particular, do I see myself upgrading to a 35mm sensor size at some point in the future?
    If the answer to the first question is "no," AND the answer to the second is "yes," then get the 50/1.4--the decision is clear. If (1) is a "yes" and (2) is a "no," then get the EF-S lens because you're not moving in a direction that is best served by a prime lens right now. If the answer is somewhere in between; e.g., you want the flexibility of a zoom but are planning on going 35mm by upgrading to a 5D- or 1D-series EOS, you may want to consider an EF zoom even though that may be more than what you are willing to pay right now. That EF-S zoom will simply not work on a 35mm format camera. On the other hand, if you don't care about zoom flexibility right now, you may just go with an EF prime and reap the benefit of higher image quality.
    Let's be clear: Given that you are going for the 40D, you need glass that will live up to the demands of a high pixel density sensor. Going for the highest-quality lens you can afford is generally a good investment, as lenses do not become outdated easily--unless Canon makes a Mark II version (and even then, sometimes people still prefer the Mark I, as in the case of the 50/1.8!).
     
  62. Between the two, I would choose the zoom. The 40D is a crop sensor camera so that 50/1.4 will behave like an 80mm lens on a full frame and you'll probably miss the wide end.
    You might also look at the Canon 18-200 zoom instead. You'll sacrifice some lens quality, but gain a LOT in versatility. I have a 40D with the 24-105 f/4 L and it's a high quality lens, but I often wish it was both wider and longer, especially longer. I'm shopping for a longer lens to supplement it.
     
  63. The deciding factor should be the lenses. Both are excellent bodies.
    Canon has a slight advantage in terms of a larger offer of lenses, specially in terms of telephoto, Nikon seems to have the edge in wide angle.
    I would do this: Look for the lens offering (available at each company's website), select the ones you want, look for the price you would pay and then choose the body for your preferred choice in lenses.
    Bodies come and go, but the lenses will be with you forever.
    Funny that Firefox thought Nixon when you wrote Nikon ;-P
    Good luck.
     
  64. Although flawed and largely responsible for the Watergate fiasco, President Nixon did a small number of good things. I think President Canon was better.
     
  65. President Canon... Hmmmm, wasn't he fired several times?
     
  66. You are very welcome Joel. When I bought my 40D I went for the kit with the 17-85mm lens. I then sold the kit lens, to reduce the overall cost of the body. i.e. there is quite a savings buying the lens in a kit rather than by itself. I think since you are just starting that I would go for the 17-85 kit lens. The 50/1.4 is actually quite long on the 40D cropped sensor ie like an 85mm lens on a full frame camera. Use the kit lens for awhile and then see what focal length you use the most and then decide on your next lens purchase - remember one of the reasons for owning a DSLR is the flexibility of attaching many different lens. Good luck with your purchase and I look forward to seeing some of your photos here on photo.net.
     
  67. Hi, Joel...... Just 2 comments:
    First, regarding refurbished items: I've bought 3 Canon factory refurbished items from Adorama, and all 3 were perfect, and have been working fine for a year or so. Highly recommended.
    Second, I've done a lot of nighttime, long exposure photography with my Canon 30D, and it works amazingly well. I use aperture priority, the exposures go up to 30 seconds or so (That's a guess; I've never actually timed them.) and the exposures are very close on the first try. Pictures by moonlight! It's fun.. I think manual focus works best; otherwise the camera gets confused. And of course you need a tripod, and maybe a little flashlight so you can see the buttons on the camera.
    You really won't regret buying either of these brands.
    Oh, you should be aware that some models won't fire at all if they don't think there's enough light. Since you know you want to shoot in the dark, you should difinitely try that function before you buy.
     
  68. I'd go with the Nixon, if you can find it!
     
  69. "Oh, you should be aware that some models won't fire at all if they don't think there's enough light. Since you know you want to shoot in the dark, you should difinitely try that function before you buy."
    Must be a Canon thing. I've never run into that problem with any Pentax camera I have used.
     
  70. I am about to get my first DSLR (I have cashed in a bunch of airmiles to get a Canon Rebel XS and am waiting for delivery). For me it is a no brainer to get a Canon because I had a 35 mm Elan IIe. The 35 mm equipment is about ten years old. About 7 years ago, I just stopped using an SLR altogether. Film, processing and printing just got too expensive. For the casual photos I was taking, I was happy to just to use a Canon digital point and shoot, shooting hundreds of photos on a weekend and storing them on CD's or hard drive; I think I have only printed 20 prints in the last 7 years.
    Over the years, I looked into buying a DSLR but never was never quite motivated enough; early on it was a matter of high cost, low megapixels, slow performance, noise at higher ISO, etc at least in the consumer level DSLR. With the technological progress being made, it seemed to me that entry level DSLR's had almost become a disposable item; they became obsolete within about a year as the next bigger and better came along. Plus, I did not miss lugging around a big camera.
    Recently, I noticed that I had more than enough airmiles to get one for "free" and that the DSLR's have reached a stage where even the lowest model of any brand will give amazing performance even in low light situation. IMO, at the entry level, DSLR's may have hit a plateau in terms of picture taking performance for the average non-professional consumer. They can jam in more megapixels, add video or maybe put in a phone or wi-fi, but pictures are not going to look a whole lot better at this stage, IMO.
    If you are new into the game, I don't think you could go wrong with either Canon or Nikon (or Sony, Olympus, etc etc.). But I do have to say that I am very happy that I went with Canon ten years ago. Canon was very forward thinking when they designed the EF mount and it is nice to see that I will be able to use all of my old Canon film lenses (50mm/1.8 and 28 -105) on the latest digial camera. I believe that even my old Canon 380ex flash will still work with the new Rebel XS.
     
  71. I'm a new photographer, too. Back in February, I had to choose between Canon and Nikon. Both offer excellent systems.
    Being a newbie, I didn't want to overspend, so I looked at the 40D, which was heavily discounted (in the wake of the 50D). I also looked at the D90.
    I hated the D90. It simply didn't feel good in my hands.
    The moment I held the 40D, however, I instantly fell in love with it! It seems like this camera was designed specifically to fit my hands!
    When choosing a camera, Image Quality and lens selection/system are important considerations. But so are ergonomics and handling! After all, you have to live with this camera for a long time (esp. at a cost of over $1,000).
    I'm very happy with my 40D. Image quality is excellent. Build quality is excellent -- I *love* the all-magnesium body! And the price is right!
    Since both cameras are priced the same, it seems to me the choice is clear.
    (BTW, don't go chasing after the latest features. Focus on the basics: IQ and comfort. The D90 and D300 may have lots of nice features, but the 40D is still a great camera and a terrific bargain to boot!)
     
  72. Joel, your first impression was merely affirmed here, mostly by choosing to post the question on a Canon forum. No problem, I have shot Canon, still keep one around, and they produce wonderful pictures. A few of the comments were, however, somewhat jaundiced.
    Just for kicks, and the sake of balance, you might want to post your query on a Nikon forum. You can bet whatever you own that the ergonomics comments will be 180 degrees around, as also backwards compatibility will have a different take than some, and a few others. That is the theory of our wonderful legal system: listen to two sides, then choose.
    No matter, though. Pick the one that feels the best would be my suggestion. Both will produce better pictures than most of us are able to print. The joy of the great images will be your real reward either way.
    Just my $.02.
     
  73. My choice: clearly Canon. The Nikon's three focus areas are not enough. Other than that, there are no bad brands.
    Both Canon and ikon have a cheap 50mm f/1.8 which is a great portrait lens
     
  74. It's also worth noting that Nikon lenses are generally more expensive than Canon lenses. Examples from Adorama:
    Canon's 24-70 f/2.8L vs Nikon's 24-70 f/2.8G: $1,190 vs $1729
    Canon's 70-200 f/2.8L IS vs Nikon's 70-200 f/2.8G VR: $1,599 vs $1,899
    Canon's 16-35 f/2.8 vs Nikon's 17-35 f/2.8: $1,399 vs. $1764
    Canon's 10-22 is cheaper and has more range than the Nikon 12-24 [$699 vs $899] and cheaper than the 10-24 [$899]
    If you're cost-conscious, that's a pretty good reason to go with Canon...
     
  75. The Nikon D80 has 11 autofocus points (at least mine did when I was out shooting with it a few hours ago). I think you're confused with the entry-level D40/x/60.
     
  76. Coming from a Nikon user and lover:
    The D80 is perhaps the worst recent Nikon camera. Aside from its poor high ISO performance (the D40 is a full stop better, and has much less chroma noise at every setting), it is known for an erratic metering system that is easily confused. Looking beyond full "systems" for a moment I'd say the 40D is clearly the better body. Depending on what you shoot Canon may also have the superior system. On the other hand the Nikon D90 is a massive improvement over the D80 and is worth spending a little extra money on. It has a great metering system, a brighter viewfinder (D80/D90 viewfinders are notably larger than that of the 40D), superb high ISO performance, more speed and a more comfortable grip design.
    If you shoot telephoto/sports, I'd push you towards Canon. Nikon supertele primes are blindingly expensive, and there are no good lower-cost alternatives; Canon also has more primes with fast-focusing built-in motors. You can't use the Nikon 85/1.8 comfortably for sports, for example, but you can with the EOS version. If you're shooting wide angle or just the normal range, Nikon is probably better. The new 10-24 DX is very promising, the 17-35 is superior to Canon's 16-35 and 17-40, and the 14-24 is the best wide angle zoom on the market.
     
  77. I went through this decision a year ago.
    Although it is true that today's new camera is next year's discounted one, the newer Nikon's (D90, D5000, D300) have much better sensors and given your interest in light, perhaps you should not consider the D80.
    Many people say that Canon has a better selection of lenses in general including more IS and USM telephoto and zoom lenses, and that Nikon may currently have better bodies (better ergonomics, more robust) and better flash. Better Nikon bodies (D200 and up) can mount almost any Nikon lens since about 1970, and this gives access to a huge selection of quality cheap manual focus lenses on the used market, if you think that is something you might use. Each system has a few items that the other does not, for example, I decided to go Nikon (D300) because only they have a VR macro lens, which made a huge difference for me. On the other hand, a friend has just switched from Nikon to Canon because he finds that the Nikon 80-400 VR cannot focus fast enough for birds in flight, whereas the Canon 100-400 IS can, and this is his main interest.
    If you have such a specific goal, you should pick based on the lens or other feature that is most useful to you, and honestly it is unlikely to be the camera body that is most important. If your interest is in 'general photography', then it doesn't matter, Canon and Nikon are the two leaders, either one is great.
     
  78. Nick, what Nikon body was your friend, who switched to Canon for the sake of 100-400mm IS, was using? Nikon 80-400mm is a great lens on D700.
     
  79. Assuming the choice is between Canon and Nikon, the answer is clear:
    Both.
    At least that's what I use and recommend.
    But the 40D is definitely way better than the D80. They weren't even supposed to be compared to each other; they are in different lines, targeted to different users. One is a semi-pro camera, the other is an amateur model. The closest Nikon equivalent to the 40D was/is the D200. It's a great camera, and one that I have used.
     
  80. Some people say the D90 has a more comfortable grip design than the 40D, but isn't this purely subjective? I've handled both cameras and the 40D is way more comfortable.
    And, BTW, if the D90 has a larger brighter viewfinder, I didn't really notice. To my eyes, the 40D viewfinder is excellent.
     
  81. This is a never ending question, so buy one of them and take some photos.
     
  82. For a beginner, a Nikon DXX body with 18-200 is probably the most practical choice.
     
  83. "Some people say the D90 has a more comfortable grip design than the 40D, but isn't this purely subjective? I've handled both cameras and the 40D is way more comfortable.
    And, BTW, if the D90 has a larger brighter viewfinder, I didn't really notice. To my eyes, the 40D viewfinder is excellent."
    Oh, the grip comment wasn't a reference to the 40D, but the D80. I find my dad's D80's grip awkward and uncomfortable; the D90's is much better. My friend has a 40D and it's also comfortable.
    The 40D viewfinder is decent, but the D90's is larger and brighter. The D300's is larger and brighter again.
     
  84. The only Nixon that matters this month used to play for the soon to be 2009 NBA Champion LA Lakers.
    I've shot with Nikons for 30 or so years, and I'd buy a D90 today if I had the money in my pocket.
     
  85. Here's a good link you can use to make your diss.
    http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/eng/Image-Quality-Database/Compare-cameras/(appareil1)/308|0/(appareil2)/180|0/(appareil3)/295|0/(onglet)/0/(brand)/Sony/(brand2)/Canon/(brand3)/Nikon
     

Share This Page