Starter DSLR -- Help me choose?

[niwell]

Originally Posted by Kingofthehill

If you're serious about photography, go for a used D80 or 40D. Seriously, you're going to grow out of the entry-level cameras sooner or later.

I'd agree with this. I used to have an old Rebel and upgraded to a 20D after it broke due to water damage. The difference was incredible, and I got the 20D at a steal since the 30D was being introduced at the time. If I was in the same position now I'd look for a used 40D since I have Canon lenses, but whatever the equivalent is with Nikon I'd do that too.

Don't get fooled by megapixels and all that. The sensor is the same size and that's what really matters.

[Matty]

Though I'm wondering if anyone knows -- would a zoom lens zoomed out to its widest (smallest mm, say 18 on the kit lens for d60/d40) achieve the same wide angle effect as a prime of the same mm, in this case, 18?

[Kingofthehill]

[edited]

[Tony]

Originally Posted by Matty

Though I'm wondering if anyone knows -- would a zoom lens zoomed out to its widest (smallest mm, say 18 on the kit lens for d60/d40) achieve the same wide angle effect as a prime of the same mm, in this case, 18?

focal length is focal length. They should be the same. Only diff. is on a prime lense, you get better clarity (supposely, I haven't really tried).

[flar]

Zoom lenses tend to be soft (i.e. not as sharp) at extremes of the focal length range.

Kit lenses do suck, but they're also much,much cheaper than better lenses. Even though they suck, you can still do a lot with them and they're expendable (i.e. who cares if they break).

The reason everyone says go Canon or Nikon is that these brands have the most options for lenses and accessories, plus you can always sell the stuff you don't want anymore. Other brands probably make excellent cameras too, but there is less possibility of reselling your old equipment and the lens options are very limited.

[ue]

^A few of the bigger companies behind Nikon and Canon like Sony and Pentax have a decent amount of lenses from what I have seen .

[drumz0rz]

Go with the Canon XSi. Nikon uses crappy Sony sensors in their pro-sumer cameras, Canon makes their own. You don't want the XS, it's really a crap camera for people who know nothing about photography. You'd be better off with an older XTi than an XS. The XSi is a very nice body, I've used it before.

Also, I personally find the Canon EF/EF-S lenses to have a much better cost-for-quality ratio than Nikon's Nikkor lenses.

[Matty]

I went with the d60.

And loving it!

[ue]

^Congratulations! I'm glad you like it, hope to see some new pictures with it.

[Lexy]

Originally Posted by drumz0rz

Go with the Canon XSi. Nikon uses crappy Sony sensors in their pro-sumer cameras, Canon makes their own. You don't want the XS, it's really a crap camera for people who know nothing about photography. You'd be better off with an older XTi than an XS. The XSi is a very nice body, I've used it before.

Also, I personally find the Canon EF/EF-S lenses to have a much better cost-for-quality ratio than Nikon's Nikkor lenses.

You're splitting hairs here but the Nikon lenses are better quality pretty much across the board. Canon makes great glass, but the fact that Nikon is able to spend more time in T&D on their glass should tell you what you are getting with them. Nikkor glass is very hard to beat even at a full 400mm!!

Nikon's sensors in their new cameras are more reliable and capture a better range of color depth than the factory Canon sensors according to many camera websites. I would love for you to show us some of your work with these Canon specs and I'll be happy to post rebutals from my Nikon D300 w/ my Nikkor AF 80-400mm VR lens! Let the people be the judge!!

[bigcubfan]

Originally Posted by Matty

I went with the d60.

And loving it!

I have a D60 with a 70-300 zoom to go with it and it's magnificent.

[Robert Pence]

I've been shooting some lately with the non-VR 70-300mm lens (< $150), and I'm pretty impressed. Most of the reviews I read were good, and the lens certainly lives up to my expectations.

[Doady]

If you buy entry-level Olympus dSLR, it would not nr a waste of money, as they do not dumb down their entry level dSLRs as aggressively as other brands, especially Canon and Nikon.

Originally Posted by Tony

You do notice a difference between ISO 100 and 200, I'm quite surprised there's even a D-SLR out there that doesn't do ISO 100. I'd say go with the D60 if you're going Nikon.

I think most (if not all) dSLR sensors do not have a true ISO 100 setting anyways. ISO 100 is probably achieved through the camera's processing and not through the reduction of the sensitivity of the sensor itself. And due to the nature of digital sensors, it is probably best to to use ISO 200 anyways, as that is the optimal setting and it gives the sharpest results, for all APS, APS-C and Four-Thirds sensors.

My compact camera has ISO 80 and ISO 100 settings, and ISO 100 is the best setting in this case due to the smaller sensor size. Using ISO 80 results in a reduction in sharpness. In terms of noise, the difference is negligible anways...

[Tony]

Originally Posted by Lexy

Nikon's sensors in their new cameras are more reliable and capture a better range of color depth than the factory Canon sensors according to many camera websites. I would love for you to show us some of your work with these Canon specs and I'll be happy to post rebutals from my Nikon D300 w/ my Nikkor AF 80-400mm VR lens! Let the people be the judge!!

Although I don't agree with drumz, you're comparing a camera that is of a higher class than those Canons that drumz was talking about. You'd be better off comparing your D300 with at least a Canon 20D or the Canon 5D. The number system between the two companies is maddening.

BTW, I love how in this thread everybody recommends what they themselves bought and then tries to criticize the "other" brand.

[Lexy]

Originally Posted by Tony

Although I don't agree with drumz, you're comparing a camera that is of a higher class than those Canons that drumz was talking about. You'd be better off comparing your D300 with at least a Canon 20D or the Canon 5D. The number system between the two companies is maddening.

BTW, I love how in this thread everybody recommends what they themselves bought and then tries to criticize the "other" brand.

Okay, then let's go the route with my D80. That should "even" it up. Bottom line is I think both camera companies have great cameras. I wouldn't have a problem shooting Canon or Nikon. It just so happens, I shoot Nikon across the board. Trust me, I hold no loyalty to any brand in the grand scheme of things. People recommend what they shoot with because that's what they know. What would you rather them do Tony? Recommend something they have no experience with?

That's like selling me a car you don't know anything about. How am I suppose to take you seriously. When someone comes on here and basically says that Nikon is crap and they should buy Canon, what do you expect those of use who have over $10,000 wrapped up in Nikon gear to do? Sit back and just let that garbage go without a rebuttal? Come on my friend. Also, he didn't specify what model Nikon he was referring to.

[Tony]

Originally Posted by Lexy

Okay, then let's go the route with my D80. That should "even" it up. Bottom line is I think both camera companies have great cameras. I wouldn't have a problem shooting Canon or Nikon. It just so happens, I shoot Nikon across the board. Trust me, I hold no loyalty to any brand in the grand scheme of things. People recommend what they shoot with because that's what they know. What would you rather them do Tony? Recommend something they have no experience with?

That's like selling me a car you don't know anything about. How am I suppose to take you seriously. When someone comes on here and basically says that Nikon is crap and they should buy Canon, what do you expect those of use who have over $10,000 wrapped up in Nikon gear to do? Sit back and just let that garbage go without a rebuttal? Come on my friend. Also, he didn't specify what model Nikon he was referring to.

umm, what? I specifically said that I don't agree with drumz and concur he was just trash talking. I'm not against either of these brands and would recommend either. I'm just saying that it's funny that people would take offence so quickly and start bashing the other brand. eeesh

[Doady]

Canon and Nikon systems are quite similar, imo:

- in-lens (rather than in-body) image stabilization only
- poor selection of lenses designed for digital, especially smaller sensors
- huge selection third-party lenses and accessories

Does it really matter which system people use? Both are real photographic companies, unlike Olympus and Sony. Real photographers use either Canon and Nikon.

[ue]

^What about Fujifilm or Pentax?

[Tony]

Originally Posted by edmontonenthusiast

^What about Fujifilm or Pentax?

Unfortunately, for the most part they have fallen behind. Even back in the film days they were always behind the big two. (actually, maybe even behind Minolta). Besides, Fuji (like Kodak) always concentrated on the film business, not camera production.

[ue]

Pentax I don't think is doing too bad, but I'm no expert, and I know it isn't to the extent of Canon or Nikon. Sony and Olympus are also decent players in the SLR world, but it isn't their focus per said earlier.