Shall I or not?>

rookies

rookies

Suspended / Banned
Messages
8,064
Name
Andrew
Edit My Images
No
I am thinking of selling my canon 40D and my canon lens and flash and replace it with a Nikon D90 as I fancy trying nikon out for a change and a mate said it a very good camera as he just got one.

But am I doing the right thing?
 
What do you think you will get out of it?? the canon 40d is a very good camera as well;)
 
The Nikon seem to have some cool feature I believe such as scene reconginsation how ever it spelt etc. Also I been told the D90 is better camera and easy to use and easier to take picture with than the 40d
 
You need to go and try one out at a camera shop. They both take good pictures, your choice should be down to feel of the body, lenses required and ultimately personal preference.
 
But will i see a different in picture quility and ease of use? I believe the nikon also got subject detection too god I am stuck or being a fool
 
Are you all saying my 40D is a better camera than the D90 or is just personal choice
 
d90 is a bit newer and has a few gimmicky features. doesn't make it a better camera, and doesn't suddenly make the 40d a bad one. its still the photographer and the optics that count.
 
I'll wager you'll be hard pushed to tell the difference between the results of the two cameras.
Once you get into the mindset of believing the only way to get better results is to buy a more expensive piece of kit then there is no end to the outward flow of £'s.
 
andrewc said:
not really. 40D is a very easy camera to use. I think you're being a fool of the top drawer!
Click to expand...

:plusone:

Pointless argument. Why ask us when its your own personal choice mate? If you prefer the Nikon camera THAT MUCH then get it, but i bet you will be hard pressed to tell the difference really. As stated, its the user and the lenses that will improve an image... so spend your cash on new glass!
 
if you are getting bad pictures with a 40d then you will still get bad pictures with a d90. post a couple of pics and see what feedback you get.

in truth, once you have technique sorted etc.. you should be able to get decent pics with any dslr, regardless of make.:thumbs:

if you are finding the 40d hard to use as the settings are in the wrong place for you, then go have a feel of the other brands and checkout what they are, but i would rather invest the money in better glass myself.

if you want to see if the d90 is better, borrow your mates for a short while and have a go, if you prefer it then you you will know.
 
MJ Stebbings said:
:plusone:

Pointless argument. Why ask us when its your own personal choice mate? If you prefer the Nikon camera THAT MUCH then get it, but i bet you will be hard pressed to tell the difference really. As stated, its the user and the lenses that will improve an image... so spend your cash on new glass!
Click to expand...

If your mate's got one, borrow his for a bit and see how you get on with it.

Every time you change your equipment though, you go through a learning process. You'll start getting better results when you know your gear like the back of your hand and you can start really thinking about your subject matter.
 
dont believe everything youre told, just because someone things its the dogs danglies doesnt automatically make it so..

tbh i wouldnt be fussed about stupid features like scene recognition. i have that already, its called my eyes and brain lol.
 
neil_g said:
tbh i wouldnt be fussed about stupid features like scene recognition. i have that already, its called my eyes and brain lol.
Click to expand...

Scene recognition is part of the matrix metering system. I would imagine that Canon has something similar using a different name, and he already has it on his 40D.

The choice is the OP's, the problem is that the grass always looks greener on the other side, as someone said earlier he needs to learn to use what he already has.

Whilst the D90 is newer, and has its advantages over the Canon, most of these would not be evident unless you are pushing the things to their limits, most everyday images would look no different from either camera.
 
My advice mate, would be keep you 40D and take more photos.

I've had a 350D since it first came out and having started doing a picture a day (365) I finding I'm really improving my photography skills. The real improvements for me have come from understanding light and composition, just understanding these kind of areas has helped me take better pics. After all this time I'm only now starting to hit the limits of the gear.

I think it's important to make a list of why you need a new camera. I've started doing this each time I encounter an issue that repeatedly comes up when I'm photo taking, for example, bigger and better quality screen (for checking shots in the field), faster focusing (now my subject matter of what I shoot has increased, i.e. nature shots and of my children at play), more AF points (when working on a tripod would help too). It's only now that I am seriously considering upgrading to a another camera (a D300).
 
'Because my mate said' is not a good reason to change camera systems. Think about it way up the pros and cons objectively, go out with you mate and use his d90 see if you prefer it. You will inevitably loose money by doing the system swap so be sure it's what you want and it's going to offer your sufficient benefit.

Pseronally I'd say no keep you cash and get shooting, changing kit will not make you a better photographer and once you've got any DSLR your skill becomes the important factor.
 
Martyn... said:
Scene recognition is part of the matrix metering system. I would imagine that Canon has something similar using a different name, and he already has it on his 40D.

The choice is the OP's, the problem is that the grass always looks greener on the other side, as someone said earlier he needs to learn to use what he already has.

Whilst the D90 is newer, and has its advantages over the Canon, most of these would not be evident unless you are pushing the things to their limits, most everyday images would look no different from either camera.
Click to expand...

absolutely, its his choice but his reasoning that "my mate says its better" is flawed in my opinion.
 
How do you think the D90 will allow you to take better pictures
YOU are the photographer, not the camera.
Sure, the D90 may have more features but the stuff you mentioned seem like gimmicks of the highest order and of little use to anyone who has an ounce of skill with a camera.
No, I think it would be an expensive change that would do nothing for your photography
 
RichardtheSane said:
How do you think the D90 will allow you to take better pictures
YOU are the photographer, not the camera.
Sure, the D90 may have more features but the stuff you mentioned seem like gimmicks of the highest order and of little use to anyone who has an ounce of skill with a camera.
No, I think it would be an expensive change that would do nothing for your photography
Click to expand...

i agree totaly
 
NEVER TURN TO THE DARK SIDE, FEEL THE FORCE
 
Scene recognition? As far as I know the D90 doesn't have this - if you mean the sort of thing I've seen advertised for some compact cameras, where the camera selects the 'best' mode automatically according to the subject. The D90 doesn't have this - it does have 'Scene modes' which you select - macro, landscape,protrait,etc, - but the 40D has this too.
The D90 does have 'face recognition' in Live View if thats what you mean.
 
If you like the camera and it is easier for you to use then make the switch.

If it's to get scene or face recognition then go out and get a compact (or mobile phone) with the same software goodness. There's a reason that this stuff isn't on the higher end cameras . . . most people who spend a lot on a camera do so to have more control over the output, why surrender part of it to an algorithm that has no idea what kind of picture you want?

I moved from Canon to Nikon recently but that was 90% down to how the camera I bought actually felt and worked.

As has been said many times, use your mates D90 and see how it works out for you. If you fall in love with it then you have your answer, otherwise just get out and shoot with the 40D. You'll get great pictures.
 
Both the cameras can take good shots but it is you that make them great.

Don't change just for the sake of it or a friends say so, after all it is your money not his.
 
stephen ley said:
NEVER TURN TO THE DARK SIDE, FEEL THE FARCE
Click to expand...

Typo corrected, :naughty:

As to the OP, there's nothing wrong with trying out different brands to see how you get on with them. Whether you want to spend the money on doing so is down to you, but it's not necessarily a foolhardy move to move from one system to another. Do you know anyone with a Nikon body? If so, see if you could borow it/swap with yours for a week or two. Try it out, bearing in mind potential differences in the optics you might be used to, features etc. Once you've used it for a while you'll have a good idea whether moving to Nikon or another system might be worthwhile.

I moved to Nikon form Minolta when two of my lenses for my X700 died. I went with Nikon purely on the feel of the handling in the camera shop at the time. When I went to digital, I didn't look at any other systems because a) my father-in-law had a D70 which I'd had chance to use and it felt as good as my F80, and b) I'd already had experience of using a Canon over a sustained period of time when I used a D30 at the Commonwealth Games. I don't get on with the way Canon's handle, but I only know that because I've had to use one for long enough to realise that it's not just unfamiliarity on my part.
 
f1charlie said:
Scene recognition? As far as I know the D90 doesn't have this - if you mean the sort of thing I've seen advertised for some compact cameras, where the camera selects the 'best' mode automatically according to the subject. The D90 doesn't have this - it does have 'Scene modes' which you select - macro, landscape,protrait,etc, - but the 40D has this too.
The D90 does have 'face recognition' in Live View if thats what you mean.
Click to expand...

The D90 does have 'Scene recognition' as I said in my previous post it is part of the matrix metering system, the camera adjusts exposure using data from 1000's of different scenes stored on its chip, it is not something that you can access, it is part of the onboard computer.
 
f1charlie said:
Scene recognition? As far as I know the D90 doesn't have this - if you mean the sort of thing I've seen advertised for some compact cameras, where the camera selects the 'best' mode automatically according to the subject. The D90 doesn't have this - it does have 'Scene modes' which you select - macro, landscape,protrait,etc, - but the 40D has this too.
The D90 does have 'face recognition' in Live View if thats what you mean.
Click to expand...

Yes it does. ;)
 
I don't think this makes any sense. 40D/50D is often used as a lightweight backup for pros with 1 series body. The Nikon D300 is probably a closer comparison, but this is twice the price of the D90.

With respect, as fletch5 said, if you can't take decent pictures with a 40D, you won't with a D90. Most DSLR now are very capable, even the entry level bodies. Give that to someone that knows how to best make use of them and you will get half decent shots.

Just fyi, I'm a Nikon shooter.
 
consider that you will be shunned by both camps if you switch. :D

Also consider that changing systems is a significant investment, would you be better off with some glass?
 
Would you jump off a bridge if your mate thought that would be fun?
 
A) if you had a parachute
B) if you have a piece of elastic around your ankles

I meant neither of the above
 
Martyn... said:
The D90 does have 'Scene recognition' as I said in my previous post it is part of the matrix metering system, the camera adjusts exposure using data from 1000's of different scenes stored on its chip, it is not something that you can access, it is part of the onboard computer.
Click to expand...

sdb123 said:
Yes it does. ;)
Click to expand...

I stand (or sit) corrected, but where is that described?
 
NorthernNikon said:
Well it's hardly a useful analogy though is it?
Click to expand...

Yes, the point being that what a friends believes is good/fun/amazing/crap/rubbish etc doesnt always make it right for you does it! What if the "friend" loves the camera as he does portraits and its really suited to that style, yet the OP shoots sports and the camera the friend likes is no good for sports etc.

What is right/good for one isnt for another!
 
MJ Stebbings said:
Yes, the point being that what a friends believes is good/fun/amazing/crap/rubbish etc doesnt always make it right for you does it! What if the "friend" loves the camera as he does portraits and its really suited to that style, yet the OP shoots sports and the camera the friend likes is no good for sports etc.

What is right/good for one isnt for another!
Click to expand...

Granted, which is why I posted a constructive suggestion further up the thread, but given the fact that we don't know whether the friend in question is as good a photographer as a) David Bailey b) Bill Bailey or c) a bottle of Baileys, we can't really comment on the validity of his or her advice can we?
 
NorthernNikon said:
Granted, which is why I posted a constructive suggestion further up the thread, but given the fact that we don't know whether the friend in question is as good a photographer as a) David Bailey b) Bill Bailey or c) a bottle of Baileys, we can't really comment on the validity of his or her advice can we?
Click to expand...

But on the basis of "my friend said its a good camera" i still stand to feel my post is valid! Also see my previous post near the top of the thread
 
MJ Stebbings said:
But on the basis of "my friend said its a good camera" i still stand to feel my post is valid! Also see my previous post near the top of the thread
Click to expand...

I have read your first post in this thread, and I disagree with it. There's enough significant differences between the handling of different systems for it to be worthwhile for all photographers to spend time using systems other than their own to ensure that they have the best system for them. IQ is not the be all and all, so while there may be very little difference between output of both cameras in the lab, in the field, the way a camera handles can make the difference between getting the shot at all and missing it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top