Nikon vs. Canon........not what you think

[bob___10]

hi,

 

i am along time nikon user and currently have d40x, 12-24 nikon and 18-200vr

nikon. i have an opportunity to buy 5d at equivalent d300 price. canon body is

very lightly used. i would like to get the full frame 5d and am willing to sell

the nikon lenses and acquire canon lenses.

 

am i better off buying the d300 with its later technology than the 5d but not

full frame or am i just spinning my wheels here? the d3 is out of my league

obviously.

 

thanks,

 

bob

[michael_hahn]

Bob,

 

I would jump at the Canon ... except I think you will take a beating (loss) on your Nikon glass. Enough to probably not make the deal worthwhile.

 

Good luck,

 

michael.

[RaymondC]

If you want it go for it ..

Some pple will argue both ways, pro's uses both, so who am I gonna say.

 

I think tho, if you want newer stuff released earlier and etc., it would be Canon.

 

I use film so incl manual focus so Nikon is still a way for me, and that I can get the older lenses for a bargain. Most of my work is on tripod do I don't need AFS or VR features.

 

But having said that, with my local camera club, there have been pple with Canon 350D or Nikon D40 with kit lenses and have gotten v good pictures, one of whom won the 2nd prize for a carnival we had and on the poster when advertising our end of year local art exhibition.

 

JIMO. Would it make a diff to the observers - nope.

Would it make you feel better - that's each personal bias.

For those who don't shoot film, what are formats anyway? If you are concerned you can always shoot medium format autofocus automatic mode systems with 3 burst a second to more manual large format. So what full frame are you looking for?

[juanjo_viagran]

here is a little something to read..

 

http://www.digitalcamerainfo.com/content/Nikon-D200-vs-Canon-EOS-5D-Head-to-Head-Review-.htm

 

it may be a little outdated but still informative.

[juanjo_viagran]

http://www.digitalcamerainfo.com/content/Nikon-D200-vs-Canon-EOS-5D-Head-to-Head-Review-/Model-Design--Physical-Tour.htm

[mike_s.3]

Bob, the 2 cameras are very different. Your shooting style will dictate which one to use and that is a decision that only you can make.

 

Here is a feature comparison:

 

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/compare_post.asp?method=sidebyside&cameras=canon_eos5d%2Cnikon_d300&show=all

 

And an ISO comparison:

 

http://picasaweb.google.com/gseitz/5DD30012D3001440D

 

Good luck with your decision.

[eric_arnold]

as michael pointed out, the x factor here is the cost of replacing your nikon glass with canon lenses.

[gerikson]

I'd take the Canon and sell the 12-24. Keep the D40X + 18-200 for general walkaround photography.

 

First lens for the Canon could be a 50/1.8, should be cheapish.

[liljuddakalilknyttphotogra]

Bob,

 

shooting subjects & existing lenses are part of the issue. 5D is two years old. Personally I'd go for the D300 which I just love. I don't like the feel & ergonomics of the 5d, nor do I like it's colors.

 

Weather proofing is also an issue. Go into a store & handle the D300. I bet you that's the camera you'll get. ;-)

 

Lil

[elliot1]

I went from D200s/D80s to the 5D a few months ago.

 

I am considering the D3 but don't expect image quality to be much better than the 5D which is making the decision difficult - image quality with the D5 is fantastic.

 

If you don't mind a small buffer and slower write speeds (mainly an issue with 15mb RAW files) as well as a crappy monitor, the 5D is the best value out there. Focus is dead on all the time. The shutter is smooth. Controls are nicely laid out and easy to change/use.

 

I have not used the D300 but based on what I have seen and read, if your buying criteria is image quality, the 5D is the way to go. If you are looking for features, the D300 is the way to go. If you do a lot of shooting in low light/high ISO, the 5D is probably your best choice.

 

As far as lenses, Nikon lenses hold their value and you should be able to sell them at a fair price. Canon lenses (L Series) seem to be less expensive. I bought a used 24-70 f2.8 L series lens for less than half the cost of Nikon's new lens. Again, image quality is superb.

 

Tough choice to make... and there is a bit of a learning curve, but the results are well worth it.

[photo5]

Another vote for D300. Newer technology, your lenses will work on it, larger selection of

lenses than Canon, new D300 has a warranty. As much as I like the Canon 5D full frame-

ness, overall image quality from the two should be very close indeed.

[kurt_garcia]

Bob, do your homework! I thought I did and ended up with the wrong company. Although the D300 has fixed some issues the D200 it still has issues with ISO and image qualily. Yes it handles the ugly noise issue but causes the image to fall apart. Read, read and read more. Try kenrockwell.com he has both cameras and good insight. This link ultimately helped my decision. http://www.digitalcamerainfo.com/content/Nikon-D200-vs-Canon-EOS-5D-Head-to-Head-Review-/Performance--Image-Quality.htm

The good thing about this site is Nikon users found reasons for choosing Nikon and Canon users found reasons for choosing Canon. I took a huge loss on my equipment but have made it back in happiness and $.

[bob___10]

well thanks to everyone. at photoexpo i handled the d3 and d300. the d3 is just a monster, although the dual slots is intriguing. the d300 was manageable. i guess i need to get over the full frame issue and stick with the nikonians. thanks again

 

bob

[simon_hickie1]

This posting reflects the dilemma I have been facing. I'd be minded to see what Canon do to replace the 5D. I wouldn't mind betting that they come up with a full frame 5D replacement that sits between the current 5D and the 40D plus a more expensive version that sits below the current uber-expensive job. To me the full frame advantage for better high ISO performance (noise & dynamic range) is pretty compelling.

[ShunCheung]

If you are interested in Canon's 5D, I would wait a few weeks until the PMA (end of January, 2008, less than 2 months from now). The 5D's technology is quite old; today, even sub-$1000 DSLRs have a better AF system. I would expect Canon to upgrade the 5D very soon. I would see whether Canon indeed has a replacement and if so, how much better it is. If your objective is bottom fishing, I also expect the value for the 5D to drop further as it is officially replaced.

[les_barstow]

I think the answer depends on why you're considering the 5D. You want full-frame but don't say why...

 

If you want the 5D for ISO performance, the D300 looks like it performs much better than prior Nikons at higher speeds. If you want the 5D for sensitivity, the D300 has a 14-bit sensor. If you want it just for the wide-angle glass, you already have a 12mm lens for your Nikon.

 

The only reason I would go over to the 5D is if you need faster glass at the wider angles, are really looking for a narrow DOF, or need the few lenses that Canon makes that Nikon can't match. The D300 is faster, has a better dynamic range, better autofocus, better LCD, live preview, has a warranty, and supports your current investment.

[elliot1]

I have read in numerous other posts and this one that the 5D focus system is 'inadequate'. As an owner of the 5D, I can say with confidence that the auto focus system of the 5D is faster and more accurate than any of the Nikon DSLR cameras I have owned (D40/D80/D200). In fact, it is incredibly accurate.

 

Through post processing, all modern DSLR images can be manipulated to look great. If you start with a better image, it takes less time/work to process the image. But the end results will generally look fine.

 

As I stated above, if image quality is your criteria, the 5D is the way to go.

[tholte]

If you can wait a few months, take Shun's advice and check out the new and updated version of the 5D. The 5D's replacement will have a more weather proof body, better AF system and a nicer LCD.

[remco-jan.woldhuis]

Do you have a specific reason for wanting a full frame camera?

[ShunCheung]

Elliot, it sounds like you have only used DSLRs that have 1 cross-type AF point, which is the case in the D40, D80, D200 and the Canon 5D. Even the Nikon F5 from 1996 had 3 cross-type AF points. That is why I have some occasional difficulty with the D200's AF indoors under dim light and I don't trust it for action photography with a moving target.

 

Today, Canon's 40D has 9 cross-type AF points, and Nikon's D300 uses exactly the same top-of-the-line AF system as the D3. If one is mainly a studio still-subject photographer, architecture or landscape type, the 5D is perfectly fine. Otherwise, I would rather not be limited by 1 cross-type AF point and 3 frames/second. Back in 2005, Canon essentially put the 20D's AF system into the 5D. In the next update, most likely they'll reuse the 40D's AF system. Once you have a chance to compare the 5D to a newer model, you'll run the risk of finding the 5D highly inadequate, and that can happen as soon as next month before the PMA. If not, it is very likely that Canon will replace the 5D some time later in 2008.

[kurt_garcia]

Bob here is more homework: read this from KR. Both Nikon and Canon users will find it interesting. http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/d3/sharpness-1.htm

Good luck and let us know what you decide.

[stwrtertbsratbs5]

Ignore Rockwell - he shoots jpegs. So all you are really seeing is how he's set up the cameras. You need to see the RAW files to see what's really going on.

 

As for cameras - I'd chose the D300 because I shoot sports. I also noticed that Canons produce a lot of chroma noise. the noise on the Nikon D300 is, IMHO, much less objectionable.