PDA

View Full Version : Canon or Nikon SLR?? Recommendations?



cutwater
04-30-2009, 05:54 PM
From what I've read here, ost pros prefer Nikons....but here's what I'm looking at -

What to upgrade from a 6+ year old Fuji S602z, which was a great "prosumer" model BEFORE digital SLRs...so I think it's more of a superzoom.

I'm looking at the Canon XSi or the newer Nikon D90. D90 is better for sure, but going from a superzoom to SLR, would I appreciate the difference?? I'm not a pro photographer. And the D90 is signicantly more $$.

For less than the D90 kit, I can get the XSi kit with 18-55mm lens and add the 55-250mm zoom.

I mostly shoot boats, SNF style and antiques, both static and in motion. Plus muscle cars at shows, and of course, family, local wildlife, etc.

So the question is: XSi and extra lens or D90 and std kit lens......

Appreciate any thoughts....

Liquid
04-30-2009, 06:26 PM
I just got a rebel xsi for christmas, told the wife what i wanted and she got me the canon, i have to say im very pleased with it, what sold her was the continueous shooting abilitys, she know i mostly shoot boats also. this will take like 3 shots per second continuous.

My2 cents

JIM

Casey
04-30-2009, 09:43 PM
Both are great cameras and you really can't go wrong with either. Put them both in your hands and see which one you like better

pyro
05-01-2009, 05:15 AM
You get what you pay for. :D

cutwater
05-02-2009, 05:39 PM
Thanks guys, appreciate the input.

Pyro, didn't someone on here say that any decent camera body is good, and to invest more in the lenses? Or is the D90 really that much better technologically speaking??

jmc
05-03-2009, 01:30 AM
I went through the Canon vs Nikon bit a while back. Its almost like Mac vs. PC, positive and negatives for each side. In the right hands most people couldnt distinguish the difference in photos taken from an upper end Nikon and Canon setup. On your question, the D90 will have cleaner shots than the XSI in higher ISO's and low light and even gives the Nikon D300 a run for its money from what I have seen. The 90 also has video mode, but its pretty rough and only manual focus....still a cool feature though. The D90 has a better Image quality kit lens than the Canon. Without a doubt the D90 is a better move than the XSI if you can dish the extra dough.

4JawChuck
11-07-2009, 01:27 AM
My first digital SLR was a Rebel when they first came out with the silver body, I bought a couple cheap lenses and had a field day playing with it and taking great photos with it.

Then it got stolen.

With the insurance money I bought a D30 Canon digital that is more a professional level camera with magnesium body and high end features. I then invested in a great 24-70L lens, 2.8 speed is great for indoor and action shots...with the high speed card I can shoot in high speed vitually non-stop, nice for stopping the action.

I really like the camera but the lens and body together weighs a ton which really restricts my enjoyment of the camera and it is physically much larger, many times I don't want to carry it for long periods so we end up taking a little Canon A520 4MP which works well also. This Pro-SLR takes great photos...don't get me wrong, but its a tank and if I had to carry it at a place like Disney World for a day I would be in pain and have a sore neck.

In a lot of ways I should have just bought another Rebel and some cheap lenses again, you can't tell how great this fancy lens is when its printed with an inkjet anyway. You can sure see the difference on the screen but the reality is even my fancy HP 8 color home printer can't print the difference.

Be realistic when your shopping for a camera, pick it up and carry it around your neck for awhile in the store. If taking video is worthwhile weigh your options carefully, buy the largest memory card you can find. As for Canon, Nikon or Pentax, once you make the choice your stuck buying lenses for that camera...Canon has a better used selection in my camera store.

So to answer your question I would buy the cheaper camera with used lenses, extra battery, huge memory card and pocket the difference.

SthrnMostMerc
11-07-2009, 06:52 AM
I have had the Nikon D 100, D 200, and now use the D 300. Never had a problem that I did not create myself and Nikon fixed quickly and inexpensively.
Many of the pro photogs I work with shoot the high end Cannons some shoot Nikon.
I think they are both great cameras and if I had not so many lenses for Nikon Cannon would probably be my next camera, just to try it.
In the lesser expensive DSLRS I have heard Nikon is a better camera..

cutwater
11-09-2009, 05:10 PM
4JawChuck and SthrnMostMerc -

Thank you guys for the thoughts.

I wound up buying a Canon 50d kit, factory refurb but warrantied. So far, it's been great, and I'm re-learning alot. Also got a 70-300 zoom. Check out the 2009 CT River Run gallery, I posted about 45 shots there. Still learning and getting better each day.

Appreciate the responses!

Sharkey-Images
11-30-2009, 08:24 PM
I just received my 1D Mark III replacement. It is a Factory Refurbished Mark III and I have only taken it out of the box to snap pics of it.

Now that it is my "off-season" I am seriously considering possibly switching to Nikon.

I am still looking to see what I might be able to ask for it.

Here are the pics:

http://sharkeyimages.zenfolio.com/refurbcanon1dmark3






.

cutwater
11-30-2009, 08:33 PM
Sharkey, your photos are spectacular, why are you considering going Nikon?

Greg is a Nikon guy, his images are spectacular too...

I tend to think it's the photographer more than the equipment, as long as you have decent enough equipment, that is...




I just received my 1D Mark III replacement. It is a Factory Refurbished Mark III and I have only taken it out of the box to snap pics of it.

Now that it is my "off-season" I am seriously considering possibly switching to Nikon.

I am still looking to see what I might be able to ask for it.

Here are the pics:

http://sharkeyimages.zenfolio.com/refurbcanon1dmark3






.

Sharkey-Images
11-30-2009, 08:48 PM
Sharkey, your photos are spectacular, why are you considering going Nikon?

Greg is a Nikon guy, his images are spectacular too...

I tend to think it's the photographer more than the equipment, as long as you have decent enough equipment, that is...Honestly, I will always regret not listening to Greg in the first place. :(
I was working with a guy everyday who was a huge Canon fan. So he talked me into the Canon. 3 cameras, 3 L-Series lenses later, I am considering a switch. I think a lot will be determined once the Olympics start. By then, Canon will have the Mark IV out in the field and if any complaints come from the pros shooting the Olympics, I will be going to black lenses...

I have had my share of the early Mark III troubles. Now I have it replaced and have decided not to shoot with it but to sell it. The serial on it starts with 571... A far enough distance from my 541...
For the last 2 years I kept blaming myself for most of the problems I was having. Then Canon wanted to blame my lenses.
Well, they sent me a loaner Mark III and I shot over 10,000 images in a week in Key West. 95% of the shots were in focus and dead on. Now I know it was not me nor the lenses.
I am up for maybe switching. Time will tell. I figured now is the best time for me to try and sell it. Still wrapped, I was promised a 1 year warranty and it has everything in the box that would come with a new unit.

John Dorn
12-01-2009, 11:01 AM
Just my thought. Look at the glass first. This is where all the money is spent. the camera its self is the cheap part. let that help with the brand you go with.

pyro
12-01-2009, 01:03 PM
I agree with that statement to a certain extent--

Dynamic range and high-ISO noise performance is not a product of lens design.
No matter how good the glass, it can't help balance highlights and shadows, or keep your shutter speed fast enough on a cloudy day (I think Image Stabilization and VR is a joke for action, a fuzzy compromise at best)
Autofocus performance is affected by both body and lens-- Body for processing, body/lens for speed.

I'm glad I went with Nikon. :thumbsup:

John Dorn
12-04-2009, 11:44 AM
The way that I look at it is the glass is more of a long term investment then the body its self. The numbers on the body change and get better every year. The glass does not change as fast. So you upgrade the body after a few years. The glass I tend to hang on to for longer periods of time. The largest and most expensive part of my gear (the Glass) is what I look at first. I can’t afford to rebuy this every two or three years.

hsbob
12-20-2009, 06:58 PM
both are great cameras. i went with nikon because i had nikon lens. the pros use either. if you goto a general camera site you'll see that. as some one said you get what you pay for. get the best body you can afford. then the fastest lenses [2.8]. and leave room for a good hi power flash. stablized lens do not replace a flash.