eos50d or nikon d3300

M

mark vaughan

Suspended / Banned
Messages
15
Name
mark
Edit My Images
Yes
Following on from my earlier post I have narrowed my choices (at the moment) to these two cameras.

I do like the more solidly built eos 50d and the external controls for more convenient settings changing.

The small sensor concerns me and how it would perform in low light. I can get both body's with LOW shutter count around 3-4000 with a years guarantee for 230, which leaves me 120 to get a lens.

I have kind read that older tech doesn't perform well in low light compared to newer what does this exactly mean ? is it when you push into higher isos its more grainy ? is it a deal breaker on the 50d ? or will it perform reasonably well within certain parameters even in low light ? I am looking to take bit of sport and the odd bit of moving wildlife.

The d3300 seems fairly straight forward to change basic settings even though its through the live view screen.

Any advice would be great thanks.
 
Nikon
 
The 50D is old in camera technology terms, performance has moved on significantly. It was a good camera in its day, but now there are much better. All camera choices are compromises, both on capability and budget, as is the D3300, but I believe it is the better camera.
 
As above the Canon 50D is old technology. Had one years ago and from experience it never liked being pushed on the ISO front with noise being evident very early in the ISO scale.

Preference would be for the Nikon D3300. Dont be put off or fooled by the fact that this is an entry level camera. The sensor in this camera is made by Sony and its a peach of a sensor. With the higher MP count you will get extra leeway for cropping as well as other benefits such as enhanced dynamic range over the canon offering.

Its a no brainer really!
 
The 50D is no longer supported by Canon, if it breaks you wont get it repaired by Canon, maybe someone else can fix it, who knows?
Matt
 
If you don't mind me saying so, that's a bit of a strange short-list. The two cameras aren't remotely comparable.

If you want a not-very-old entry-level camera, you should compare the Nikon D3300 with something like the Canon 700D or 750D.
If you want an older camera with better ergonomics, you should compare the Canon 50D with something like the Nikon D5000.
 
Also, have you actually held and tried both these cameras yet? Or at least some sort of Canon DSLR and some sort of Nikon DSLR? If not, you really should.

When I bought my first DSLR, I was comparing the entry-level Nikon and Canon models of the time - D70 vs 350D. In terms of specs they were comparable, and I didn't have any particularly niche interests which would incline me towards one system or the other. So I went and handled both cameras in my local Jessops.

I found that the Canon felt totally intuitive to me. All the controls were in the right place and worked the way I expected them to. The Nikon was bizarrely unintuitive, with confusing menus and awkward controls - even down to the placement of the main control wheel, which I found really awkward to reach and use. So as soon as I'd handled the cameras the decision was a total no-brainer.

But - and this is the key point - I know people who made exactly the same comparison and reached exactly the opposite decision. It's a very personal thing. So don't trust any person or any review if it says one has better ergonomics than the other. The only person who can decide that for you is you.

And it's important to get this right because you're potentially buying into a system. Your first DSLR is unlikely to be your last DSLR, and within each manufacturer's range the cameras have a lot of shared DNA. So if you find you particularly do or don't get on well with a particular camera, it's more than likely that you'll have a similar reaction to any camera from the same manufacturer.
 
StewartR said:
Also, have you actually held and tried both these cameras yet? Or at least some sort of Canon DSLR and some sort of Nikon DSLR? If not, you really should.

When I bought my first DSLR, I was comparing the entry-level Nikon and Canon models of the time - D70 vs 350D. In terms of specs they were comparable, and I didn't have any particularly niche interests which would incline me towards one system or the other. So I went and handled both cameras in my local Jessops.

I found that the Canon felt totally intuitive to me. All the controls were in the right place and worked the way I expected them to. The Nikon was bizarrely unintuitive, with confusing menus and awkward controls - even down to the placement of the main control wheel, which I found really awkward to reach and use. So as soon as I'd handled the cameras the decision was a total no-brainer.

But - and this is the key point - I know people who made exactly the same comparison and reached exactly the opposite decision. It's a very personal thing. So don't trust any person or any review if it says one has better ergonomics than the other. The only person who can decide that for you is you.

And it's important to get this right because you're potentially buying into a system. Your first DSLR is unlikely to be your last DSLR, and within each manufacturer's range the cameras have a lot of shared DNA. So if you find you particularly do or don't get on well with a particular camera, it's more than likely that you'll have a similar reaction to any camera from the same manufacturer.
Click to expand...
^^^^ This really is sound advice and I couldn't agree more with it.

fwiw I did the same as Stewart in that I went to Jessops and handled the same two camera models. My intention was to buy the Canon as I had been using my friends AE1 (film camera) ... after handling them I had the opposite reaction to Stewart as in the Canon felt wrong but the Nikon just worked for me.
 
D3300 but I would save for the D5500, its worth its money and extra
 
Thanks for all the reply and advice , the reason for the variation in spec is quite simple really as its a budget choice of newer beginners tech verses older mid range . if budget wasn't a problem then I would be going for higher spec new cameras but alas being single , mortgage , putting myself through university and working at the moment I only have a limited budget. I am leaning towards the d3300 and can pick up for around 250 with kit lens with at least 6 months warranty. I have done many comparisons online and it seems the Nikons basic models can hold their own against canon lower mid range models. (in tems of basic spec and sensors)
Not keen on the d5xxx series don't it fee it gives me much more then the d3300 not to fussed about variable angle screen or wifi or touch screen or video for that matter.

As for trying out cameras not that easy for older models I have picked up a Nikon d3400 and a eos 1300 in currys , the slower shutter put me of the canon.

I not to anxious about getting locked in to a system as I believe if you buy wisely on used body's and lenses you can recoup most of your money if you want to change.

At 250 for the d3300 if I changes or upgraded I would hope to get a good chunk of that back and it will do me for now to get back into photography until I decide on what features are important when I upgrade.#

I discounted the d3400 because of the sensor cleaning omission and doesn't seem that much different in terms of what is important for me in a camera
 
stupar said:
As above the Canon 50D is old technology. Had one years ago and from experience it never liked being pushed on the ISO front with noise being evident very early in the ISO scale.

Preference would be for the Nikon D3300. Dont be put off or fooled by the fact that this is an entry level camera. The sensor in this camera is made by Sony and its a peach of a sensor. With the higher MP count you will get extra leeway for cropping as well as other benefits such as enhanced dynamic range over the canon offering.

Its a no brainer really!
Click to expand...
:plus1::agree:
 
mark vaughan said:
I have done many comparisons online and it seems the Nikons basic models can hold their own against canon lower mid range models. (in tems of basic spec and sensors)
Click to expand...

That’s the problem with reading specs.

As Stuart says, the 2 cameras are incomparable, and there’s no way the ergonomics of an entry level Nikon compare with a mid range Canon. I’d go as far as to say, it’s a stupid idea of equivalence.

As others have said, the Nikon is superior in many ways, as it’s a much newer camera, but if you offered me the choice to use on a job, I’d take the Canon every time.

There nothing wrong with your eventual choice, but the shortlist is just funny.
 
mark vaughan said:
I discounted the d3400 because of the sensor cleaning omission
Click to expand...
I can guarantee you will at some point need you will need to get a sensor clean. Whether a camera has ultrasonic cleaning or not probably won't make that much difference to that. The omission is just Nikon marketing to make a differentiation between models and an 'on paper' marketing upgrade path pushing users higher up the model range. What would make me avoid the D3400 is no wired cable release port, for me that makes remote use (or long exposures using bulb mode much harder) nearly impossible (I was recently researching possible remote camera options and came across it).


mark vaughan said:
As for trying out cameras not that easy for older models I have picked up a Nikon d3400 and a eos 1300 in currys , the slower shutter put me of the canon.
Click to expand...

There probably isn't much change in ergonomics between say Canon to Canon or Nikon to Nikon models of the same range (D3100,D3200, D3300), where there are differences is between Nikon and Canon cameras of the same model range point (entry level in this case). Which felt better to you? Button placement can be more important than camera spec. It needs to feel good and comfortable otherwise it won't be comfortable to use. What's right for others may not be right for you. The problem asking for advise which to model go with people will likely advise the model they have or the same manufacturer. Firstly handle the cameras of each manufacturer and see what feels most comfortable. Once you know that you can then see what specs are about your budget. If there are any good camera stores around you that hold a good used stock it can be worth the slight premium for the ability to handle and try before buying.
 
mark vaughan said:
I discounted the d3400 because of the sensor cleaning omission and doesn't seem that much different in terms of what is important for me in a camera
Click to expand...
rob-nikon said:
The omission is just Nikon marketing to make a differentiation between models and an 'on paper' marketing upgrade path pushing users higher up the model range.
Click to expand...
The irony is that Nikon's sensor cleaning is comparatively ineffectual, so omitting the functionality doesn't create that much difference between the models. Canon's sensor cleaning is much more effective, so if they were to leave it out it would be a much more noticeable omission.
 
Just to point out that the nikon D3300, D3400 (basically entry level camera's) don't have exposure bracketing and although this isn't the end of the world, because there are ways around it, it's just more fiddling with controls than you should need to have to and more chance of the camera moving between shots.
 
StewartR said:
Also, have you actually held and tried both these cameras yet? Or at least some sort of Canon DSLR and some sort of Nikon DSLR? If not, you really should.

When I bought my first DSLR, I was comparing the entry-level Nikon and Canon models of the time - D70 vs 350D. In terms of specs they were comparable, and I didn't have any particularly niche interests which would incline me towards one system or the other. So I went and handled both cameras in my local Jessops.

I found that the Canon felt totally intuitive to me. All the controls were in the right place and worked the way I expected them to. The Nikon was bizarrely unintuitive, with confusing menus and awkward controls - even down to the placement of the main control wheel, which I found really awkward to reach and use. So as soon as I'd handled the cameras the decision was a total no-brainer.

But - and this is the key point - I know people who made exactly the same comparison and reached exactly the opposite decision. It's a very personal thing. So don't trust any person or any review if it says one has better ergonomics than the other. The only person who can decide that for you is you.

And it's important to get this right because you're potentially buying into a system. Your first DSLR is unlikely to be your last DSLR, and within each manufacturer's range the cameras have a lot of shared DNA. So if you find you particularly do or don't get on well with a particular camera, it's more than likely that you'll have a similar reaction to any camera from the same manufacturer.
Click to expand...

^^^ Take this advice, I am a Nikon man for exactly the same reasons, I like where Nikon put the controls and have done for 20 odd years, same as Stewart likes Canon, in this day and age no one can say Nikon is better than Canon and vice versa, both are equal and do the same thing, take great photos, you need to hold them and feel comfortable holding one for a long period, my absolute favourite body is the old D2X but getting a nice one is now like plaiting fog, so I have the D700 which is relatively old tech these days, but it can still shame some of the newer cameras out there in the right hands, its still the best for low light shots and wont be beaten for a while if on a budget, see if you can handle some bodies and see what is comfortable as I felt the D3200/3300.3400 and D5XXX felt far too small for me
 
Not sure if people are reading my replies but yes I have tried canon and Nikon bodies in store. Thanks sssnake I have put a post on the Nikon thread about lenses and will be on there when I get my camera hopefully in the next couple of weeks !!

I am aware of lower models not having exposure bracketing but its not a deal breaker for me.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top