canon or nikon?

355858

355858

Suspended / Banned
Messages
679
Name
Ben
Edit My Images
Yes
hey guys

i recently brought a fuji s100fs awesome camera in my opinion but its got its faults ie purple fringing..

i'm looking to upgrade to a DSLR.

I know this questions probably asked about 10 times a day but in your opinion which is the best nikon or canon?

i liked the look of the canon 450d and 50d obviously the 50d is better but does it warrant the extra money?

if nikon in your opinion is better which ones would be an equivilant?

cheers ben
 
They'll both take the same photo....it is just a matter of which you prefer when it comes to how they do it! Get down to Jessops or somewhere and try them all out...that's the only way :)
 
All joking aside there really isnt anything in it.

Its all down to personal preference. Im a nikon user, and recently considered changing, went and had a play with a canon, and thought it felt cheep compared to my D300.

You will find a canon user who says the nikon feels cheap.

Go handle them both in your budget, and whichever feels nicest, buy that one. The quality of the image is dictated by your ability not the feature set of a camera.
 
whats the equivelent of the 450d and 50d from nikon? does the difference between the two warrant the extra in money?
 
Minolta makes the best bodies. Nikon makes the best lenses. Canon makes the best compromise. :D

Ok, ok... It's an old quote, but still one of my favorites. Doesn't hold to well today. lol

I agree with PC and Monkey. Try them out and see which feels better.
 
355858 said:
whats the equivelent of the 450d and 50d from nikon? does the difference between the two warrant the extra in money?
Click to expand...

youre looking at the Nikon D90, or the Nikon D300.

The extra money is warranted if you want the features, the image quality will be very similar.

As a rule, and no offence is meant by this, if you need to ask then you probably dont need the 50D / D300 level yet.
 
If it were my money i'd be looking at the Canon 40D or the Nikon D90

The 50D isn't worth £300 more than the 40D, the D90 is a couple of years newer than the D300 and is more suited to the beginner
 
ok guys thanks for the response, i'll go to warehouse express in norwich and jessops also to have a play with them..
 
another on for the 40d if you do go for a canon

but this has to be your choice personally i went with canon because people i knew recomended them i did have a nikon point and shoot with a million options it was a great point and shoot i have held both nikon and canon digital slr's and i like the feel of the canon's especially the 30D

but as mentioned above got to jessops or another local camera shop to get a feel for what you like
 
Think about the system you're buying into as well as just the camera body. There might be relatively little to choose between the two main manufacturers as far as the DSLR bodies are concerned, but their complete systems are quite different in their capabilities.

If you're into shooting wildlife / birds / aircraft, then it might be a good idea to bias your decision towards Canon because they offer a better range of quality telephoto lenses.

If you like shooting indoors in very low light, then it might be a good idea to bias your decision towards Canon because they offer a better range of ultra-fast prime lenses.

If your style of photography uses flash a lot, then it might be a good idea to bias your decision towards Nikon because their flash system is said to be easier to understand and control.

If you don't mind a big manual element to your photography and like the idea of bargain hunting, then it might be a good idea to bias your decision towards Nikon because pretty much every lens they've made since the 1950s will physically fit on their new DSLRS (but might need a lot of manual control).

If you don't want to have to faff around with lens/camera compatibility tables, then it might be a good idea to bias your decision towards Canon because every lens they've made since 1987 will work 100% on a 40D.
 
oh ok cheers didnt realise that, i'm into doing nature shots and also a few arty things, currently alot of light trails and city scapes, will this sway me more towards the Canon market?
 
Either.

It is down to hwo the actual user friendliness of the layout, botht he physicallayout of the knobs, buttons, switches and the internal layout of where allthe options live - that is where you will be better basing your choice on - both Nikon and Canon prodce equally good pictures.

There are plenty of pro action / motorsport photographers who use Nikon, there are plenty of nature photographers who use Nikon.

There are just as many of each that use canon.....both are as capable as each other.

Seee which one fits you rhand better.
See which one is on the same wavelength as you....you'll know what I mean when you go to try them out.

It is the same as the Mac versus PC issue...come the crunch, they both do the same job, both produce the same results, they just go about it a different way.
 
thanks lensflare, i'm going to jessops saturday to have ago, looking forward to finding the right one for me now, probably goin to be between the d90 and the eos 40d
 
If you like Fuji, you could always go for an S5 Pro, which is essentially a Nikon D200 with a Fuji sensor, but at Nikon D60 prices :thumbs:
 
StewartR said:
Think about the system you're buying into as well as just the camera body. There might be relatively little to choose between the two main manufacturers as far as the DSLR bodies are concerned, but their complete systems are quite different in their capabilities.
Click to expand...

To be fair Stewart, you really have to be going to some to reach the limits of either brand's range of lenses.
 
NorthernNikon said:
To be fair Stewart, you really have to be going to some to reach the limits of either brand's range of lenses.
Click to expand...
It's not the limits which are the issue. Both companies make stunning 600mm f/4s and 400mm f/2.8s.

But in my experience it's "prosumer" lenses where there's a big difference.

Example 1: If you're into wildlife, birds or aircraft, you might want a good telephoto. Canon offer you three choices that Nikon don't:
* EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 L IS USM (Nikon's 80-400VR is an embarrassment by comparison)
* EF 300mm f/4 L IS USM (Nikon's equivalent doesn't have VR)
* EF 400mm f/5.6 L USM (Nikon have nothing remotely similar)

Example 2: If you like shooting indoors with fast primes, as some wedding photographers do, then Canon offers you:
* EF 24mm f/1.4 II USM (Nikon's fastest 24mm is f/2.8, but it's not USM/AF-S)
* EF 35mm f/1.4 L USM (Nikon's fastest 35mm is f/2, but it's not USM/AF-S)
* EF 50mm f/1.2 L USM (Nikon's fastest 50mm is f/1.4)
* EF 85mm f/1.2 L II USM (Nikon's fastest 85mm is f/1.4, but it's not USM/AF-S)

I admit that these are fairly expensive lenses. But their prices are of the same order of magnitude as a modern body such as a 50D or a D300, and a surprising number of people seem happy to spend that kind of money for a marginal improvement to their photography. So it doesn't seem unreasonable to me that, when you're planning to buy into a system, you might want to have at least one eye on where that system might be able to take you.
 
Image wise not a lot in it but the better people use Canons :p and the Nikons have far to many buttons for me :lol: Seriously go and check out both and get the one you like the feel of and feel you can control better.
 
StewartR said:
But in my experience it's "prosumer" lenses where there's a big difference.

...

I admit that these are fairly expensive lenses. But their prices are of the same order of magnitude as a modern body such as a 50D or a D300, and a surprising number of people seem happy to spend that kind of money for a marginal improvement to their photography. So it doesn't seem unreasonable to me that, when you're planning to buy into a system, you might want to have at least one eye on where that system might be able to take you.
Click to expand...

When you're talking f:1.2 you're talking exotic glass and the limits of a lens range. Pro have survived on f:2.8 lenses with internal focusing motors or VR/IS for decades so your average enthusiast surely can. If not, then the likes of Sigma make good fast third party lenses with HSM. I agree that you should have an eye on the overall system, but my point is that both Canon and Nikon have such wide ranging systems that I think that you're over emphasising a problem that really isn't there for 99% of photographers. There will of course be exceptions, those wanting tilt shift lenses or the kind of macro magnification only a Canon 'whatsit' can give you (5:1 I believe) but these examples are very few and far between.
 
I agree with StewartR, look at the lenses & accessories available in the areas you are intrested in. When I bought my first DSLR I did exactly that, I researched the ranges of lenses I wanted and find out what was available in my price range at the time and for me Canon was a better fit.

I have always found the "Try the both to see which feels better in your hands" approach rather odd. People are adaptable and learn to use what they have. I can't imagine that any of the camera makes are that awfull to use or control. Sure some may be slightly better than others but bodies changes as do the ergonomics of the bodies. Attaching yourself to a manufacturer because one entry level body felt better in your hands than another seems strange to me, this is just my opinion of course :)
 
Lenses tbh I don't think makes that much of a difference as both Canon, Nikon and other 3rd party companies have it pretty much covered, what really is the difference you all talk about with 1 stop here and 1 stop there. With the sensors giving the range of sensitivity these days and the software available I personally can't see the problems in that argument anymore. I'm suire if I took a shot with one system and then the same shot with the other you would be hard pressed to know what took what. This is my opinion and no animals were harm in concocting this opinion :lol: Oh that is why I suggest you try out and see what feels best for you ;)
 
canon also have the f4 range of 70-200, which nikon dont;) and there is canons mpe65 for macro as well

and another thing i have noticed(not really checked though), the nikon top end stuff seems to be more expensive than the canon equivelant. eg:24-70 f 2.8, 70-200 f2.8 IS/VR.

i dont know how it translates down to the "consumer lenses".

in truth i wouldnt worry too much about it, just stick to the body that feels better to you. as you go up the chain to FF there will be the chance to swap if need be.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top