canon rebel XT vs. Nikon D50 - image quality

[ireneb]

I know this question has been debated ad infinitum, but I am confused

about what I am reading in the reviews and what I am seeing in the

camera store.

I have enjoyed film SLRs but this will be my first foray into digital

SLRs. I have read here and elsewhere that the Canon XT has better

image quality, thanks to its sensor and 8MP. However at 2 camera

stores the salesman has told me that he thinks the quality of the

photos taken with the D50 are superior, and more consistent.

I tried out both cameras at the stores. While the XT felt more

comfortable with the kit lens (small hands), once I put a heavier

lens on it the camera felt poorly balanced. More importantly, the

D50's photos seemed to have more detail (every pore and pimple stands

out). The canon seems to have "airbrushed" the photo - my skin looks

perfect, etc. Since I want my pictures to look real, not "perfect",

this is disturbing.

I was all set to get the canon, but now I'm confused. why do the

reviews say one thing when the picture says another? (The photos were

just in the store and with both cameras set on auto, and both using

the Tamron 18-200 lens).

Please help!

[dmitry_a]

You'll probably be better off spending your energy taking pictures and maybe choosing lenses. No, seriously.

 

Those two cameras probably have slightly different default settings, so the images you saw were different. I'm pretty sure tha they both can be set to produce nearly identical results. So, don't fret this. Image quality is just not different enough to be a primary concern between choosing one camera or the other.

[gluteal cleft]

The kit lens with the XT isn't exactly stellar, and unless you stop it down to about f/8, you're not going to get a very sharp image - but put a better lens on the camera, and then things are entirely different. Even the $75 50mm f/1.8 makes the kit lens look like a toy. However, I do keep mine around, because occasionally, I do need the extra-wide angles, and haven't found enough of a reason to buy a 10-22.

 

Between the Nikon and Canon, you'll be hard-pressed to find someone who doesn't have a bias one way or the other. In the end, both cameras are very capable, and the megapixels isn't going to matter - the quality of your lens will be more important. The important thing is that you decide on the feature set that is most important to you, and purchase accordingly.

 

steve

[orensztajn]

"Since I want my pictures to look real", try then a KM5D.

[tony kinney]

I have a Rebel XT and a good friend has the D50. The D50 takes much better pictures....but if my friend had the Rebel XT and I had his Nikon the Rebel XT would win. He's simply a better photographer than me. At the level of image quality in these two cameras it is only the user that makes any difference. Just take a look at some of the highly rated pictures on this site, from both Nikon and Canon users, you will see great images from both. Buy the camera that fits your hands best.

[ray]

Tony hit the nail on the head. Both cameras are excellent and at the end of the day the

photographer will make or break the image.

 

Go with the camera that is more comfortable to look through (viewfinder quality), easier to

hold (with the appropriate lens on) and in your budget.

[mag_miksch]

"Since I want my pictures to look real"<p>

All digital is heavy processed, its just a virtual reality,

[andrew robertson]

Gustavo and Mag are trolls, who temporarily have chosen this forum as their bridge.

Shame on you fools for trying to screw with Irene's head.

 

The D50 and XT are both good cameras. How about 'Canon or Nikon or Konica-Minolta or

Pentax or Olympus' and then once you decide on a camera SYSTEM you will then know

what budget DSLR is right for you.

 

8 MP does have a bit more detail than 6 MP, but it is a very small difference.

 

And that Tamron 18-200 is a piece of crap. Don't let the camera store flunky fool you into

getting a do-it-all soccer mom zoom lens. You might as well dig a coke bottle out of the

trash and shoot through that.

 

Get a 35mm f/2 or a 50mm f/1.8 for starters. Avoid super zooms.

 

Both cameras can shoot RAW, and also you can customize the look of the JPG to suit your

taste.

 

But if you're planning on getting a mediocre lens like the Tamron, and nothing else, you'll

probably be happier with a small, fixed lens compact digital camera like the Panasonic

FZ30.

 

One reason that the Canon had less apparent detail than the Nikon is because sharpening

was probably cranked all the way up on the Nikon, but left off on the Canon.

[john schroeder]

Andrew the Tamron lens is much better than a Coke bottle. I would compare it to the bottle from a decent wine. The lens is what it is. It's a "jack-of-all-trades and a master-of-none" lens. I have one and find it quite handy when I can only cary one lens.

Irene, The D50 kit comes with a better lens than the Cannon. It's only slightly better though. Other than that the quality is realy going to depend on you. In "Dummy" full auto mode the Rebel tends to over-saturate colors and over sharpen edge detail. The Nikon has slightly poorer auto-focus. The Nikon has a much better metering system. The Rebel has a vertical grip availible. The D50 has better battery life. It's really a coin toss, either way you will get a great camera. It's up to you to get great pictures. If I have to choose one then I vote for the Nikon because I own Nikon and I'm biased.

[ireneb]

Thank you all for your input. It was extremely helpful to me. I have decided on the canon rebel XT with the 17-85 lens, and I will probably also get the 50/1.8 prime. In the end, it is a real toss-up, because each camera has certain strengths and weaknesses, and since I am only entering the world of dSLRs, I'm still not sure what I can and cannot live without. However, I think that the canon series of lenses suit my (hypothetical) needs well, and as several of you pointed out, it is ultimately about the system.

That said, it was a tough choice, and if anyone else has an opinion about a better camera/lens combination, I would love to hear it.

[john schroeder]

Irene, the 17-85 lens is a great choice. The image stabilization will serve you well. I do recommend investing in high speed memory cards and a good flash. You can never go wrong with a 50mm prime.

[hash]

Would you like image stabilization with your 50mm 1.8 lens? Get Konica Minolta 5D.

 

-hash

[orensztajn]

I am so troll as you.

It was my opinion that Irene may try a KM5D, and I was not the only onre recommendng this.

Before you write somenthing like that, look if I am a troll or not.

All the hints I have wrote in forum is for helping people.

So shame of you writing those things of poeple you do not know.

If you have a problem you can meil me.

 

At least I have photos in my workspace, but I suppose that is what your pencil symbol means, "to write nonsense".

[orensztajn]

Irene as Hashim said, try a KM5D.

D50, XT and KM5D are all good cameras. But you get anti shke in the body of the KM5D, a very good help.