Canon vs. Nikon

[JDS]

Now that I have your attention on a much-discussed debate, I'm looking for a little bit of info on lenses to help me with my decision.

I'm looking to buy my first DSLR. Right now, it's between the Rebel XT, and the Nikon D40.

If I go with the Nikon, I already have all the memory cards I need, so that's a plus. But to have all the functionality in any lenses, I have to buy the newer AF-S or AF-I type. For autofocus, the D40 doesn't have the mechanical pin that turns the lens to focus it, etc., and for some of the other lenses I lose metering. So I'm somewhat limited in my choice of lenses if I choose the D40. But all you guys know this already.

For the Rebel XT, I can use pretty much any lens Canon offers, right? From what I understand, (with a few exceptions) most lenses work on most cameras, the Rebel XT included. From some of the online stores I've browsed around, I can get some of Canon's lenses for a little less money. The only downside is I have to buy memory cards since it doesn't use SD..not that big a deal.

So my real question is, is the difference between Nikon and Canon in this area any better for either? Another question I had was, if I choose to upgrade my camera body later, will the D40's lenses work on, say, a D70s? I haven't been able to get a straight answer anywhere, but maybe my internet search skills stink. This part is important to me because as I progress in skill with the camera body I start with, I want to be able to use the same lenses on my new camera body so I don't have to start that investment all over again.

Thanks!

 

[Orgnoi1]

I was a little sorry to see Nikon come out with the D40... they really kinda shot themselves in the foot with that one... on the other hand you can get a D50 or a left over 70 for a good price... and all nikon lenses will work... or you can go with the Rebel XT and all Canon EOS lenses will work...

I know where you could get a nice D70 complete kit right now in fact.. =)
http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/showthread.php?t=71816

 

[Icon72]

I am in the exact same situation JDS. I should have some tax return money shortly and I will be getting a DSLR, my first. I keep thinking I'd like to just start out with a D70 or something similar but I can't get over the price tag vs. skill level hump. At the same time I hear a lot of people saying the D40 is just a glorified point and shoot. I certainly don't need the most professional camera out there but I would, some day, like to make some sort of profession out of my photography if even as a side venture. So do I spend the money on a D40 only to grow out of it quickly or do I bite the bullet and pay for a D70, D70s, D80? I suppose in the end only I can answer that but any and all opinions are more than welcome.

Signed,
Undecided

(I hope I'm not thread jacking but it seems like, to a degree, we're in the same boat at the moment.)

 

[portersangel]

When comparing those two cameras, there's more to look at than just lenses. With the Canon Rebel XT you have an 8 megapixel camera that shoots at 3 fps. It also has the cmos sensor so it tends to shoot better in low light situations. You are however losing the bigger LCD screen. The Nikon D40 is only a 6 megapixel camera and has 2.5 fps. I guess it all depends upon what you are going to be useing your camera for.

 

[Big Mike]

I don't shoot Nikon, so I don't know all about which lenses will and will not work on the D40. But you have to ask yourself...would you buy those older, non-compatible lenses anyway? If you did upgrade to a D50, D70, D80...are those older lenses something that you would go out of your way to get? There are probably many great lenses that are compatible with the D40.

Any DSLR can be a glorified point & shoot...if that's how you use it. It does have a lot of the benefits that any other DSLR has...so I don't think it would hold you back too much.

The best thing to do...is to go into a shop and hold them both. The one that feels best to you...probably is.

 

[ericande]

To answer your unanswered question: Yes, any lens that works on the D40 will work on any other new DSLR. That being said, as Mike said, go and hold them, shoot with them. I wouldn't worry about the mp difference or 2.5 vs 3 frames per second. If you can find a D50 or D70 kit for a good price, I would go with that.

 

[ksmattfish]

The dpreview.com review of the D40 gives it an overall rating of better than 8 out of 10. Their main negative issues were (with my comments):

# No lens motor in body means non-AF-S/AF-I lenses are manual focus only

Only an issue if you can't manually focus.

# Disappointingly RAW+JPEG setting only records Basic quality JPEG's

Only an issue if you shoot RAW+JPEG.

# No status LCD panel on top of camera (we hate to see these go)

Too bad, but you'll learn to live without it.

# No exposure or white balance bracketing

What they mean is no automatic bracketing. It's still totally possible if you actually know how to run a camera.

# No hard buttons (without customizing) for ISO or White Balance


Too bad, but you'll learn to live without it.

# No depth-of-field preview

Ineffective in most APS-C DSLR veiwfinders anyway.

# Occasional visibility of moire artifacts (although seldom)

Yikes! Is this an issue with RAW too? Or just oversharpening of JPEGS by the in-camera software?

# Fixed exposure steps (1/3 EV)

Desperate to come up with a list of cons, I guess. Cameras used to only work in 1 stop exposure steps.

# Disappointing automatic white balance performance in incandescent light

What DSLR doesn't have dissappointing auto-WB?

# No RAW adjustment with supplied PictureProject, only simple conversion

Plenty of better RAW software available.

# Limited image parameter adjustment (especially for color saturation)

Only an issue if you shoot jpegs, and don't do any post processing.

If the price is right, the D40 seems like an okay DSLR to me (assuming that moire issue isn't too serious). At least for non-professionals buying their first DSLR. It is definately not a glorified point-n-shoot.

As a portrait and wedding professional, I would find 2 fps more useful than 3 fps, 5 fps, or whatever. Nothing I photograph moves quicker than that. None of the medium or large format gear I use can come anywhere close to even 1 fps. They are more like 0.03 fps if I'm moving at my fastest.

6 megapixels doesn't leave much room for cropping, but is still very capable of making nice 10"x15" prints. The difference between 8mp and 6mp would be hard to tell in prints created by competent photogs.

 

[droyz2000]

I would agree with Big Mike. As long as you purchase a Canon or a Nikon, you are going to be getting a good camera that will be capable of use many different lenses. The best thing to do is to go to a camera store and hold each of the cameras that you are interested in. See which one fits your hand. Also, you may want to make a list of things that you must have on your camera and things that might not be necessary at this point and time. Based on that you should be able to find a camera that is right for you and still inside your budget.

 

[MPowerM3]

When comparing those two cameras, there's more to look at than just lenses. With the Canon Rebel XT you have an 8 megapixel camera that shoots at 3 fps. It also has the cmos sensor so it tends to shoot better in low light situations. You are however losing the bigger LCD screen. The Nikon D40 is only a 6 megapixel camera and has 2.5 fps. I guess it all depends upon what you are going to be useing your camera for.

He could get the XTi with the huge LCD screen and 10.1 megapixels as an option too. I went with Canon when in the same boat as you. I just like Canon better, all there products! A Nikon friend of mine just jumped ship this year to all Canon gear, lost tons of money, but loves the Canon stuff more! Thats gotta mean something.

 

[Orgnoi1]

would you buy those older, non-compatible lenses anyway? If you did upgrade to a D50, D70, D80...are those older lenses something that you would go out of your way to get? There are probably many great lenses that are compatible with the D40.

Unfortunately it ISNT the old lenses you would be missing out on...

Heres a short list of "old" lenses you wouldnt be able to use... except manually focusing...

Nikon 10.5mm f/2.8G ED-IF DX Autofocus Fisheye Lens
Nikon 14mm f/2.8D ED AF Nikkor Super Wide Angle Lens
Nikon 16mm f/2.8D AF Fisheye-Nikkor Lens with Hood
Nikon 20mm f/2.8D Ultra Wide Angle AF Nikkor Lens
Nikon 24mm f/2.8D AF Nikkor Lens
Nikon 28mm f/2.8D AF Wide Angle Nikkor Lens
Nikon 35mm f/2D AF Wide Angle Auto Focus Nikkor Lens
Nikon 50mm f/1.8D AF Standard Auto Focus Nikkor Lens what? no nifty fifty?
Nikon 50mm f/1.4D Auto Focus AF Nikkor Lens
Nikon 85mm f/1.4D IF AF Telephoto Nikkor Lens with Hood
Nikon 85mm f/1.8D AF Telephoto Nikkor Lens with Hood
Nikon 105mm f/2 AF-D DC Nikkor AutoFocus Telephoto Lens
Nikon 135mm f/2.0D AF DC Nikkor Autofocus Telephoto Lens with Hood
Nikon 180mm f/2.8D ED-IF AF Nikkor Lens with Case & Hood
Nikon 80-200mm f/2.8D ED AF Zoom-Nikkor Lens
Nikon 80-400mm f/4.5-5.6D ED VR AF Zoom-Nikkor Lens (Vibration Reduction) with Hood

To me thats about 16 GOOD reasons I wouldnt want a camera that only allows for AF-s or AF-i... ALL the primes... until you get to the 200/2VR are not usable...

 

[Icon72]

At least for me, awesome replies all of you. ksmattfish knocked it out of the park for me. I read the review of the D40 at dpreview but having the added comments brings it all together nicely. :thumbup:

 

[Big Mike]

Are the not usable at all...or are they usable but with no auto focus?

 

[Orgnoi1]

no AF... and lets face it... very few people dont use AF... I dont when I shoot medium format... but I dont know one person who doesnt use it most of the time... when they have it... and most would expect when buying a *new* camera to be able to use AF...

and dont forget that MOST if not almost all 3rd party lenses do not have motors...

 

[shingfan]

He could get the XTi with the huge LCD screen and 10.1 megapixels as an option too. I went with Canon when in the same boat as you. I just like Canon better, all there products! A Nikon friend of mine just jumped ship this year to all Canon gear, lost tons of money, but loves the Canon stuff more! Thats gotta mean something.

Canon and Nikon are equally good......is more of a preference when it comes to choosing which brand to use.....unless you already have accessories from one brand handy then obviously you would be steered to that brand.........otherwise.........canon and nikon are both excellent brands and i can not find a logical reason why someone would throw all their gear from one brand and go for the other brand of the same gear (unless the person is buying new and different gears)

 

[JDS]

Thanks for the feedback everybody! I've read tons of reviews on both, and both have pros/cons I can live with. They both feel good in my hand, and both have great photo quality..hence my hard decision. I've been leaning towards the Rebel XT for a while, but the D40 is tempting except for the lens deal. My biggest let-down for the D40 was the lens selection. Yeah, there are quite a few out there, but there are many more for the Rebel when it comes to full compatibility.

Big Mike - most of the Nikon lenses will still work on the D40, minus autofocus, and minus metering on some of them. I just find it hard to pay for features on a lens that I can't use because they're not compatible with the body. I think that's what will push me to Canon in the end.