First DSLR - yet another Nikon vs Canon dilemma

[uzee_uzee]

<p>Hi,<br>

I have been reading up on DSLR features and understanding the various terminology and such for about a month or so. I have also read a few online guides into buying your first DSLR, and unfortunately I'm still confused.<br>

Recently I went to a wedding where a friend was using a Nikon 5200 with a f1.4 lens for portraits, he is not a pro but just took 2-3 intro classes in understanding photography, and the results were quite amazing, the picture quality was great, very clear and sharp with natural colors. I was quite certain that I will go with the same equipment until I walked into a store and asked a sales person, who provided a completely opposite view, in his advice a Canon T3i or T4i would be a much better choice. He took some portraits of me using both Canon and Nikon (couldn't save because demo models did not have memory card) but according to him he kept the same settings on both the Canon 600D/T3i and the Nikon 5200 with the same type of lens and I could clearly see that the Canon pictures were visibly sharper and had better colors.... :( hence my confusion. I understand that it is possible that he kept different settings to maybe prove his opinion but I don't know if that was the case or not. He said in fact that even a Canon T3 would also take the same quality of great pictures.<br>

After reading several online reviews and comparisons, people tend to suggest that the Nikon is a superior camera.Her is some comparisons I have looked at:<br>

http://snapsort.com/compare/Canon-T3i-vs-Nikon-D5200<br>

http://www.2cameraguys.com/Canon-EOS-Rebel-T3i-vs-Nikon-D5200.htm<br>

I have also compared the T3 and T4i with Nikon D5200 on the above sites.<br>

However, I recently talked to a couple of professional photographers and one of them clearly said that in the higher end photography Canon is preferred (I don't now if thats a fact or opinion)<br>

All of the above has unfortunately led to a lot of information but with added confusion.<br>

If I may, I'm listing below the features I think are important to me, if some of the experienced folks would be kind enough to help me out, I would really appreciate it.<br>

1. budget - $500-700 (incl lenses, I'm looking at refurbs to help fit this in my budget)<br>

2. Ability to very quickly pick up the camera to capture kids activities, moments etc.<br>

3. Very good image quality specifically for portraits with great colors<br>

4. Excellent resolution in case of enlarging upto 15x20 ( I think)<br>

5. Good quality images in non-uniform lighting or low light or very bright light<br>

6. Good quality video capture (preferably HD) with HDMI<br>

7. I think good viewscreen resolution is important (pls correct me if its not that crucial)<br>

8. GPS tagging would have been nice but as far as I have checked, my shortlisted cameras do not have it<br>

These are what I can think of, I'm open to all suggestions and advices.<br>

<br />Thanks a ton<br>

uzee</p>

 

[Wouter Willemse]

<p>Hi,<br /> First of all, snapsort and sites like that are oversimplified comparisons. More megapixels for camera A, so it is better... that's not really how it works. The other claims - be it from store people, be it the pro's you talked to - that one brand is superior to the other, can be safely ignored.<br /> Fortunately, the answer is simpler :-)</p>

<p>Both Canon and Nikon make excellent cameras. As do Pentax, Sony, Olympus and some others. All of them can do what you want except point 8 (as you already noted). For point 5, this is to a large extend more the photographer being capable than the camera - do not expect the camera to fix tricky conditions for you. The importance of point 7 - all current models have sufficiently sharp screens; it's no big concern (the screen on the camera is just to quickly check your photo, it's not essential).</p>

<p>Anyway.... there is one difference between these cameras: how they handle, how they fit your hand. A camera should be comfortable to hold (not 'stress' your fingers or hand), and buttons should be placed where they make sense to you and where you find them easy to operate.<br /> So, my advice is to go to a store, ignore all talks about "camera A is much better than camera B" and <em>feel</em> for yourself which camera fits you better. Choose the one that you prefer holding.</p>

[David_Cavan]

<p>It will be interesting to see where this thread goes but at the end I doubt it will help you choose, especially if the fans of these two systems weight in heavily. Quite frankly I don't think there are detectable differences between these systems except in staged situations, which you won't be facing on a day-to-day basis. The camera will not make you a better photographer when you are comparing these two solutions that have very similar sensor sizes, lens kits and software. You would likely see a difference if you spent a lot more, but only after you know how to use the camera, lens and post-processing tools.</p>

<p>My recommendation is what you read on this forum repeatedly. Try both systems, see which you are more comfortable using (there are ergonomic differences that really do matter) and choose on that basis. And happy shooting after that.</p>

<p>PS: Wouter and I posted at the same time - "what Wouter says"</p>

<p> </p>

[Michael R Freeman]

<blockquote>

<p><em>However, I recently talked to a couple of professional photographers and one of them clearly said that in the higher end photography Canon is preferred (I don't now if thats a fact or opinion)</em></p>

</blockquote>

<p>It is an opinion that is not based on fact, but personal bias. Ask enough pros, and you'll get the exact opposite opinion.</p>

<p>Try both cameras. Buy the one that feels better and the most comfortable to use in *your* hands. The fact is the ability of any currently available Canon/Nikon/Pentax/Sony DSLR to produce outstanding high quality photos (and video) usually exceeds the ability of most people who buy them. You can't go wrong with any of them. At the entry level point of the DSLR market, there is virtually no difference is photo quality.</p>

<p>To be blunt, I think your salesman was pushing the Canon system for his benefit, not yours. Especially if you walked in and asked about the Nikon but you were steered to the Canon. That should not necessarily deter you from buying a Canon T3i if *you* like it, but don't let sales BS sway your choice one way or the other. If you prefer the way the Canon handles, buy the Canon. If you prefer the Nikon, buy the Nikon.</p>

<p>There is such a thing as <strong>too much</strong> information (and opinions). ;-) :-)</p>

[devon_mccarroll]

<p>Of the cameras that you mentioned, it looks like only the Canon T3i would be in your budget. Both Nikon and Canon make great products, and for learning you really can't go wrong with either one, but be sure that whatever you choose feels good in your hands.<br>

I would start with a camera and kit lens for learning, as the kit lenses are usually a really good deal when purchased with a new camera body. Then I would really encourage you to take a class to learn all of the technical stuff, so that you can use your new DSLR in the way that it was intended, and practice different techniques along the way. I can't emphasize enough how important it is to learn these things before jumping into buying a bunch of lenses, because you'll start defining your style along the way, and will learn a lot about why you might want certain types of lenses vs. others. You won't regret it!<br>

You can look for classes at community colleges in your area, or if you have the discipline, look at online classes at places like PPSOP or Better Photo. I've taken classes through both, but you need to be disciplined and do the work (which applies to in-person classes as well). <br>

Good luck, and enjoy your new venture into photography! Be forewarned, however, it's addicting and can get a bit expensive :-)</p>

[JDMvW]

<p>As has been suggested by the above, almost any new dSLR is going to function well and produce excellent, sharp, photos. Your choice should depend somewhat on what you want to do (e.g., only Canon has a 17mm tilt-and-shift lens for architectural work at <em>this moment</em> in time); but for most beginners that sort of esoteric lens availability is irrelevant. Mostly it comes down to a matter of "style" in the operating system and the "feel" of the camera. This applies inside each line as well, as some people find some lines to be too large or small for their hands.</p>

<p>Which one you start with is an existential decision--that is, one that you will have to live with pretty much from that point on. Once you've committed, changing to another system is not unlike a divorce - it's difficult and expensive. So choose wisely, and once you're committed, don't look back.</p>

[richsimmons]

<p>One advantage of the T3 or T4 is that it has a touch screen. Makes changing settings much easier. The D5200 does not and is quite menu driven to change your settings. This might eventually get in your way the more you learn and decide you want more dedicated buttons on the back of the camera. This is where I am now with a Nikon D5100. Great camera, great image quality, but I can't change settings as fast as I'd like. Canon's will have that already, so will most, except the two low end Nikons. Image quality is great on just about all modern DSLR's, it's the lenses that you choose that will really make the difference.</p>

[purplealien]

<p>Excellent advice above.</p>

<p>Regarding the in store demonstration: the image you see on the back of the camera has been processed by the camera and is being displayed on a small LCD screen which is not necessarily providing a very accurate representation of what you would see on a computer monitor.</p>

<p>It's very likely that the images on the Canon appeared sharper with better colours, only because the camera is applying more sharpening and more colour boosting by default; or that the LCD is set up differently (more contrast). A few button presses and the Nikon could look the same.</p>

<p>There's a reason why TVs in shops always have the contrast turned up high!</p>

<p>Just go with the one that feels best to you. You can't go wrong with either brand.</p>

<p>Chris</p>

<p> </p>

[DWScott]

<p>There is so much detailed information, and so many egos, that I would not worry about sifting through what is posted online. Don't overthink this one, and don't compare pictures on the back of a camera. Neither will yield meaningful results.<br>

All current entry-level DSLRs are good. With excellent image quality. So here is my input:</p>

<ul>

<li>Handle each of the cameras in the store. Have the store put a decent lens on each camera (i.e. a 50mm 1.8 or 35mm 1.8) so that you aren't holding back a camera with a slow lens in a dark store. See how each camera feels. Step through the controls. Do they fall comfortably to hand? How does the camera make you feel? Like you want to shoot it? Or like it's not what you imagined? One or more of these cameras will feel great, and that is much more important than arguing about detailed specifications. Because a camera that feels great will be a camera that you use.</li>

<li>A couple of fast prime lenses, like your friend uses, open up a whole new level of image quality. Every camera maker offers lenses like these, so include at least one in your purchase.</li>

</ul>

<p>Don't over think it, and enjoy!</p>

[rick_m.]

<p>I am curious why you ruled out the D3200. For the things you want to do it is the hot ticket. You will be in your budget and get an additional lens for your money. (Or if you are really smart, instead of the additional lens you will pick up a great Nikon flash.)<br>

You can get a refurbished D3200 with lens for$479.00 and add the flash for either 125.00 for the SB-40 or $289.00 for the SB-700. Take this to the bank.... A good flash and the knowledge of how to use it (easy to master if you try) will make <em>vastly</em> more difference than any body or additional lens upgrade for what you want to do. </p>

<p>So as to image quality. There is no difference between entry level Nikons or Canons. None. Nada. Zip. Perhaps one could speak to Nikon's edge on the MP front but that is a mere quibble for what you want. </p>

<p>ALL OF US are so used to what we shoot everyday that we can't imagine just starting out. You will learn the system you buy and it will become second nature to you. After a time it WILL fit you well. Either one. Yes he D5200 has some additional goodies. You will rarely if ever use them. Including the wiggly screen and zillion focus points. </p>

<p>So get what you want. My vote is for a refurbished D3200 with the 18-55 lens and a refurbished SB-700 flash. That is inside your budget. Get it from Adorama, join their VIP club and you can get the warranty extended for $7.98 for all three to 15 months. Then in two years, IF you decide to upgrade, you can look at the D7100. </p>

 

[paddler4]

<p>I would write this in caps, but the system would reject it as shouting: forget about it. Buy the camera within your budget that feels most natural to you, as Wouter said, and that has the largest number of features that you personally will find most useful. Forget about brand. The leading manufacturers make superb cameras.</p>

[david_smith110]

<p>All of the above advice is spot on. Buy what fits your hand the best. The camera is just a tool.</p>

<p>My advice would be to look at how much time you are researching gear on the internet vs how much time you are researching photographic technique, the works of master photographers past and present, and finding photographs that move you.</p>

<p>Forget about gear specs. All of the DSLR's you will look at with your budget will take <em>the exact same photos with you behind the viewfinder. </em>Rather, spend your time learning all you can about LIGHT.</p>

<p>Oh yeah, I recommend fast primes instead of zooms.</p>

[brett_w.]

<p>I agree with the other posters, more megapixels and different features will sometimes equate to higher ratings but the images from DSLR cameras are very similar. I prefer Canon because (to me) it has more accurate colors and a better image quality but other camera owners will certainly disagree. ( I used to be a Nikon owner!) Go to a store like BB, Target, etc., and take pics with the different models (bring a memory card) and compare RAW file images. You can't go wrong with either Canon, Nikon, Sony or even Olympus !</p>

<p> </p>

[Rick Helmke]

My short answer is that they are all

good. Buy the Nikon of course.

 

Rick H.

[User_6502147]

<p>Agree with the above. Check the specs, do comparisons...and check it in the store. If you still have some questions, come back and we'll discuss it. But, if I had both cameras, the results most likely will be incredibly close.Indeed, it's mostly photographer's skill that determines the outcome. Good luck.</p>

<p>Les</p>

[drjoder]

<p>Yes, as everyone has said, try both camera brands in your hands to see how they feel...both the Nikon and the Canons you are considering are excellent. It is also true that whichever camera you choose, you will get eventually used to it and its buttons no matter what it felt like at the beginning. What YOU do with the machine will make most of the difference in image quality. There is, however, another factor you might consider that hasn't yet been mentioned...you could also choose Canon or Nikon based on which brand most of your friends are using. That way, you can borrow lenses and they can help you out with the menu, switches, etc. To repeat what someone else said...just get one or the other and start shooting and learning. Have fun!</p>

[jcuknz]

<p>I use neither Canon nor Nikon although I have affection for my early Nikon largely unused now. So my point is that all this talk about color fidelity is quite irrelevant when you accept that camera and editor are companion tools in the digital age and most serious photographers shoot raw or at least raw plus jpgFINE. It is only snapshooters who judge a camera by what comes out of it .. the true judgement is what it looks like following editing.<br>

Until you have used a number of cameras you will not know what features you want in a camera becuase we are all different with varying aims in our pastime/occupation. Most cameras these days have 'everything' to appeal to 'everybody' so it very likely that whatever you choose from any of the many DSLR makes will suit your needs ... and from my personal point of view sadly you are not considering MFT.</p>

[uzee_uzee]

<p>Thanks a lot everyone for such detailed responses. I am reading through and getting a better understanding of what my real questions or priorities should be. I will now also consider at least looking at or feeling-out the Sony/Olympus/Pentax just to get an idea when I'm in the store... will keep everyone updated on where I'm going.... thanks again<br>

(Discalimer: I posted the same question on dpreview also as I follow both sites, I hope that is not considered wrong or bad, I have received very similar detailed and useful info there too)</p>

[ellery]

<p>oh man, salespeople in various stores are just terrible.....<br /><br />When I was shopping around for my very first SLR 5-6 years ago, I recall with horror advice given....<br /><br />I recall one guy at a best buy telling me something like "they are getting to the point where in even very dark rooms, flash is unnecessary" - this guy was not just talking about modern FX bodies with high ISO performance, apparently these cameras are much much more....lol<br /><br />This example of a guy showing photos as "better" or "worse" only looking at an LCD is equally absurd and hilarious - exactly the kind of ignorance you expect from salespeople in many cases.<br /><br />"7. I think good viewscreen resolution is important (pls correct me if its not that crucial)"<br /><br />Well, I personally enjoy such a feature, but overall, it is over very little importance in the scheme of things. Best thing I use it for is to judge focus with on the fly, look at the histogram, and to get a general sense for how the shot turned out. The camera manufacturers are smart to try and make your shots looks as nice, contrasty, a bit saturated, sharp etc for your review....because...well, this example is case and point....for new comers to the scene who are interested, it does not seem obvious at first glance to question what you see on the LCD as such. <br /><br />of course, also, the comparison with the two cameras in your post....who knows what camera controls or settings he had up...was one shot in RAW or Jpeg with "neutral" or minimal picture controls and the other was set up with Jpeg with more aggressive picture controls such as "vivid" - that could alter your perception entirely as well....<br /><br />People on this very site back when I bought my first camera were giving me this very same advice, and it worked out just fine. I know folks that shoot nikon, cannon, my family photographer has in the past shot one, then later switched to another.....<br /><br /><a href="

[jcuknz]

<p>I don't think anybody can fault you for trying to get a wider selection of viewpoints by posting at dpreview.</p>

[shutterbud]

Lots of good advice here but I'd add just one thing. Get the body and lens separately and don't even bother with a kit lens. Get a 35-50mm equivalent prime for whatever system you decide on. On a purely personal note, I have a D5100 and 3 lenses, but will not be buying any further Nikon equipment due to their abysmal q.c. and c.s.

[brett_w.]

<p>I agree, they are all good. <br>

<strong><em>Canon</em></strong> just happens to be better but that's life</p>

<p> </p>

[joe_willmore]

<p>I've got a couple of thoughts on this matter...<br>

1. I shoot Nikon and have for most of my life. That said, you can get great results shooting Canon, Olympus, Sony or other makes. To turn this in to a Nikon vs. Canon choice is kind of silly at this stage. If you had a bunch of lens already, then yeah...let the make influence your decision. But you're starting fresh.<br>

2. The store demo is total crap (regardless of whether the Nikon or the Canon got you "better" results). First, you can change camera settings (vivid color, sharpen image) within the camera so it "looks" better. Second, you're not seeing the print, you're seeing the image of a print--big difference.<br>

3. I think you're mis-analyzing your budget. The quality of the glass matters more than then the body. I'd lower the amount you expect to pay for camera body an upgrade the lens you get with it. Most kit lens won't be very fast (which either limits what you can shoot or means you need to also buy speed lights and modifiers to start out with). For instance, you might look at getting a used D90 (which is a very good all-around camera) so you can afford a better lens.<br>

4. The initial advice you got is good: see which camera feels the most natural in your hands. See which menu and OS is the most intuitive. For instance, some people love the D3100 b/c it's so light and small--I don't care for that at all and am used to holding bigger bodies.</p>

[uzee_uzee]

<p>Hi Guys,<br>

Just wanted to provide an update. Based on the responses I have also included the Nikon D3200 and the Sony A57, actually if I get a Nikon I feel the 3200 is a better value for me at this point than the 5200. I have been to a couple places and held both the canons and Nikons, like most of you said, the Canon interface seems a bit more user friendly, but I didn't feel that the Nikon was too difficult either. I felt the overall grip and feel to be somewhat similar too. I haven't found a Sony A57 yet, I want to definitely try it out mainly because it weighs significantly less than the canon/nikon, plus it has the better video feature, thoughts..?<br>

One question that I now have is what kind of lens should I start with. I will probably get the kit lens as it comes with most packages but I want to be able to do these 2 things:<br>

1. Good portraits<br />2. Taking childrens pics in a school event for example so need some decent zoom functionality. From my experience I'm usually at least 50 ft - 100ft away.<br>

My understanding of the DSLR lens specs is terrible, don't know whether f/1.4 or 2.8 or what they actually are capable of.<br>

Can someone please let me know what kind of lens I should get, would one extra lens be sufficient or I'll need 2 extra ones for the above 2 points?<br>

I know that that I'm not going to be into serious photography at least for the foreseeable future, so what I start with would probably stick for a while, thats why I want to get something that doesnt just collect dust.<br>

Thanks very much once again<br>

uzee</p>

 

[uzee_uzee]

<p>Hi All,<br>

So I've finally made the purchase :) thanks to each one of you for your advices and suggestions.<br>

As opposed to the cameras I had been considering, I bought the Canon 60D.<br>

Ok so I had decided to get either the Canon T3i or Nikon D3200 whichever is on a better deal and as I mentioned I was looking at refurb deals due to my budget. Sadly there weren't any deals on the d3200, just a refurb at nikon for about $30 less than a new one -- not much of a deal. Then I spoke to Adorama and they had a used T3i, but excellent condition at $450 with 6 months warranty, and then a 60D at $540, talking to the guy there and doing a bit of search it was clear that 60D is a much better camera and not necessarily entry level so I decided to go with that. I also bought a similar used lens EF-S 18-135 3.5-5.6 IS, hopefully based on my reading this should be a better starter lens than the 18-55. According to adorama both are in excellent condition (hope thats true)<br>

So please let me know what u think of my decision or any other comment, I hope I made the right choice, oh yes my total was just about $800, a T3i with the same lens would have cost $90 less.<br>

thanks</p>